Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8

Author Topic: The Balance Beam  (Read 34061 times)

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #15 on: April 13, 2017, 01:00:08 PM »

Here's a demonstration, showing how what I've said works in regards to Beam balance.

The results were unequivocal.  

Despite the AI being afraid to close aggressively with the Beam-armed Frigates, the IR Pulse Lasers win, every time, by a considerable margin.  Much more so if humans intervene in any way (even a Waypoint suddenly structures the outcome in favor of the IR's), and I suspect much more so if the IR Pulse Frigates had Aggressive captains.

The "beams are fine and do magical things when they're piled up" arguments simply didn't hold water, folks.  What really happens is that, when the IR Pulse laser-armed ships finally get into range, which takes bloody forever because the AI is being too conservative, they put a Hard Flux lock on the Beam-frigates, which cuts their speed by 50 until they Vent.  Then the IR Pulse lasers get a few hits in here and there.  Both sides tend to stay Flux-locked a lot more often than is reasonable, but that's Alex's AI behavioral code doing its thing.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 01:05:17 PM by xenoargh »
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Dark.Revenant

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2806
    • View Profile
    • Sc2Mafia
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #16 on: April 13, 2017, 01:01:38 PM »

FYI: beams do damage several times a second, not per frame.  Also, the armor damage reduction calculation simply uses DPS/2.

Beyond that, your estimation of beams is dead wrong.  Ten tac lasers painting a target is like a low-cost Longinus Heavy Laser baking your shield.  Projectiles can be dodged and shield-feathered against; this is not possible with beams.  Combined with their range, this gives beam weapons an unusual power curve where they begin poor and, after reaching a critical mass of beams in your fleet, become utterly unstoppable.
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #17 on: April 13, 2017, 01:08:53 PM »

I just put up a demo that speaks for itself.  Science!

Beams just ~look~ magical, because when you exceed the Dissipation stat, the extra Flux-per-second climbs really fast, instead of being staggered.  The basic mechanics aren't special.  They're just a gun that does damage over time very consistently and has a huge range advantage.  Take away the range advantages and they're not powerful at all.

As for the dodged / feathered, yeah, yeah, that's so much a part of what actually happens in big fleet battles... not. 

Players do that fancy stuff as they kite / aggro their way to victory; the AI generally doesn't, and when it's a big fight, it's even worse.  I'm pretty sure I could take down all 10 of those beam ships with the IR ship solo, frankly.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 01:11:33 PM by xenoargh »
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2847
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #18 on: April 13, 2017, 01:16:46 PM »

I just put up a demo that speaks for itself.  Science!

Beams just ~look~ magical, because when you exceed the Dissipation stat, the extra Flux-per-second climbs really fast, instead of being staggered.  The basic mechanics aren't special.  They're just a gun that does damage over time very consistently and has a huge range advantage.  Take away the range advantages and they're not powerful at all.

As for the dodged / feathered, yeah, yeah, that's so much a part of what actually happens in big fleet battles... not. 

Players do that fancy stuff as they kite / aggro their way to victory; the AI generally doesn't, and when it's a big fight, it's even worse.  I'm pretty sure I could take down all 10 of those beam ships with the IR ship solo, frankly.
Using skills doesn't count as they are currently OP as all hell and most high quality content is balanced around level 0
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7223
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #19 on: April 13, 2017, 01:20:28 PM »

Quote
Take away the range advantages and they're not powerful at all.
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #20 on: April 13, 2017, 01:21:02 PM »

Right.  There aren't any Skills, Captain levels, all Captain AIs are "Steady", etc., etc., in the demo.

And Thaago, range matters a huge amount; what I'm pointing out here is that they're still not all that; you've said "I think you're undervaluing Beams in Vanilla", I've said, "no, I'm correctly valuing them, I think"... this gives us a good demo.

