TheSuperHackers
Change: Patriot Missile Battery standardisation
- Relevant to #1178
- Relevant to #1580
- Relevant to #1755
This change standardises a lot of inconsistencies between missile-based Patriot Batteries, and improves the standard Patriot Battery so that it shares the same price, range and shot delay as the EMP variant.
Other inconsistencies have also been addressed, such as the EMP assist weapon firing slower and both the assist and air weapons doing more or different damage. The scatter radius vs infantry and assist weapon idle reloads are now standardised as well.
The primary adjustments to the vanilla Patriot to consider are the -$100 price, +50 range, -0.15s shot delay, and +5 air/assist damage. And for the EMP variant; the -15 air damage, -10 assist damage and -0.15s assist shot delay. This set of changes should make standard Patriots a little more useful and bring both structures' outputs more in line with player expectations.
Before:
| Standard Patriot | EMP Patriot | |
|---|---|---|
| Build cost | 1000 | 900 |
| Ground range | 225 | 275 |
| Ground damage | 4 x 30 | 4 x 15 |
| Ground reload | 4 x 0.25s | 4 x 0.1s |
| Air range | 350 | 400 |
| Air damage | 4 x 25 | 4 x 30 |
| Air reload | 4 x 0.25s | 4 x 0.1s |
| Assist range | 450 | 450 |
| Assist damage | 4 x 25 | 4 x 25 |
| Assist reload | 4 x 0.25s | 4 x 0.25s |
After:
| Standard Patriot | EMP Patriot | |
|---|---|---|
| Build cost | 900 | 900 |
| Ground range | 275 | 275 |
| Ground damage | 4 x 30 | 4 x 15 |
| Ground reload | 4 x 0.1s | 4 x 0.1s |
| Air range | 400 | 400 |
| Air damage | 4 x 30 | 4 x 15 |
| Air reload | 4 x 0.1s | 4 x 0.1s |
| Assist range | 450 | 450 |
| Assist damage | 4 x 30 | 4 x 15 |
| Assist reload | 4 x 0.1s | 4 x 0.1s |
Closes #897.
Could you please also compare damages, reload and ranges with USA Firebase, to have a better overview how these compare now?
Could you please also compare damages, reload and ranges with USA Firebase, to have a better overview how these compare now?
Comparisons can be found here.
Why change assist Reload time if it was equal before?
So that there is no firing behaviour discrepancy between the various Patriot weapons. There are 6 in total, 3 for Patriot and 3 for EMP-Patriot.
Ok, so what is the plan with this now? This change changes more than its advertised "standardisation": Patriot is strengthened by a lot, EMP Patriot is weakened a bit. There is no precise explanation of how these levels of strength are justified and logical.
If this cannot be addressed here, may I suggest to close this change and break it up in smaller chunks to go step by step? Perhaps it is too much to change all at once.
Ok, so what is the plan with this now?
You requested changes but provided no actionable items.
This change changes more than its advertised "standardisation": Patriot is strengthened by a lot, EMP Patriot is weakened a bit. There is no precise explanation of how these levels of strength are justified and logical.
It was advertised as increasing the standard Patriot Battery's utility by standardising many of its attributes with the EMP Patriot. The EMP variant is not weakened in any significant or meaningful way, and could even be considered a minor improvement. Regardless, the impact is low. This is a direct response to #897 and much of the feedback from #965.
If this cannot be addressed here, may I suggest to close this change and break it up in smaller chunks to go step by step? Perhaps it is too much to change all at once.
I would suggest merging it and acquiring feedback, as you have done and suggested with previous changes. It seems others are happy with this change as well. I expect standard Patriot Batteries to remain underused.
I am skeptical about these points:
- Increased attack ranges
- Increased Patriot damages
- Decreased EMP Patriot damages
None of these buffs/nerfs are explained in the Rationale. It just mentions what is changed, but not how it is justified.>
Note that any other user looking at this change will ask the same question: Why is this changed to what it has changed? And we will not be able to give an accurate answer. I know this because I do not understand this change myself.
I don’t like nerfing emp patts. Swg is one of the worst armies and emp pats are one of their few unique advantages.
