Use the IFBC branch to test PvP balancing

cpt.N3M0

Well-Known Member
my personal problem is not about the fact that sniper are slim and they maybe more usefull as tank...
the idea is that they re usefull as snipers but they are not moving anywhere , they dont move either because
they have multiple account with multiple fort fight or because they re too afraid to die...
but they are the glasscannon sooooo.... it is what it is ... only few dueller moves...

its 2 month that i try to pull off this manovre on my FF but the duellers doesnt move from the north trench...
i think we need more method of cohercition from the general to the player now is either you re in or you re a traitor...
we need some in between , is a game and there must be free will but the ff leaders are those who try to spice up things..
i dont mean only cohercition but also ways to show strategy better , for exaple if i post the url of west stats on the topic
it will show dark on dark.... cmon...

let give a minus 5 in attack to a dueller :D

also i wanna point out that we miss consumable that boost resistance... what is the pro about booby traps for tanks?
50-70 dmg ? you do less than 3500 dmg each times... give me 70 res more and i will tank 20 shot more
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
also i wanna point out that we miss consumable that boost resistance
Yea we emphasized that when new Buffs were coming and several times after that.

Damage bonus makes sense but the issue is, it doubles (or goes even higher) in the hands of Damager builds.
So say, Viewfinders will provide like 100-160 extra to Damagers.

Which makes me think Booby Traps should've had Damage, Defense and Resist buff.
Of course might as well make that Defense bonus "sector-wide" stackable few times, or something.

The issue is though, while Resistance barely "helps" against Damagers.. soon enough Tanks won't be able to Damage each other and we will see "tickling" instead.

Meanwhile, other buffs like Amulets, Hushpuppies etc should've been buffed long time ago.
 
Last edited:

cpt.N3M0

Well-Known Member
we also may need a checkeing box where player signing in for fort fight can tell the ff leader
if they will be offline or online
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
I've some.. ideas/suggestions! for Formulas.
Damage:
( Weapon Damage + Buff + Sector Damage ) x ( 1 + max(0, (Leadership^0.7 - |MaxHealth ÷ 8 - (Leadership)|^0.6) ÷ 120) )

Resistance:
Resistance Bonus + ( (Skill1)^0.7 − |MaxHealth ÷ 10 − (Skill1)|^0.6 ) ÷ 2

Ps. Remove ÷ 2 if increasing max Character Level. But here's hoping that it won't be increased.

Hit Chance (Attack)
25 + Leadership^0.5 + Aiming^0.55 + (Skill1)^0.6 + Multiplayer Attack + Sector Attack + High Ground Bonus - Distance Penalty

Dodge Chance (Defense)
10 + Leadership^0.5 + Dodging^0.55 + (Skill1)^0.6 + Multiplayer Defence + Sector Defence + High Ground Bonus


These should fix/penalise; "Leadership spam" as well as "everything on Hp" while comparatively rewarding mid-Range Hp Tanks (10-15k) .

For Comparison:
Damage:
( Weapon Damage + Buff + Sector Damage ) x ( 1 + [Leadership ÷ MaxHealth] )

Resistance:
300 × (Skill1) ÷ MaxHealth + Resistance Bonus

Hit Chance (Attack)

25 + Leadership^0.5 + Aiming^0.5 + (Skill1)^0.6 + Multiplayer Attack + Sector Attack + High Ground Bonus - Distance Penalty

Dodge Chance (Defense)
10 + Leadership^0.5 + Dodging^0.5 + (Skill1)^0.6 + Multiplayer Defence + Sector Defence + High Ground Bonus


> Skill1 refers to Hiding/Traps
> "Distance" calculated as a hypotenuse if its not a straight line to the target. And it's powered by ^1.4.
> High ground bonus (or penalty) is calculated as a percentage of your Attack/Defense value
> Defenders aren't immune to Flag penalties
Damage:
( Weapon Damage + Buff + Sector Damage ) x ( 1 + [max(0, (min(Skill1, Leadership, Aiming)^0.8 + median(Skill1, Leadership, Aiming)^0.7 + max(Skill1, Leadership, Aiming)^0.6 − |MaxHealth ÷ 10 − mean(Skill1, Leadership, Aiming)|^0.6) ÷ 400)] )

Resistance:
Temporary
100 × (Skill1 + Leadership + Dodging) ÷ MaxHealth + Resistance Bonus

Second
Resistance Bonus + [max(0, (min(Skill1, Leadership, Dodging)^0.8 + median(Skill1, Leadership, Dodging)^0.7 + max(Skill1, Leadership, Dodging)^0.6 − |MaxHealth ÷ 10 − mean(Skill1, Leadership, Dodging)|^0.6) ÷ 3)]


These should fix/penalise; "Leadership spam" as well as "everything on Hp" while comparatively rewarding mid-Range Hp Tanks (10-15k) .

