View Full Version : Add-on vs add-on
May 27 2004, 15:03
I know very little about addon making but i was wondering if there is some sort of rule Add-on makers use to keep the field balanced.
After downloading some os the most reputed Addons around, i decided to pitch them against each other when possible, all AI. East vs West as the game kind of forces you to do.
Both were supposed to represent tough, well equiped troops. One of the sides consistently creamed the other. Was it the difference in troop toughness? Weapon letality and accuracy? Does it remotely represent reality?
Is this important? Well... when building a mission i like to think i'm seting a somewhat believable scenario. So do add-on makers when seting out to make their favourite units tend to make them super-soldiers or do they keep them human?
I think most addon makers in the OFP scene will try and keep things as realistic as possible http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif For NAFP we do try to keep things on a realistic level. There is no common standard i know of except maybe JAM for weapons.
May 27 2004, 15:23
well most addonsmakers focus on reality in looks not on weaponeffects for instance BAS weapons have really high accuracy compared to other weapons
May 27 2004, 15:30
the best way for set standards is to download one of the modified config sets out there. They make everything equal in armor values, weapon lethality, etc. That way the BAS rangers dont rip up the spetznaz just cuz they can take a few more hits. Yes, weapons may make a difference, as if u have a squad of men with scoped weapons they will most likely have better shots than a squad with iron sights.
A good way to test these out is to put two oppsing groups in front of eachother, preferably on Desert Island, and put this in each of their Init lines: | this setunitpos "UP" |. That way they will never go prone, and just be shooting at eachother. I usualy put their skill to the highest, just so stray bullets are less common. Then be a civilian, stand to the side, and watch the civilwar-esc carnage. (CANT WAIT FOR THE CIVIL WAR MOD!!!!!!!)
Most addon makers want to see their addons in as wide circulation as possible. Circulation depends in part on reception in this here forum. If you watch the A&M: complete forums, you'll see people who apparently do nothing else with addons then take them out on desert island and kill stuff. It's no surprise that superlethal addons are better received. So there's an incentive to make addons that please this crowd.
Even if there weren't, many addonmakers use anecdotal data -- and why not. If my grandpa said that a round from a Sherman killed everybody in a 2-mile radius, who am I to doubt it?
Furthermore, there really is no standard. JAM's goals are much more modest than that, ammunition and magazines (and rather annoying for someone like me who infrequently downloads addons -- JAM only generates errors for me half the time). And some addons do the configs better than others. IT's not just armor, hit, ih, and ihr: there are tons of other settings that affect lethality and survivability, and most of them are underdocumented.
Lately I've been using WGL, because they went through a bunch of addons, fixed up the problems, and made them all work according to a common standard.
May 28 2004, 00:04
IMHO, the easiest form of balance is to base stats for addons based on stats for official BIS units...I mean, there isn't much point creating an uber realistic damage value for an AT weapon which means it can blast some BIS tanks out of the water with one shot...unless you also include updated tanks with your AT weapon - if you see what I mean...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.