Balancing Changes

Sasri · Aug 14th 2018, 12:56pm

Dear generals,

today we are happy to present to you the upcoming balancing changes, which will be on beta upcoming Wednesday, August 15. After a two week test phase the changes will go live on August 28. We collected a lot of feedback including what we read in the forums and on other platforms and we felt the need to make some change to provide a balanced and interesting game experience. Please keep in mind that these changes will then also affect running games. If you have beta status you will be able to test the changes in frontline pioneer games after the beta release. Feel free to give us feedback in the forums, adjustments can still be made if necessary.

Kanaris · Aug 14th 2018, 2:56pm

Very interesting update!

Just one comment regarding the nuclear reactors would it not be better to leave the rares daily upkeep, but instead give some kind of incentive to leave them running like incremental resource production boost per level?

Level1 +5% to resource production
Level2 +10% to resource production
etc...

Quasi-duck · Aug 14th 2018, 3:08pm

I do not mind any of these changes except for infra. It's prices should not have been meddled with.

Fritz Christen · Aug 14th 2018, 8:04pm

TANK Destroyer
it does not need to be faster it needs more life points or more defense against armored vehicles, for that they are and they do not fulfill their function.

Railroad gun
added small damage vs submarine
what it really needs is an increase in damage against structures and troops,
currently it is very expensive and inefficient, if it were more efficient the cost would not matter

The commands
the commands almost nobody uses them could be added the function of parachutists, so they avoid creating a new unit, they give use to the unit and make everyone happy

HEAVY TANK
Need decreased HP in all levels
are overwhelmingly superiors

Kehsct · Aug 14th 2018, 9:16pm

Most of these changes I agree with and think will make the game much better! However, I do not think that the cost of infrastructure should've been increased. Infrastructure is one of the first buildings made on day 1 by experienced players, and by raising the price, hinders most early game strategies. In addition, later game, people might actually shy away from infra due to it's increased oil and steel costs, especially since many late game units require large amounts of oil and steel, along with consuming oil daily.

cchyt · Aug 14th 2018, 10:29pm

What does normalizing damage for attack and defense mean? numbers shown are the actual attack/defense of the unit?

VorlonFCW · Aug 14th 2018, 11:32pm

Lets keep this thread to the topic at hand, which is these balancing changes.

Suggestions for additional units should be done in the suggestions section.

The paratrooper comments have been moved to Here
And spam has been removed.

VorlonFCW · Aug 15th 2018, 12:32am

Kehsct wrote:

I do not think that the cost of infrastructure should've been increased.

I think The morale bonus for infrastructure will more than pay for them with increased production, both early game before your core typically grows to 100% morale, and late game in large maps to stabilize far flung food provinces.

cchyt wrote:

What does normalizing damage for attack and defense mean? numbers shown are the actual attack/defense of the unit?

This means the Air to Air offense and defense values.

Currently with units such as Tactical bomber it does more damage defending that attacking, like so:

This means that there has been an exploit often complained about where players can avoid attacking on patrol and allowing their planes to be attacked in order to do more damage. While I have personally found this "exploit" to be useless when I have tried it, so I have never gotten worried over it, but some players have. Really it only matters when both players know the same trick and are locked in a permanent dance never actually attacking.

This balance change will mean that all bombers will do the same amount of damage both attacking and defending, thus avoiding the dance.

abdoer · Aug 15th 2018, 2:44am

im against interceptors & tactical bombers upkeep and cost change they made fun and oil is currently rare

also their hp was perfect

abdoer · Aug 15th 2018, 2:46am

artillery needs more damage against infantry

im against increase oil cost& upkeep of everything

Diabolical · Aug 15th 2018, 4:56am

Quasi-duck wrote:

I do not mind any of these changes except for infra. It's prices should not have been meddled with.

I think this is a refreshing change. Albeit, the increased cost seems a bit more of a jump than ought to be. Perhaps mellowing the increase, a tad, would make the morale-factor more valuable. Otherwise, I fear people will avoid using them as much as they ought.