For more:
 
Last edited:

cpt.N3M0

Well-Known Member
i think that you re a bit biased by the role that you re playing...
i am biased because i like to play as a resistance soldier but
if tanks keep gettting low damage sooner or later they will not be able
to do anything... tanks need more damage and duellers need a bit less...
the focus should be on resistance and damage formula putting a band filter
on the equation that allow both classes to be balanced ... keeping full resistance
soldier would be an added bonus ;)
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
Results are in!
HpSpecsBeforeAfter
1590 (No-Hp)​
1700 setting traps​
300 resistance​
100 resistance​
7000​
1700 setting traps​
75 resistance​
120 resistance​
14000​
1000 s. traps (Pure Hp & Mobility)​
21 resistance​
45 resistance​
25000​
1000 s. traps (Pure Hp & Mobility)​
12 resistance​
23 resistance​

Ps. 1000 Hiding isn't possible to reach with same Hp values as J.Cortina doesn't have Hiding and R.Livingston doesn't really offer anything else than Hp.
While this isn't an issue for Soldiers (it is an advantage even, with these suggested formulas), it is a bit of an issue for others.

HpSpecsBeforeAfter
1590​
1800 leadership​
2.13+​
1.88+​
7000​
500 leadership (Set only)​
1.07​
1.35​
14000​
500 leadership (Set only)​
1.03​
1.04​
14000​
700 leadership (Set + Sp/Ap)​
1.05​
1.27+​
25000​
500 leadership (Set only)​
1.02​
1.0​
Ps. Tanks get very little Leadership from their Sets as of late. Hp sets having a little bit more LS would be great.
On a side note, I still don't like "Sector Damage" bonus being multiplied as it makes things even more Set Dependent..

 
Last edited:

cpt.N3M0

Well-Known Member
I dont know if you notice it but you re actually increasing snipers damage...
with your formula you reduced to a one third the resistance values
meanwhile you reduced the dmg amplification of sniper of only the 15% ...
as I said before are you biased from a class ?
to reduce the sniper dmg efficiently without risking to unbalance the sistem in other way
you need to modify their formula , not other....
You touch one thing at the time not all toghever, its called scientific approach!
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
Idk if you notice that you aren't reading the "Before" and "After" parts right because u say the opposite of the results.
Or did you just read the first ever line because that's how you build ur odd character?

No, I'm not a Damager.

Sniper doesn't exist. Sniping is something else and not especial to Damagers.

Read, the, whole, post, before, judge, it.
Or just don't talk about it because u embarrass yourself like this.
 
Last edited:

cpt.N3M0

Well-Known Member
yeah ... no you wanna be a mathematician and play with numbers but now you insult me
when you miss the point... I personally think that your behavior is a bit off...
I just made the conclusion that what you made IS NOT ENOUGHT !
I didnt bother that my class of character get wyped totally out of the game with your new formula.
I noticed that you dont look at the main scheme !

In game I got 600 resistance and its totally useless against sniper ,
If you gave 20-60 more resistance to a tank it will only reduce other tanks damage,
sniper are going full leadership and it will not effect them !
They will damage you for 1000-1200 each round!

Practically if I read your "Before" and "after" I am really Embarassed because I need to say to you
that you missed the point!

Follow with me the points :
-You are taking away the class of the full resistance soldiers
-You are actually making sniper into full resistance soldier , good luck with that
-You are increasing tank resistance soo you are reducing tank overall damage
-You are reducing the leadership moltiply factor for everyone
-You are reducing the leadership moltipy factor of sniper by a little more than 10%

Do you see the problem now?