Let's try another version, with my current rebalance numbers; if I'm way, way wrong, then my new Beam values ought to mean the Beam Frigates suddenly destroy the IR Pulse Frigates, right?  I can deal with the embarrassment, if the fudge-factors are wrong; that's fixable, after all.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 01:25:11 PM by xenoargh »
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

mehgamer

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 58
  • TTK is not representative of combat performance.
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #21 on: April 13, 2017, 01:32:52 PM »

Any time you argue points exclusively based on statistics like "Time To Kill", or test weapons meant for fleet scale engagements exclusively in 1v1 engagements, you're showing that you're missing the point entirely.  Beams are powerful.  Other people have said it better than me already.

In fact there's nothing more I CAN say here except you really need to try things in situations other than 1v1 duels.
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #22 on: April 13, 2017, 01:53:22 PM »

Here's after-balance in an identical testing scenario.

This time, the Beams ever-so-slightly win the fight.  It was far more even than the first demo was, but the range advantages allowed the Frigates to concentrate their fire well-enough to pull ahead.

Quote
you really need to try things in situations other than 1v1 duels.
Uh... you did try the demos, right?  Because they're 10 vs. 10 fights, no human intervention unless you spend Command Points, by design.  

Basically, this is Science, not just some nerdy theory-crafting; we can watch the results in real-time.


Anyhow, let's do one last test of the balance equations, to settle this.  I'm going to balance both Tac Lasers and IR Pulse to have identical ranges and 1.0 efficiency... let's see how this works out.  If it's still pretty even, I have the fudge-factors set about right.
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #23 on: April 13, 2017, 02:15:45 PM »

Well, it's nice to have a theory borne out by reality.

Here's after-balance, where Beams and IR Pulse Lasers have equal range (but wildly different OP costs and DPS/Flux efficiencies).

The IR Pulse Lasers won this fight hands down.  Take away the range advantages, and all of the other "advantages" of the Beams go away, even with me undervaluing them by 75% vs. everything else (y'all did catch that in the first release of the spreadsheet... right?) to compensate for Soft Flux damage.

So, the question this leaves me with is whether range is under-valued a bit (my first thought) or whether Beams need a further handicap.  

If I go with my first instinct (range is still under-valued) then the Tac Laser can go back to my previous values, but will need to be a teeny bit less-efficient, since it didn't exactly face-roll the IR Pulse Laser equipped ships, just gradually killed them off.  

If I go the other way, Tac Lasers need to be just a little bit more efficient and IR Pulse goes back to the original values, which would mean Tac Lasers would continue to win this scenario by a little bit, like the first test of my theory.  I'm not sure that makes them OP, though; they're still required to stay at a distance to remain efficient, I think.

But the real difference in TTK and the effects of Hard Flux was rather striking in this demo; the IR Pulses demonstrated quite aptly that, once the Shield was no longer a factor, their damage-per-shot vs. Armor was a major contributor to their victory.  It took them a while to get close enough to do damage (the AI crowded the edges of the map invariably) but it eventually worked in their favor, because of the stuff I've been saying about the difference between needing to Vent and simply backing away.  

This strongly suggests, at least to me, that I'm going to have to include Armor TTK to get HE and weapons with higher-than-average per-shot damage balanced correctly.  So, on that score at least, my spreadsheet formulas are probably still wrong.  I can live with that.

So, test these scenarios out and feel free to poke holes in my working theories, folks.  Feel free to run each scenario a hundred times, to make sure I didn't just record statistical noise, etc.  I'm fairly certain we're looking at reality, though.  I'm pretty close, but not quite there; the basic theory looks good but there's room around the edges for improvements.  

But can we quit trying to burn me at the stake or feed me hemlock, now?  None of the balance produced by the equations is crazy; if the moaning is because the TTK is too short, we can always set the 1.0 balance figures to a different DPS / Flux efficiency level, so that it's balanced, but feels more "Vanilla".
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 02:43:08 PM by xenoargh »
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Dark.Revenant

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2806
    • View Profile
    • Sc2Mafia
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #24 on: April 13, 2017, 03:24:42 PM »

It's not that beams are inherently more powerful, it's that they get more than projectile weapons out of the best stat in the game: range.  Tactical lasers, graviton beams, and HILs are so good because they reach out so far.  With that extra range, more beams can paint the target from more turrets/ships.  And it's not like you can dodge a tac laser at 1000 range like you can a HVD (AI doesn't always lead the target properly, so even in AI vs AI it misses a lot).