Kehsct wrote:

Infrastructure is one of the first buildings made on day 1 by experienced players, and by raising the price, hinders most early game strategies.

Mmmm, not always. I prefer to upgrade Factories to level 2 before adding infrastructure on some matches, especially when your craftiest of neighbors blows half their starting cash on a bunch of military spies and tries to flatten your level 1 factories on the day 1 -> 2 change. Trust me, this has been done to me, before, and I never could recover enough to afford all the repairs to my IC's just to bring them back to functional status. And since most players try to max out the starting tech research as fast as they can, they won't have enough Rare Materials to rebuild their defunct factories anymore than I had, that one time.

Besides, only the Armored Car is buildable early enough to take advantage of first-prioritized Infrastructure. By the time one researches Light Tanks, usually a couple days have gone by and the player can easily get at least a level 1.5 upgrade on their factories before switching over to Infrastructure. This way, they can avoid the risk of a successful espionage attack while still getting their Infrastructure built.

Also, there are some players that always went straight to Tac Bombers, not even bothering with Infrastructure, but using Gold to upgrade and build level 2 airbases and researching the technology instantly. Those folks get themselves a big stack of bombers on day one and pretty much ruin the game for all their neighbors. Actually, I had that happen to me in a match I recently started. But, I got wise to it, immediately....I convinced about 10 or so players around the map to sell me their starting Fighters. By the time they got to my shores, I was already growing into a full-fledged empire and I'm ready to take on that golder....and I am going to do so without using gold. Oh, and by the way, I tricked him into selling me three of his bombers. Trust me, by the time he realized, I had flown them far enough out of his reach. He was madder than a wet hen....but it was totally his own fault. You should have seen it!

Kehsct wrote:

In addition, later game, people might actually shy away from infra due to it's increased oil and steel costs, especially since many late game units require large amounts of oil and steel, along with consuming oil daily.

Well, at least in Oil provinces, they won't. But since you can't build tanks without Infrastructure, this update is more likely to force players to build both fewer aircraft as well as fewer armored units....since there just won't be enough Oil to go around. But, the change affects everyone. And since most mid-level players favor the tank/bomber strategy, this update will give newer players more of a chance to survive....at least in the early game.

VorlonFCW wrote:

I think The morale bonus for infrastructure will more than pay for them with increased production, both early game before your core typically grows to 100% morale, and late game in large maps to stabilize far flung food provinces.

Actually, the early game won't be affected by the Infrastructure morale improvement. Think about it. The morale starts low, but equal, for everyone. It will increase the same amount, each day, up to your maximum, which, if you aren't at war, is 100% for most of your nation. But, capturing a capital can speed that up. However, though having added Infrastructure will help to maximize the possible morale in a province, it won't increase the speed in which it's daily morale growth occurs....beyond the normal daily maximum. Thus, the early game isn't affected by the added morale capabilities of Infrastructure.

That said, the mid and late-game affect will be very serendipitous for those of us who like to build gargantuan empires. Unfortunately, with the increased resource costs, it will likely be used less frequently than would make sense. As I mentioned at the top of this post, the increased resource costs should probably be mellowed a bit.

abdoer wrote:

im against interceptors & tactical bombers upkeep and cost change they made fun and oil is currently rare

also their hp was perfect

I like the changes. And, the HP was perfect ONLY to players that wanted to build nothing but bombers. I know there is a divide in the opinions of those who participate in the forums. But I fall into the camp that thinks that Tactical Bombers are/were a little overpowered. At least, with a lesser HP -- and with the normalized air combat numbers -- they can become a little more realistic.

Little Racoon · Aug 15th 2018, 9:50am

Well from what I read, here's a few agrees and disagrees:

Agree:

Tactical bombers. Tac bombers have been OP and most players use it, including me. Decreasing its HP would encourage players not to just produce tac bombers but interceptors and naval bombers as well.

