Author Topic: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread  (Read 166518 times)

Offline Solarius Scorch

  • Global Moderator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 9928
  • WE MUST DISSENT
    • View Profile
    • Nocturmal Productions modding studio website
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #810 on: February 15, 2020, 07:27:21 pm »
Robin made very nice scientists of both genders (in From The Apocalypse).

Offline mlavia

  • Squaddie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #811 on: April 21, 2020, 05:08:14 pm »
Is the alloy ammo cost really intended?
I like the idea of alloy ammo to improve early game conventional weapons, but manufacturing cost and time are so high that are pushing them out of the game (specially in early game, when you need them).
From a fast calculation, supposing 40 engineers working for 730 hours per month and computing base maintenance costs, this is a compare table with conventional ammo costs (per single unit buyed/produced):
(sorry for the terrible formatting, I'm new here)

pistol clip: 70 - alloy: 1774 (more than 25 times over)
rifle clip: 200 - alloy: 3180 (~16 times)
shotgun clip: 200 - alloy: 7401 (~37 times)
sniper clip: 500 - alloy: 8401 (~17 times)
HC AP: 300 - alloy: 12184 (~40 times)
AA AP: 500 - alloy: 12184 (~24 times)

and for a complete comparison:

knife: 100 - alloy: 18236 (~182 times!)
rocket: 900 - elerium: 33733 (~37 times)
vest: 20000 - alloy: 75438 (~3.77 times)

For a mere +10 damage, seems skipping them and investing the money in laser research is a much better investment.
I did not study the whole game economy, but I think alloy items cost ratio should be more like the alloy vest, or something between 5-10 times conventional costs. This could be easily achieved raising by ten times the number of clips produced (and the required alloy) in a single production cycle, but keeping current project time and space. It would also be logical that ammo clips are produced in batches and you can't start a project for a single one. I think the real challenge with these items should be the alloy management, not the cash. I could post more specific numbers if requested.

Offline hellrazor

  • Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 2254
  • Deep Ruleset Digger & Bughunter
    • View Profile
    • Github Account
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #812 on: April 22, 2020, 10:11:49 pm »
Is the alloy ammo cost really intended?
I like the idea of alloy ammo to improve early game conventional weapons, but manufacturing cost and time are so high that are pushing them out of the game (specially in early game, when you need them).
From a fast calculation, supposing 40 engineers working for 730 hours per month and computing base maintenance costs, this is a compare table with conventional ammo costs (per single unit buyed/produced):
(sorry for the terrible formatting, I'm new here)

pistol clip: 70 - alloy: 1774 (more than 25 times over)
rifle clip: 200 - alloy: 3180 (~16 times)
shotgun clip: 200 - alloy: 7401 (~37 times)
sniper clip: 500 - alloy: 8401 (~17 times)
HC AP: 300 - alloy: 12184 (~40 times)
AA AP: 500 - alloy: 12184 (~24 times)

and for a complete comparison:

knife: 100 - alloy: 18236 (~182 times!)
rocket: 900 - elerium: 33733 (~37 times)
vest: 20000 - alloy: 75438 (~3.77 times)

For a mere +10 damage, seems skipping them and investing the money in laser research is a much better investment.
I did not study the whole game economy, but I think alloy items cost ratio should be more like the alloy vest, or something between 5-10 times conventional costs. This could be easily achieved raising by ten times the number of clips produced (and the required alloy) in a single production cycle, but keeping current project time and space. It would also be logical that ammo clips are produced in batches and you can't start a project for a single one. I think the real challenge with these items should be the alloy management, not the cash. I could post more specific numbers if requested.

Manufacturing times and cost will stay as they are and are prefectly balanced.
Also you can not produce alien alloys so where is your problem?

If you wish to go through the painful process of going to get Laser Weapons without Alloy Ammo, feel free to do so.
Even thou i do not recommend it.

If you think the mod is not balanced correctly, feel free to do so.
I do not see any issues in this regard.

Whats your problem anyway?


Offline mlavia

  • Squaddie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #813 on: April 23, 2020, 12:38:12 am »
Ehi, no need to be upset.
This thread is called feedback, so I provided a feedback.

I did some January/April run tests, and peeked manufacture and research rules.
Funds are scarce and you need loot to pay upkeeps, so I found more appropriate to invest in radar outposts and weapon research (scanner, drones, explosive, containment -> slate -> laser = good weapons and good money).
The base mission is doable in February with drones and conventional weapons + explosive (vs. Floaters, Reapers). I really like drones!
The only unfair missions are terror missions, where all civilians are dead after 2/3 turns and you often face 4+ Cyberdisk just in front of your Skyranger door. Only wise choice is abort, but even when you win you collect a big negative score due to civilian casualties.
But before lasers, the only life saving strategy is to smoke, scout, snipe/rocket. It gets repetitive. Differently from vanilla, AI tends to send all aliens out of the ufo (why?), and I can wait and snipe/blow them on the door. I almost never entered large ufos (I would like to, but aliens keep coming out and I never have a safe approach chance).
I tried alloy ammo, and I found it more enjoyable because they allow little bit more aggressive and less tedious strategy.
But I really felt they are too far overpriced (see the numbers) and was curious to understand the reason, if any (did I miss something? no debate over it in the forum?), so I asked. I also did my personal rebalance in the rules, felt it more fun and realistic (in game terms) and shared my mind. That's all.