With few beams, they're proportionally weaker than projectile weapons.  With many beams, they're proportionally stronger.  You can push the break-even point left or right but you can't eliminate it unless range is capped.
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #25 on: April 13, 2017, 07:16:53 PM »

I agree with you on that; the demonstrations pretty clearly demonstrate how that works. 

Don't get me wrong; Beams reaching past fleet members in a big scrum are valuable. 

This whole debate is "how valuable are they" and "can we value them correctly with ballistic weapons" (well, when it hasn't been "burn the heretic", lol). 

I think that we've got some answers here; yes, we can compare them to ballistic weapons without absurdity and they're a bit less-valuable than current Vanilla numbers suggest, but they certainly don't suck now, even in Vanilla.

Anyhow, I've got the next build of the spreadsheet done. 

I'm correcting a goof this time, too; the numbers being produced really aren't bad, when an outlier is very obviously OP, and I left 6 weapons in that are (but 2 are arguable).

Making the Heavy MG much better than 1.0 is problematic, to say the least; even though other Kinetics out-range it in that size category, it became the obvious choice, unless the ship couldn't close the range.  Lessons of the Light Needler, there.

How to handle the issue of weapons that are primary PD is a bit of a puzzler, frankly.  They often waste rounds, given that their targets are frequently smaller than 32.  But if they're given much of a bonus, they're too dangerous as prime weapons.  Cutting their ranges below 400 means they're frequently unable to address threats in time to kill them, though.  My compromise is that LMGs got cut down quite a lot on their DPS and Vulcans are the kings of DPS / Flux, against unarmored targets, which is basically in-line with Vanilla.

The two weapons that have been left as outliers are the Ion family.  They're a good example of where this stuff breaks (not to mention how they behave in SS+); I probably need a "special effect bonus" or something to give modders a reasonable fudge-factor, for all of the weird guns that do weird things.
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #26 on: April 16, 2017, 06:16:42 PM »

OK, I feel pretty confident this is now a reasonable system, after a few more adjustments.

You can download a test of the rebalanced weapons here.  

Raw CSV format for now, I'll build a mod for this later.

Changes made:

1.  TTK's factor in balance needed some tweaking, to get it better in line with DPS / Flux.  This fixed some issues with certain weapons that have very high rates of fire (LMG, Vulcan, Chaingun) that felt like they weren't quite right.  It took a couple of passes to get it to feel about right, in terms of preserving a similar-to-Vanilla feel to Flux tradeoffs.

2.  I tweaked the value of range a bit more, using 800 as the basis point; this slanted the Small weapons to be a bit more efficient than Medium and Large.

3.  Soft Flux from EMP damage is now accounted for properly, like Beam damage.

4.  I refactored how I look at the TTK in relation to Armor a bit.

I think that now it's mainly just adding in a fudge-factor for "worth" for special modded weapons that go way outside the box and it's about ready to be used as a tool.  

I think that people will find that the results are pretty clearly better now.  While the values are different in a few important cases and a few specific weapons are suddenly better / worse after adjustments, none of them feel useless and there aren't all the big, obvious holes in the weapons that there used to be.  

If people find that the weapons are feeling too efficient, the best fix is to punish weapons for TTK or range; these are our best control factors.  But they're kind of blunt objects and I honestly feel like these values are about right now.

Change Examples

Kinetics

Heavy Machine Guns actually have a point, rather than just being "me, too++" slightly-scaled-up but way-less-efficient LMGs.; they're able to switch-hit and serve both as heavy PD and as Kinetic assault weapons.  

Light Needlers remain great shield-killers, but aren't the over-powered, ultra-efficient weapons they once were, so the Light Autocannons are considerably more attractive as slow-burn Kinetics with higher-per-round armor killing power.  They're both "good", they both still have different roles; but Light Needlers aren't a huge upgrade that you literally won't ever skip once they're available.  

