PDA

View Full Version : Game balance



damien123_214
05-17-2008, 03:42 AM
Have no idea if this has been mentioned but i thought it would a great addition to the game to give it balance, especially in multiplayer.

If at the start of each game the host could pick how much each person is allowed to speand on their aeroplane it would make a much more balanced environment (i.e. if the host only allowed $200 million then a person would be able to buy the F22 but not put any missiles on it or maybe only rubbish ones, but someone who picks a eurofighter etc would be able to fully kit out their planes with the best of the best, you get my drift?)

This has been explained really badly, hopefully someone who understands this can reword it lol, but it seems like a good idea to me, it keeps the realistic aspect of the game but would also make using older planes viable

RawKryptonite
05-17-2008, 09:48 AM
Balance ruins games.
There *should* be a right tool for the job. I can't stand COD4 when you can have a silencer *or* a red dot sight. An F-22 should be better than an F-14.

The way to get them all used is to offer gametypes that have different objectives and give hosts options for limitations on aircraft and loadouts available---but not across the board limitations.

In OGF, we play with all F-16's, or a mix of A-10's and an F-16/18. We almost never use an F-22, simply because it isn't as fun. Give the host power to set up a "theme" for a match. Russian vs. US planes for instance, or no stealth, 2 bombers req'd for each team etc. and that takes care of it and adds gametypes.

damien123_214
05-17-2008, 10:14 AM
Im not saying that planes should be standardised in any way or that you cant put anything on a plane, that would suck. It's just a type of different restriction for the host to put on, so people can still choose anything within their budget allowed so to speak but it means that people have to compromise between what plane they want to fly and what load out they want - i see your point tho, other option would just allow the host to turn planes on and off and achieve the same thing, but i just thought this would be a more flexible restriction.

ikharus
05-18-2008, 05:24 AM
hmm, money would be interesting, would add the feel of mercenary missions and add a different taste to the game (a good one in my opinion).

Silver-Hawk-Red
05-18-2008, 12:30 PM
LOL, F-22A better then the F-14D.

LexKaziDelfos
05-18-2008, 07:59 PM
and budget for maintnance?

damien123_214
05-19-2008, 04:52 AM
wasnt thinking so much in terms of maintaining the craft, but perhaps this could play a role - for example the host might be able to set a series of deathmatches and you have to repair the damage your plane sustained or fly it as it was in next round?

Also if this is gonna be more like a arcade than a sim game i hope they include aracadish game types too (I'm just thinking from FFS games) like infection (one plane starts off "infected" and all the others are uninfected, if the infected plane shoots down an uninfected one they they join the infected team etc. until there is only one guy left). What does everyone feel about that?

Blademanx2008
05-21-2008, 12:12 PM
lol when a deathmatch ends it ends. How can you repair a plane that was demolished mid air and turned to dust. You would need to buy a new one lol.

However if you just got minor damage then thats understandable

damien123_214
05-22-2008, 05:47 AM
yeah thats what i was thinking when i wrote it, maybe those who have too extensive damage e.g. complete destuction lol wouldnt be able to enter the next round - it would be kinda like a little tournament. By the end the players will be flying dustbins in the air tho lol!

MPSSC
05-23-2008, 12:13 AM
the reason players will wait for HAWX is because they wnat to play an air combat game that different from AC/OGF.
if HWAX is another AC/OGF,why all players just go back to play AC/OGF???

ubi should pick the market that the current games didn't cover,not compete the current market

why don't everyone check a look at the sucess of NDS/wii,isn't it a really good examply for discovering new markets??

kamelord64
05-25-2008, 12:59 AM
did you play Blazing Angels or cod 4 ,? think multi menu must be mix of these two games ;
Blazing Angels for balance (aircraft type:early,middle,late sth.)

cod4 for rank.and when you start a game you can chose your own wepon from list,maybe we can chose our aircraft like so.On cod4 we can modify our wepon,maybe we can modify our aircraft like too.

Or without these,there is only classic mode deathmach and teamdeathmach's,but its not be enjoyable for long time.

Summarize;

when we enhance our skills with time,we develop our plane too.