None of these buffs/nerfs are explained in the Rationale. It just mentions what is changed, but not how it is justified.>
The justification is that players are already used to the respective price / ranges / fire rates / attributes that the EMP Patriot uses, and naturally expect the same of the standard Patriot while maintaining the key factional differences, so it makes sense to use the same values for the standard Patriot.
Note that any other user looking at this change will ask the same question: Why is this changed to what it has changed? And we will not be able to give an accurate answer. I know this because I do not understand this change myself.
I thought I made it clear that the standard Patriot's values are taken from the EMP Patriot because those values improve the structure's utility and are what players are already generally familiar with. There is not really much more to it. Is this justification not enough? I guess not if there is confusion. I will take a look at what information can be adjusted or added.
I don’t like nerfing emp patts. Swg is one of the worst armies and emp pats are one of their few unique advantages.
Neither do I. This is a very carefully considered change, after which they could be technically considered better. Groups of them would be stronger against Air Force, and be able to disable more units.
So the assisting EMP now basically fires faster, but with less damage?
How does that work out vs incoming Scud missiles for example? Will they be stopped more or less reliably?
Vs ground I can imagine this is a buff, because disabling stuff is what makes the EMP effective.
So the assisting EMP now basically fires faster, but with less damage?
How does that work out vs incoming Scud missiles for example? Will they be stopped more or less reliably?
Probably at about the same rate. How many volleys a Patriot gets at a ballistic missiles is heavily dependent on the reload time. While a single EMP Patriot will get one and maybe two volleys off, an assisting EMP Patriot in 1.04 is quite unlikely to get two volleys off due to the slower fire rate / reload. Two EMP Patriots will stop a single SCUD missile before and after the change. Any more than one SCUD missile and the values are largely meaningless anyway.
I am skeptical about these points:
- Increased attack ranges
- Increased Patriot damages
- Decreased EMP Patriot damages
None of these buffs/nerfs are explained in the Rationale. It just mentions what is changed, but not how it is justified.>
Note that any other user looking at this change will ask the same question: Why is this changed to what it has changed? And we will not be able to give an accurate answer. I know this because I do not understand this change myself.
i'm not sure about this either, why not just standardize them to the same values and then worry about balance later? i think it needs further studying + testing, we don't know, we might buff SWG elsewhere, EMPs are already too good or too bad situationally and better not mess with that just yet
what is the laser pat range?
I think it makes sense that all patriots have better range than other faction defenses, usa is technologically better. However it is strange that the firebase has no range advantage.
Weapon Lazr_PatriotMissileWeapon
AttackRange = 225.0
Weapon Lazr_PatriotMissileWeaponAir
AttackRange = 350.0
I think it makes sense that all patriots have better range than other faction defenses, usa is technologically better. However it is strange that the firebase has no range advantage.
I do not understand the desire to make changes for the sake of faction diversity. Major differences will make it much more difficult to balance strengths as well. Weapon range is one of the most powerful weapon attributes, and changing it cannot be taken lightly.
Hmmm, I'm not too sure now about the extra vPat range. Yes, you would expect the vPat to have the same range as the EMP, both are missile-based. But the sheer range advantage over Laserpats doesn't make too much sense, neither to have the same range as Firebases. We shouldn't touch Laserpats, EMP's or Firebases though.
Hard case tbh.
I do not understand the desire to make changes for the sake of faction diversity. Major differences will make it much more difficult to balance strengths as well. Weapon range is one of the most powerful weapon attributes, and changing it cannot be taken lightly.
And I don't get the desire to streamline everything between factions.
There shouldn't be a desire to do any of these extremes, but it should be clear that everything in this game is asymmetrically based on technology level, which is the primary faction differentiator. For example USA usually has the most firepower, range and precision, but is more expensive and often relies on power.
The only desire should be to balance things out with thematically sensible pros and cons to make the unit/building/upgrade fit a specific role.
In this case 275 feels a bit too extreme though, if it was up to me in 2003 I would never have given the EMP 275 in the first place, it doesn't make much sense compared to the Firebase. We shouldn't nerf the EMP though, but what about a middleroad for the VPat then?
- Laserpat: 225, least range but most damage output. Strong vs everything.
- Vpat: 250, medium range and damage output. Strong vs light vehicles and aircraft, ok vs infantry and heavy armor.
- EMP: 275, most range but low damage output. Effectively disables all vehicles, bad vs infantry.
