My suggestion: Fire the balance team, get a new one.

[The_Bloody_Nine]

I guess the ultimate formula for crpg balancing is easier to find than the formula of life. Then again, both are probably 42.

[Phew]

Phew, I have the code in front of my eyes.

Something doesn't add up. Anyone that has played the game can tell you that each weapon type has different sweetspots for each animation type. I did 6 gens of polearm, and the left swing glances during the early part of the animation. 1h left swing will hit someone at your 8 o'clock just fine. Polearm thrust will connect at near-facehug range, 1h thrust requires like 80cm between you and your target. 1h right swing doesn't have a prayer against someone between 1 o'clock and 4 o'clock, but that is the ideal strike location for 2h and polearm right swing.

Is the code for sweetspots temporal or spacial? i.e., you inflict max damage x seconds into the animation, or x degrees into the swing arc? If it's the former, then the fact that the different weapon types have different delays for each animation might explain the differences. If it's the latter, then the fact that each weapon type "starts" the animation from a different location relative to the player could explain the differences.

If it's literally "right swing deals 10% damage at 3 o'clock, up to 100% damage at 12 o'clock" or similar regardless of weapon type, then you can say that animation sweetspots are independent of weapon type. If there are any other variables, then you can't.

[Joker86]

There is one thing which some people seem to forget here:

Balance can never be achieved by leveling the deadliness of all weapons on the same "fitness value". All you would achieve is that all classes wield weapons which have the same chance to inflict damage. What you can not calculate, for example, are different skill requirements (is it equally difficult to master heavy lance, rus bow and greatsword?). Or does it contain also all the backhits your class is suffering from certain items? For example flamberge, pike and long maul are 3-slot weapons (I think?) and unsheathable, which has severe impact on your entire gameplay. And ultimatively, you should also take the class combinations of your enemies into account. Being a pikeman is really nice, but if for some odd reason cavalry becomes ultra unpopular, your class is worth less, because one if its main purposes has disappeared, and only supporting in melee is left. You can't balance this by a formula which calculates how good a weapon is in dishing out damage. Not at all.

And then there is this one factor which causes the biggest problem of balance in cRPG since the beginning of the game: battle game mode. The goal is to kill all enemies, and never mind how you balance it, a bow will always be more useful in accomplishing this goal than a steel pick, because latter doesn't allow you to kill every enemy possible, he first one does.

Just take a look at my post in the "lobbying" topic in the general forum, where I explain why infantry is the class which is complaining most, and why archers and cavalry are suffering the most nerfs in this process (careful! It's a bigger wall of text than this one here!). It's basically because of the same problem, that infantry is not made for battle mode. The game mode changes EVERYTHING! I don't know many topics where infantry player who are mainly playing siege complain about cavalry or archers a lot. The game mode works for them, as infantry is the best class to conquer a flag, and in difference to killing the last surviving horse crossbow it's a goal they can accomplish at all! Cavalry doesn't even try to complain about siege, because it's obvious the class is not made for that game mode at all, and most cav players don't even play it or do it only for the lulz, riding around on the battlements.

I say before we go on with the entire balance discussion, the devs first need to decide if they will complement or even better replace battle mode with conquest mode, with three capturable flags (and one player spawn nonetheless). The changes on class balance would be quite severe, and I could even imagine that it would create some room for buffs for cavalry and archers, who - in all honesty - are nerfed to ground and look horribly bad on the paper, because mechanical issues (concerning the "flexibility" of the different classes) were adressed by balance solutions (changing values, but leaving those problematic mechanics untouched). As this topic has the attention of the devs, I would like to use the chance and ask them on a final answer about the game mode matter. I think it could solve a lot of problems and open a lot of new possibilities, but again, it's only me, and I already suggested a lot of bullshit before, I admit. Things I would never dare to suggest nowadays. 

[cmp]

Something doesn't add up. Anyone that has played the game can tell you that each weapon type has different sweetspots for each animation type. I did 6 gens of polearm, and the left swing glances during the early part of the animation. 1h left swing will hit someone at your 8 o'clock just fine. Polearm thrust will connect at near-facehug range, 1h thrust requires like 80cm between you and your target. 1h right swing doesn't have a prayer against someone between 1 o'clock and 4 o'clock, but that is the ideal strike location for 2h and polearm right swing.

Is the code for sweetspots temporal or spacial? i.e., you inflict max damage x seconds into the animation, or x degrees into the swing arc? If it's the former, then the fact that the different weapon types have different delays for each animation might explain the differences. If it's the latter, then the fact that each weapon type "starts" the animation from a different location relative to the player could explain the differences.

If it's literally "right swing deals 10% damage at 3 o'clock, up to 100% damage at 12 o'clock" or similar regardless of weapon type, then you can say that animation sweetspots are independent of weapon type. If there are any other variables, then you can't.

For stabs it's based on animation progress (I'm not sure what delays you're talking about).
For swings it's based on difference of angle between agents - so yeah, it's independent of weapon type.

[Phew]

For stabs it's based on animation progress (I'm not sure what delays you're talking about).
For swings it's based on difference of angle between agents - so yeah, it's independent of weapon type.

You know, the animation delays you guys messed with like a year ago. I think Paul even posted the delays for each swing animation at once time; these are the reason 1h left swing is "fast" and right swing is "slow" for instance.

Anyway, I think cmp is trolling me about this sweetspot homogeneity between weapon types. I'll stop posting about it until I do some more testing.

