The Energon Pub

[[This is split from darkmount as its a conversation for everyone, not just the 'cons - Psych.]]

Psychout wrote:

Name_Violation wrote:predator: ram 1000, avoid 3000
Med vehic: ram 1000, avoid 3500

in the long run it costs way more for tactics.

2 avoid is 6000 vs 7000. it just keeps getting worse.

Now IF you have the xp to spare its viable, but thats why i stick with predators and hunters. best price break for tactics.

We need to start balancing out the tactic types better, so we dont end up with only 2 types used and the rest being regarded as too expensive.

Any one got any ideas to try and help us with that?

either lower the cost of some secondary tactics (except for ram/strafers) or add aome new tactics to single tactic alts

pounce- like strafe, but str based
charge shot- ram, but fpr based
Resist- avoid, but end based

Psychout wrote:We need to start balancing out the tactic types better, so we dont end up with only 2 types used and the rest being regarded as too expensive.

I don't believe that everyone is as worried about the costs of the various types so much as getting ones they like. though of course there are some people that must try and min/max everything to perfection.

Bristleback wrote:

Psychout wrote:We need to start balancing out the tactic types better, so we dont end up with only 2 types used and the rest being regarded as too expensive.

I don't believe that everyone is as worried about the costs of the various types so much as getting ones they like. though of course there are some people that must try and min/max everything to perfection.

tru, but it would be nice if moat alts had a standardized 1000/3000 cost. alts with dual offensive tactics could have 1000/4000 and maybe some 1500/3500 tactic costs.

and its not all about min maxing. i just dont wanna wait an extra week to upgrade my second tactic with a vehicle.

Name_Violation wrote:

Bristleback wrote:

Psychout wrote:We need to start balancing out the tactic types better, so we dont end up with only 2 types used and the rest being regarded as too expensive.

I don't believe that everyone is as worried about the costs of the various types so much as getting ones they like. though of course there are some people that must try and min/max everything to perfection.

tru, but it would be nice if moat alts had a standardized 1000/3000 cost. alts with dual offensive tactics could have 1000/4000 and maybe some 1500/3500 tactic costs.

and its not all about min maxing. i just dont wanna wait an extra week to upgrade my second tactic with a vehicle.

Ahhh, fair enough, then for you it's all about the impatience.

Seriously though I kind of like the pricing differences, it makes choosing an alt something more to consider and can be used to explain why the sides have preferences for certain modes and others are more rare.

Psychout wrote:We need to start balancing out the tactic types better, so we dont end up with only 2 types used and the rest being regarded as too expensive.

Any one got any ideas to try and help us with that?

ohh yeah, plenty of ideas, and gripes on this issue , got me working, lets see what i can do

got a question that if possible would change the outcome before i take a deep gouge at this
1= issue with un-lockable tactics
example = strong air animal 1k ram, 3k avoid with it unlocked with 2 skill, what is a ram avoider going to do with 2 skill when he is a str bonus user for damage and the skill is waisted.
so before i dive in is there a way to change the unlockable tactics, stats say from only skill/int to others this would open up more alt tactic configs. and make a standard unlock prices.
like to unlock
avoid= 2 spd or end
repair= 2 int
strafe= 2 skill or frp being they use weapons anyway
ram= 2 str or crg

or what not, if this/or something like it could be done we could do a lot more with different tactics /cloned tactics / so all are not the same as others and or waisted XP.

I think avoid and repair could be linked to skill also by some classes, my variations for some existing classes:

Battle Station: 1. Strafe (start: 2000, needs 3 Firepower), 2. Repair (start: 2000, needs 2 skill and 2 Intelligence)

Dragon: 1. Ram (start: 2000, needs 3 strength), 2. strafe (start: 2000, needs 3 firepower and 1 skill)

Fighter: 1. Strafe (start: 1500, needs 1 intel), 2. avoid (start: 2500, needs 3 skills and 1 intel)

Small Land Animal: 1. Avoid (start: 1500) 2. strafe (start: 1000, needs 6 speed - only for the rabbit alt? )

i don't see a reason to keep alts with 1 tactic. give'em all a second tactic.

also, maybe make a new repair tactic based off skill.

