Matrix Games Forums

By the way - if there is something interesting, I will try to prepare text and icon

The issue needed to be remembered and checked how much bigger quantity of luxury and strategic resources will influence the economics, happiness cap and supply / demand and access to basic resources? Will be there much more resources per planet? Per system? How much economy and happiness maximum will be compared to vanilla resource set? How that change game and balance? Just saying - there will be need to mind those things.

ORIGINAL: DinoSaurus

Well, I started to add a few new once, but then stopped due to the mods here in the forum.

I think one special rare luxus resource on each planet would be fine. You have all 80 resources? Or are some free slots?

PLEASE not on each planet a special rare luxus resource, that would be realy boring !!!
There would be no more challange in the game with the ressources

Why not?

Special luxury resources you will have once in a galaxy. I think this would be a nice item...

ORIGINAL: Blackstork

The issue needed to be remembered and checked how much bigger quantity of luxury and strategic resources will influence the economics, happiness cap and supply / demand and access to basic resources? Will be there much more resources per planet? Per system? How much economy and happiness maximum will be compared to vanilla resource set? How that change game and balance? Just saying - there will be need to mind those things.

You are right. But I think due to the moment it is hard to say anything regarding to balancing the game - CFirst Lurchi has to finish the Sience-Tree...

In my opinion it is more interesting, if you will have all in all more different possibilities on resources. E.g. - on ice planets you only find four resources... why not more? But I agree with you that there is a rebalancing needed...

ORIGINAL: joproulx99

Here is some numbers for you in case you are interrested in this ( you should be i guess lol)
[..]
anyway this is my 2c on this important matter that is weapon balance.

It's not that easy. You also have to consider the energy consumption.
More energy -> more reactors -> less space for weapons.
The speed of the ship is important as well, especially for low range weapons. Even the speed of the shots has a certain impact. Then there's the damage vs range equasion.

More damage and less range is not as good as less damage and more range - unless your ship is fast enough to go near the target. More range and less damage is better as less range and more damage - unless the reactive armor of your target reduces the damage no almost nothing.

Also I'm dead against removing damage reduction. It's a fact that weapons using some sort of focussed energy loose damage. Removing it would devalue weapons without it like missiles. It would destroy battle tactics like point blank if you have the same damage at maximum range. Damage reduction increases diversity - and I'm all for diversity.

ORIGINAL: DinoSaurus

@both:

... funny, I also thought about orichalcum...

Well, if you have not any special Luxury resources like Zantabia etc. on ICE, I would suggest ICE CRISTALS... extremly rare material which induces very low temperatures. Could be used for different special things: extrem temperature evolving weapons, special food storage...

... and if possible on BARREN PLANETS: STAR DUST - powdered residues of rock from meteorites or s.th. like this, extremly rare luxury resource and could only found on planets (or asteroids?) with no vegetation and climate... I thought of this like some people of rhino horns or some other animal parts you normaly won't eat...^^ -- makes the planet population happy^^

common mineral: MAGNETITE - could be found on planets with vulcanic activities, especially on vulcanic and continental planets, maybe also others... will be needed for weapons, but maybe also for transportation, if you have something which needed magnetic behaviour... ^^

LITHIUM - mineral resource which shows higly agressive behaviour to water. Could be used for terrafroming items and especially LITHIUM-BOMBS - typically found on desert planets..

ICE LICHES - only will be found on ice planets. is a luxury resource which makes some races happy... I have no further definition until now... if there is any possibility to define negative effects: Works as drug/poison on insectoid-races

ZERADON - is a gas-resource. The idea was to use it for another kind of power unit, but I think you will have s.th. like this...

I already have something slightly similar to ice crystals, ice liches and zeradon. The others just might wind up in the mod in some form or other.

ORIGINAL: DinoSaurus

By the way - if there is something interesting, I will try to prepare text and icon

Thanks. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Blackstork

The issue needed to be remembered and checked how much bigger quantity of luxury and strategic resources will influence the economics, happiness cap and supply / demand and access to basic resources? Will be there much more resources per planet? Per system? How much economy and happiness maximum will be compared to vanilla resource set? How that change game and balance? Just saying - there will be need to mind those things.

You can have more resources per planet, IIRC up to six, so there's still plenty free space. I guess it's demand and supply just like with the vanilla ressources. Happyness due to luxuries can be set in the race files, no problem here. I doubt it'll have substantial influence on balance since every race can get the new ressources. Well, unless I create a race specific drug that turns the populace into zombies. [:D]

It sure will influence the game if rare ressources get expensive, though. Like one advanced armor alloy I have added that uses very rare stuff. We'll see how that works out during beta testing. If need be I can just increase the availability.

ORIGINAL: Hawkeye_BF

ORIGINAL: DinoSaurus

Well, I started to add a few new once, but then stopped due to the mods here in the forum.

I think one special rare luxus resource on each planet would be fine. You have all 80 resources? Or are some free slots?

PLEASE not on each planet a special rare luxus resource, that would be realy boring !!!
There would be no more challange in the game with the ressources

Too many super luxuries would take away the special something, true. I might use the system for something different if need be, depends on certain stuff I set up working the way I intended or not.

ORIGINAL: DinoSaurus

on ice planets you only find four resources... why not more?

There is more. [;)]

Edit: As for why, I guess it's due to there being only gas and luxuries. Mineral and gas resources can't be mixed so most stuff can't be on ice worlds.

I just found a problem when ...

Problem solved. It works even though it shouldn't. [:D]

[:(]Lurchi... i need your mod to play DW.[:(][:D]

I now go and search a game to play, no motivation to any game i have.