Money,Money,Money

gdtyrael
03-16-2009, 08:00 AM
Thats a great idea kamelord64 said bout CoD4 rank thing... the more pts you might do at deathmatch rounds, better planes you might be getting... so as it is by now, its a F-22 fest... Whats the point in having 50+ planes, if theres just a couples worth getting if you dont wanna be screwed by everyone... Im for one support any kind of balance, ubi should do something

IamKFAM
03-16-2009, 09:05 AM
So what... I tied a dude 1v1 this weekend. He was flying the ubiquitous F-22... I was flying a Mig-21... If he didn't get two emp strikes during our 10 mins... I would have beat him. The planes mean almost nothing. Get your skills up.

ICEMANREAPER83
03-16-2009, 09:36 AM
this is true i've been eating HARVs an F-22s in a mig 21 fishbed. the planes dont matter.

JSF-89
03-16-2009, 10:41 AM
Originally posted by damien123_214:
Have no idea if this has been mentioned but i thought it would a great addition to the game to give it balance, especially in multiplayer.

If at the start of each game the host could pick how much each person is allowed to speand on their aeroplane it would make a much more balanced environment (i.e. if the host only allowed $200 million then a person would be able to buy the F22 but not put any missiles on it or maybe only rubbish ones, but someone who picks a eurofighter etc would be able to fully kit out their planes with the best of the best, you get my drift?)

This has been explained really badly, hopefully someone who understands this can reword it lol, but it seems like a good idea to me, it keeps the realistic aspect of the game but would also make using older planes viable


How is this more realistic?
When a Raptor goes into battle its going in fully-armed, yeah Raptors are expensive but being the best is never cheap, and their weaponry is going to be outfitted as such.

LexKaziDelfos
03-16-2009, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by JSF-89:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by damien123_214:
Have no idea if this has been mentioned but i thought it would a great addition to the game to give it balance, especially in multiplayer.

If at the start of each game the host could pick how much each person is allowed to speand on their aeroplane it would make a much more balanced environment (i.e. if the host only allowed $200 million then a person would be able to buy the F22 but not put any missiles on it or maybe only rubbish ones, but someone who picks a eurofighter etc would be able to fully kit out their planes with the best of the best, you get my drift?)

This has been explained really badly, hopefully someone who understands this can reword it lol, but it seems like a good idea to me, it keeps the realistic aspect of the game but would also make using older planes viable


How is this more realistic?
When a Raptor goes into battle its going in fully-armed, yeah Raptors are expensive but being the best is never cheap, and their weaponry is going to be outfitted as such. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is more realistic in terms of numbers, but since this is not a strategy game but an individual pseudo-simulator you can't apply numbers, so his approach actually makes sense.

Less expensive aircraft = more aircraft
in HAWX could be
less expensive aircraft = more missiles

Adnihilis
03-16-2009, 02:58 PM
I think the weapons allowed in TDM custom games should be able to be individually allowable. In other words, if we want to host a game allowing all weapons besides, say, All Aspects, we should. I don't really like having to restrict it on occasion to purely JS missiles. I enjoy the other weapons, but come on. All Aspects are cheap as hell.

Then again, only allowing a max of 2 missiles per target per life would go a long way toward balancing the game (in TDM). You can't respect those that do nothing but spam those missiles.

Ragnar257
03-16-2009, 06:33 PM
I think what would be best would be to give each plane a specific point value, like in compaign mode.

Like you get 30 points for shooting down MiG-21s and MiG-25s , 50 for something newer like F-15s and F-16s, and 70 for the top tier planes like the F-22 and Typhoons

v1k
03-16-2009, 07:03 PM
I certainly think the multi aspect of hawx is much more fun than AC6. It just needs partying support, maybe 1 or 2 more game modes. I think a real online community could form around this then.

gdtyrael
03-17-2009, 04:35 PM
So what... I tied a dude 1v1 this weekend. He was flying the ubiquitous F-22... I was flying a Mig-21... If he didn't get two emp strikes during our 10 mins... I would have beat him. The planes mean almost nothing. Get your skills up.

If we have 50 planes to choose from, and they mean nothing cause theyr most equal gameplay wise, just picking one for its skin, Its worst than having a few better ones. Im trully wish something be done about planes uniqueness