KaM Remake gameplay balance

[sado1]

I'm satisfied with the direction of the changes, but I've changed my mind a bit - it's too big of a decision to be done before next version. I'd love to balance units both by spam factor and by rock-paper-scissors factor, and lances are definetely too strong the way it is now, it feels like they are the main fighting unit, not a tactical one for killing off horses. But this needs to wait until next version. We definetely need to organize at least one KaM chat related to this issue, there's simply way too much info to consider, and I'm already a little lost here, it'd be much easier to discuss this in real time.

[Bo_]

I don't think that ignoring militia in the core battle is bad, they're too easy to build to be a good fighter. But that's IMO.
Also jeronimo, did you watch the replay I've uploaded?

[Jeronimo]

I don't think that ignoring militia in the core battle is bad, they're too easy to build to be a good fighter. But that's IMO.
Also jeronimo, did you watch the replay I've uploaded?

Yes, but I think that Lewin and Krom should watch it. There are many battles, and all unit types are trained.
You won't see that if "unit-original.dat" remains.

I'm very sad about going steps back with the military balance.
I guess I we all lived a brief dream...

[Lewin]

I agree that the unit.dat change is a step in the right direction but I think we can make a much bigger/better step if we have months not weeks to test it. There are other ideas that could be tried.

This thread is going really well so we don't want to lose the energy. As soon as this release goes public we can setup a build for balance testing, like our beta build except this one will basically be the same as the public release but with new unit statistics being tested (and a different server list of course). We can organise a server like we currently have for beta testing, and you guys can test different ideas on it. Hopefully over the many months while Krom and I develop new features for the game, the "balance tester team" can develop a more balanced combat system. At the end of it Krom and I have to agree/be convinced with your recommendations, but we'll probably be quite involved in the process anyway (I'll go the KaM Chats where you discuss it and plays some games with it) so we'll be providing our opinion and commenting on the ideas being tested.
We could allow "interesting" game values like unit statistics and archer accuracy to be set in a text file or in the lobby so ideas can be tested without needing a whole new release.

If anybody wants to volunteer to coordinate this that would be great. You'll need a bit of free time over the coming months, some organisational skills to arrange times to chat about it and times to play games with different options implemented, a friendly inclusive attitude (since everyone's opinion is important in balance testing and being rude/arrogant will not be tolerated from a coordinator), and the ability to make decisions fairly impartially, based on what the majority thinks not just what you personally think (e.g. if the majority thinks testing with increased attack for axefighters would be the best option but you disagree, you would still need to go along with that).
Having a few coordinators/organisers like there was for the tournament might work well, it makes it easier to remain impartial and requires less free time from any one person. Discussions about it should be open on a thread here so everyone can see which ideas were tried and what the results were.

This is just an idea to give the community a bit more power in terms of balance testing, what do you think? I could still do all the organising if nobody suitable is able to. The point is we don't want to wait until next beta testing phase to play with the balance, beta testing is for finding bugs not completely redesigning game balance which needs months to be done properly.

Do you think this would work?

[Da Revolution]

Yes this is a really good idea. Stuff can be tested way better this way, without delaying a future release. We can adjust stats step for step to reach the balance everyone want to.

[Siegfried]

With patch noone is ignored: tough lancers/militia mass meets the power of professional fighters.

That's so wrong as I showed some posts earlier. Pikemen disappear completely, swordmen are useless, too.

Many are satisfied, but aren't writing their feedback in the forum so looks like just a few backup the change... While in fact, a few are against.

This is a typical behaviour of politicans. They claim the silent majority for their own point of view. Fact is, however, that you don't know if people are pro or contra this change. We didn't make a poll among all KaM players. And if you read this thread carefully, you'll only find two person promoting this idea, but they are promoting it very loud. And you'll find five people that are not overly happy with this change.
So it's safe for me to say that it's just the few of you that were responsible for developing this idea that are in favour of it. We understand that you want idea implemented into the game, but you have to face the fact that not all ideas are implemented and there are severe arguments against your change.

Again to say, more uploaded replays with the patch... to clear ANY doubts (testing in singleplayer map or multiplayer game).
If you don't agree, then show us how wrong we are (because everyone can talk, but testing is proving).

