Weapon Balance
by Richard Foge · 05/05/2006 (6:30 pm) · 6 comments
Played some BF2 today with some coworkers that are using it to prototype some ideas, and I got into a sniper duel.
I was completely overpowered by his superior weapon, found out later that in addition to a higher rate of fire his weapon didn't scope out between shots.
I appreciate the realism that accurately modelling weapon behaviors can bring to a gameplay experience, especially FPS games. BF2 weapon behaviors are fantastic, every single weapon in the game has a distinct feel that is very polished. But when I ran into a situation where I was repeatedly defeated because the weapon I had available to me was severely outclassed.
I switched teams and found myself having a much better time with the sniper class.
I am now musing the delicacies of not only making sure that a weapon is fun to use on its own, but, in multiplayer situations specifically, properly balanced against similar weapons on the opposing team.
So, not just making sure that the whole rock, paper, scissors orthogonal system is fun, but also making sure that one team doesn't end up with a bigger rock.
Common sense, I know, but it's my blog! :)
I was completely overpowered by his superior weapon, found out later that in addition to a higher rate of fire his weapon didn't scope out between shots.
I appreciate the realism that accurately modelling weapon behaviors can bring to a gameplay experience, especially FPS games. BF2 weapon behaviors are fantastic, every single weapon in the game has a distinct feel that is very polished. But when I ran into a situation where I was repeatedly defeated because the weapon I had available to me was severely outclassed.
I switched teams and found myself having a much better time with the sniper class.
I am now musing the delicacies of not only making sure that a weapon is fun to use on its own, but, in multiplayer situations specifically, properly balanced against similar weapons on the opposing team.
So, not just making sure that the whole rock, paper, scissors orthogonal system is fun, but also making sure that one team doesn't end up with a bigger rock.
Common sense, I know, but it's my blog! :)
About the author
Recent Blogs
• TGB Combat Editor• Action Puzzler Prototype
• New Project
• Free Textures
• Networking Fun
#2
05/06/2006 (2:01 am)
My game uses (sorta) realistic modern weapons. To keep it balanced I've decided to simply allow anybody on any team to choose from the same list of weapons. Certainly nullifies anybody's complaint about being out-gunned. Also makes the load-out selection alot simpler to create. =)
#3
I intend to use cash value to balance it out. Teams will only have so much to spend. But it needs to be worked out. Maybe combine with respawn times. Its difficult, but doable.
I'm heartily sick of games where both sides have the same units on each side just with different models etc. There is no variation in what you can do depending on the side you choose.
05/06/2006 (4:04 am)
I guess it depends on the game, and how you balence it. Sometimes being outgunned is a pain, sometimes it can be a challenge.I intend to use cash value to balance it out. Teams will only have so much to spend. But it needs to be worked out. Maybe combine with respawn times. Its difficult, but doable.
I'm heartily sick of games where both sides have the same units on each side just with different models etc. There is no variation in what you can do depending on the side you choose.
#4
Are you refering to the SVD? I assume you were using a m24 or m95 if you "scoped out". Personally I think the bolt action guns are way better than the SVD and chinese sniper rifle. They all do 95 damage while the svd does 45. Having to shoot someone 3 times (unless you get a headshot) with a sniper rifle is pretty stupid.
05/06/2006 (12:13 pm)
Ah weapon balance. One of my favorite topics. BF2 isn't exactly a shining example of the principle.Are you refering to the SVD? I assume you were using a m24 or m95 if you "scoped out". Personally I think the bolt action guns are way better than the SVD and chinese sniper rifle. They all do 95 damage while the svd does 45. Having to shoot someone 3 times (unless you get a headshot) with a sniper rifle is pretty stupid.
#5
05/06/2006 (12:22 pm)
There is also the difference in use of the weapons, a sniper isn't just a sniper. A american barrett is meant do do a lot more than the russian Dragunov. The Barrett can be used against a APC so most games do not really do it credit as you usually can't take out any persons inside a APC unless you blow it up.
#6
@Nick - Yup, referring to the SVD. I had a few situations where I had to go for a second shot vs. the SVD and the fact that he could knock out 3 shots for my one put me in pretty dire straights when we both knew where each other were. I guess it's down to personal choice to some degree on the rate of fire vs. damage balance issue. I definitely found that for myself I prefered staying scoped in and getting a second, (or third, maaaaaybe a fourth :) ), shot if I needed it.
@Martin - That's another great point. Hopefully soon functionality at that level will be considered as part of the balancing. I wouldn't mind a slower rate of fire if I could shoot through armor :)
I'm looking forward to seeing how BF2142 does things, since realism won't be as much of a factor anymore. Also really looking forward to Quake Wars, their teams play styles sound like they are going to be radically different than each other. Not only in terms of weapons, but movement and character class abilities, that's gotta be an interesting balancing act. I'll definitely check that one out at E3, they're supposed to have a pretty big LAN setup at the Activision booth for it.
05/06/2006 (2:59 pm)
@Corey - I tend to cut BF2 a lot of slack too, this was actually the first time I really noticed the issue. Their weapons are some of the best feeling that i've ever played with. I don't tend to go into snipe too often, my usual group of guys has a much better sniper than me :)@Nick - Yup, referring to the SVD. I had a few situations where I had to go for a second shot vs. the SVD and the fact that he could knock out 3 shots for my one put me in pretty dire straights when we both knew where each other were. I guess it's down to personal choice to some degree on the rate of fire vs. damage balance issue. I definitely found that for myself I prefered staying scoped in and getting a second, (or third, maaaaaybe a fourth :) ), shot if I needed it.
@Martin - That's another great point. Hopefully soon functionality at that level will be considered as part of the balancing. I wouldn't mind a slower rate of fire if I could shoot through armor :)
I'm looking forward to seeing how BF2142 does things, since realism won't be as much of a factor anymore. Also really looking forward to Quake Wars, their teams play styles sound like they are going to be radically different than each other. Not only in terms of weapons, but movement and character class abilities, that's gotta be an interesting balancing act. I'll definitely check that one out at E3, they're supposed to have a pretty big LAN setup at the Activision booth for it.
Torque Owner Corey Martin
I think this is an area that even a lot of commercial games get tripped up on. They follow the rock-scissors-paper mantra well enough, but, as you put it, one rock ends up being bigger than the other. I cut Battlefield 2 a little bit of slack, simply because it seems they (Dice) are trying to balance, er, balance with the realism and parameters of the real-life weapons they are modeling after. In this way, made up weapons have the upper hand, since there simply isn't a 'realism' factor playing in with regards to the specific factors of a weapon.