or maybe make the tactics listed in the help section (bite, slam, ect), even if they take away the rip off armor ability it'd be nice to have more options. (and quint missions )

me i would go with a standard layout take down the cheapest alt tactic groups and have them at the cost basis then working on the MAX XP spent on both tactics ,then working from that go for differences in price---
Alt-mode class--Tactic name-------Base XP---Min INT---Min SKL
Predator--------Avoid------------3,000 xp------0-------0
-----------------Ram-------------1,000 xp------0-------0

the total xp to make both tactics to 10 is
1k and 3k is 4,092,000xp
2k and 2k is 4,092,000xp
1.5k, 2.5k is 4,092,000xp
flipping around and an such to make the classes.

but on the other hand dual attack tactics alts ram/strafe should cost more being you are dealing more damage than a combo with avoid or repair in it to me the standard is.
Alt-mode class--Tactic name-------Base XP---Min INT---Min SKL
TANK-------------RAM--------------3,000 xp------0-------0
----------------Strafe------------1,000 xp------0-------0
the total xp to make both tactics to 10 is
1k and 4k is 5,115,000xp
1.5k an 3.5k is 5,115,000xp
this to me, would seem to work best, having a 2.5k,2.5k ^or a 2k,3k here just seems to powerful to me but i guess you could offset with a high MIN INT ,SKL to even them out some but the 2.5k/2.5k seems to good to me at any extra cost in stats. IMHO

Before we all get too excited: this isnt about getting new tactics or altering the feeders of the current ones, this is a discussion about balancing the current alt costs and seeing if we can standardise the alt classes. Dream all you want but we need to get the game as it is fixed up first.

As for the STR stat requirements; that is a matter for Mkall but to my knowledge, only int and skill can be used to unlock them so please assume that until told otherwise.

So, lets start with the basics; We consider all alt groups to be dual-tactics from now on and call ram and strafe Offensive and avoid and repair Defensive, we can make 4 basic cost brackets:
(Primary tactic/Secondary tactic)
Offensive/Defensive - current median
Defensive/Offensive - should be cheaper
Offensive/Offensive - ...expensive
Defensive/Defensive - ...cheapest

Each of these should then have a standardised cost that can be applied.
(figures for example only:)
Off/Def - 1500/1500xp
Def/Off - 1000/3000xp
Off/Off - 2000/2000xp
Def/Def - 1500/1500xp

(This does not take into account the int/skill pre-requisites or how useful a tactic can be for various levels.)


Waylander: I had been working on the same cost theory, but with the defensive tactics being, in general and overall, less effective than the offensive ones for XP gain at the mid levels, to cost them all the same just seemed odd. I may be wrong though.

Thoughts?
How much would that change the way the game currently works?
How would you guys'n'gals cost up the 4 brackets?
Does the Off/Def division system work?
Can you think of a better way to do it?

Psychout wrote:Thoughts?

Make more tactics unlockable. For example, it's not natural for animals to have repair, make it more or less dependant on skill (Int for Opportunistic classes).
Also, Avoid for other than Fast/Small/Light ... classes should require skill or int requirements too (for example, a jet-mode robot must require some skills in order to succesfully avoid enemy hits)

Kaijubot wrote:
I think making more tactics unlockable is a bad idea; the XP needed to unlock the tactic is essentially a tax on the character's xp that can be a hinderence on the character given that otherwise all Skill does is open up more weapon options, many of which also aren't worth the stats needed to access them.

The "tax" could be balanced out with the unlocked tactics overally cheaper than basic sets.

the main reason i like the rotating 1/3,2/2,1.5/2.5 for the OFF/DEF classes is the things you can do in mid lvls, if you want a high cheap tactic-and a lower more costly 2nd tactic you can play within the 1/3,1.5/2.5s at different lvls you can get different setups at the same cost, or you can go for even cost and use the 2/2 , and you could in theory use them in the 3 alt classes if you wanted, but this setup is just a basis, in truth as long as the total basic costs are at total of 4k when added ,they cost the same when at tactic 10.
1k and 3k is 4,092,000xp
2k and 2k is 4,092,000xp
1.5k, 2.5k is 4,092,000xp

playing with this or whatever is worked out here or decided, a combo different in each class,for the set tactic price,but most will always go for the cheapest primary tactic they want ,unless they want a even tactic cost for both tactics they want.
and i do agree Repair is the weakest,less rewarding tactic,until you get higher lvled TFs to repair/with endurance, then you can be a real XP maker, but still the real steady xp maker is a damage primary tactic config,IMHO i have seen repairers go missions without using there tactic, and lvl/end of the TF being repaired is a major factor i the XP gain, and i have seen a range of 5-20% on repairs on the same TF in same missions. so when we all figure out what the Primary and secondary xp costs for each tactic config should be, in each combo, then we could come up with a set basic setup and work from there.
i myself just do not want primary tactics below 1k, and more of a option with tactic setup for each tactic combo,with the total XP costing the same when they are at 10 for each setup that has the same tactics, even in different combos IE avoid/repair, or repair/avoid total xp spent for 10 tactics each cost the same no mater what tactic comes first.