That's so funny. You're familiar with the placebo effect, right? So you intend to show a replay where you build more different troops, because you want people to be in favour of your change. The building is done on purpose. It's as easy for me to give you a dozen replays with the change where I build scouts+xbows only.

What does this prove? Nothing. Nothing at all. The same nothing that your replays prove.

With the statistics I've already shown you how wrong you are. These were games done with the remake with the units change and without. But you're not accepting this. And I don't accept your replays where you intend to build different troops to convince people. So how to proceed now?

The best would be to do a poll among all players whether or not they'd like a change. Or we accept the fact that in the end, Krom and Lewin will decide how to go on with the remake, and leave it to them to decide.

Well, after all this might be an idea for a mutator. No need to force this change onto everybody. This splitting of the community due to this idea is already there, so this mutator would not do more harm.

[Lewin]

Siegfried, please read my posts above. Krom and I aren't happy with this change either, for most of the same reasons you mentioned. The next release will be using the old unit stats that we've always been using, and we can test out different ideas to make axe/sword men useful separately to the public release. If a "good" solution is found ready for the release after this one it can be used, but we'll want most people to be happy with it, the last thing we want to do is divide the community. For this reason I don't think a change like this would be implemented as a mutator either.

[Siegfried]

Lewin, I'm aware that there are folks outside who want that change pretty badly. So I expect that they will offer the changed units.dat for download and ask people to play with it. In order to avoid the problems that come with that, it would be much easier to implement this as a mutator, so people can easily access this.

I meant it literally, not sarcastically, when I said that the mutator would do no harm. It's maybe the best way to deal with the situation. You see, if you'd force all people to use either the old or the new unit.dat, there will always be people who are disappointed or even worse. I love the idea of testing a such severe change extensively and I'm willing to contribute to this testing.

My problem maybe is, that I've seen this things happen in more than one gaming community before. It never ended really well. And I see parallels between here and there.

[Lewin]

Lewin, I'm aware that there are folks outside who want that change pretty badly. So I expect that they will offer the changed units.dat for download and ask people to play with it. In order to avoid the problems that come with that, it would be much easier to implement this as a mutator, so people can easily access this.

For that reason I regret posting the unit.dat change publicly (it's removed now, and we won't be posting experiements like this so publicly in future). I hope we don't get many emails after this release about people complaining that they can't join lobbies because of errors about "wrong data files". In the worst case we can update the game so it only accepts the official unit.dat file. But I really don't think it will come to that, the people who really want this change will HOPEFULLY be involved in the testing process after this release so they won't feel the need to ask other people to download the patch and split the community. I think we can come up with a much better solution than the unit.dat change through thorough testing over many months, trying different ideas.

[The Dark Lord]

Don't worry, most people already swapped the files back.

[Bo_]

That's so wrong as I showed some posts earlier. Pikemen disappear completely, swordmen are useless, too.

Appearently your earlier post didn't convince enough.

This is a typical behaviour of politicans. They claim the silent majority for their own point of view. Fact is, however, that you don't know if people are pro or contra this change. We didn't make a poll among all KaM players. And if you read this thread carefully, you'll only find two person promoting this idea, but they are promoting it very loud. And you'll find five people that are not overly happy with this change.
So it's safe for me to say that it's just the few of you that were responsible for developing this idea that are in favour of it. We understand that you want idea implemented into the game, but you have to face the fact that not all ideas are implemented and there are severe arguments against your change.

Well if me and jeronimo are talking 'loud', like you say, then it's because we talk about this with other players, and since we already say things 'loud', those other players don't realy need to post on the forum to say 'quietly' the same. "It's safe for me to say." I'm sorry but your arrogance offends me. The 'few' of us, don't talk like if it was 2 people being contra, 100 being pro.The reason the patch won't be included is because there wasn't enough testing time and it was a too big change to do in once. We can't be sure yet if it was a good thing or not, certainly not because 'a few of you' are using wrong arguments.

That's so funny. You're familiar with the placebo effect, right? So you intend to show a replay where you build more different troops, because you want people to be in favour of your change. The building is done on purpose. It's as easy for me to give you a dozen replays with the change where I build scouts+xbows only.

What does this prove? Nothing. Nothing at all. The same nothing that your replays prove.

