Weapon balance proposal

[george moromisato]

I've put together a concrete proposal for weapon balance changes, based almost entirely on Shrike's various threads:

https://ministry.kronosaur.com/record.hexm?id=30518

A few notes:

1. Feel free to comment either on the record itself on on this thread (but there probably will be more discussion on this thread).
2. I expect to refine (or add to) this proposal. I will rigorously track changes so you can see how the proposal evolves.
3. Concurrently with these changes, I also expect to do something about WMD (more WMD at lower levels), particle resistance (fewer enemies with resistance), missile availability (more), and weapon costs (make sure they are correct).
4. We don't have to get it perfect in this release. We should take our best shot for 1.7 Alpha 1 and then re-assess. It's OK to try something in Alpha 1 and change our minds later.
5. Post Alpha 1 (maybe Alpha 2) I intend to also revamp station defenses. HPs are a little low right now, and they need to have better long range defenses (at minimum, guards should have a bigger radius).
6. Post Alpha 1 (maybe Alpha 2) I also intend to do something about compartments. I'm leaning towards the proposal of supporting multiple armor segments per location (and lowering compartment HPs).

[Song]

Ahahaha! *thunder crash* My plan to eventually move up the credits continues well! [/not entirely serious]

It's been huge fun seeing you slowly edit that over the last day or so. And it's a good bunch of changes. I've already commented on the ticket directly (before seeing this thread), but here's what I wrote there:

This is really going to shake things up. It'll be very interesting to see the impact.

I agree with pretty much everything, although I'm not sure about the Heavy Ion Blaster (and to a lesser extent the standard ion blaster).......I've never had any issues with reactor power at that level (especially since the SN2500 tends to get skipped because of its low efficiency). So I'm not sure there really is a low-powered niche right now....although I'd certainly love to see one developed. The important thing will be whether the reduction in damage spread from the altered diceroll lets it adequately fight the ICS. It might make a very good endgame auton gun, however.....if there's anything that can use it. Both ion blasters will also still have their appalling anti-compartment performance, although that's been discussed enough elsewhere that I'm confident that the WMD will be reviewed eventually.

The new GDC looks nice, although that dice spread is a bit high...max damage of 480 and minimum of 24 gives it the same problem that just got fixed on the APA. Might be worth seriously cutting that spread. EDIT: And the reactor power is still a bit high for a non-rechargable gun.....but I guess it's fine if the recharge method is simpler (and less rare) than the QAC.

The mention of reviewing particle resistance is a welcome surprise as well.

All in all, I'd say this is a good set of changes based on what we got right out of all our nitpicking.

[Xephyr]

In Eternity Port, Eurasian Diarchy Archura bolts should probably have some level of WMD.

[JohnBWatson]

3. Concurrently with these changes, I also expect to do something about WMD (more WMD at lower levels), particle resistance (fewer enemies with resistance), missile availability (more), and weapon costs (make sure they are correct).

All of these sound excellent. I'd like to suggest configuring enemies that make more use of non - NAMI missiles. The Kobol station, in particular, could do to replace its lethal but trivial to avoid battery of Tev9s with a Rasiermesser launcher and some missiles.

5. Post Alpha 1 (maybe Alpha 2) I intend to also revamp station defenses. HPs are a little low right now, and they need to have better long range defenses (at minimum, guards should have a bigger radius).

I wholeheartedly support this idea. A basic but sturdy solution to this is to add guards in a 100ls patrol, and have them attack anything that gets within their sensor range(plus call the station's main guards to help out if something kills one of them). That'd also bring out the Roguelike tradition of stealth being a valuable skill.

6. Post Alpha 1 (maybe Alpha 2) I also intend to do something about compartments. I'm leaning towards the proposal of supporting multiple armor segments per location (and lowering compartment HPs).

I look forward to testing this out.

---

In Eternity Port, Eurasian Diarchy Archura bolts should probably have some level of WMD.

Certainly.

---

Most everything looks like a fairly major improvement. Slicer cannon could definitely be buffed more, but this should be enough for now.

Tritium cannon could probably stand to keep its current power - it doesn't really have any edge on the howitzers as it is, especially with the speedloader. Nerfing it further could make it undesirable to use at all.

Omnidirectional tritium cannon doesn't have any balance issues, but looks very strange with such a slow projectile speed, and isn't used very well by the AI. Not sure how to fix it, but seemed like something to mention here.