The main reason tactic costs differ from one another, is that some tactics, in theory at least, are suposed to recharge faster on some alt-classes than others. I don't know if that actually happens in reality though.

Theory doesn't work.

Standardise them all across the board with 1000/2500.

Absoloutely NO difference between ANY alts in cost.

Put the ram/strafe combo back to being unlockable (Int3/Skill4) as it's never viable until higher levels anyway.

The only alts that shouldn't need unlocking are the "light" class or basically any with avoid as their primary cheap stat because they're only viable and useful for xp generating at lower levels. All the rest can have an unlock function.

The whole idea of a combo like Int3/Skill4 to unlock the secondary tactic was to encourage people to put xp into what many considered "worthless" stats.

*doesn't agree with Burn, but too sleepy to write more*

While I am in agreement that standardization would be good for the game. My question is fair implementation of said changes.

If this was to occur how would it effect current characters, as I would assume while some players would have characters that would find themselves refunded extra XP, others could end up with configurations that cost more than their current XP allows.

Thus leading to the questions:
-- Would a move like this cause a total reset of configurations?
---- Would that not effect peoples purchased armor as well?
---- Would that effect the current alts?
-- Can a soft reset of just tactics be done?
-- If a reset isn't possible, would characters be placed in a situation where they don't accumulate xp until a negative difference is "payed back"?

I whole heartedly agree with standardizing the tactics.

As for the theoretical differences in the recharge rates, if they are to be taken into account they should be tested as thoroughly as possible. I suppose it's too much to hope we have some sort of data mining tools to help said testing isn't it?

make the 3500 xp 3000 instead

so here is what i think may work
work with me here , if ya did not know it is a real pain for me to type, and the forum setup is not the best here for making a page graft. so here it goes.
i will make a few different ways for a few while sticking with standard,we need a basis to start from. and by no means do i have any say in this, just putting what i think on the table, so plz no more PMs on the mater, i am not a MOD anymore. TY
but i am open for chat on the subject, just do not think i have any pull in the issue. always like a good debate.

basic tactic facts=
avoid is widely used in the lower lvls, less in the higher , because Damage tactics are the real XP makers.
Repair is mission selective,needs others to repair,thus limited
arena ,and mission use Vs most alt classes.
RAM?strafe are the damage takers and xp makers, for the whole game, unless already stated above.


Primary Tactic=PT
Secondary Tactic=ST
Avoid=A
Ram=R
Repair=REP
Strafe=S

Alt classes with Avoid,in it or repair with a attack tactic
1k,3k basis, or any combo with a total basic combo of 4k
R/A
A/R
S/A
A/S

REP/A ======i kinda think these should maybe be 1k,2.5k
A/REP

S/REP
REP/S=====i kinda think these should be 1k/3.5k
R/REP
REP/R

Alt classes with Strafe,Ram together
1k,4k basis or any 2 base tactics total of 5k combo
S/R
R/S

the un lockable cost prices, well to me a RAM/Repair/AVOID with a skill cost for a tactic un-lock is a waist,
Strafe with a skill cost /less of a waisted stat, at least a strafer use weapons and are not nuke knuckles bound like a rammer,unless pure skill weapons got a STR +. but as of now STR give you the most, more armor, feeder stat for ram and more damage going nuke knuckle. than having weapon stat.
Strafe/RAM/AVOID with a unlock INT cost is a flat waist of XP.
Repair would be better, feeder stat.

extra stats that will not aid in the power of the TF, and make it weaker than a TF, and spending 7 skills is out of the question, thats almost a whole lvl of waisted XP, and if the un lockable tactic in question doe not use said un-lock cost of making the second tactic would not be mission effective. the un-locked tactic would get costly while building a tf if you did not reset, or save for the whole XP cost,while others whom stick with one tactic would get stronger for less XP. some people never reset,and enjoy playing this way, but stepping on toes will happen so if it helps the game do it i say.

but in truth, whatever is decided i will follow, just pointing out some facts, hoping not to have too drastic of a change, while fixing one of the oldest game issues.

and if your sea monster alt gets more of a XP cost for tactics it is too good now IMHO.

OK, with a bigger sleep...

Burn wrote:Standardise them all across the board with 1000/2500.
Absoloutely NO difference between ANY alts in cost.