Anti air. Not mentioned much here, but I think this is pretty major. Anti air isn't produced much since it's quite hard to find out other people's troop placements (unless you have espionage), but anti tanks can be really effective. Lowering the manpower cost can make anti airs more common and more effective.

Nuclear reactor removing upkeep. This is really useful because you don't need to worry about your rare resource production and just put it in more worthwhile things, such as rockets.

Armored cars increased damage against armored troops. This is good because I don't use armored cars except on early game simply because their health isn't very good and they can't put up a fight with tanks. Increased damage could increase armored cars winning rate against tanks and thus make good use of their speed to quickly conquer provinces.

Disagree:

Infrastructure. As mentioned before, the increased cost is too much. I like infrastructure and the update that allows it to increase morale, but the cost doesn't encourage people to build more of those. Infrastructure's supposed to increase production but if it's too expensive, then what's the point? ICs would be preferred then.

Railroadgun. RGs are really expensive and good because of their range, but it's not good enough. An extra buff like increasing health or increasing speed with infras would be nice since I've had many RGs defeated at once because of an enemy blitz.

Nuclear sub. I'm not disagreeing to it's nerf on anti-air capabilities, I just think it's too much. Maybe nerfed to a 3-3.3 would be good because halving the damage is simply too much and discouraging to people who wants to build nuclear naval weapons.

Quasi-duck · Aug 15th 2018, 2:35pm

Yeah so the one guy who spoke up supporting the change to infra builds lvl 2 facs before anything else? Alright, noted. This change was unneeded, and as for this

VorlonFCW wrote:

both early game before your core typically grows to 100% morale, and late game in large maps to stabilize far flung food provinces

Early game morale does not matter too much since it goes up to 100% anyways, not once have I had a morale problem early game. Late game, fair enough, but infra should have a morale boost without an increased cost anyways.

Kehsct · Aug 15th 2018, 5:30pm

Diabolical wrote:

Kehsct wrote:

Infrastructure is one of the first buildings made on day 1 by experienced players, and by raising the price, hinders most early game strategies.

Mmmm, not always. I prefer to upgrade Factories to level 2 before adding infrastructure on some matches, especially when your craftiest of neighbors blows half their starting cash on a bunch of military spies and tries to flatten your level 1 factories on the day 1 -> 2 change. Trust me, this has been done to me, before, and I never could recover enough to afford all the repairs to my IC's just to bring them back to functional status. And since most players try to max out the starting tech research as fast as they can, they won't have enough Rare Materials to rebuild their defunct factories anymore than I had, that one time.
Besides, only the Armored Car is buildable early enough to take advantage of first-prioritized Infrastructure. By the time one researches Light Tanks, usually a couple days have gone by and the player can easily get at least a level 1.5 upgrade on their factories before switching over to Infrastructure. This way, they can avoid the risk of a successful espionage attack while still getting their Infrastructure built.

Also, there are some players that always went straight to Tac Bombers, not even bothering with Infrastructure, but using Gold to upgrade and build level 2 airbases and researching the technology instantly. Those folks get themselves a big stack of bombers on day one and pretty much ruin the game for all their neighbors. Actually, I had that happen to me in a match I recently started. But, I got wise to it, immediately....I convinced about 10 or so players around the map to sell me their starting Fighters. By the time they got to my shores, I was already growing into a full-fledged empire and I'm ready to take on that golder....and I am going to do so without using gold. Oh, and by the way, I tricked him into selling me three of his bombers. Trust me, by the time he realized, I had flown them far enough out of his reach. He was madder than a wet hen....but it was totally his own fault. You should have seen it!

You do make a fair point Diabolical, and that match you're playing sounds fun. However, in terms of infra usage early on, you're forgetting about arty. Artillery is something that I have grown to use a lot prior to medium tanks and the like, and even afterwards if oil stops me from producing SPGs. It's just too good at reducing casualties. Especially now that AA won't be needed as much with the air debuffs taking place.