Heavy Ion Blaster is still without a niche. Ares Positron Cannon is still much better against gunships, has a similar power use, and can almost always be found as a free drop whereas HIB must be purchased. Howitzers are about as good as it for killing gunships, given the similar damage and ROF, but they benefit from the ability to hurt compartments and use the speedloader. Could benefit from higher rate of fire.

QAC probably still needs more shot HP. Given its fairly short range, cost of using, and difficulty of acquisition, it'd be okay for it to be able to block a good amount of enemy shots.

Very much looking forward to NAMI Heavy rework. Two possible means of improving it are letting the Rogue Fleet use it for something(very rarely, of course) to justify the missiles' presence in their drop tables and increase the amount of them available to the player, and letting it fire standard NAMI missiles as well(pure upgrades are by nature attractive to players, though I'd understand if the Ares Launcher using a similar mechanic makes that undesirable). I would also suggest giving them a better cost - power ratio; APD missiles in Eternity Port are a good baseline for this.

Positron Lancer improvement is much needed for the AI ships that use it. May need adjustments for players that use them, given the very high range allows most enemies to be killed from outside of weapon range.

GDC looking very good. I should point out that the Gaian Processor does not appear to actually use this against the player(at any rate, I attack the things on sight and they've never once fired it at me). The Processor should probably have whatever AI trait lets ships break off from its orders to retaliate against attackers enabled. In addition, it could probably use better range if it's intended to complement the short ranged Thermo cannons, in order to prevent a player from just lining up with its path to the next wreck and hitting it repeatedly with a ranged weapon. Its poweruse is probably a bit high for a rechargeable weapon, but that's minor considering it's not really intended to be a player - usable weapon right now.

Also, the Processor should be able to recharge its GDC, if that hasn't been done yet.

Finally, the Lamplighter is still fairly underpowered. It's effectively the game's ultimate weapon, after all. Unless a rework of the Iocrym is planned which will restore it to the role of vital anti - ICS weapon, it should be roughly as powerful as the APA, which is about as difficult to acquire. My best recommendation here is to balance it such that it is possible to defeat a Phobos with one, given that that seems to be its canonical purpose.

---

I agree with pretty much everything, although I'm not sure about the Heavy Ion Blaster (and to a lesser extent the standard ion blaster).......I've never had any issues with reactor power at that level (especially since the SN2500 tends to get skipped because of its low efficiency). So I'm not sure there really is a low-powered niche right now

Can confirm. I typically go from 100MW to 1GW, skipping everything in between, with no difficulty at all. There are too many endgame quality ammoless weapons that fit into the 100MW range, and too little power falloff for early game workhorses like the OTL and Flenser. Higher poweruse for the Makayev howitzers would help fix this. The Mk. V should not be compatible with a 100MW reactor, given its effectiveness against virtually every enemy in the late game. Even a 250MW should struggle with it, given how easily it destroys ships that can drop one.

[PM]

Most everything looks like a fairly major improvement. Slicer cannon could definitely be buffed more, but this should be enough for now.

Do not forget the Slicer uses it against you, at first! It is his weapon, after all. If it is too strong, player could die too easily unless he acquires (overleveled) countermeasures.

Tritium cannon could probably stand to keep its current power - it doesn't really have any edge on the howitzers as it is, especially with the speedloader. Nerfing it further could make it undesirable to use at all.

Tritium cannon is overpowered. 117 DPS is higher than other ammoless thermo options and much higher than ion options (84 DPS on light ion blaster). It even exceeds level 8 ion blaster's DPS (of 115.5). 5d6 is more reasonable. Maybe as compensation, tritium shots could be faster (like slam cannon shots), have more hp, or more WMD (to set it apart from advanced Kuma repeater). Come to think of it, if slam cannon will get WMD5, then tritium cannon should get at least that much.

I did not see thermo cannon on the ticket. Currently, it is twice as strong as tritium cannon, though balance guidelines for ammo seem to intend x3 to x6 instead of the x2 we get in practice.


As for reactors, I tend to go from 100 MW to 250 MW. I tend to skip 500 MW unless I fabricate one out of the numerous 250 MW reactor drops from one of the late-game piñata enemies.

[JohnBWatson]

Do not forget the Slicer uses it against you, at first! It is his weapon, after all. If it is too strong, player could die too easily unless he acquires (overleveled) countermeasures.