Honestly our replays prove more than you saying how op scouts + xbow would be. With you saying that you prove nothing. You realy give us the feeling that you're a realy bad player, just because it's like if you fear to face us in battle. That's why invite you again to have a game against me or any other player being pro the patch, you do xbow and scouts, I do xbow and lances, even with the +1 lp. We asked you before, but why don't you accept the challenge, knowing that we have no chance? Know that our replays have proven that lances are weak against axefighters. You prove nothing TBH.

With the statistics I've already shown you how wrong you are. These were games done with the remake with the units change and without. But you're not accepting this. And I don't accept your replays where you intend to build different troops to convince people. So how to proceed now?

The best would be to do a poll among all players whether or not they'd like a change. Or we accept the fact that in the end, Krom and Lewin will decide how to go on with the remake, and leave it to them to decide.

Actualy you have proven nothing.
A truth is that some players are better, have more experience than others. So a poll where a 7 year old kid has the same vote as someone who has played the remake for 2 years, sorry but no. I'm sorry but some players needs more experience to understand some ways of the game, that's why this has to be a debate where everybody has to use correct arguments.
This isn't even about the patch anymore, nobody claimed it to be perfect, we just claimed it to be better. For me now it's more about you using wrong arguments and then pretending to have it all right.

[Da Revolution]

The reason the patch won't be included is because there wasn't enough testing time and it was a too big change to do in once.

Thats just one of the reasons. Krom, Lewin and many others weren't convinced this was the best or only solution.

[Bo_]

Yes, one of the reasons. And I said it too, this isn't the best reason, this isn't perfect. But IMO it was better.

[T*AnTi-V!RuZz]

But IMO it was better.

Precisely. So what's the big deal that Siegfried doesn't agree with you? I think you're overreacting a little bit, since he clearly has a point. He's just giving his opinion and is trying to clarify that on this moment there are more people against than in favor of the patch.

[Siegfried]

Well if me and jeronimo are talking 'loud', like you say, then it's because we talk about this with other players, and since we already say things 'loud', those other players don't realy need to post on the forum to say 'quietly' the same. "It's safe for me to say." I'm sorry but your arrogance offends me. The 'few' of us, don't talk like if it was 2 people being contra, 100 being pro.The reason the patch won't be included is because there wasn't enough testing time and it was a too big change to do in once. We can't be sure yet if it was a good thing or not, certainly not because 'a few of you' are using wrong arguments.

I'm sorry if it looked arrogant, I just tried to show that these points are not valid in this case because they don't help in this discussion. You see more people having problems with that change in this state, but still you claim that a fictitious majority would be in favour of these changes? Don't you think we talk to others, too?

Honestly our replays prove more than you saying how op scouts + xbow would be. With you saying that you prove nothing. You realy give us the feeling that you're a realy bad player, just because it's like if you fear to face us in battle. That's why invite you again to have a game against me or any other player being pro the patch, you do xbow and scouts, I do xbow and lances, even with the +1 lp. We asked you before, but why don't you accept the challenge, knowing that we have no chance? Know that our replays have proven that lances are weak against axefighters. You prove nothing TBH.

That's "right through strength". We play and the winner was right? That still proves nothing. And why does it matter how good I play? I don't want to judge myself, so please ask the people I've played with. And please stop the black-and-white thinking. This change wouldn't make anyone having no chance, you know that perfectly as your next lines prove. It shifts the balance, and I think it shifts it too much so it gets inbalanced.

Actualy you have proven nothing.
A truth is that some players are better, have more experience than others. So a poll where a 7 year old kid has the same vote as someone who has played the remake for 2 years, sorry but no. I'm sorry but some players needs more experience to understand some ways of the game, that's why this has to be a debate where everybody has to use correct arguments.
This isn't even about the patch anymore, nobody claimed it to be perfect, we just claimed it to be better. For me now it's more about you using wrong arguments and then pretending to have it all right.

Again that black-and-white-thinking where some people should be restricted from voting and others shall be allowed. Why that?

The problem that I see with you is that you are not accessible to my points. You still reject them all and rely on your replays. I even tried to access your arguments and further develop them. But I still want to carry on the discussion, really! Let's continue in the other thread. I have tried to work with your points and find that the balance is good already.

The reason why I did not yet play with you was the first offense from your side. Plus maybe the fact, that I don't have internet access on evening during workdays