I would also change the alloy weapons tree a little bit:
(melee): alien alloy -> alloy knife -> alloy sword (no dependence from ammo and personal armor)
(fire): alien alloy -> alloy ammo -> alloy cannon (cannot operate a cannon before ammo)

I never used melee until now, it just makes more sense to me like this.
I really could not find any debate on alloy weapons in the forum, so was thinking they are overlooked and not properly balanced.
But they are just suggestions, you can discard them without being harsh.
Peace!

Offline hellrazor

  • Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 2254
  • Deep Ruleset Digger & Bughunter
    • View Profile
    • Github Account
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #814 on: June 21, 2020, 07:42:02 pm »
Ehi, no need to be upset.
This thread is called feedback, so I provided a feedback.

Sorry bro, I was over reacting, just came out of lockdown when i wrote the last message.
Did seem it got to me, this social isolation...

I did some January/April run tests, and peeked manufacture and research rules.
Funds are scarce and you need loot to pay upkeeps, so I found more appropriate to invest in radar outposts and weapon research (scanner, drones, explosive, containment -> slate -> laser = good weapons and good money).

Good, i hope you enjoyed it so far. Money is scarce intentionally.

The base mission is doable in February with drones and conventional weapons + explosive (vs. Floaters, Reapers). I really like drones!
The only unfair missions are terror missions, where all civilians are dead after 2/3 turns and you often face 4+ Cyberdisk just in front of your Skyranger door. Only wise choice is abort, but even when you win you collect a big negative score due to civilian casualties.

Jeah Terrormissions are basically screw you player thing so to say. This might change in early game in the future, when armed civilians (police, soldiers) also play a role.
But usually you can fight the missions and still get a okish score. Better then to take the immense despawn penalty.

But before lasers, the only life saving strategy is to smoke, scout, snipe/rocket. It gets repetitive. Differently from vanilla, AI tends to send all aliens out of the ufo (why?), and I can wait and snipe/blow them on the door. I almost never entered large ufos (I would like to, but aliens keep coming out and I never have a safe approach chance).
I tried alloy ammo, and I found it more enjoyable because they allow little bit more aggressive and less tedious strategy.
But I really felt they are too far overpriced (see the numbers) and was curious to understand the reason, if any (did I miss something? no debate over it in the forum?), so I asked. I also did my personal rebalance in the rules, felt it more fun and realistic (in game terms) and shared my mind. That's all.

Overpriced? You mean how many clips you can produce from 1 alien alloy? Production time and space?

I would also change the alloy weapons tree a little bit:
(melee): alien alloy -> alloy knife -> alloy sword (no dependence from ammo and personal armor)
(fire): alien alloy -> alloy ammo -> alloy cannon (cannot operate a cannon before ammo)

Interesting suggestion, i consider those changes. Have to review the research tree anyway. Thanks.

I never used melee until now, it just makes more sense to me like this.
I really could not find any debate on alloy weapons in the forum, so was thinking they are overlooked and not properly balanced.
But they are just suggestions, you can discard them without being harsh.
Peace!

Well damagewise and researchwise i think the alloy ammo in my mod i pretty balanced towards the enemies. Production of the ammo is something else.

Would you mind sharing the changed ruleset? Maybe your changes are more reasonable and realistic, a look can't hurt :)

Offline mlavia

  • Squaddie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #815 on: June 29, 2020, 02:14:45 am »
Would you mind sharing the changed ruleset? Maybe your changes are more reasonable and realistic, a look can't hurt :)

Sorry, after reaching lasers I didn't care alloy ammo anymore, so I didn't save my modified ruleset when updating to your new version. Now I'm December, fighting all the big bad guys with high tech weapons.
Anyway I still have my costs analysis sheet (see attach), so is possible to recreate it.
For "overpriced" I mean total production costs are too high compared to the normal ammo, and giving a low benefit (+10 damage) it would push the player to skip them (specially because you need them only in the early game, when your cash is short).
To fit them into the game I tried to lower their production costs, but balancing production of single clips was impossible due to the high labour/workshop cost, so I created batches of clips.
This way alloy ammo will cost about ten times the normal one for rifles, and some more for the cannons.
As I said, I didn't study the whole economy of the game nor a perfect new balance of ammo costs, just did a quick and dirty fix for something I felt wrong.