It's fairly easy to dodge, and right now he's a pushover compared to the Molotok we fought a few minutes earlier, so I'm not all that worried about him being too tough. The previous boss was a Tripoli - class destroyer, so there's a fairly high limit to what we can be expected to kill at that point.

Still, I'll test it out before making any conclusions.

Tritium cannon is overpowered. 117 DPS is higher than other ammoless thermo options and much higher than ion options (84 DPS on light ion blaster). It even exceeds level 8 ion blaster's DPS (of 115.5). 5d6 is more reasonable. Maybe as compensation, tritium shots could be faster (like slam cannon shots), have more hp, or more WMD (to set it apart from advanced Kuma repeater). Come to think of it, if slam cannon will get WMD5, then tritium cannon should get at least that much.

Right now, fixed firing ion weapons are very underpowered. The Ares Lightning Turret outdoes them against gunships(and the thermo howitzers fire fast enough that they are sufficient for the role as well), and capital ships are all but immune to them. They don't really have a niche in which they excel. The Katana Star Cannon is a good example of how to make a good fixed ion weapon, serving as a more balanced counterpart to thermo howitzers by being a dogfighting weapon that can also bombard.

Other ammoless thermo options are much longer ranged, and have higher WMD. As an example, the MK V can outrange almost everything, uses 20% less power(and can be acquired earlier on), and has barely more than 10% less damage(which is quickly negated by the far lower need to dodge). In addition, it has a damage *advantage* when paired with the speedloader, for which the Tritium cannon has no counterpart.

If the generally harder to use and more power intensive Tritium cannon doesn't have any real advantage, it's not going to be used at all. That advantage can be higher raw DPS(enough to compensate for greater need to dodge), lower poweruse and level(making it usable earlier than the mkV), or higher WMD(making it better against capital ships). If the howitzers were altered to concentrate their DPS in a firerate low enough that they wouldn't fill the dogfighting role, this could be its niche as well.

I did not see thermo cannon on the ticket. Currently, it is twice as strong as tritium cannon, though balance guidelines for ammo seem to intend x3 to x6 instead of the x2 we get in practice.

I'd support x3, to make it attractive enough to use despite the rarity of its ammo early on yet still a worthwhile gun once the ammo - filled Gaian Processor becomes common.

[PM]

Tritium cannon is the only outlier. Yes, most non-thermo weapons are underpowered because thermo is more powerful. It is not only ion that suffers, but also particle. Level 7 particle damage is in an even worse spot than ion.

Most Ares weapons are overpowered compared to standard weaponry. Ares Lightning Turret is better than current Omni ion blaster, Hecates is better than FusionFire, and Ares Positron Cannon is better than Positron Lancer in almost every way.

Come to think of it, the only buffs Positron Lancer will get are more range and less powerUse. Damage is still no match to plasma weapons, and I am doubtful that it will make it more attractive than Ares Positron Cannon.

[JohnBWatson]

Tritium cannon is the only outlier. Yes, most non-thermo weapons are underpowered because thermo is more powerful. It is not only ion that suffers, but also particle. Level 7 particle damage is in an even worse spot than ion.

I think that's probably true. If we're planning to balance that way instead(which would make midgame enemies a bit less easy to kill and make upgrading for late game more of a priority), I suggest the following:

Increase Mk V poweruse to 90, lower firerate by half but increase damage for no net change to DPS. Set range to around 90 ls.

Tritium and thermo cannons probably work okay as is, with the planned nerf to Tritium cannon damage.

Omni TeV9 is good as is, it's a large step up from the previous omni weapon. Dual TeV9 and Hanzo could do to be more common, cheaper, or less power consuming, but they still present a reasonable threat to everything in the region.

Most Ares weapons are overpowered compared to standard weaponry. Ares Lightning Turret is better than current Omni ion blaster, Hecates is better than FusionFire, and Ares Positron Cannon is better than Positron Lancer in almost every way.

Positron Lancer seems to be a bombardment weapon, and APC a dogfighting gun. Nerfing its damage would probably be a good change considering how easy it is to acquire, but it should still be worth using compared to an omni weapon. I would also suggest changing Ares sentries to be fewer in number(2 - 3 per commune, 5 per shipyard) and field better defenses(light shielding, heavy armor, possibly larger size to compensate), in order to make the APC less trivial to acquire. Upping its rarity would be good too.

Ares Lightning Turret could use a bit less accuracy, and perhaps increased rarity and poweruse(it's effectively a massive turret gun ripped off the hull of a capital ship, after all). It'd still be a fearsome defensive gun for the Deimos and Phobos, but players looking for a way to deal concentrated damage against a single gunship would have a reason to use the OIB instead.

