Balance APB Delta patch balance discussion

[moonsense715]

Just a note that APB's previous version, Gamma already tried a gradually unlocking technology system, which in time would act similar to the "let's build structures before we can build better units" and it basicly killed the playerbase.

[Isaac The Madd]

Why don't we make an animation of a tech center building up and being sold in the first five seconds of the match.

[Pushwall]

Because making enough open space in bases on all the maps to support that and then fully modelling out/texturing/animating both tech centres is not a good use of time that could be spent on things that actually matter. Also it's stupid.

[ChopBam]

Why don't we make an animation of a tech center building up and being sold in the first five seconds of the match.

I hope you're being sarcastic, man.

[delta]

Funny, when I first started playing Renegade Alert waaaayyy back, the thing that surprised me was how consistent it felt with RA1. Most notably the fact that helicopters had limited ammo and exactly the same number of shots as in RA1, how you needed a Service Depot to repair vehicles just like RA1, how Minelayers had exactly five mines and were reloaded the same way as in RA1, how MAD Tanks and Demo Trucks worked exactly the way they did in RA1, etc.

[harvester]

• Vehicles can't be driven by anyone other than rifle soldiers. Which, to be fair, is probably one of the less unreasonable changes that could be made... except it'd be a big step backwards with regards to making infantry useful, and would be a MASSIVE nerf to the Allies due to mechanics. A nerf which they really don't need considering it is very possible for Soviets to win games in the face of LOLOPMECHS.

Technicians drive Ore trucks, MRJ, mobile gap generator, and MineLayers. (other non combat vehicles i forgot to mention)

Volkov can drive a phase transport.

Spies can drive a supply truck.

And captains/kapitans control vessels.

[Raap]

On Tech Centers: The original design intent prior and during my time on the team for this, was that it would work similar to the Missile Silo and provide two different support flares for each team. As far as I can remember, it'd be AI paratroopers and parabombs for the Soviets at different recharge timers and costs, and two other things for the Allies that I cannot remember at all anymore (Edit: I think off-shore Cruiser bombardement was the parabomb counter).

 

This never came to be, like many things. I'm not sure if any of the once-planned content has ever been properly documented... A lack of documentation always bugged me during my time on the BHP team.

 

Edit: Basically they would have been mini super-weapons primarily for maps with no Missile Silo, and nothing that would one-shot any primary buildings. I think such use of Tech Centers would actually work in Delta, especially when setting up parabombs/cruiser shell impacts to deal heavy damage to map objectives/key locations like bridges. They'd also be a decent "credits sink" on high-economy maps.

Edited March 19, 2016 by Raap

[moonsense715]

 

• Vehicles can't be driven by anyone other than rifle soldiers. Which, to be fair, is probably one of the less unreasonable changes that could be made... except it'd be a big step backwards with regards to making infantry useful, and would be a MASSIVE nerf to the Allies due to mechanics. A nerf which they really don't need considering it is very possible for Soviets to win games in the face of LOLOPMECHS.

Technicians drive Ore trucks, MRJ, mobile gap generator, and MineLayers. (other non combat vehicles i forgot to mention)

Volkov can drive a phase transport.

Spies can drive a supply truck.

And captains/kapitans control vessels.

 

Wouldn't that mean that you need to pay the price of the vehicle first and then also for the proper pilot? Vehicles usage price would go up a lot

[Pushwall]

Funny, when I first started playing Renegade Alert waaaayyy back, the thing that surprised me was how consistent it felt with RA1. Most notably the fact that helicopters had limited ammo and exactly the same number of shots as in RA1, how you needed a Service Depot to repair vehicles just like RA1, how Minelayers had exactly five mines and were reloaded the same way as in RA1, how MAD Tanks and Demo Trucks worked exactly the way they did in RA1, etc.

 

Yeah, and all that has stayed that way because they're some of the few Red Alert gameplay mechanics that were either sensible to begin with or become sensible when you transition them over to an RTS environment - for example, Red Alert's 5-shot minelayers were a joke, AP ones for the reasons I mentioned above and AT ones because tank rushes can get too big for a small minefield to be a concern (and again they can just start shooting the ground when they notice because in RA mines died from being breathed on), whereas here there's a much smaller number of units going around, infantry actually matter, and mine removal is less of a trifle unless you're using an artillery/V2/demo (or in the upcoming patch, an engineer) so the 5 mines per trip approach works. Gamma actually shook that up and made it 8 for some reason but it got reverted pretty quickly.