I agree that a sum of 3500 for two tactics would be perfect, but only for the total. Variety between classes should be between the balance of the costs - f.e.: 1200/2300- with a balanced 1750/1750 for some classes (Ram/repairers?).

Put the ram/strafe combo back to being unlockable (Int3/Skill4) as it's never viable until higher levels anyway.

The only alts that shouldn't need unlocking are the "light" class or basically any with avoid as their primary cheap stat because they're only viable and useful for xp generating at lower levels. All the rest can have an unlock function.

The whole idea of a combo like Int3/Skill4 to unlock the secondary tactic was to encourage people to put xp into what many considered "worthless" stats.

On second thought, this isn't a bad idea either... With the second tactic unlockable for every class... yes, good idea.

Mkall wrote:The main reason tactic costs differ from one another, is that some tactics, in theory at least, are suposed to recharge faster on some alt-classes than others. I don't know if that actually happens in reality though.

This I didnt know. Ive never looked into the variances of when the tactics activate, and cant say ive ever noticed a difference, but that doesnt mean there isnt one.

Spectral Dragon wrote:I suppose it's too much to hope we have some sort of data mining tools to help said testing isn't it?

Im afraid so. There are methods of testing it manually for anyone that is interested?

Ive taken the rest of this conversation home on USB so I can read it in more depth but the idea of the feeder tactics was, as Burn rightly said, to make more use of the tertiary stats (skil/int - which I at least agree is a good idea) as tactics are generaly maxed-out by L7, if there is an int/skl penalty to the powerful OFF/OFF combination it stops it from becoming too accessable and gives the higher levels more to consider in their builds. Pre-reqs and cheaper base costs are also a consideration for repair - after all, for a minion to be able to repair it should have a degree of inteligence...

Again, none of this is guaranteed to be implemented, im just trying to see if there is a way to make all the alt types more balanced, keep it up with the input though - the more ideas and suggestions the better.

ive got nothing new to add just thought id way in 1st if there is going to be a hmw2 someday does this issue matter now or would this be for v2 as well 2nd with the int/sk have the tactics been put in the game yet for example with the intell: attack higher level bots with high str. high endu. i would love to use intel. but its a waste of xp if its not doing anything. 3rd and final i have certain alts that i like to use and to level up there ram comes at a high price for instance wipeout and dead zone there ram is is 2000 or 2500 a pop so they take long so i could use a diffrent alt mode and balance my xp in that way but then there would be no diffrence in builds which is a piont we should also consider everyone would have the same builds if we made cookie cutter tactics some builds let you level up faster than others which gives us a mutiple of levels so that we can get 4000xp off a level 5 when your at a level 1 just kind of my thinking

oh and one more question, is the XP LVL cap still here, because if it is ,that too will limit some TF configs Vs same tactic lower cost Alts. something i pointed out then, and do not know if still applies now.
and as a gaming fact,players more so than not go for the biggest bang for the buck,so to speak, instead of forcing a limited few -which is the issue at question here- give them more options. even out the playing field so you do not have Alts seen as play-toys of the higher lvls like the repair tank used to be.

backslide wrote:1st if there is going to be a hmw2 someday does this issue matter now or would this be for v2 as well

HMW2/V2, whatever you want to call it is essentially in hiding with Duke Nukem Forever.

This discussion is related to the current version as we attempt to get it balanced using whatever resources we can that don't require a massive amount of recoding done to the game.

2nd with the int/sk have the tactics been put in the game yet for example with the intell: attack higher level bots with high str. high endu. i would love to use intel. but its a waste of xp if its not doing anything.

Intell boosts your repair. Other than that, it doesn't do much else. Hence why I suggested using it to unlock the secondary tactic.

3rd and final i have certain alts that i like to use and to level up there ram comes at a high price for instance wipeout and dead zone there ram is is 2000 or 2500 a pop so they take long so i could use a diffrent alt mode and balance my xp in that way but then there would be no diffrence in builds which is a piont we should also consider everyone would have the same builds if we made cookie cutter tactics some builds let you level up faster than others which gives us a mutiple of levels so that we can get 4000xp off a level 5 when your at a level 1 just kind of my thinking

Which is why i've always felt tactic costs should be the same across the board. Yes, we'll end up with a lot of builds the same but at the end of the day, the current structure of the game doesn't really allow for much variety in builds.

Waylander wrote:oh and one more question, is the XP LVL cap still here,

It's there, as for it working properly ... well that's questionable.