Offline mlavia

  • Squaddie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #816 on: July 03, 2020, 11:03:39 am »
There is something else giving me a bad feeling: almost every month the aliens will send a large group of UFO trying to build a base. Even if I attack and destroy every landed UFO, the base is still built and a local country infiltrated. And even if I destroy the base before the end of the month (and my area/country score is much higher than the aliens) the country is still lost. I understand you want to make the game hard, but I feel this is somewhat incoherent with the outcome of the events (aliens were totally defeated).
Anyway, after discovering lasers (april/may) I start to build laser cannon factories everywhere and stop concerning about money. So losing countries is not really affecting the game, but still leaving a bitter taste in the mouth since you are punished even if you didn't do anything wrong.

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1346
    • View Profile
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #817 on: July 06, 2020, 05:24:04 pm »
Even if I attack and destroy every landed UFO, the base is still built and a local country infiltrated. And even if I destroy the base before the end of the month (and my area/country score is much higher than the aliens) the country is still lost.

To Hellrazor: It is now possible to allow an infiltration mission to fail (thus not build the base AND not cause nation to leave council) by adding an interrupt chance to one or more of its waves. There has to be at least one wave after the one that interrupts it, because the mission completes at the same instant that the final wave spawns onto the globe.

Code: [Select]
      - ufo: STR_BATTLESHIP
        interruptPercentage: 100
        count: 1
        trajectory: P6
        timer: 120

^ In the above case, if this battleship is either shot down or a ground assault finishes it off, the mission has a 100% chance of failing. This failure can only occur if the mission has not already completed, therefore one or more extra waves must be tacked onto the list, appearing after the battleship. It takes around 4-8 hours for the battleship to land, and it stays landed for another 6-10 maybe, so if you have the final wave (a small scout, for example) appear with a wave timer of 1440 (24 hours), it'll take 12-36 hours to appear, which will always grant enough time to assault the battleship.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2020, 05:25:49 pm by The Reaver of Darkness »

Offline hellrazor

  • Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 2254
  • Deep Ruleset Digger & Bughunter
    • View Profile
    • Github Account
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #818 on: July 06, 2020, 05:30:17 pm »
To Hellrazor: It is now possible to allow an infiltration mission to fail (thus not build the base AND not cause nation to leave council) by adding an interrupt chance to one or more of its waves. There has to be at least one wave after the one that interrupts it, because the mission completes at the same instant that the final wave spawns onto the globe.

Code: [Select]
      - ufo: STR_BATTLESHIP
        interruptPercentage: 100
        count: 1
        trajectory: P6
        timer: 120

^ In the above case, if this battleship is either shot down or a ground assault finishes it off, the mission has a 100% chance of failing. This failure can only occur if the mission has not already completed, therefore one or more extra waves must be tacked onto the list, appearing after the battleship. It takes around 4-8 hours for the battleship to land, and it stays landed for another 6-10 maybe, so if you have the final wave (a small scout, for example) appear with a wave timer of 1440 (24 hours), it'll take 12-36 hours to appear, which will always grant enough time to assault the battleship.

Interesting i was not aware of this.
Is this OXC or OCXE option?

Remeber i will not support OXCE, only OXC.

Offline hellrazor

  • Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 2254
  • Deep Ruleset Digger & Bughunter
    • View Profile
    • Github Account
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #819 on: July 06, 2020, 05:31:22 pm »
There is something else giving me a bad feeling: almost every month the aliens will send a large group of UFO trying to build a base. Even if I attack and destroy every landed UFO, the base is still built and a local country infiltrated. And even if I destroy the base before the end of the month (and my area/country score is much higher than the aliens) the country is still lost. I understand you want to make the game hard, but I feel this is somewhat incoherent with the outcome of the events (aliens were totally defeated).
Anyway, after discovering lasers (april/may) I start to build laser cannon factories everywhere and stop concerning about money. So losing countries is not really affecting the game, but still leaving a bitter taste in the mouth since you are punished even if you didn't do anything wrong.

That is default DOS Version behaviour. So to say vanilla.
But yes maybe something can be done about this with the option DarkReaver mentioned, I will check.

Offline The Reaver of Darkness

  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1346
    • View Profile
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #820 on: July 07, 2020, 01:01:57 am »
It's OXCE, but you don't have to support OXCE to add it. People will only be able to make the mission end early if they are using OXCE, but the other players will be unaffected. (It will make a small balance difference between playing OXC or playing OXCE.)

Offline hellrazor

  • Moderator
  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 2254
  • Deep Ruleset Digger & Bughunter
    • View Profile
    • Github Account
Re: [EXPANSION]Hardmode Expansion -- General Feedback Thread
« Reply #821 on: July 07, 2020, 02:22:51 am »
It's OXCE, but you don't have to support OXCE to add it. People will only be able to make the mission end early if they are using OXCE, but the other players will be unaffected. (It will make a small balance difference between playing OXC or playing OXCE.)

So it could be used additionally. I see. I might consider it.
Thanks for your constructive critic. :)