Map balance discussion -1 reply

Please wait...

Ohioan

Not Wise Shitashi - Cheston

50 XP

6th October 2003

0 Uploads

3,604 Posts

0 Threads

#1 16 years ago

Hi all. I think I've found an issue in the fundemental design of the maps that should be addressed. The realism of the mod is expressed in the vehicle and weapon stats, but does not allow for other factors which were the reason for a given side's success. For example, the Tiger Tank, which is largely considered a superweapon and is commonly leading the scoreboard. The Tiger DOES have it's weaknesses, as described in the guide, but they aren't readily exploitable. In fact, it's very difficult to get in a position to destroy a Tiger, be it with a tank or as infantry. Don't you think that's a little bit unfair? Don't get me wrong I know the realism base of this mod is incredibly high and people who play love it. I just dissagree with putting a few immensely powerful tanks in a map with several weak tanks, almost as if their sole purpose is to be destroyed. That leaves the driver of the Tiger as the one with the most kills, and thus, makes the Tiger a camped-for and commonly wasted asset when a noob gets it. I am not a fan of the "Food Chain" map setup that exists now. One unit or vehicle or plane is the ultimate best, then everything else is relatively innefective against it and the largely uneducated pubbers who play the game are slaughtered by it. The German jetplane on Bocage (.5b) was a prime example. It was invincible. Faster and more maneuverable than anything the US had. The AA turrets couldn't even turn fast enough to hit it, not that they'd do any real damage if they did. That unit was the top of the food chain on that map. The pilot usually ended up with 45 to 2 or some ridiclous score while the allies couldn't get a plane in the air. The Stug and the Panzer4s would camp the hill and pick off any allied tank that got on a bridge. The allied tanks couldn't do anything, their rounds weren't powerful enough to hurt the front armor (the ONLY armor exposed) on the Axis tanks. Yes, I know the German tanks were superior to the US tanks, but the US had 10x as many. That isn't represented fairly in that map. The one advantage that the allies had, which was Mass Quantities of their bad tanks, wasn't given to them and thus they would get slaughtered. The Axis units were better and the allies were given the same amount of inferior tanks.

What I'm asking for is that the future release maps do a bit in the way of balancing. Balancing the unit strength values is great, but you also have to take into consideration the amount of them that were fielded in that battle, and make sure each side as an equaly powerful army. One Tiger would be nearly the equivalent of 5 Shermans. What do you guys think?




Ohioan

Not Wise Shitashi - Cheston

50 XP

6th October 2003

0 Uploads

3,604 Posts

0 Threads

#2 16 years ago

*bump*




Peo

The forums staffers think I'm Cool

50 XP

28th April 2003

0 Uploads

177 Posts

0 Threads

#3 16 years ago

Yes. I've raised this question before.




-SSLS- dEmOnSpAwN

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

16th September 2003

0 Uploads

108 Posts

0 Threads

#4 16 years ago

ok here we go again:

How about the the maps when russia have better tanks? Like krakov there the t34 own the german pz4 d... And the new map with russia vs japan the russian t34 and t34/85 own the japanise tanks ..... The other new map usa vs japan the sherman ownz the japanise tanks. Market garden the rockets on the planes own the tigers and pz 4s . And now on bocage the german jetplane dont have rockets and they have put a pz4 d inplace of the pz4H




mondogenerator

Wolfgaming.net *****istrator

50 XP

24th September 2003

0 Uploads

568 Posts

0 Threads

#5 16 years ago

I agree on some points althought map balance is there on most maps. A for the Me262 on Bocage, that was historically wrong as it was use as a high level interceptor but it was slow to accelerate and bad at rolling and turning and thus was equal to the allied escort fighters (P51) and the newer heavier allied fighters like the P47 and Hawker Tempest in combat

I found when I got into a tiger its more like an armoured bus service with all those seats. I spent more time responding to pick up calls then I did hunting for enemy tanks.

