Pqmiesh Blog: Balancing Multiplayer Games

Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 20:00 PMvoltardark

Nice analysis,

But terrain, buildings will often make a single unit more powerful. Also one unit is easier to micromanage too.

A lone Tiger hidden between buildings will be a lot harder to flank meaning he will be harder to be destroyed because of it's frontal armor. But 2-3 hidden Sherman with be killed easily from a frontal assault by any Tiger.

Balance cannot only be achieve with numbers, where those numbers will be used often matter the most.

Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 20:10 PMAvNY

This is key. 2-3 times the units are not 2-3 times harder to micro. The difficulty is greater than that. Even assuming you know what you want to do you have to translate it to the game and that means APM. As you add units and tasks the numbers of APM goes up but your abilities generally don't, so each additional unit and its required APMs means you aren't doing something else or has already exceeded your abilites. The single uber-unit doesn't put this same tax on your abilities.

The other response is to make the 2-3 (or more) units equal to the uber unit but without additional micro.... but that is how you get blobbing.

Someone used the example of CCP and EvE which is supposed to be the penultimate spreadsheet game, but spreadsheets don't define their end-product, balance and meta does.

Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 20:14 PMAvNY

I should add that this focus on "difference" exhibits what could be a lack of imagination.

The m10 and the StuG of COH1 about on par in cost and utility. One came out of an earlier and cheaper tier, didn't have a turret but had really strong frontal armor, the other was much more weakly armored but with a turret. Two similar units yet very different in feel and without imposing a huge micro discrepancy.

Jump back to quoted post15 Apr 2015, 19:15 PMNapalm

He thinks at a very tactical level. Before even getting into the math there are "other" game balance design considerations. What is the units intended role within the game?

My favorite game balancers are the ones at CCP games. They always start with the role question first and balance from there.

An example of community engagement BEFORE the patch is published
here is an example, there are many others.

Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2015, 08:14 AMsomenbjorn

I suspect this lack of coordination between role and balance. Role is a game design aspect and balance, is well a balance thing.

You need a good coordination between game design teams and balance design team.
I do remember reading an article on his blog a while back talking about the problem of game designers and balance designers not being synced. I got the feeling he was talking about his experience at relic.

Jump back to quoted post16 Apr 2015, 07:11 AMFaustCostBulletin

StuG`s only advantage is Target Weak Point as of now, contrary to popular belief, it is purely AT as well.

Jump back to quoted post17 Apr 2015, 01:42 AMNuclear Arbitor

it's not purely AT; it'll hit a model every 4 or 5 shots. not very useful though.