[?] How is Damage Calculated?

[Çhristovas]

Unlike many RTS' out there, DoW seems to do things "behind the scenes" so to speak. For me, it makes me quite uncomfortable in my gameplay. This is not a bad thing at all, I am just asking for you to explain a few things. Let me give you an example of what I am talking about.

In game "X," which is an RTS game, an inf. does 10 dam. vs. anything including tanks. The reason you would buy a tank to fight another tank instead of the infintry is becuase tanks do 20 dam. vs. anything and have more armor. Simple

On to Dow:
From what I understand, you have unit "A" which does 20-40 damage vs inf. and Unit "B" which does 20-40 damage vs. vehicles. If you use unit "B" vs. inf. what is the damage and if I use unit "A" what would be the damage vs. vehicles How does this all work?? There is obviously MUCH more detail I could get into, but I think you get the idea. Please elaborate as much as you can so that I am a little more confident about my in-game decisions. Thanks in advance.

[Amaron]

I don't think they're going to give out any details which is sad. In order for this to be a competetive game they are going to have to display all the formula's and everything so people can truly learn how all the math behind the scenes is working.

This is why WC3 is such a big hit for competition. It's method of armor and counters to armor is fairly simple to figure out and easily explained by in game tooltips so even the biggest newb can figure out that you need siege damage to kill a building etc. etc.

DoW is going to have to follow a similar course if anyone is going to take it seriously. Otherwise we'll have to listen to countless arguments about how things work and the serious players will move on when their theories don't help them win.

[-_Phoenix_-]

TBH i'd always assumed its something on the to do list. The number of people i've had to tell to use plasma guns and not heavy bolters vs. marines is frightening.

[Wally]

TBH i'd always assumed its something on the to do list. The number of people i've had to tell to use plasma guns and not heavy bolters vs. marines is frightening.

Maybe because they are the basic infantry unit of that army people just assume they count as infantry, rather than heavy infantry.

[Raging Idiot]

Maybe because they are the basic infantry unit of that army people just assume they count as infantry, rather than heavy infantry.

Scouts are the basic infantry of the Marines and they are light infantry.

[Beelzebuddy]

I'd much rather have an intuitive damage system that doesn't need explaining over an arcane system of weights and balances that must be memorized for your units to be effective. Seriously, if WC3's damage system was so good, explain how archers deal extra damage vs. large units. Do those units wear armor with big gaping holes in it? Do the archers say "Whoo, a knight! Break out the BIG bows, boys!"

In any case relax, the damage system will all be easily viewable and modifiable, if HW2 is any indication.

[Amaron]

Seriously, if WC3's damage system was so good, explain how archers deal extra damage vs. large units. Do those units wear armor with big gaping holes in it? Do the archers say "Whoo, a knight! Break out the BIG bows, boys!"
Try not to let reality interfere with the quest for balance. If making lasers do piddly damage to unarmored infantry balances the game in a more fun when then thats all good.

[DarthVaygr]

I would think that anti-vehicle units could pretty much kill infantry on the spot, but they are very inacurate and they *might* have a low multiplier. Anti-infantry units will probably have a low multipler that makes then ineffective. My guesses, no game yet *stupid download timed out*

[Aimless]

WC3 does seem to have an interesting system of counters and armor types. I love the way its all explained in detail, although im not very good at the game due to my inferior micro. I think the system can be both intuitive and have tactical depth.

IMO it would be better if everyone knew just how it worked. A game called Master of Orion 3 comes to mind (not an RTS but turn based strategy) where the developers never told people just how some things worked so most of the community did their own testing and concluded that the functions in question are broken.

[Maxible]

I'd much rather have an intuitive damage system that doesn't need explaining over an arcane system of weights and balances that must be memorized for your units to be effective. Seriously, if WC3's damage system was so good, explain how archers deal extra damage vs. large units. Do those units wear armor with big gaping holes in it? Do the archers say "Whoo, a knight! Break out the BIG bows, boys!"

In any case relax, the damage system will all be easily viewable and modifiable, if HW2 is any indication.
omg

sry for spamming, but blizzard surely didn't meant knights to be big targets, but dragons etc. The damage bonus is because the targets are bigger so they are easier to hit and because of that it is easier to hit critical zones too.

btw imo MUST epic tell us the formula's etc., that's very important if they want DOW-freaks. Look at Diablo 2 for example. It has a very large community and there are very very much calculators and character guides on the web because everyone know the formulas.

[Bridger]

This is why WC3 is such a big hit for competition. It's method of armor and counters to armor is fairly simple to figure out and easily explained by in game tooltips so even the biggest newb can figure out that you need siege damage to kill a building etc. etc.

So when you click on a unit, and it's got the units it counters listed *right* there, that's not easy enough for a newbie to figure out?

Double Post


omg

sry for spamming, but blizzard surely didn't meant knights to be big targets, but dragons etc. The damage bonus is because the targets are bigger so they are easier to hit and because of that it is easier to hit critical zones too.

btw imo MUST epic tell us the formula's etc., that's very important if they want DOW-freaks. Look at Diablo 2 for example. It has a very large community and there are very very much calculators and character guides on the web because everyone know the formulas.

Seems pretty lame IMHO. If everybody gets the forumulas and such, it all breaks down into math and the game isn't fun anymore. Everyone does exactly the same thing because it's mathmatically garenteed to be the best way.

[Ice_Assassin]

I'd much rather have an intuitive damage system that doesn't need explaining over an arcane system of weights and balances that must be memorized for your units to be effective. Seriously, if WC3's damage system was so good, explain how archers deal extra damage vs. large units. Do those units wear armor with big gaping holes in it? Do the archers say "Whoo, a knight! Break out the BIG bows, boys!"

In any case relax, the damage system will all be easily viewable and modifiable, if HW2 is any indication.


If you didnt know archers do the type of damage that goes through armor.

[Maxible]

Seems pretty lame IMHO. If everybody gets the forumulas and such, it all breaks down into math and the game isn't fun anymore. Everyone does exactly the same thing because it's mathmatically garenteed to be the best way.
imho that seems pretty lame:bandit:

cuz you dont have to know the formulas, but when you want, you can look them up on the website or by tooltip. It is only a feature for guys wanting a nearly perfect tactic, noobs can play without knowing anything of math :D

[Aimless]

Amen to that, Maxible

Bridger, the only time a strategy game doesnt break down into math is when both u and ur opponent r just playing to enjoy the game without trying to win competitively and that is a lot of fun some times :)

If we r using WC3 as an example of a game where the system is known to everyone then ur argument about everyone doing the same thing does not apply. Sure there are some common combinations of units but these would occur even if people didnt know how the system worked, it would just take them longer to work it out. WC3 is a very competitive game at high levels (im no WC3 fanboy and im not particularly good at it). Everyone doesnt do the same thing because mathematically every unit has a counter (as should be in a good RTS). Im sure DoW will be fun whether or not they tell people how it works but i hope they do.

[Amaron]

So when you click on a unit, and it's got the units it counters listed *right* there, that's not easy enough for a newbie to figure out?

Seems pretty lame IMHO. If everybody gets the forumulas and such, it all breaks down into math and the game isn't fun anymore. Everyone does exactly the same thing because it's mathmatically garenteed to be the best way.

It has the counters listed but it doesn't really explain how the counter system works. Unless you go around trusting Developers to actually design things the way you EXPECT them to work you need to know the actual formulas.

As for your second comment lets look at the alternative. You've people who've figured out the best way to do things and do it. These people can then go around easily beating people with some little "trick" in the math that they've discovered and their opponents may never understand why they are loosing.

For example I know that upgrading a Dreadnaught to a twin linked lascannon is a Bad Idea™. I know this because I did extensive testing and found out that Dreads loose a lot of melee damage by giving up an arm. The game doesn't indicate this anywhere. The stats listed don't change. Its logical but the stats stay the same so some people might not know it.

Do I now deserve an advantage over less knowledgeable players just because I've figured this out? Some would argue yes but I think that's a crock. It's an argument for people who want a crutch.

The only reason for such an argument is some players want to pretend they are truly skilled simply because they play the game more often and learned a few tricks that they can rely on instead of using true skills like strategy and microing.

No community is going to get actively involved in this game if they have to fight an uphill battle to figure out the rules.

It's a game! Would you play Poker for money with someone if you didn't know the rules? The very thought is rediculous. Competitive games thrive on rules and thats why all the formulas and processes need to be explained.

[Bridger]

True, RoN had a damage multiplier counter system, but never could anybody find the multipliers anywhere in the .ini files. Never got them released either. Kinda sucked :\

[Maxible]

It has the counters listed but it doesn't really explain how the counter system works. Unless you go around trusting Developers to actually design things the way you EXPECT them to work you need to know the actual formulas.

As for your second comment lets look at the alternative. You've people who've figured out the best way to do things and do it. These people can then go around easily beating people with some little "trick" in the math that they've discovered and their opponents may never understand why they are loosing.

For example I know that upgrading a Dreadnaught to a twin linked lascannon is a Bad Idea™. I know this because I did extensive testing and found out that Dreads loose a lot of melee damage by giving up an arm. The game doesn't indicate this anywhere. The stats listed don't change. Its logical but the stats stay the same so some people might not know it.

Do I now deserve an advantage over less knowledgeable players just because I've figured this out? Some would argue yes but I think that's a crock. It's an argument for people who want a crutch.

The only reason for such an argument is some players want to pretend they are truly skilled simply because they play the game more often and learned a few tricks that they can rely on instead of using true skills like strategy and microing.

No community is going to get actively involved in this game if they have to fight an uphill battle to figure out the rules.

It's a game! Would you play Poker for money with someone if you didn't know the rules? The very thought is rediculous. Competitive games thrive on rules and thats why all the formulas and processes need to be explained.
That's exactly what I wanted to tell :argh:

Especially this thing:

No community is going to get actively involved in this game if they have to fight an uphill battle to figure out the rules.
As I wrote above without formulas there will only be fun or hobby players, playing the game sometimes and that's it. Hobby players will definately stop playing this game when a better one comes out. With formulas there will be a second groop I call freaks :D And they will definately play this game for ever (ok, not for ever, but a very long time:nana: )

[psikotik1]

You guys have to remember that this is still in beta, so the numbers aren't set in stone yet. Let things get more settled in balance issues and such and there will probably be some kind of list.

[Charon]

My guess is this: Every unit has a different damage based on the type of unit it's firing upon. Let's talk about a marine squad, and base it on a 1-10 system, with 1 being the lowest (least powerful) and 10 being the most powerful.

Bolter
Infantry: 6
Heavy Infantry: 4
Vehicles: 1
Buildings: 2

Heavy Bolter
Infantry: 7
Heavy Infantry: 5
Vehicles: 1
Buildings: 2

Flamer
Infantry: 6
Heavy Infantry: 2
Vehicles: 1
Buildings: 3

Plasma Rifle
Infantry: 7
Heavy Infantry: 8
Vehicles: 4
Buildings: 2

Missile Launcher
Infantry: 6
Heavy Infantry: 8
Vehicles: 6
Buildings: 3


Obviously this is a very simplistic way of looking at it, but I hope it gets my idea across. :)