Diabolical · Aug 15th 2018, 5:58pm

Kehsct wrote:

You do make a fair point Diabolical, and that match you're playing sounds fun. However, in terms of infra usage early on, you're forgetting about arty. Artillery is something that I have grown to use a lot prior to medium tanks and the like, and even afterwards if oil stops me from producing SPGs. It's just too good at reducing casualties. Especially now that AA won't be needed as much with the air debuffs taking place.

Actually, I usually don't build Artillery for, at least, a couple days. And I prefer to build Artillery after getting a couple waves of Light Tanks built, first. Of course, I'm not locked into that strategy, but it seems to work best at clearing out a human neighbor or two.

I usually don't attack any of the little AI nations until AFTER I've cleared my borders of anyone with a brain (as in, any human player with more than a noob rating). And that usually requires Light Tanks before Artillery. And, because I assume that my competitors will be doing the same ——— and many — if not most — DO try to build Light Tanks as soon as possible ——— I start out with some Anti-Tanks, which works better with low starting manpower than just building all Infantry, anyway. Besides, adding some Anti-Tanks on day one are a good way to defend against golders who like to build first-day-tanks.

Kehsct · Aug 15th 2018, 6:11pm

Diabolical wrote:

Kehsct wrote:

You do make a fair point Diabolical, and that match you're playing sounds fun. However, in terms of infra usage early on, you're forgetting about arty. Artillery is something that I have grown to use a lot prior to medium tanks and the like, and even afterwards if oil stops me from producing SPGs. It's just too good at reducing casualties. Especially now that AA won't be needed as much with the air debuffs taking place.

Actually, I usually don't build Artillery for, at least, a couple days. And I prefer to build Artillery after getting a couple waves of Light Tanks built, first. Of course, I'm not locked into that strategy, but it seems to work best at clearing out a human neighbor or two.
I usually don't attack any of the little AI nations until AFTER I've cleared my borders of anyone with a brain (as in, any human player with more than a noob rating). And that usually requires Light Tanks before Artillery. And, because I assume that my competitors will be doing the same ——— and many — if not most — DO try to build Light Tanks as soon as possible ——— I start out with some Anti-Tanks, which works better with low starting manpower than just building all Infantry, anyway. Besides, adding some Anti-Tanks on day one are a good way to defend against golders who like to build first-day-tanks.

Fair enough. I don't shy away from producing LTs either, I just see arty as a lot more worthwhile early on typically. It allows you to conserve troops if you can and not have to replace infantry and the like.

Diabolical · Aug 15th 2018, 6:38pm

Kehsct wrote:

Diabolical wrote:

Kehsct wrote:

You do make a fair point Diabolical, and that match you're playing sounds fun. However, in terms of infra usage early on, you're forgetting about arty. Artillery is something that I have grown to use a lot prior to medium tanks and the like, and even afterwards if oil stops me from producing SPGs. It's just too good at reducing casualties. Especially now that AA won't be needed as much with the air debuffs taking place.

Actually, I usually don't build Artillery for, at least, a couple days. And I prefer to build Artillery after getting a couple waves of Light Tanks built, first. Of course, I'm not locked into that strategy, but it seems to work best at clearing out a human neighbor or two.I usually don't attack any of the little AI nations until AFTER I've cleared my borders of anyone with a brain (as in, any human player with more than a noob rating). And that usually requires Light Tanks before Artillery. And, because I assume that my competitors will be doing the same ——— and many — if not most — DO try to build Light Tanks as soon as possible ——— I start out with some Anti-Tanks, which works better with low starting manpower than just building all Infantry, anyway. Besides, adding some Anti-Tanks on day one are a good way to defend against golders who like to build first-day-tanks.

Fair enough. I don't shy away from producing LTs either, I just see arty as a lot more worthwhile early on typically. It allows you to conserve troops if you can and not have to replace infantry and the like.

I agree, except that usually I encounter at least one other player that blitzes with their entire army against my borders. By the time I could even get those Artillery online (barring using gold, of course), they won't make much of a difference and I will likely have had to stand and fight a melee battle which has already cost me some of my Infantry, despite their defensive advantage. But, since that foolish other player will have lost far more Infantry than me, my newly-coming-online tanks will be able to counter with less resistance and then take over their entire nation because they lost it all taking me on.