 

On Tech Centers: The original design intent prior and during my time on the team for this, was that it would work similar to the Missile Silo and provide two different support flares for each team. As far as I can remember, it'd be AI paratroopers and parabombs for the Soviets at different recharge timers and costs, and two other things for the Allies that I cannot remember at all anymore (Edit: I think off-shore Cruiser bombardement was the parabomb counter).

 

This never came to be, like many things. I'm not sure if any of the once-planned content has ever been properly documented... A lack of documentation always bugged me during my time on the BHP team.

 

Edit: Basically they would have been mini super-weapons primarily for maps with no Missile Silo, and nothing that would one-shot any primary buildings. I think such use of Tech Centers would actually work in Delta, especially when setting up parabombs/cruiser shell impacts to deal heavy damage to map objectives/key locations like bridges. They'd also be a decent "credits sink" on high-economy maps.

 

Yeah I never saw any documentation on how tech centres should be so when I joined the team all hopeful and optimistic to get a lot more shit done than I did, I was imagining for Tech Centres to be tied into tech levels - like on a tech level 5 map, lose your tech centre and you drop down to 4. This was when Destroyers/Missile Subs were tech level 5 and I was hoping to get the Chrono Tank included, so you'd lose a lot more than just tanyas, demos and MADs. I took part of this idea and applied it to Radar Domes; now losing them means you just lose access to Tanyas and Volkovs which is still noticeable.

[Einstein]

Ahhh, another variation of the age-old question with accompanying discussion has emerged once again! Reading this did give me an idea though. Why not (for a joke or even a LOLtest) redo all the balance of everything in APB to match RA 1-for-1? Mine layers automagically "do the hokey pokey and you turn yourself a-north", and make the tanya able to do walk-by's on buildings (with the one-second grace period of course), remove captains, kapitans, sergeants, starshinas, soviet RPG trooper, anything else we've added, make all rifle soldiers shoot in very slow 5 round (pop-op-op-op-op) firing patterns without them ever having to reload....Oh and be sure to bring back the olympic grenadiers that can kill anything from anywhere!

 

EDIT: forgot to remove snipers

[ganein14]

Sounds like a job for Eggman891

[des1206]

Sounds like a job for Eggman891

Wasn't there a crazy map of some sort back then where units didn't do what they were supposed to do?

[Einstein]

 

Sounds like a job for Eggman891

Wasn't there a crazy map of some sort back then where units didn't do what they were supposed to do?

 

I believe you're referring to the .9935 test maps Yes they exist

[Raap]

 

On Tech Centers: The original design intent prior and during my time on the team for this, was that it would work similar to the Missile Silo and provide two different support flares for each team. As far as I can remember, it'd be AI paratroopers and parabombs for the Soviets at different recharge timers and costs, and two other things for the Allies that I cannot remember at all anymore (Edit: I think off-shore Cruiser bombardement was the parabomb counter).

 

This never came to be, like many things. I'm not sure if any of the once-planned content has ever been properly documented... A lack of documentation always bugged me during my time on the BHP team.

 

Edit: Basically they would have been mini super-weapons primarily for maps with no Missile Silo, and nothing that would one-shot any primary buildings. I think such use of Tech Centers would actually work in Delta, especially when setting up parabombs/cruiser shell impacts to deal heavy damage to map objectives/key locations like bridges. They'd also be a decent "credits sink" on high-economy maps.

Yeah I never saw any documentation on how tech centres should be so when I joined the team all hopeful and optimistic to get a lot more shit done than I did, I was imagining for Tech Centres to be tied into tech levels - like on a tech level 5 map, lose your tech centre and you drop down to 4. This was when Destroyers/Missile Subs were tech level 5 and I was hoping to get the Chrono Tank included, so you'd lose a lot more than just tanyas, demos and MADs. I took part of this idea and applied it to Radar Domes; now losing them means you just lose access to Tanyas and Volkovs which is still noticeable.

 

If BHP had documentation, a lot more things would have been done more easily. We never had a single design document for development consistency either, something project leadership should have been more on the ball on.

 

Everything just sort of went into various directions (hello Gamma). I know me and ChopBam tried to be consistent in some level design things, but we also never really wrote anything down.