The Fusionfire could be overhauled now that we've got so many weapons that work exactly like it(and are generally easier to acquire). Giving it much higher damage and a radius effect on impact but a range of only 85 would set it apart from CC's mkVII, the Deimos, and the APD's thermo howitzer as well, while justifying its high cost of acquisition(in vanilla, where Omnithor isn't dropping endgame weapons like they're fuel rods) and fitting well into NAMI's reputation for creating distinctive and unique weapons.

[AssumedPseudonym]

 Speaking as someone who avoids using howitzers because I don’t like compensating for recoil, their ranges do not need reduced. These are supposed to be the game’s heavy-hitting long range weapon options. If anything, their range is a part of their balance, since it’s entirely possible to one-shot a friendly ship out of LRS range with a poorly aimed shot — the consequences of which can range from non-existent to inconvenient to getting you tried for piracy. Regardless of your disdain for long-range station sniping tactics, it is still a viable gameplay tactic, and should remain so for players players who prefer a less up-close-and-personal playstyle.

[JohnBWatson]

 Speaking as someone who avoids using howitzers because I don’t like compensating for recoil, their ranges do not need reduced. These are supposed to be the game’s heavy-hitting long range weapon options. If anything, their range is a part of their balance, since it’s entirely possible to one-shot a friendly ship out of LRS range with a poorly aimed shot — the consequences of which can range from non-existent to inconvenient to getting you tried for piracy. Regardless of your disdain for long-range station sniping tactics, it is still a viable gameplay tactic, and should remain so for players players who prefer a less up-close-and-personal playstyle.

I enjoy(and, in general, prefer) sniper weapons, but at a certain distance they start getting overpowered. Past 100ls, they can effectively kill a station and its entire set of guards with impunity, as well as quite a few late game capital ships. Even 85ls is enough to cleanly avoid any short ranged weaponry while still being vulnerable to retaliation from stations and not breaking the facings system for AI.

I use howitzers as my primary weapon in almost every game. I've hit a friendly ship only a few times, and only killed one, if I recall correctly, so it's hard to call their range a negative balancing factor.

All of this said, assuming interceptors are made effective(capable of chasing down a fleeing playership, able to survive 2 - 3 hits from most weapons, possibly able to dodge heavy weapons fire), and capital ships get them as escorts, it would probably be enough to just half howitzer firerate and double damage to compensate, so that they aren't dogfighting weapons. Having tested the APA in a few games, its lower firerate makes it weak enough as a dogfighting gun that it felt very well balanced to me(at least without the combined effects of the howitzer loader and optimizer ROM, at which point it became even more fun but objectively overpowered).

---

At present, excluding weapons with effects like EMP and device disrupt(which disable ships so that other weapons can kill them), there are three main roles for a weapon.

Bombardment
- Kills capital ships and stations

Omnidirectional
- Swats light gunships, and can be useful in prolonged dogfights with heavy gunships

Dogfighting
- Fixed angle weapons that quickly kill heavy gunships

Any weapon that is able to fill more than one of these subcategories as well as or better than a dedicated single purpose weapon of the same level is overpowered. Any that fails to adequately fill any category is underpowered. A weapon can fill more than one category and still be balanced, so long as there are drawbacks to compensate.

Examples of overpowered weapons

The Flenser and Lancer cannon can deal rapid pseudo - WMD damage to capital ships and stations from outside of weapon range, often shooting down any retaliatory fire in the process. They can also clear swarms of light gunships in a very short amount of time, often before they get in range, with their fast firing rate and quick projectiles. Finally, their raw DPS is sufficient to kill most heavy gunships of similar level. Thus, these weapons serve as satisfactory bombardment weapons, excellent dogfighting weapons, and highly efficient swarmkillers, being objectively better than most weapons of their level without any significant drawbacks.

Howitzer weapons fire fast enough to easily kill most heavy gunships, and, as they are generally slower than the player(even dedicated fighters like the Chasm are easily outrun), can be used to kite them to death without them ever getting in range. Their DPS is better than most dogfighting weapons of their respective levels, and exceedingly so with the speedloader installed, making them well above average for dogfighting. As bombardment weapons, they have average to high WMD and DPS compared to other anti - station weapons, typically use low power, and do not require ammunition, in addition to firing from a range at which station defenders, capship turrets, and stationary defensive guns cannot retaliate. Thus, they effectively fit two roles incredibly well, and have no real failings to speak of.

