Balancing late game units

Martin Gühmann · May 16, 2003, 13:35

In the default game you can use a stack of 12 tanks and you have something like a super weapon, I like to see the need for a stacks with SAMS and other modern units much more effective then 12 tank stack. I know Dave modified the values for Cradle, but from a short look on the values, I think it is not a good idea to just copy and paste the values. So I like to hear which units should be balanced and what are the values that should be modified.

-Martin

HuangShang · May 16, 2003, 20:16

maybe u can use counters to tanks...

Maquiladora · May 17, 2003, 06:04

Flanking should be used very sparingly, its the most powerful ability in the game when its combined with a half balanced unit. I always thought all foot units should be flankers because they have low stats and that would make them worth building more, because none of us builds hover infantry when we can have extra armour do we?

In effect a lot of infantry units could then overrun a few armoured units by flanking. But if you dont want to test all that id just make flanking less available, especially to well armoured units.

child of Thor · May 17, 2003, 14:00

Yes Flanking in the ancient and middle ages does seem a little better balanced than later on in the game. Still i guess the tank and airpower completely changed warfare. Maybe if you removed the flanking ability from the tank and give it a few tests? Would it encourage a more mixed stack? And would the AI be able to make use of it? As Maq said you could add flanking to an infantry unit instead and see how it played.
IMHO Tanks are to powerful as they stand, even if it is reasonably accurate to make them like that - It might improve the end game to reduce their power/abilties? And then again it might not? Worth a test.......

Tamerlin · May 18, 2003, 21:22

The real problem IMO is not with the tanks and their unbalanced stats but with the fact the AI is technology behind when you are closed to the end of the game and that it is not able to group its units and its tanks and use them efficiently.

Removing the flanking ability of the tanks would certainly reduce their efficiency but to the detriment of the simulation aspect of the game.

IMO, the Hover Infantry should (if it does not have it already) have the flanking ability because of its supposed speed...

Immortal Wombat · May 19, 2003, 06:31

Or should have a bonus against tanks.

stankarp · May 19, 2003, 07:35

I once played an on line game and my opponent invaded me with a stack of 12 knights in the middle ages. I had 4 pikes, 4 archers and 4 knights and I beat him for the loss of 5 units.

Moral, only very special units should have a RANGED value as well as FLANKING. Thats what makes the tanks so powerfull. Knights dont have ranged ability. The second row just watched while I gradually got the upper hand.

J Bytheway · May 19, 2003, 11:39

I think it would be a good idea to decrease the tanks ranged attack more than to remove their flanking ability. It should have a lower ranged atttack (compared with its normal attack), rather than a higher one.

Immortal Wombat · May 19, 2003, 12:05

Yeah, that would work. Then you may need some artillery, which would slow you down some as well. Maybe their hit points are a little high also?

Martin Gühmann · May 19, 2003, 13:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Maybe their hit points are a little high also?

In the original game and in ApolytonPack, all units have 10 hitpoints, so changing this means to redo all units concerning hitpoints. And that is a little bit much.

For the flankers in general, it seems that they should have a higher attack value then a higher ranged attack value, for ranged attack we have specialists like Archers, Artelry, Mobile SAM and War Walker.

So what else needs some balancing?

-Martin

child of Thor · May 19, 2003, 14:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Martin Gühmann
....edity edit....

So what else needs some balancing?

-Martin

Well apart from the tank, some kinda overhall of all the stealth type units(Slaver-Cyberninja all of them). Some people hate them, i like them - nothing gives me greater satisfaction than converting/franchising an enemy, even if the actual in game benefits are hard to pin down or not really worth the effort. It just a nice 'real world' strategy to employ(think christianity in the third world(which does some good at the cost of indoctrination)and WorldBank/IMF shernanigans). I really like this aspect of CTP2, just sort of doesn't really quite work the way i'm sure it was hoped it would. Like a fair bit of the ol girl CTP2, it just needed that extra time spit+polish to really balance it all up. So i'd like to start with the 'Stealth' units........well i'd like someone else to