Heavy Needlers are feeling better.  Choosing them used to be a no-brainer except for a few squirrel cases (Light Needlers were so much more efficient that it rarely made sense to use Heavies if you were minmaxing) but it no longer is; Heavy Needlers get more range and considerably more burst damage, but you have to pay the Flux costs; they have a place that works for them that's pretty obvious.

Arbalests aren't terrifically-inefficient guns; they and the Heavy AC each have pretty obvious niches and are complementary, and neither one is overshadowed by the Light Needler or Railgun.

High Explosive

The Light Mortar is no longer an inefficient joke-gun.

The Heavy Mauler is no longer the obvious choice in Medium HE.  It still kites just fine, but the Chaingun is now efficient-enough that it's a real choice; do you want kiting kills or do you want a 1-2 Kinetic / HE punch for efficient killing?

Fragmentation

The Vulcan lost some DPS / Flux but it got into a better range-band.

The Flak / Dual Flak are probably in need of my last "adjustment" variable; they're sensibly-priced (i.e., very efficient) when considered without their AoE.  I don't think that matters very much, though; they were always quite efficient for their use-case.

The Thumper remains somewhat-questionable, but in theory, it should now be a fairly-decent pressure weapon as well as a shredder of fighters.

Energy

In general, this whole category got improved, which is totally proper now that so many ships can choose between Ballistics and Energy weapons.  I've also decided, somewhat arbitrarily, to declare that these weapons are all "Blasters", to keep them from being confused with Beams by newbies.

The IR Pulse Blaster and Pulse Blaster remain good, solid workhorse guns, but they're no longer weirdly gimped vs. their Kinetic rivals and they're more efficient.

The Mjolnir is a weird case; it's efficient but I think that it's priced correctly now for its giant price of 24 OPs.  I wasn't convinced until I tested it out a bit.

The Auto Pulse makes good sense as a pressure gun; it's a firehose of pure power that will kill your Flux reserves but can destroy a ship in seconds.

The Mining Blaster, Antimatter Blaster and Heavy Blaster all have their own niches that are sensible.  The Mining Blaster, in particular, was in need of some love, as it's been terrible for ages and largely ignored by serious players.  It's now in a niche spot where it's at 600 range and fits between the Heavy Blaster and Antimatter Blaster in terms of per-shot damage.  The Antimatter Blaster no longer has ammo limits, a relic value that was left in the Vanilla CSV for <reasons?>.

Beams

Beam changes are probably the most-controversial aspects of this rebalance, because it's one of the few areas where I made significant alterations to Vanilla's core concepts in a few spots.

I've said, repeatedly, that the PD Laser and Mining Laser need to be differentiated in the game design; they're way too "samey" for my tastes.  Mining Lasers are now burst-beams like Phase Lances; high DPS, short bursts, high Flux per burst.  They're reasonable PD and can serve as assault weapons.  This gives them a vastly-different sense of role.

The PD Laser and LRPD Laser are both very well-differentiated now.  LRPD no longer feels somewhat-superfluous; it's OK-ish at its prime job, if sub-par vs. fighters.  The PD Laser is quite efficient but remains short-ranged, but slightly longer-ranged than the Ballistic equivalents.

The Tac Laser remains a decent workhorse "support" weapon that feels like it's actually support.  Range was reduced to 800 to differentiate it from the Medium mount weapons but leave it with a longer base range than Small Ballistics.  This gave it a bit more efficiency, so that it's trading Soft Flux at a considerable advantage, which feels about right now.

The Phase Lance is almost unchanged.  It's still a short-ranged, high-cost death-dealer.

The Graviton Beam is more efficient, making it an excellent support weapon even before Captain bonuses.  I like how it changed, because it and the Tac Laser now have distinct roles, rather than feeling rather "me-too".

Guardians finally make sense, as a jack-of-all-trades large upgrade to Heavy Burst PD.  It's efficient now, and that means that while it's still not an assault weapon, it's death to unshielded Fighters and it's very good PD against heavier ordinance.  I'd actually consider buying one now, if it wasn't Large.

The HIL is not a great deal different than Vanilla's current balance.  It trades Flux a bit better now, but it's still basically a HE-damage razor you can chop armor with if Shields fail.

