[MOD] [TC/AP] X3 Rebalance Mod (XRM) - Total conversion - v1.28 (21.12.12)

[zhukov032186]

@greypanther

Making OOS and IS similar has been one of the goals of all inhabitants of the X Universe since its creation... As you can see, efforts toward that goal are hit and miss

[greypanther]

Yes I knew that; I just falsely assumed that things had improved.

[zhukov032186]

I know... Silly you

[Mythrantar]

Having only minimal knowledge of modding (therefore not being able to judge for myself), I was wondering how much of an effort would be to merge Dillpickle's "TC plots in AP" mod with XRM. I think that would be result in the ultimate experience!

[Alkeena]

So.

I've programatically changed Tbullets according to the speed of the particular bullet. Essentially, I've set a maximum OOS damage of 17% of the IS damage, while also maintaining a minimum OOS damage of 10% of the IS damage.

From there I map the available weapons to that range, according to their bullet speed. Outlying bullets (anything faster than an XRM PAC bullet -> 1400 m/s, or slower than an XRM PSP bullet -> 480 m/s) were ignored for this mapping and instead directly assigned to the maximum and minimum values (i.e. PACs, IREs, etc do 17% of their IS damage OOS, while PSP, Mining Drills, etc do 10% of their IS damage OOS). For the remaining bullets there is a linear map of speed to OOS damage percentage (for every 1 m/s faster the bullet moves, the OOS damage is increased by a certain percentage, starting at 10% and maxing at 17%).

The Cat/Dat file can be found here: http://www.mediafire.com/?cinbarkb5o5i8xi

This should be applied as a false patch _AFTER_ XRM. Let me be clear, just as with my assymetric warfare XRM plugin ( http://forum.egosoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=323959 ), I don't really intend to support this--keeping up with Paul is simply not sustainable given my RL obligations. this is merely for my own uses and I've made it public in case Paul finds it useful or so that others can build on it if they so chose.

Technical stuff:

I did this using a quick Mathematica program that I just whipped up. You can find details here: http://www.mediafire.com/view/?b3siw66qqw7ozba

Edit:

I've run a few tests, though testing has been by no means exhaustive. To me, OOS combat feels about right now, but I'm sure there are some cases that still need work. I've also only done my tests actually observing fights in the map--timings change when not actually looking and so these values may not yet be optimal. Still, I'm pretty happy with it, so far...3 Scimitars still lose to a pirate Katana, but it's actually a very close, and protracted battle where shield recharge counts, but doesnt dominate and the Katana ends at 75% hull, instead of never dropping below 95% shields. A 4th scimi and the Katana loses.

The resultant weapon OOS/IS ratios are as such:

The first item is the Bullet_ID
Second item is the Bullet speed (in engine units)
third item is the OOS/IS damage ratio (IRE, PAC, etc vary a little from 17% due to rounding)

[kigercochise]

Hello,

I have downloaded this Mod, is there anything I need to be aware of since I have both TC and Albion installed via Steam? There seems to be some common files.

[paulwheeler]

[paulwheeler]

[paulwheeler]

@ Alkeena

I found that the really slow projectiles needed a much larger change in percentage than the faster projectiles. Looking at your list, your PPC and PSP are very similar. That will make Terran capitals much more powerful. There needs to be a bigger percentage difference between those two. Currently in the XRM i have PPC at 10% and PSP at 7.5%. Ive currently got the PPC at 20% and PSP at 15% although i think these values are a little too high.

[Alkeena]

PPC is honestly not much faster than the PSP--it's only only 20 m/s, or 4%, faster than the PSP.

Compare an FPD to an EMPC, where the difference is closer to a 42% (630 vs 900) speed difference, or an EMPC vs a HEPT with a 22% bullet speed difference (900 vs1100) but the OOS/IS damage ratios in XRM for these weapons are constant at 10%. Why is a 4% difference enough to call PSPs unbalanced, but a 42% difference overlooked?

If PPC/PSP are unbalanced, I would suggest that it's not in their hit percentages. The real issue is that the Terran ships are simply better than their Argon counterparts, though they're much more restrictive in loadouts and generally more expensive, and so _should_ win. The proper balance point for a generalist vs a by-design-top-tier is numbers, not artificial gimping.

If you're worried about the Argon losing, Increase the size of their defensive jobs.

[paulwheeler]

Its not just about projectile speed - nor can it be reduced to a simple equation. For instance the Gauss cannon has relatively low damage for its class to compensate for the huge range and the fact that it rarely misses. Thats fine for in sector, but it means it needs a bit of a boost for out of sector.

The PSP may only be slightly slower, but youll be amazed how much more often it misses in sector than the PPC - that evens out the fact that it does more damage. It also has a much slower fire rate and damage per shot is much, much higher, so when a shot misses it hurts overall damage much more than when a PPC misses.

All OOS sees is the damage per second. All other stats are essentially ignored.

An Osaka should beat a Titan one on one, but it shouldnt be a walk in the park. I think youll find with your values the Titan will barely scratch the Osaka.

[Aegyen]

[Alkeena]

[zhukov032186]

As a bystander...

With the evidence at hand, in the form of Alkeena's tests, and Paul's statements of current damage model...

I'm inclined to agree with Alkeena, at least in part.

Observing the exchange, I would suggest increasing the overall damage values, while retaining the mild "nerf", as it were, to PSPs to compensate for the manner in which OOS is calculated. It seems to be very realistic, that with the OOS damage values set too low, it is itself influencing the outcome unduly as a result of shield regeneration.

As for the "length" of OOS battles, aside from affecting the ability of the player to arrive and attempt to influence the outcome, I do not see the point of dragging out OOS battles. If the player is concerned about participating in a particular potential battle, then he should be there... If he's not... Then... It's just the simple logistics that he's too far away to get there in time. I don't see what relevance the "length" of the battle persay has on the accuracy of the results. If it's a 30 sec battle IS, it ideally should only last 30 sec OOS, as long as the end result is relatively accurate.

Realistically, a perfect solution to this issue will never be found, due to the manner in which OOS is calculated and the variable nature of ship load outs. If ships were hard set with certain weapons, a viable formula could be reasonably achieved. As it is, no matter what settings you choose, there will always be combinations/flukes that "win" when they shouldn't. You can only ever hope for the philosophy driving most of X decisions, namely, "it's good enough... most the time"

-edit

On an unrelated note:

I noticed that the Morrigu, which is now a light carrier design capable of docking 15 ships:

#1 Indicates in the description it only carries one fighter
#2 Does not appear to spawn with any fighters.

[Osiris454]

In general the OOS damage values need to be increased. My own testing of 50% was only as long as I was able, and that was only a few hours. I'll probably reduce that number later, but so far, battles seem a bit more 'realistic' for when I'm IS and actually watching it.