Skip to Content
 

Weight of charging a weapon over time?

12 replies [Last post]
Tue, 11/19/2019 - 16:29
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013

I run into a balance problem.
But the question itself can be relatively easy?

If a weapon charges over multiple turns.
How much would the weight be of said weapon?

Previously I tried dividing the weight by the amount of turns needed to charge.
Thus weapons of equal value, gain increased linear damage by increased linear amount of charging turns.

This proves to be slightly off balanced.

Also, the weakness of these weapons are:
-Enemies can go out or range or vision.
-The weapon gets destroyed before fully charged.

Somehow, I should give weapons with a longer charging time. A little bit more power than first calculated. But how much?

Top
Tue, 11/19/2019 - 16:44
#1
Jay103
Jay103's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/23/2018
20%. Well, maybe. It really

20%.

Well, maybe.

It really depends on the exact game design of everything else, and how likely it is that something negative will happen while the weapon is charging. Estimate what that is, and then increase the damage by roughly that...

Top
Tue, 11/19/2019 - 17:03
#2
let-off studios
let-off studios's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/07/2011
Variables as Cost Multipliers

If I were in your position, I would weigh the variables against one another, and then balance weapons with Cost. In other words, if your variables on range, charge, damage, etc. can be compared to one another, then the more effective weapons overall will be more expensive.

I want to try this as a thought experiment, and then you let me know if I've covered everything.

Let's assume there are the following variables for each weapon:

  • Damage
  • Charge Time (a negative modifier, since this is a liability)
  • Range
  • Weight/Mass
  • Crew (as in, weapons that take a squad to fire them, like a howitzer)

Here's an example of how a typical infantry unit, armed with an assault rifle, might look:

AK-47 wrote:

  • Damage = 1
  • Charge Time = 1
  • Range = 2
  • Weight/Mass = 1
  • Crew = 1

Let's say the cost factor for these weapons will be multiplying the value of all the variables together. In this example, one Assault Infantry will cost $2. Pretty darn cheap.

Now, let's have a go at an anti-tank laser.

BFG-9000 wrote:

  • Damage = 15
  • Charge Time = 3 (we'll divide by this number)
  • Range = 10
  • Weight/Mass = 4
  • Crew = 3

Wow. That's gonna cost $1,800. Quite expensive in comparison.

Not to say that you need to follow the same process exactly. However, the principle you apply can be similar to the above. Is there some way you can use the variables themselves to determine the resource cost? Have you attempted this already? What do your results tell you?

Different weapon qualities may have different weights (in fact, I suspect this is your main dilemma). For example, is range a major factor in this game? What about the weight of the weapon? What if it's motorized and has a Speed attribute? Maybe Crew could be a negative modifier as well.

Maybe you want to weight a category by 0.5, or maybe you want to have a "tiered" classification for multipliers versus straight multiplication of variables. Maybe items with a Range of 1 to 10 have a multiplier of 1, while those with a Range of 11 to 30 have a multiplier of 2, a Range of 31 to 100 provides a multiplier of 3, and so on.

Is this along the lines of what you're dealing with? Have you already done this?

Top
Wed, 11/20/2019 - 03:00
#3
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I think you are not far away.

Jay103 wrote:
20%.

Well, maybe.

It really depends on the exact game design of everything else, and how likely it is that something negative will happen while the weapon is charging. Estimate what that is, and then increase the damage by roughly that...

Once I can estimate what to estimate.
I could calculate it ;)

I presume that it has to be linear to the increasing of the negative effects.

So 20% might actually be a nice start to test.

Top
Wed, 11/20/2019 - 03:06
#4
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Soon

let-off studios wrote:
If I were in your position

I want to go deeper into your post. (No time atm, sorry)

Top
Wed, 11/20/2019 - 13:32
#5
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Tought experiment

Of course I could delve into the math. But it would be complicated as of how I got the numbers.

Even the "cool down" mechanism is based on ancient scripts in my drawer :)

Although, the pause before a weapon fires is something rare.
The Obelisk of Light from Brotherhood of Nod is one of those rare examples.
It doesn't fire right away, but charges its weapon. Meaning that it is going to be relatively cheap, compared to other weapons.