Examples of underpowered weapons

The Lamplighter does WMD damage, but not as much as bombardment weapons of its level, and its DPS is low enough that it would have trouble with compartments even at high WMD. Its range is low enough that capship turrets typically block its shots, and anyone using it is exposed to return fire from effectively everything. Its low shot speed and mediocre DPS makes dogfighting with it less than efficient, as well. Overall, it's useless as a bombardment weapon and mediocre for dogfighting, and comes with the significant drawback of being among the hardest weapons in the game to acquire.

The recoilless cannon has lower shot speed than its laser equivalents, with little significant difference in DPS to compensate. It can't really hit the fast enemies found early on with much effectiveness, and is harder to aim at a distance against gunships. It also has lower firerate, making it worse for killing stations in the very early game, where dedicated bombardment weapons aren't really present. It is effectively much worse than its peers across all roles.

Examples of balanced weapons

The Katana star cannon has the range and pseudo - WMD of a bombardment weapon, but lower DPS, making it capable of getting the jump on gunships but not capable of killing them before they close the distance(of course, most gunships cannot close the distance at all, and those that can do so can be killed in one hit, but this is its own issue). It can stay out of capship turret range, but killing them takes more time(enough that, when AI range glitch is fixed, fighting capital ships with one becomes genuinely challenging), and with their poweruse, this is less than optimal. With its fast firing rate and shot speed, it is a good dogfighting weapon, but lacks the raw DPS of other weapons of its level, especially small gunships that don't give its passthrough effect room to work. In effect, it's a versatile weapon that doesn't fit any role perfectly but fits two of them well enough.

The omni thermo cannon has high damage and good WMD, but requires heavy ammunition, making it important to ensure that its shots count. The ability to dodge and fire makes it decent for killing capital ships, and the omnidirectionality makes it decent for killing gunships, but the low shot speed and heavy ammunition make it less desirable than conventional turrets for taking out the fast enemies that omni weapons specialize in killing. Overall, it's a decent if unconventional bombardment weapon, and a usable but below average omni weapon, which is also moderately effective at dealing with heavy gunships. A fair, well rounded weapon that perfectly fits the EI500's style of gameplay.

[Atarlost]

Ships exist that have only two weapons slots, therefore multipurpose weapons are not overpowered but rather necessities.

[JohnBWatson]

Ships exist that have only two weapons slots, therefore multipurpose weapons are not overpowered but rather necessities.

I said almost exactly that. The lower half of my post is a treatise in support of that concept.

Multipurpose weapons are not overpowered. Multipurpose weapons that are better at their multiple roles than a comparable single purpose weapon is at its one role, however, are objectively overpowered.

[Aury]

The issue with long range weapons being able to attack stuff with impunity is a flaw with the AI system, not with the weapon. The weapon is merely being used to exploit a flaw in the AI system.

[Atarlost]

Ships exist that have only two weapons slots, therefore multipurpose weapons are not overpowered but rather necessities.

I said almost exactly that. The lower half of my post is a treatise in support of that concept.

And yet almost every balance suggestion you make is a demand for an allegedly multipurpose weapon to be nerfed into uselessness.

[JohnBWatson]

The issue with long range weapons being able to attack stuff with impunity is a flaw with the AI system, not with the weapon. The weapon is merely being used to exploit a flaw in the AI system.

Anything that's slower than the player and has a shorter range weapon cannot retaliate regardless of AI. There are some complex things that can be done to alleviate this, like having ranx gunships that are going to attack a player that's faster than them and has a longer ranged weapon instead going to escort the nearest dreadnought and telling the dreadnought to go after the player, but it's certainly not a simple fix.

---

And yet almost every balance suggestion you make is a demand for an allegedly multipurpose weapon to be nerfed into uselessness.

"Useless" isn't a synonym for "not objectively better than every other weapon of its level".

Find a good reason to use a missile or mag launcher over a howitzer. Compare the mk V howitzer to the tritium cannon or Katana, and find any real reason not to use it. Ditto for the Mk III and the Nandao, Behemoth Cannon, or Tev9. Compare the lancer or Flenser to the Sunflare, dual particle weapon, or heavy slam cannon.

---

On another note, the Ares Lightning Cannon should probably be at least a level lower than the Mk V, Katana, or Tritium Cannon.