The vaunted Tachyon Lance is still a bit disappointing after re-balancing it.  Then again, it isn't amazing in Vanilla with its current range, either.  It's still a big burst-DPS gun that can be pretty deadly vs. unshielded targets or targets that have high Flux.  Kind of tempted to crank it up in some way, to eat more Flux but actually kill things.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2017, 06:23:40 PM by xenoargh »
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7223
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #27 on: April 16, 2017, 09:23:03 PM »

I decided to download this and take a look - I think the file you have posted must have some columns swapped or shifted or something, because the values here are just not right.

Example:

LMG: 150 damage/s, 88 flux/s
DLMG: 600 damage/s, 420 flux/s

Heavy Mauler: 500 damage per second and per shot (!), 187 flux per second
HVD: 138 dps, 84 fps
Heavy Autocannon: 333 dps, 66 fps
Heavy Needler: 580dps, 823 fps

Could you verify that the file is correct?
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #28 on: April 17, 2017, 08:48:47 AM »

Those numbers are correct.

The big issue here, and I'll admit it's a puzzler, is that, essentially, if weapons are actually balanced fairly accurately against OPs, they're simply not going to resemble Vanilla's numbers, because Vanilla's numbers aren't good.

The main reason for that, in terms of what I'm doing on the math side, is how I'm dealing with Time To Kill- a factor we largely need in there to better-adjust for weapons with huge cyclic speeds vs. weapons that shoot very infrequently.

If that's set too aggressively, then weapons like the LMGs cost more Flux than the damage they do (inverse of Vanilla) and ships using them for PD get bogged down with Soft Flux costs very rapidly.  If it's set too loose, it makes stuff like the Mauler, which shoots fairly infrequently, very efficient.  Which isn't actually a terrible thing, but it certainly makes the game play differently.  Not that I care much about that, because the whole point is to make the game play in a balanced way, so that it's not robbed of real variety if you're playing it seriously.

One possible fix for this specific problem (i.e., that players expect weapons with ranges > 600 to be 1:1 Flux-efficient or less) is to either declare that by fiat or by further penalizing range, so that short-ranged weapons get even stronger.  Might work.

Anyhow, I understand what you're saying here and I'll see if I can adjust this in a way that gets closer to the expected result for Flux / DPS while still remaining balanced vs. OPs.  Not sure I can reconcile stuff like the LMGs / Vulcans, but I'll try my best.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2017, 09:00:38 AM by xenoargh »
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7223
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: The Balance Beam
« Reply #29 on: April 17, 2017, 09:50:21 AM »

I playtested for roughly 30 minutes.

Constructive feedback:

Offense is WAY too high. It depends on the weapon, but things are dealing between 2 and 3 times as much damage as they should. It trivializes armor and magnifies range as the all important stat. Any ship that gains an advantage instantly wins.

Flux costs are WAY too low. There is none of the "offense vs dissipation" that makes building and flying vanilla ships fun - any ship that can shoot wins the flux war. Usually without needing to put any vents on. Just singling out the Heavy Autocannon, it has a 6:1 damage to flux ratio on a kinetic. That should immediately tell you that your results are not working.

The only part of a ship that matters with these weapons is number of mounts, speed, and size class (for range) - capacity, dissipation, armor, hull... basically don't matter because the balance is so bad.

I tested beams a bit. 200 damage gravitons are interesting in that they immediately overwhelm frigate and destroyer systems. Its horrific, but actually in line with how overpowered a lot of weapons are. So... balanced?

I don't know what metric you are using to balance these guns Xeno, but the results are atrocious. Perhaps if you spell out explicitly your metrics? Something to do with TTK and OP costs? In which case, how can you have a 3 OP lmg doing 150 and a 5 OP ldmg doing 600? Or that the Heavy Mauler does almost the same damage as the HVD against shields. It doesn't matter that is costs double the flux, because that flux cost is still easily managed by ships that will be firing them - there is essentially no reason to ever use a HVD.

I'll be honest here: I don't see just tweaking the Damage:Flux parameter fixing things. Too many other things are just not right.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 8