I tried considering this charging to be part of the cool down. Since it is part of the cool down of the previous fired weapon.

Normal weapons have a cool down of 1 if you will. Or a charge of 1, would mean the exact same thing.

In fact, I think that the "first shot" is supposed to be cheaper this way. If a cool down is 5. The damage weight is 4/5th of an advantage. Which can be considered to be negative health on the opponent. The remaining 1/5th will be considered to be normal.
If the normal weapon is based on equal costs to an equal weight of health. Then the weapon with a cool down of 5 will have 1/5th of a weight. PLUS 4/5th weight considered to be health related.

The charging weapon will simply have less of this health related weight. I guess, I need to make a formula for this first and reconsider my table for quick references.

I need to go deeper.

***

PS.
I only use damage and range.
:)

Top
Thu, 11/21/2019 - 15:34
#6
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Going in math circles

I don't think anyone is able to help me with this one.
Every time when I try some logic to the weight factor. I find myself creating paradoxes.

Sometimes I managed to get the result 0 costs for all.
Sometimes I even managed to get negative costs.

I am going to give this a rest for a while.

Top
Thu, 11/21/2019 - 17:03
#7
Jay103
Jay103's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/23/2018
20% :)

20% :)

Top
Thu, 11/21/2019 - 23:47
#8
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
If a simple percentage would be true

Jay103 wrote:
20% :)

It would be 16.7 or 33.3.
Or a variable percentage depending on the charge time multiplied by this 16.7 or 33.3 percent.

Whatever it is going to be. I figured I need to get it right for RTS games. Before adapting to my board game.

Top
Thu, 11/21/2019 - 23:53
#9
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Wait

Could it be that calculating the average damage on itself is wrong?

A game where we didn't have cool down, nor charging: Will not show that average damage is wrong.

Should I remove this average damage. And simply replace it by the charging damage in the future?

If so, then cool down of 1 plus charging of 1, should equal damage.

Top
Sat, 11/23/2019 - 20:46
#10
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I tried several things

I first tested if my cool down system was correct.
This still seems to be the case. And thus my initial plan of simplifying the calculations failed.

Then I tried using the results of the cool down, as an invert to the charging.
This yielded weird results.

It didn't matter how long something charged. The maximum damage would be 9. And this is stupid.

Then I though of multiplying the "average damage" by the same factor instead. Because infinite charging time should yield infinite damage.

While a cool down of 2 yields 1.5 damage.
A charging of 2, yields 3.0 damage.
While a cool down of 3 yields 1.8 damage.
A charging of 3, yields 5.4 damage.
While a cool down of 4 yields 2 damage.
A charging of 4, yields 8.0 damage.

It is kinda strange in my eye's. But if it is balanced, why not?

If I want a simpler version. I could try 33% for each level. This means:
A charging of 2, yields 2.67 damage.
A charging of 3, yields 5.00 damage.
A charging of 4, yields 8.00 damage.
But it is unbalanced!!!

I guess, I should give my latest finding a couple of tests. But I am happy, that I found something that is still clouded in mystery. Because it has not proven to be bad yet.

Cool down has a disadvantage against durable units.
Charging has a disadvantage against dodging units.

Top
Sun, 11/24/2019 - 11:52
#11
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I think it is good

I have yet to see how to combine cool down with charging.
It would be very cool if a weapon would have a charging first. Then once it fires, it too will take multiple AP.

A weapon with a cool down of 7 should be more expensive than a weapon with a cool down of 6 with a charging of 1.

Top
Mon, 11/25/2019 - 15:27
#12
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I am an idiot

Even with math this time.

I managed to think of a way to calculate cool down and charging as one thing together. But the result is that having a higher cool down combined with a charging time of 3. Always will yield the same damage and costs. The only difference truly would be that the cool down can range from 1 to any number. But the damage is always 5...

Still. I wonder how charging time is connected to cool down.
In RTS games, you begin with a charging time. But then the cool down is actually a cool down plus the next charging time. Thus higher as a new cool down.

Even though I know that. It will not make the stupid mistake that I have made.

***

I am starting to feel that I should make some sort of table or something?

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut