Reverse Engineering in my hobby game

Back to the drawing board.

Seems I made a mistake during the translation.

So, why that 8??

I took a completely different route.
And started from scratch.

Not sure yet how players would react. But let me put down some ground rules.

The cost is still the body + weapon.
This time, the difference of the values is used.

Then....I divide this by 8.
It turns out that this gives the best numbers.
But we are not there yet.
The result is actually added to both the body and weapon. Simply an addition.

An example would be a rocket soldier having 30 body and 270 weapon points.
The difference is 240. Divided by 8 gives 30.
We add this 30 to both body and weapon. Resulting into 60 for the body and 300 for the weapon.
The cost remains 300.
These are very good numbers for me to work with.

Another example would be a grenadier. The goal is a cost of 150.
We take an initial value of 55 for the body and 95 for the weapon.
I know, I know.... these values look like shit.
But with the recalculations. I get to a body of 60 and weapon of 100. And these numbers are excellent as well.

As for the efficiency. Dividing by 8 gives a top of 106.7%. This is acceptable. And turns out to be linked to that one design of the grenadier.

For now, there are 2 interesting things happening that regard this method.

1. I need to make a table to see all my options for a certain goal cost. This is....ok. but perhaps I need to find a reverse engineering method. Either way. I just got a lot of options.

2. 100% glass cannons that initial have no health??? This is ok. After the modifying, I get 12.5% body points and 112.5% health points. The efficiency of a glass cannon is now 56.25%.

3. Rogue projectiles and walls will get the other portion added to the main.
Thus they are 125% now.
Not sure how well this goes in the balance. But seeing as how in my boardgame, walls are simply extra health. This should proof well.

4. I still need to check several glass cannon choices. I will come back on this, if it is succefull or a failure.

Well then. I have a better idea.
Instead of boosting the health of glass cannons. What about actually boosting the damage instead?

The balance would remain the same. But the boost would increase visually.

However, 0 health or 0 damage units. Should not get an infinite boost on the other part.

That is where I blinded myself from other options.

So, I need to find a way to make the boost on the higher value. AND make sure there are no infinities.

Designing a weapon also has 1 more factor AND can be split into 2 or even 3 portions, thus more options.

Everything above...has been scrapped.

And I made some decisions.

Since it is all math based. I am not going to bother you with it.

One decision is that I let go of my ocd in regards of exact numbers.
Rounding numbers while designing is a thing now. The "imbalance" is less than 1%. And you need to play 30 games in order to notice a difference... I wonder why it took so long for me to notice this.

As for the method of calculating. I picked one that is based on the efficiency of a design itself.
Nitpicking on which glass cannon is best, is now part of the past. And it only exist in a region of a spectrum that is not accessable by the unit stats.

I could make an update on the first list. But I figured, no one would care tbh.

Anyway. In order to understand the numbers. I copy RTS games. The ones where you have 1 resource like in C&C, Tiberian Sun, KKnD etc. Even though, other games can simply be part of the big story as well.

Know that I divide the stats of units into 2 groups. Body points and weapon points.
A rifleman costs 100. And we have 50 points in body stats and 50 points in weapon stats.
When ignoring the weight costs of movement and attack range. You can clearly see that you can calculate efficiency points.
For a rifleman, this is body*weapon= 50 * 50 = 2,500.
The numbers grow big fast. Since a tank would be for example 300 * 300 = 90,000

This efficiency is literly the influence an unit can have on the game. While it is being destroyed.
If there are 2 units fighting together. 1 gets destroyed first, then the other. Calculations go a bit differently now.
The one being destroyed is 50*50=2,500.
The second one normally gets the same. But also gets extra efficiency points.
BodieS*weapon=(50+50)*50=5,000

We add everything up and see that an army of 2 infantry has 7,500 efficiency points.

Reverse engineering shows us that you need 8 of these infantry in order to destroy one tank. Both sides would be having 90,000 efficiency points.

This "balancing" is done for most RTS in the form of playtesting. Because other factors are included like size collision, movement speed, attack range, pathfinding(yes indeed). But for a boardgame, all I need are just the body and weapon points.

Now, how did I get to the maximum should be 1?
A 50-50 design is the best balanced design.
We get 2,500 points for this. Divide by 2,500. And we get 1.
Divide by 25, and we get 100. Which can be seen as a percentage.
Perhaps I should call it the efficiency index.

No matter the cost. They get their individual max efficiency of 1. Because it is based on the average 50-50 design in percentage. A tank of 600? 300*300=90,000. We divide by 90,000. And get 1 again.

How do other designs compare?
20-80 or 80-20. They die fast, or hardly deal damage. The efficiency points are 20*80=1600.
This is divided by 2,500 = 0,64. Or 64%.
Now, if I multiply both the body and the weapon for reaching 100%. I need to keep in mind that the efficiency is a multiplication. Thus the adjustment needs to be a square root of things. While the true efficiency is only 64%. The "cost efficiency" is 80%.
To get to 100%. I need the factor 1.25.

We get 25 for the body and 100 for the weapon now. But what is the efficiency?
25*100=2,500 efficiency points. And we rebalanced the other design perfectly.

A tank of the same levels?
120 * 480 = 57,600
Divided by 90,000 = 0.64

The efficiency index is always calculated by having the efficiency score divided by the most optimal efficiency score.

However, this method doesn't work for walls or rogue projectiles. Since there is either no weapon or body.
And the score and index are all 0.

So, we look at the practical balance instead.

***

In RTS:
Players don't shoot walls if there is a support unit nearby.
Players can't even shoot at rogue projectiles.

Thus, the cover mechanic I had in my boardgame. If I wanted to get rid of it. I should make sure that my designs where somewhat more balanced.
I can't calculate the costs at body+weapon.
I can't calculate the costs at body*weapon.

But I sure can make a mix out of it. And that is what I did.

My best results so far is 5 portions of "cost efficiency" and 1 portion of "linear cost". Divided by 6.
For the 20-80 design, I got 83.33 as cost. But bringing it back to 100. Would be a factor of 1.2.

The new stats are 24 and 96.
24 * 96 = 2304
And the new index is 0.9216
Which is 1.44 times better.

Perfect? No.
Practical balanced? Yes.

Because the higher stats do give more advantages in movement and attack range weights as well.

My time has run out. But I hope this was easy to follow. It is the basis to understanding the previous list. But also the list that is comming. I think tomorrow. Or maybe the day after. Unless I got time and braincells avaiable at work today.

Lets begin with the glass cannons in question.

There is still a little cheat here. But before that...
The first set would be that of the 8, 10 and 12 body points.

As infantry, the armor set is that of 1.
The health is... also 1.
The movement speed is 1, 2 or 3 for the 8, 10 or 12 body points.

Now then...understanding how little 1 hit point can be. It really depends on what a normal unit design of that proportion has as health.

The normal body points is supposed to be 600.
This is ridiculous high compared to only 8 for certain.

600 body points at movement speed 1 has:
75 hit points of tier 1.
150 HP of tier 2.
225 HP of tier 3.
etc.
+75 HP per tier.

The body of 8. Has only 1 HP per tier.
And in a sense, this is a cheat due to the fact that the design can have any tier. Which would be any HP.

No worries here. We got a cheat weapon as well.
In stead of the accuracy being only 50% for example. The damage factor would be 50%. As soon as the "cheat" health comes in, a design of "cheat" damage is also added. I got this covered within a minute (mhuhahahaha).

***

The real discussion starts now. The damages.

8, 10 and 12

We only gained 2 weapon points with the 2 body points being removed.
2 damage points where nothing. And thus the whole discussion started at the "Whyyyyyyyyeeeeyyy?!?!" even choose it??

The new weapon points are:
Body-W:old -E.I.old-W:new-E.I.new
_12 - 1188 - 0.199 -4790 - 0.400
_10 - 1190 - 0.182 -4962 - 0.371
__8 - 1192 - 0.163 -5160 - 0.339

Well...we don't have to look at the old and new E.I. for sure. Only that it kinda doubles at this level. Which is a good thing. But it doesn't mean anything for the reader here.
And nor does it really to me. We are really watching the nether region of the list.

The body points are 1 HP for each. (unless the "cheats" are allowed) But the designs allow for a movement of 1, 2 or 3.

As for the new weapon value's...
-4790 for the fastest.
-4962 for the normal.
-5160 for the slowest.
The differences are:
-172 for the first 2.
-198 for the second 2.
-And of course 370 between the first and third.

Roughly, this means dealing damage at normal values... A difference of 4.8, 5.5 and even 10.3 difference in dealing damage.
That doesn't mean much. But on average it is either 1 or 2 infantry kills on average. (basic infantry have 5 health)
The basic total? At 4790, we got 133 damage or 27 infantry kills.

Ok, so we got a total of 27, 28 kills on average. Depending on the movement speed. Comming from a total of 36 soldiers. What remains are 9 or 8 infantry.

Well then, that is actually a big difference?? Not really.
But the question might return, "Whyyyyyyyyeeeeyyy?!?!"

Well....compared to the original numbers....
1188 to 1192 as weapon points, simply meant a solid 33 damage on average. Or in short, standard infantry kills was only...7....

Yes, 7. And there was no clear choice at all. In the old situation you could have 29 soldiers survive the first strike.

I mean, in the long run, you could choose between letting 9 live, or only 8. And the movement speed was either 1, 2 or 3.

I am still talking about the basic attack range here. But it clearly shows that playing with the movement speed in the glass cannon spectrum. Shows a difference in damage...
Not much, but it is noticable.

Keep in mind, this regards units of cost 1200. And the targetted squad has 36 soldiers standing.
The new system reduces from 29 survivors down to 8 to 9 survivors.

***

In terms of percentage. We went from 0.3% up to 7% difference.
So, this 7% is THE choice that we have at the glass cannons spectrum.

We are...really close to the rogue projectiles though.
Personally, I would choose the one with a movement of 3.

But knowing that movement speed is involved here. The E.I. kinda changes. For 8, it remains the same. But the other E.I. will go down for certain. And the ones based on only body points go down too.
It would be recalculated based on that 8. And they would be slightly less efficient on direct combat.
Well, that is kinda bullshit. Let's do it differently now.

If we need only 1 damage... We can look at the attack ranges instead.

Ehm...ok, 24 hexagons difference. Let's put it that way.

In a sense. A movement speed of 3 needs 8 turns to move that far. And only then it can start returning fire. It does mean that the slowest glass cannon simply has the advantage of the best attack range.
Then again, an attack range of 342 hexagons doesn't exist.
Would be funny though....

I think that having a nice balance between damage and attack range would show the best choices.
Still...the "Whyyyyyyyyeeeeyyy?!?!" is finally being a discussion here.

Oh, on a side note:
I forgot to add that I looked at the damage as if they are targetting infantry units.
But if you think of the difference of killing 1 HP units. The difference of 370 in damage points is certainly a difference of 6 units on top of a minimum of 80 average.
The original had no difference...

Body-W:old -E.I.old-W:new-E.I.new
_60 - 1140 - 0.435 -2940 - 0.700
_50 - 1150 - 0.400 -3169 - 0.663
_40 - 1160 - 0.359 -3446 - 0.619

Right....
This time the maximum difference is even 506 in weapon points. On basis of a 2940 weapon points. The extremes are 17.2% appart.

We have finally arrived at the "normal" bodies.
We can have for example 3 infantry units of tier 1. Each with 5 HP and then a movement of 1, 2 or 3. OR...Each with a movement of 2 with 4, 5 or 6 HP.

Either way goes. But know that 4 HP can be instant killed a low chances by normal rifles. 6 HP almost always needs at least 2 rounds to be defeated.

Not only that, but tier 1 can take any fire in this regard. Where our tier 2.5 could still be insta killed by tier 2.5 or higher weapons. The new list is clearly having differences in HP now.

Well, that is short. Maybe I should add that while we are still looking at glass cannons. The intended damage has almost halved already.
And now comes the true reason I am calculating like this.

Comparing 60 with 8. Means a big difference in health etc.???
Well, maybe so. But the weapon points were originally going down from 1192 to 1140. Which is only 52. Not 2220!!!
You can think of this as a difference of roughly 1 or 37 damage difference on normal ranged weaponry.
Or NO kills or 7 kills difference.

Normal movement speeds !!!!
Health being 1, 2 or 3 !!!!

Body-W:old -E.I.old-W:new-E.I.new
_30 - 1170 - 0.312 -3795 - 0.562
_20 - 1180 - 0.256 -4160 - 0.486
_10 - 1190 - 0.182 -4962 - 0.371

While prevously we saw that the minimum difference is 1% at the square root. In terms of weapon powerrrr...

We know that looking at that difference closer to a perfectly balance unit is even going worse. But at that level, we don't even need to choose, since the difference in body is also less. It doesn't make sense anymore to look at it. So let's look at the most! neat! basic! differences.

Yes, only 1, 2 or 3 hit points. While the basic infantry have 5 hit points.
The weapon powers? 3795, 4160 and 4962.
Between 3 and 2 hit points. The enemy has a chance of using 1 rifle man of cost 120. And it would be able to shoot and have a chance of 33% or 50% in order to kill your glass cannon.

That is a big difference. And in return, you have the choice of either dealing 63 or 69 damage with the same weapon. Again that difference of 1 soldier. But it is at 12 to 13 soldiers.
Now I got something interesting to share.
Of all the 1200 units. You can have 3 in a squad. Meaning you would be dealing enough damage to kill 36 to 39 soldiers.
Since the enemy has 36 at most. And seeing as how we are now shooting at 30 soldiers costing 120 each. This means we got overkill and overkillll.

Alright, lets assume the basic enemy squad was 36 soldiers. Then there is a chance of them surviving against one side, but loosing against another.

If that isn't enough. We got our little guy of 1 health. Who will even deal 83 damage. And this little guy will be able to harm 16 soldiers. So, when we have 2 of these, while 3 is the norm. We can actually whipe out an entire squad of 30 soldiers.

10 body points seems to be a very optimal glass cannon design when facing basic enemy infantry.

"It's gonna be pee-pee pants city here real soon." - Negan

Half the body. Almost double the damage.

And here we are. Instead of 900, we get 1115 weapon points.

If these are put into rogue projectiles, then we get 11/9 as factor. And on top of it another factor of 18. Thus a total factor of 22 here...? Of course, you are paying 1115/3. per projectile. 371.... well, that isn't much compared to the 300.
But, we aren't getting exponentially more with producing other units either. So, we are going to ignore this now.

Well....

You want 180 of 360 hit points on your tank?
And then being able to deal 60 or 112 damage?

If you pick the normal tank of 360 hit points. You need 3 hits on the enemy tank. That same enemy tank needs 4 hits on your tank. That difference is very small now. But...very big at the same time. Why? The original support would deal 90 damage. Still 4 hits. But that would be on the level of tanks.
The true difference is now going from 900 to 1115 weapon points. Or 215.
Certainly, in terms of infantry units. Going from 3 or 4 kills to 4 or 5 kills on average. Is a big difference as well.

***

Well....I am done showing the interesting differences between the old and new designs.

One might ponder of why I went into so much trouble.
At least for the glassiest of cannons we got a noticble difference now. And most often, it is the attack range in that regard.

Well, if I where to look at the attack range for the one discussed in this single post. Then we would look at the same damage type. And perhaps going from an attack range of 2 up to 5.5 instead of up to 4. Yes, 1.5 more attack range means a lot. This is certainly also regarded to 1 extra shot at the normal stats.

And with 3 tanks. You could actually take out 1 enemy tank as well. Clearly the new system even supports the lowest classes of support units. You simply need to know where to look. The attack range.

***

***

PS. All this stuff above. You can do the same but then reverse the body with the weapon points. Enjoy the chaos that follows up, IFfff you managed to read it all.

Made 2 new colums that can calculate the weight of what either the body or weapon should be. When I put in a fixed number for either the weapon or body, alongside with a desired cost for the design.

The new system is a spectrum. And thus easier to balance with other game mechanics. Having a sheet calculate things for me makes it easier to pre-balance, than calculating it all by hand.

If the calculation tells me to put 60 into body and 105 into the weapon. I know how much health, movement speed, damage and attack range I can apply. And the unit is always balanced due to the fact that I use a spectrum.

I tested this on my (prototype game) grenadier.
160 Cost (N= 7.5 / 15 / 22.5 / 30 / 37.5)
80 Strategy Points
1 Armor
5 Hp
3 Sp
4 Dmg
2 Dice; 4 Accuracy + 3 Accuracy

(((The prototype designs in regards of infantry, don't differ from the "once upon a time" public versions.
The die rolls might change a bit. And the Armor tiers above 1 will be less. For example, the armor tier 2 would be 3 and you need 3 hits with a rifle for 1 damage on a tier 2. In the prototype version, you deal roughly 5 damage with 3 hits, and remove this from 20 health. Which is from 20% up to 25%.)))

Result for this grenadier
It was 60 body and 100 weapon. That 5% more into the weapon made it 5% more usefull in 1 on 1 battles. Which was missing at first. I wanted to know what only 5% would do.
And I found out. It actually means a lot. It is 15% in the long run. If...there is no cover mechanic applied.

That is for one of the smallest of support types.
Want to know more about the other support types?

Not sure why you want an example like that?
The riflemen and tanks are kinda 50-50 designs in general.
No matter if it is the prototype or public version.
AND, they are kinda slow in combat against each other. So you need a lot of rounds before 1 side dies.

In regards of who goes first. This depends on the attack range.

Since high attack ranges can fire while the 2 squads physical approach each other. When both sides fight. The shortest attack ranges may go first. This is for balance reasons. But also tactical reasons in relations to the map layout.

Another way to look at the attack range turn order would be:
The 2 squads approach each other. The higher attack range can fire. Then they meet, and the shorter attack range can now fire. The higher attack range can fire just after (their reload). Something like that.

***

Ok, let's example the prototype. They are luckily very basic.
(I also see now I forgot to include the attack range, which is 1 for that Grenadier)

Rifleman:
100 Cost
1 Armor
5 Hp
2 Sp
1 Dmg
1 Die; 5 Accuracy
2 Range

Light Combat Tank:
600 Cost
25 Armor
125 Hp
3 Sp
25 Dmg
1 Die; 5 Accuracy
3 Range

***

Remember, this is the prototype version. Where health is very big. And armor works as a "maximum damage" possible.
The public version doesn't even have this armor.

Basicly speaking. I can see how the 3 tanks are going to attack the riflemen and there is no escape.

The riflemen will try to approach the tanks. The movement speed and attack range of the tanks aren't good enough to do a constant hit and retreat tactic. So, they are good for 1 round of firing. Not going to include the actions, and keep it basic.

Round 1:

The 25 damage a tank can do is reduced to the maximum of 1 when used on an infantry unit.

3 Light Combat Tanks have 1 die each.
They are rolled for an accuracy of 5. Thus 5 or less remains a hit.
All 3 hit? The hand remains 3 dice.
Now we roll for damage, the dice will be normal damage dice.
So, we roll and remove any 5 or 6 that are rolled.
Let's say, we roll a 3, 4 and 5. The 5 is removed.

The remaining projectiles will deal 3 and 4 damage.
Now, the player has a choice here.
Either put the 3 and 4 damage on 2 riflemen. Or on the same rifleman.
For simplicity sake. The same rifleman takes 7 damage and dies.

4 Riflemen remain.

Round 2:
The riflemen are now close enough in order to fire as well.
Since they have a shorter attack range, they may go first.

4 dice. 1 die ended up being a 6.
3 dice remain.

We roll for damage, 2, 4 and 6 are rolled.
We have 2 and 4 damage. Well, 1 of the tanks goes down from 125 to 119 health.

Just remember, this is the prototype game where the units are far appart in terms of RPS. Normally you have 18 riflemen against the 3 tanks. Dealing an average of 25 damage

Either way, the tanks can still fire in this round. But I have given 2 firing examples now.

In this situation, the tanks win in roughly 6 rounds.
Taking a damage of roughly 25 in total in those 6 rounds.

***

In the public version. They would be:
Rifleman:
5 Cost
1 Hp
2 Sp
1 Dmg
1 Die; 5 Accuracy
2 Range

Light Combat Tank:
12 Cost
4 Hp
3 Sp
4 Dmg
1 Die; 5 Accuracy
3 Range

And a die roll would be accuracy, then followed by a 2/6th roll for a hit.

So, the roll is 3 dice again.
5 or less is a hit.
The remaining dice are rolled.
2 or less are still a hit.

Same principal. But 3 tanks have a hard time hitting now.
3 * 5/6 * 1/3 = 15/18 average.
And the riflemen at most.
5 * 5/6 * 1/3 = 25/18 average.

But a combat tank would only be damaged here.

When designing support and meat units in the public game. I need to get them much further appart then a ratio of 2:3 in the body:weapon or something. in order to have a noticable rebalance effect.

In this situation, the tanks win in roughly 6 rounds.
Taking a damage of roughly 5 in total in those 6 rounds.
This time, if cover is not allowed. 1 tank will die.