If the tiger is being driven by a n00b there are factors to consider and thus needs no balancing:

a)N00b Tiger camper drivers rarely spawn as engineers so they won't repair there tiger. b)They will drive without infantry support or allowing for people to jump in the tank and they will drive to easy ambush points where they can be totaled by people using the land scape. c)They for some reason never wait for engineers to repair them. d)They will driver hapily by artillery peices and not check to see who's hiding, ready to jump in the gun and shoot the tiger in the A@@. e)They will drive straight to the allied uncapable base and be either totally destroyed or kicked by a server admin for basecamping:)

This is where the tiger is dangerous and very overpowered, a competent driver with team mates on a voice chat prog like team speak:

a)Driver will spawn as engineer. b)Driver will fill the tank with other soldiers, including mates who are also engineers. c)Driver will travel with infantry and take heed of calls of armour spotted and use apps like TS with team mates to maximum advantage. d)driver will repair his own tank or let others do it for him. e)Driver employs brain and uses tiger as a support weapon for infantry, clearing out buildings and letting infantry use the tiger as cover while dealing with armour.

At that point the tiger need balancing. its way over powered when used competantly and almost indestructable. My opinion: Get rid of some of the seating positions, raise the spawn time.




Piispa

Dread thinks I'm a special person

50 XP

20th August 2003

0 Uploads

292 Posts

0 Threads

#6 16 years ago

One Tiger per map is fairly enough, and with a LONG spawn time. Destroying a Tiger is surely possible, some times even easy, but most of the time one just beats his head on a wall when the driver of the Tiger knows what he's doing. It's very hard to beat a Tiger even with good teamwork if the driver of the Tiger knows how to use infantry support, keeps distance and watch his surroundigs. And most of the time Tigers do that, so when you finally get a Tiger smashed it would be nice if there didn't come another one in half a minute. And in Valirisk when there can be not just one but TWO Tigers fielded at once, it's rather impossible for the Russians to get out of the base.

I wouldn't feel sorry even if you made the Tiger not respawnable, so that once it's destroyed it keeps that way. Make the axis understand the importance of the beast, and give the allies a fair change, which they surely don't have now. And I'm not saying this just for allies: it's not fun for me as axis either, cause there's really no good challenge in playing when you're in a Tiger, and challenge is the thing why games are enjoyable.

Also it would've be a dream if you could limit the number of axis players to 1/2 of the allies. Yeah, probably not possible, but it'd be good if the players understanded this by themselves. Too many times this is vice versa and the allies are playing short handed coz everyone wants to get a Tiger. Not a fault of the mod, but the players.




Major Hartmann

Major Disinformation

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

2,347 Posts

0 Threads

#7 16 years ago

The Tiger will get an additional weakness in the next version: It will have a much slower turret, and probably the repairspeed or the engineers will go down.




mondogenerator

Wolfgaming.net *****istrator

50 XP

24th September 2003

0 Uploads

568 Posts

0 Threads

#8 16 years ago
PiispaToo many times this is vice versa and the allies are playing short handed coz everyone wants to get a Tiger. Not a fault of the mod, but the players.

I think you'll find that with bout 70% of all game bugs, its not balance, its not the game engine, its the players not using or some using features to well.




-rincewind-

Slightly cooler than a n00b

50 XP

3rd October 2003

0 Uploads

40 Posts

0 Threads

#9 16 years ago
-SSLS- dEmOnSpAwNok here we go again: How about the the maps when russia have better tanks? Like krakov there the t34 own the german pz4 d... And the new map with russia vs japan the russian t34 and t34/85 own the japanise tanks ..... The other new map usa vs japan the sherman ownz the japanise tanks. Market garden the rockets on the planes own the tigers and pz 4s . And now on bocage the german jetplane dont have rockets and they have put a pz4 d inplace of the pz4H

You are joking. On maps with allied tank advantage, the allied tanks get simply screwed up by the superior axis AT-infantry. On charkov the T34 is superior against the Panzer IVD, but not against anything else. The axis AT simply hides in good position and blows every russian tank that comes near any outpost. So i have to say again, take away the axis AT's rifle and replace with only a pistol.




D-Fens

uwe bolltastic!

50 XP

2nd May 2003

0 Uploads

4,837 Posts

0 Threads

#10 16 years ago

I would say the Fw190 is the most overpowerd plane, (maninly because it's physics) but that should be solved too. About the Panzerfaust, as soon as the Russians get their AT-Rifle they will be able to pick off infantry with it also. Maybe the American and British AT class also should have rifles (with less clips), some may say that they couldn't carry that much, but look at the engineer, he's got three heavy tankmines + lots of tnt+ rifle...