The only thing that should change is EMP assist reload 0.25 -> 0.1, because it's a bug.
As far as I am concerned though, the entire assist feature should be scrapped until it is properly implemented in Thyme.
why not just standardize them to the same values and then worry about balance later? i think it needs further studying + testing, we don't know, we might buff SWG elsewhere, EMPs are already too good or too bad situationally and better not mess with that just yet
Agreed that it should be tested so that it can be seen just how trivial of a difference the adjustment to the EMP Patriot's assist weapon is.
I do not understand the desire to make changes for the sake of faction diversity. Major differences will make it much more difficult to balance strengths as well. Weapon range is one of the most powerful weapon attributes, and changing it cannot be taken lightly.
There are no changes in this PR that are 'for the sake of faction diversity'. On the contrary - this is more in line with faction homogeneity, as it standardises counterintuitive differences. Nothing is being taken lightly.
Why should EMP Patriots have greater range than standard Patriots? Because SWG's Humvees are expensive? (Ludicrous!) The EMP Patriot intuitively fires a different missile with a reduced damage yield in exchange for a crippling EMP effect. This is a concisely logical tradeoff and interesting design paradigm. The fact that the standard Patriot has a lower attack range and fire rate is counterintuitive to this paradigm, and pollutes the tradeoff. Standardising the attributes in such a way, conversely to your point, actually makes it easier to balance and compartmentalise the factions as both designers and players have fewer (hidden) attributes to keep track of, which leads to a more streamlined design and experience.
And I don't get the desire to streamline everything between factions.
There shouldn't be a desire to do any of these extremes, but it should be clear that everything in this game is asymmetrically based on technology level, which is the primary faction differentiator. For example USA usually has the most firepower, range and precision, but is more expensive and often relies on power.
The only desire should be to balance things out with thematically sensible pros and cons to make the unit/building/upgrade fit a specific role.
I very much agree with this. Asymmetrical distinctions between factions should be intentional and logical, and are a core tenet of what makes the game interesting. None of the proposed changes negatively affect this paradigm. Regardless, I still disagree that any of the changes are extreme, nor that they will result in the standard Patriot becoming a more attractive option over the Firebase - primarily due to the high power requirement and cost, by extension. The +50 range is the difference of two Humvee lengths, which I would argue players are unlikely to notice due to the structure's overwhelming rarity. The difference is demonstrated below.
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/11547761/200225170-423da986-c2bc-4a49-a435-17f0d67f03f0.mp4
In this case 275 feels a bit too extreme though, if it was up to me in 2003 I would never have given the EMP 275 in the first place, it doesn't make much sense compared to the Firebase.
We shouldn't nerf the EMP though, but what about a middleroad for the VPat then?
* Laserpat: 225, least range but most damage output. Strong vs everything. * Vpat: 250, medium range and damage output. Strong vs light vehicles and aircraft, ok vs infantry and heavy armor. * EMP: 275, most range but low damage output. Effectively disables all vehicles, bad vs infantry.
Agreed, the EMP Patriot should never have been given 275 in the first place. It actually makes the least sense that the EMP Patriot has a greater range than the standard Patriot, as the disabling effect is far more punishing, and is uncharacteristic of ensnaring-type behaviour. It would make more sense if the ranges were flipped, and the most sense if they were equal (this change).
Regarding the Laser Turret; I think the fact that it is an entirely different (experimental) weapon provides more than enough context and leeway in delineating its distinction with the other Patriot Batteries. (It isn't even technically considered a Patriot Battery.) Many of the Laser Turret's properties are different, such as its immediate damage output, PDL / countermeasure immunity, effectiveness against infantry, and relatively lower power requirement. It is reasonable for the respective benefits to have alternative tradeoffs to counterbalance them, with range being one of them. It also makes logical and thematic sense that a laser cannot reliably travel as far as a missile.
Anyway, I can split this PR into two separate ones if the combination of changes is too much, but I really think it needs to be tested and contemplated as a combined change.
I think the standardization should be a branch, and the nerf/buff a different branch, so that we have the freedom to choose one or both of the changes in the future
I also think we won't be able to see a clear result of the standardization if it was combined with the nerf/buff, that test is important, maybe if it goes well we don't need that nerf/buff
Oh I always thought that the firebase range advantage was quite a bit more than demonstrated in that video. Honestly I never even knew that the EMP had the same range either.