We re complaining because tanks have no damage mainly not the fact that snipers do too much damage !
You may need to look to the equation of the various "Band filter type" and try to modify the low pass filter
made with HP points on damage multiply into a Band-stop filter allowing both snipers and tanks to do damage!
Band filter type

Resistance need a rework to but on how its calculated but on how it works decreasing damage,
now work subtracting the value to the rng damage, it should be proportional to help tank absorb more
but whatever... personally I am having fun with this wormhole!

You can thanks me later for being soo polite and helping you with your math problem,
I accept credit card ;)
 

Abydos1

Well-Known Member
I know I'm not the most authoritative guy to comment on this but I just have to suggest something about the distance penalty affecting the attackers who are missing so many shots to the point that the defense has an overwhelming advantage sitting on their towers and walls wearing Cortina and such making it pretty much impossible to win an attack these days even with most of the damagers wearing their Captain sets including me now who is usually a benchmark tank worker that has very good stats on the flip side when wearing Cortina on the WT...I was wondering if tweaking the distance penalty to give more of a fighting chance to the invaders would be on the table and if not when is this new tank attack set coming out?
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
Well sadly there are too many issues that are related to each other. And they don't know what to do with the mess they created over the years.

Anyhow..
Cortina isn't "OP" on its own. Only Towers + Distance make it seem like.

But then Damages of Leadership spammers are too high. And I don't see absurd "Hits taken + Dodges" for the most part.
On the other hand.. Tanks hit even more rarely and with even less Damage.

So considering that + Increase of the Total Hp of Defenders.. We got the opposite of what we had few months ago.
Even though Tanks ain't getting rewarded all the same :roll:

So my suggestion was to increase the Damages of Tanks a little bit, while slightly decreasing/limiting the Damages of Leadership spammers.
Then, discourage the "All-in-Hp" builds while encouraging mid-range Hp builds with better Damages (& Hit ratios).

Ps. Thats what Inno or at least Diggo actually wants.
While, they don't want "0-Hp" Resist builds.
I was wondering if tweaking the distance penalty
Well I hope not.. I mean it really only effects the very big distances.

Sure, Tanks can't really hit from anywhere but that's another issue.
when is this new tank attack set coming out?
Not before Easter I suppose. I wish they just added minimal "Hiding" to Cortina instead.
 
Last edited:

roland jacobs

Well-Known Member
Maybe it's time we revert the Attack numbers to their original values which were, 50, 100, and 140, respectively
But there are too many complaints about 30v30 battles. It can be expanded to 500 v 500, but without the active chars, attack numbers aren't going to matter.

It seems they changed fort bonus + cortina + lower attack numbers all around the same time. Doing one of those things might have helped balance, instead of swing the favor from attackers to defenders.

Can't they run a simulation where randomized levels (100-150), gear (2018-2021), full battles, and movements are all put into a test server and ran 1000x. All chars should optimally skilled for the gear and battles. Use the battles from 2010-2012 with the new gear/builds/etc and run the simulation. Share the results, and n00bs like us me assuming that they messed up again are proven wrong by actual stats.
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
But there are too many complaints about 30v30 battles. It can be expanded to 500 v 500, but without the active chars, attack numbers aren't going to matter
Well yea but migrations and stuff hopefully will start at last.

Besides, Colorado usually fills mediums.
And most likely even more would join with a bit of change.
lower attack numbers all around the same time.
No they did not.
Number changes were on May 2020. And didn't help much.

Cortina is DotD and Structure bonus changes were a bit before that.

Before Cortina we still couldn't hold Towers with both changes.
And we barely can hold the nearest Tower with it.

They had to change the Formulas, Rewarding mechanics and all too but they did not.
That's the issue.

Still, they could give us a decent Attacker Tank set instead of this meh one and that would help.
But yea.
 
Last edited:

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
If nothing else will be done

I will actually suggest the "nerf" of Class bonus of each Tower, just a tad bit.

This way, players on their own Tower won't ignore the distance and all completely while shooting, and/or amplify it against the shooter while dodging/getting shot.

Otherwise default Tower/Structure bonuses are fine as is imo.
 
Last edited:

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
I stand by my last suggestion :'P

ST still a death trap for Attackers and no wonder why %95 of the Attacks start East :roll:

As for DT , hit ratios of Damager Duelers are ridiculous there.
No matter the distance.
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
Maybe, just maybe, with the new LCM there could be changes?

At least the suggestion I made above.
(Maybe don't involve Smalls)