[cmp]

You know, the animation delays you guys messed with like a year ago. I think Paul even posted the delays for each swing animation at once time; these are the reason 1h left swing is "fast" and right swing is "slow" for instance.

That was animation duration, not delay. And yeah, a longer animation means bigger sweetspots.
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that for swings.

Anyway, I think cmp is trolling me about this sweetspot homogeneity between weapon types. I'll stop posting about it until I do some more testing.

Yes, I was totally trolling you. Couldn't you tell from the tone of my posts?
Here, have some troll images to further your brilliant theory:

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Joker86]

Yes, I was totally trolling you. Couldn't you tell from the tone of my posts?

On a completely unrelated note: no, cmp trolling indeed can't be told from the tone. 

[Elindor]

Phew - don't argue with cmp...bad idea

Artie - i thought we all knew that this is a MELEE game cause melee is cool and ranged are nerds 

(click to show/hide)

this thread was too serious

** No but seriously i played a long time ago too when the webpage was all white and looked like a geoscape page....and personally i like the balances...less trolly builds - there's a reason most people fought a certain way with certain weapons and armor.  but again, i like the medieval period and so i like the simulator aspect of crpg...whereas i know for a fact many here just want whatever "kills people the best" even if its some rediculous build and playstyle. 

I do think the pros/cons of strength focus builds is off a bit (im 27/15 now and barely slower than 21/21), and that some long/heavy weapons are not dealt with properly by the engine and therefore a bit overpowered compared to shorter/lighter "faster" weapons...but im hoping the new turn speed equation helps with that.....speaking of - CMP PUT IT ON THE SERVERS K THANKS!

[Paul]

Sweetspot mechanic is the same for all weapon types afaik. The difference comes from the animations themselves:  the positioning of the weapon cylinder(capsule?) during the the animation and the different animation durations. 

[Jarlek]

For stabs it's based on animation progress (I'm not sure what delays you're talking about).
For swings it's based on difference of angle between agents - so yeah, it's independent of weapon type.

So on swings, the time the animation lasted has nothing to do with damge? Just the angle between the swinger and the guy being hit?

[dontgothere]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is your point that we need to trust the balancers implicitly for the simple fact that they know what they're balancing for and we, because we aren't them and they don't tell us what they're doing, don't?
Why should we be content with the balancing team, or at least with the direction they're taking balancing, when all kinds of "balances" they've done in the past have been nonsense? Yes, it should be about player skill and not "just" about one "class" defeating another, but what has been the effect of prior balancing measures if not to make skill matter less? For example, these artificial constraints to mechanics of playing (archer nerfs, horse nerfs, turn speed nerfs, ladder nerfs, throw jumping removed, etc) instead of just balancing mainly through item statistics?

You're going way overboard; you think that you're balancing, but you're just nerfing the game into something slower, more limited. Why on earth would you undertake all these convoluted, disruptive attempts at balance, while the most simple glitches go completely ignored? What could possibly be your excuse? Just because you have a hard time fighting against certain 2hers, certain polearms fighters, or certain throwers doesn't entitle you to nerf their classes so that in your subjective experience they seem more "balanced" when compared against your own ability to play the game.

Almost every change you make pisses off NA players. Look at the poll results and remember that most of the oldschool players have already quit because of you and aren't here to vote.

[El_Infante]

Animations are animations and formulas are formulas, but nowadays crpg is glancerpg. I don't know if Phew is wrong or not, but playing as 1h is being the king of glances and 2handers can 'hiltslash' avoiding it.

[Soldier_of_God]

I would have to pretty much disagree with everything in this post. pretty much every major concern i have ever raised has been met.

http://forum.meleegaming.com/suggestions-corner/wpf-reset-refund-button/msg8427/#msg8427  - fixed. the new system is great.

http://forum.meleegaming.com/game-balance-discussion/calvary-needs-a-buff/  - fixed. new system makes horses more affordable, and overall usefulness/affordability is there.

http://forum.meleegaming.com/game-balance-discussion/crush-thru-weapons-that-need-to-be-nerfed/msg35976/#msg35976   - crushthrough was fixed. not eliminated unfortunately.

you probably can continue to look through my posts and find more of my suggestions. i dont think i've ever had one problem that went unfixed in this game. i am satisfied, but not impressed by their performance.

better than the original development team anyway.

[Tomas]

Afaik new items have been added at least a month ago, including kebab remover's armor. Just waiting for patch. So go spam chadz.

I'm an engineer too. The "fitness" parameter thing was one of the firsts things I scratched because it just doesn't work out and is beated by stats given "so it feels right" by a mile. Fuzzy logic.

Fuzzy logic wins and the stats don't feel right because any systematic balance method will give swords sod all damage compared to all the other weapons (as they should realistically have) and that will cause massive amounts of QQ

[Tigero]

Current balance is heavily biased to agi builds, loomed rus bows, destriers, throw axes, polefaxes and danishes. The game needs more diversity for overpowered weapons and stuff, i'd start by redoing horse stats, what is the reason that the 'fastest' horse in game is in reality way slower than arabian and just barely outruns destrier in action? Give courser 2 more base speed for fukken's sake.

Then maybe add some diversity to loom stat increases, give slower and badasser weapons more speed and less damage to make them more useful.

I'm not gona say anything else about HA and HX than remove it, there is no way to balance a class that can fire across great distances and in case of HX from speed and being able to outrun anyone in A MELEE GAME, it's just not going to happen. (Unless you start making better maps)