I don't expect it to be OP then, just a more viable alternative to the Firebase. It's still power hungry so many players would still prefer Firebases most likely.
Let's test your current proposals.
I think the standardization should be a branch, and the nerf/buff a different branch, so that we have the freedom to choose one or both of the changes in the future
I also think we won't be able to see a clear result of the standardization if it was combined with the nerf/buff, that test is important, maybe if it goes well we don't need that nerf/buff
But the buffs and standardisation kinda go hand in hand. I was thinking the standardisation between the EMP Patriot's primary, air and assist weapons could be one change, and the standardisation between the EMP Patriot and standard Patriot would be the other. But this still feels like overkill.
Oh I always thought that the firebase range advantage was quite a bit more than demonstrated in that video. Honestly I never even knew that the EMP had the same range either.
Yes! This notion is a good example of how I imagine such a change would be perceived by most players - unknowingly!
Anyway, to address the "EMP is weakened" and "don't nerf EMP" concerns, below is a demonstration of the difference between 1.04's 250ms delay between shots and the proposed 100ms delay between shots for the EMP Patriot's assist weapon, which highlights several ways in which the change can technically be considered a buff. This will, of course, have little to no impact on your average game, and practically none in competitive games. The assist weapons are incredibly buggy in 1.04, which has a far greater impact on the game than a minor shot delay reduction. As @commy2 has repeatedly noted, the assist weapons / behaviour would be better off removed, at least until it can be properly fixed.
Test 1 - 250ms vs 3 Avengers
1.04's values result in the EMP Patriots never breaking through the PDLs of the three Avengers. If they move a bit closer so that all three Patriots switch to their primary, faster-firing weapons, the Avengers will be in trouble.
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/11547761/200353830-1cf9980d-05bd-4f68-a21e-5ef16a604d92.mp4
Test 2 - 100ms vs 3 Avengers
The faster delay between shots of the assist weapons allows the EMP Patriots to break through the PDLs of the three Avengers with coordinated volleys.
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/11547761/200354078-2a5934df-4b3b-4887-9a52-a4668bb803c2.mp4
Test 3 - 100ms vs 4 Avengers
The faster-firing EMP Patriots have great difficulty trying to take down four Avengers. There is some elegance to this change as players can now more effectively determine how many Avengers they need to successfully block a Patriot barrage. If a player has fewer Avengers than there are Patriots, then they are in trouble, whereas if they have an equal amount of more, then they can attempt a push.
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/11547761/200355649-242da3b6-2fd9-478f-997b-441067377572.mp4
Test 4 - 250ms vs 2 King Raptors
The EMP Patriots could never break through the PDLs of the two King Raptors with 1.04's values. (No countermeasures.)
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/11547761/200352509-0cbcfb95-b41b-49a2-bcf0-5e1dac5907c1.mp4
Test 5 - 100ms vs 2 King Raptors
The faster delay between shots of the assist weapons allows the EMP Patriots to break through the PDLs of the two King Raptors if they get a good volley / coordination. It is a very close call, but only one missile needs to get through and it's all over. (No countermeasures.)
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/11547761/200352649-e083602f-b6c6-4688-8309-bba2299b62a4.mp4
The reduced delay between shots of the EMP Patriot's assist weapon demonstrates that not only can groups of EMP Patriots potentially disable larger armies / more targets, but they are more effective at taking down King Raptors and other PDL aircraft, thus increasing USA Super Weapon's prospects not only in general, but distinctly against USA Air Force.
But the buffs and standardisation kinda go hand in hand. I was thinking the standardisation between the EMP Patriot's primary, air and assist weapons could be one change, and the standardisation between the EMP Patriot and standard Patriot would be the other. But this still feels like overkill.
Let me rephrase, i meant we have a branch that has all the changes combined (like this one) and other branch with only the streamlined values
The worst thing about PatriotMissileAssistWeapon bug is that even if you set AntiGround = No and restrict it to be called only by PatriotMissileWeaponAir -- it still hits ground targets if any is in range before the assist clip is out.
Just another feature that was good on paper but underdeveloped and buggy. I'd disable it completely as it brings more imbalance than actual use.