Damn, found another problem. This one is really evil.

I have added four types of drugs with various effects, but a race can only have 3 ressources affecting them and most are already used up. [:(]

I placed it on my wish list. [&o][&o][&o][&o]

ORIGINAL: Kizucha

[:(]Lurchi... i need your mod to play DW.[:(][:D]

I now go and search a game to play, no motivation to any game i have.

Are we there yet? [:D]
Soon. [8D]

Ok... soon...*mumble* what should i do...

And yeeeeeeeees my life is boring and it only waits for the release of your mod, i neeeeeeeeeeed your mod![:D] And no dont take this serius, i only wait for the support on an new mmo i trie but as alway's the support is not very fast on the release time because they get flooded with "help-me"-cry-mails.

You can have more resources per planet, IIRC up to six,

You can have eight per planet / asteroid (both types).

Darkspire

It's not that easy. You also have to consider the energy consumption.

But I do agree with this...in my post thats exactly what im saying, though english isnt my native langage so maybe im not clear lol here I'll try a second time

what i meant is this:

Tech level 0 weapons and armor:

armor is 8/1
damage is :
beam 5
rails 5
phasers 4 (5 x 0.75 = 3.75 rounded up = 4)
missiles 6 (5 x 1.25 = 6.25 rounded = 6)

then for the next tech level simply double armor and damage of beam and follow the same equation for other weapons so:

Tech level 1 is:

Armor 16/2
damage is :
beam 10
rails 10
phasers 8 (10 x 0.75 = 7,5 rounded up = 8)
missiles 13 (10 x 1.25 = 12.5 rounded = 13)

the key thing here isnt dps no, it is DAMAGE PER SHOT PER WEAPON TYPE. Please do read.

Specialty weapons:

rails: will make those who dont upgrade armors (in favor for shields for example) regret it, as it should be.
beams: are jack of all trade.
phasers: are anti armor specialist but deplete shields slower then beam, as it should be.
missiles: are best weapons vs shields, but suffer againt armor, as it should be.

By deviating from this ratio you will have broken results. aka vanilla Torpedo syndrom. Torpedo in vanilla at close enough range bypass (or almost anyway) armor by having too high damage per shot, its dull. They have high energy usage sure...but who cares at +/- 12 size, just but another reactor at +/- 20 size and problem solve, good to go break the game with boken weapons lol.

More energy -> more reactors -> less space for weapons.
The speed of the ship is important as well, especially for low range weapons. Even the speed of the shots has a certain impact. Then there's the damage vs range equasion.

More damage and less range is not as good as less damage and more range - unless your ship is fast enough to go near the target. More range and less damage is better as less range and more damage - unless the reactive armor of your target reduces the damage no almost nothing.

Now like i said in my post : ''Size/Energy per shot/range/projectyle speed/rate of fire'' need to be in relation one another of course!! BUT do not touch DAMAGE PER SHOT!!

example let say you want long range and short range version of each weapons:

lets do it with missiles:

''we'' decide that 1 size = 1 energy use = 10 range = 10 speed = 0.1 sec rate

at 10 size we would get

10 energy use, 100 range, 100 speed, rate 1 sec

now i want a range 900 missile weapon! easy :

900 range / 10 range = 90 so...

size 90, energy used 90, speed 900, rate 9

Now ships with short range weapons can afford to put any combo they like between more engines to go point blank, ions, trator, etc...since they pay less in size/energy for same DAMAGE PER SHOT while long range weapons have the advantage of starting the fight from a distance, also good for spaceports infinte size defenses.

Also I'm dead against removing damage reduction. It's a fact that weapons using some sort of focussed energy loose damage. Removing it would devalue weapons without it like missiles. It would destroy battle tactics like point blank if you have the same damage at maximum range. Damage reduction increases diversity - and I'm all for diversity.

This would be cool thing if we had a more complex fight! we dont :S . Its stand off or point blank. Thats it. There is no inbetween so why have the assles of damage reduced per 100 when you cant control it...at least AI cant decide hey vs x ship combo i should stay at stand off vs being at point blank! but no it wont happen.

My thoughts on weapons:

I believe that weapons should be balanced in a way that there is no one 'best' weapon. Basically, the weapons should all equal out so that they have the same damage per second per size unit. Larger weapons do more base damage, faster firing weapons have weaker base damage, etc...but in the end, when it gets right down to it, if your formula for success is 1 damage per 1 second per 1 size unit, then ALL weapons should equal that DPS/Size goal.

Example of three 'balanced' weapons:

Laser that does 1 damage per shot, fires once per second and 'weighs' 1 unit

Rail gun that does 3 damage per shot, fires once per 3 seconds, and 'weighs' 3 units

Torpedo does 10 damage per shot, fires once every 10 seconds and 'weighs' 10 units

When you break it down, they all do the same damage per second per weight, and thus none of these weapons is 'superior'. It makes weapons fits less about how many of the 'best' you can get on, and simply a matter of taste. It also ensures that no matter what template the AI is given, their ships can remain competitive (assuming the player does not customize designs).

Weapon balancing is not just simple math, since so many complex factors are involved (reactive armor, shield recharge, energy consumption, range, and so on)
While math is a part of it, experience/intuition and experimentation/testing are much more important.


@Shark7:
The laser would need to be balanced vs a reactive armor rating. The torpedo would have a dpst of 0.1 while the rail gun would have 0.3 dpst, without reactive armor (damage/second*ton is a relevant measure, not DPS/size). Also, no formula goal is good for comparison, due to the complex factors, not dpst or dpse or anything else.