I couldn't have done that with artillery, since, by the time I bring them to bear, the other guy will have already replaced his losses. Tanks can get in there fast enough to capture defenseless factories and whatever free units the other guy was vanely building. Thus, I increase my army's size much faster, overall.

This is a more aggressive strategy. But it is one that works very well against both noobs as well as more-experienced players.

Kehsct · Aug 15th 2018, 7:33pm

Diabolical wrote:

Kehsct wrote:

Diabolical wrote:

Kehsct wrote:

You do make a fair point Diabolical, and that match you're playing sounds fun. However, in terms of infra usage early on, you're forgetting about arty. Artillery is something that I have grown to use a lot prior to medium tanks and the like, and even afterwards if oil stops me from producing SPGs. It's just too good at reducing casualties. Especially now that AA won't be needed as much with the air debuffs taking place.

Actually, I usually don't build Artillery for, at least, a couple days. And I prefer to build Artillery after getting a couple waves of Light Tanks built, first. Of course, I'm not locked into that strategy, but it seems to work best at clearing out a human neighbor or two.I usually don't attack any of the little AI nations until AFTER I've cleared my borders of anyone with a brain (as in, any human player with more than a noob rating). And that usually requires Light Tanks before Artillery. And, because I assume that my competitors will be doing the same ——— and many — if not most — DO try to build Light Tanks as soon as possible ——— I start out with some Anti-Tanks, which works better with low starting manpower than just building all Infantry, anyway. Besides, adding some Anti-Tanks on day one are a good way to defend against golders who like to build first-day-tanks.

Fair enough. I don't shy away from producing LTs either, I just see arty as a lot more worthwhile early on typically. It allows you to conserve troops if you can and not have to replace infantry and the like.

I agree, except that usually I encounter at least one other player that blitzes with their entire army against my borders. By the time I could even get those Artillery online (barring using gold, of course), they won't make much of a difference and I will likely have had to stand and fight a melee battle which has already cost me some of my Infantry, despite their defensive advantage. But, since that foolish other player will have lost far more Infantry than me, my newly-coming-online tanks will be able to counter with less resistance and then take over their entire nation because they lost it all taking me on.
I couldn't have done that with artillery, since, by the time I bring them to bear, the other guy will have already replaced his losses. Tanks can get in there fast enough to capture defenseless factories and whatever free units the other guy was vanely building. Thus, I increase my army's size much faster, overall.

This is a more aggressive strategy. But it is one that works very well against both noobs as well as more-experienced players.

Yeah, that does work. In my own experience, I have rarely been attacked first early on. It's typically myself who strikes first, and most opponents go inactive upon seeing artillery tearing up their troops with no way to counter. At least, that has been my experience.

Dontezuma · Aug 15th 2018, 7:33pm

A lot of the balancing changes seem to be directed at players developing overpowering air forces.
I thought I might propose another logical way to address the issue using SBDE.

Instead of calculating SBDE on the stack on which the planes are flying, calculate SBDE based on the base it is flying from. Therefore 25 tacs flying out of single airbase are less efficient in SBDE. Currently players will put 25 tacs patrolling overlapping space in stacks of 5. Which is hugely destructive but technically due to the overlap it should be treated like a single stack of 25. Using the base method they might be still able to accomplish the same thing but they'd have to use 5 different air bases.

:thumbup:

Quasi-duck · Aug 15th 2018, 8:30pm

Diabolical wrote:

Actually, I usually don't build Artillery for, at least, a couple days. And I prefer to build Artillery after getting a couple waves of Light Tanks built, first. Of course, I'm not locked into that strategy, but it seems to work best at clearing out a human neighbor or two.

Just because you play this way does not mean everyone else should. The infra cost should not have been raised, it will slow down the game quite a bit in conjunction with these other changes.

Share