Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Balance suggestions aiming at better multiplayer experience

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Balance suggestions aiming at better multiplayer experience Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Balance suggestions aiming at better multiplayer experi... - 8/31/2020 3:13:58 PM   
tikhun

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 8/14/2020
Status: offline
I have played several multiplayer games. I should say I love the game and its potential for the genuinely entertaining player vs player games. There are many strategical and tactical decisions that can win you the game or lead you to a catastrophic defeat. But there are a few points that make this experience less enjoyable and sometimes frustrating.

But before that, I see there is a lot of discussion about logistics, and it is a significant part of the game, so I will throw in my five cents. In short: I like logistics, I have no complaints. My games have started even before the pull points system and the bug fix about zero weight items consuming logpoints, so I assume now it is even better.

Points that I don't like so much and would love some changes:

1) OHQ Commanders are overpowered. They provide a major boost to morale, readiness, experience, and most importantly, among 6-10 modifiers applied to attack values/HP they usually provide 4-5. Thus having a good OHQ Commander becomes your absolute priority, and other considerations (even tech level!) are less critical. If you have rolled good OHQ Commander and especially after some experience, you would destroy enemy tank destroyers with somewhat obsolete light tanks with no problem (if the enemy commander is not so good). There are many ways to improve; the easiest one is to cut attack/HP bonuses significantly. Now it seems that they can go up to +100%. If you have rolled 4 bonuses aound +100% to attack (not impossible or even rare with good OHQ Commander), you will get attack value multiplied by SIXTEEN. But if you change the max bonus to be around +50%, the highest roll, in this case, will be 1.5^4 = x5 on attack values. It is still a huge bonus, but not insane anymore. Making OHQ Commander less important will make unit experience, tech level, choosing your unit types more important considerations.

2) Solar Panels are too good. There is rarely even a consideration to build any other energy source. They are cheap (especially given that until very late techs, there is usually an abundance of rare metals). They are available early in the game, are not workers hungry, consume no resources for energy production, and can be spammed everywhere outside the city. I have not seen Fusion Plant, but other types are just not worth it if compared to the massive spam of solar panels. Please, consider rebalancing. Maybe increase the price, or worker requirements, or add maintenance cost (rare metals for constant replacement of panels?). A more exciting option is to tie energy production to a season or the star properties. On a hot planet with a bright star, they would be awesome; they would be less viable on the frozen world, opening possibilities to use other types of energy production assets. Seasonality in energy production would also mimic the real world issue with solar panels: you need really big power banks to use them reliably. Although in the real world, it is more day/night issue rather than summer/winter, but the idea is the same.

3) Structural damage from conventional missiles/rockets is quite strong, and it seems there is no way to protect your buildings from it. If the frontline is close to your city, you can say goodbye to your assets no matter what (if the enemy wants to destroy them). It is also not really hard; just a couple of launcher battalions will do the work. Maybe there could be some assets that increase HP of the city buildings or provide point defense against missiles. Alternatively, allow shield generators to shield buildings as well, saving them from the incoming fire.

4) The game allows you to build roads of any length as long as you have IP, and units can use them in the same turn. Some delay on that similar to asset construction would be great and would make roads more strategic decision. As of now, you can suddenly build a road through mountains and go through it by your tank corps, all in the same turn. It sounds not too realistic as well. That said, I love the ability to demolish roads instantly. This opens interesting tactical options like blocking mountain passages or destroying bridges in front of the enemy army.

Thank you for reading this rather long post. Again, I love the game and wish it the best!



Post #: 1
RE: Balance suggestions aiming at better multiplayer ex... - 8/31/2020 6:44:30 PM   
HansLemurson

 

Posts: 133
Joined: 7/28/2020
Status: offline
I agree with these suggestions, they seem pretty sensible.

1) Multiplicative bonuses can clearly get out of hand! This could also be a case for Additive bonuses instead.
2) Solar Panels are amazing. The only reason I've ever not built them is when I've captured a cluster of geysers, or didn't direct my Economic Council correctly to ensure the tech.
3) I read an AAR where a guy won by rocket-attacking his opponents cities, despite material inferiority.
4) I didn't even realize that you could use roads on the same turn that they were built! Wow. Same-turn road demolition though I think should be allowed. Or maybe if all construction happens at End of Turn, then that would work out.

(in reply to tikhun)
Post #: 2
RE: Balance suggestions aiming at better multiplayer ex... - 8/31/2020 7:52:08 PM   
tikhun

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 8/14/2020
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HansLemurson
1) Multiplicative bonuses can clearly get out of hand! This could also be a case for Additive bonuses instead.

Absolutely agree, additive bonus instead of multiplicative is another good solution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansLemurson
3) I read an AAR where a guy won by rocket-attacking his opponents cities, despite material inferiority.

This is literally what happened in my 1vs1 game. We had war lasting more than 40 turns, there were many ups and downs. I had less population (37% versus 50%) and was somewhat behind on military techs and unit designs, as well as resources (I have lost one major industrial city early in the war). But at some point I managed to get close to my opponent's capital and have unloaded some rocket launchers on his city during 2-3 turns. Many assets were destroyed, the others badly crippled. My opponent had huge logistical collapse and few turns later he have surrendered as my offence was very successful after bombing. Yes, he have made a mistake by centralizing economics too much in the capital (he had ~500k population there while my capital was barely at 200k), but potency of rocket artillery feels almost game-breaking (and this is just conventional rockets, not nuclear missiles).

(in reply to HansLemurson)
Post #: 3
RE: Balance suggestions aiming at better multiplayer ex... - 9/1/2020 3:54:10 PM   
Saros

 

Posts: 425
Joined: 12/18/2010
Status: offline
We had a similar thread previously from our experiences via pbem, check it out tand see if you agree.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4866308

(in reply to tikhun)
Post #: 4
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Shadow Empire >> Suggestions and Feedback >> Balance suggestions aiming at better multiplayer experience Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.180