Our Properties: Gamasutra GameCareerGuide IndieGames Indie Royale GDC IGF Game Developer Magazine GAO
My Message close
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
Analyst questions validity of unusual January NPD results [3]
 
DICE 2012: Blizzard's Pearce on World Of Warcraft's launch hangover
 
DICE 2012: Insomniac's Price on Quality Of Life, ditching the 'Loser' badge [2]
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
arrow Principles of an Indie Game Bottom Feeder [16]
 
arrow Postmortem: CyberConnect 2's Solatorobo: Red the Hunter [1]
 
arrow Jerked Around by the Magic Circle - Clearing the Air Ten Years Later [39]
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
February 10, 2012
 
Airtight Games
Art Director
 
Telltale Games
Core Technology - Senior Systems Engineer
 
High 5 Games
Technical Artist
 
XEOPlay Inc
Game Developer (Mobile)
 
Kabam
Lead Software Engineer - Flash
 
Kabam
Lead Software Engineer-Ruby
spacer
Blogs

  Weapon Balancing Based On Gameplay Situations (Part One)
by Daniel Helbig on 06/28/09 03:24:00 pm   Expert Blogs   Featured Blogs
15 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
  Posted 06/28/09 03:24:00 pm
 

(This article is a repost from my personal blog at www.rationalgamedesign.com)

Weapon Balancing

This is going to be the first post in a longer series of articles I want to write about the balancing of weapons in shooters via gameplay situations. I was rather frustrated about the lack of information I found about this topic, may it be balancing at large or the balancing of weapons specifically, so I thought it could be a good idea to write some of my thoughts and approaches here and maybe create a forum for a more detailed discussion and exchange on this matter.

Let me start with a short list of the most interesting resources I found on the web:

Dave Sirlin on Balancing Multiplayer Games.

Dave Sirlin, game designer of Streetfighter 2 Turbo HD Remix, has written a very deep and interesting four part series on the matter of balancing multiplayer games and I am seriously thinking about getting his book.

Part one: Definitions, Part two: Viable Options, Part three: Fairness, Part four: Intuition, Overview (Handout, PDF)

Brandes Stoddard on Balancing Weapons

Brandes Stoddard is System Designer for the upcoming MMOFPS Fallen Earth and shares some of his experience in this Dev. Journal.

Part one, Part two

Eric Heimburg on Balancing for Awesome

Eric Heimburg wrote an article called Balancing for Awesome describing the problems of system design and why you should try to balance for awesome and not for the sake of your excel sheet.

Tom Cadwell on Techniques for Achieving Play Balance

Tom Cadwell was apparently working for Blizzard on WC3 and WoW and has written a good article on balancing.

Techniques for Achieving Play Balance

If you know some other good resources please tell me and I will update the list. But for now let’s continue with the approach of balancing weapons via gameplay situations. First I think you can split the way to balance weapons into eight single steps.

First Step: Define your weapon system.

This is the first step you have to make. How should the weapon system work? The most important question is the limitation of weapons a single player can carry. Can he carry all weapons at the same time like in a classical shooter (Half-Life, Unreal Tournament, etc.) or is the number of weapon slots limited like in most modern shooters? (Gears of war, Dead Space, Resident Evil 5) This will determine how valuable a single weapon should be and in how many gameplay situations one weapons must be useful.

If the player can carry all weapons, each weapon can have a single purpose because the player can switch between weapons and adjust his equipped cannon to the specific situation. If you’re weapon system is limited either by the number of slots, inventory space or weight than each weapon must be more useful in different situations because you want to avoid that the player can’t overcome an obstacle because he hasn’t chosen the right equipment. (Even if you provide the right weapon in front of the challenge, a player could still decide to go with his old armory because he invested too much money in upgrades or simply because he likes them)

Another important point is the way player gain new weapons and ammunition. Do you have a shop system, a weapon upgrade system or does the player need to search rooms and loot corpses? There are a lot of different options to choose from and I think the decision depends on the way you want to reward the player and the restrictions of your game world. (A shop system in a WW2 shooter can easily break the immersion of a game)

Second Step: Define your goals

The next step I took was to define my balancing goals. An important matter for me is that I don’t want to have a dominating weapon, meaning a weapon which is better than all the others in every situation and I also want to avoid dominated weapons, which are worse in all situations than at least one other weapon. Based on this system I think you can create two categories of weapons. The first category I called special weapons, which are the best in at least one situation but also the worst in others. The second one I defined as mixed weapons, which are good in a lot of situations but also crap in others. When you think in these categories all weapons should be useful in the game but in different situations, challenging the player to choose the best weapon for each situation and by this creating depth to the gameplay because you cannot just rush with the weapon of your choice through the game.

The next point I would describe as aiming for maximum difference. The player should really feel that each weapon feels and behaves differently. This means that the differences between the ingame values should not be in a small percentage area because than the player will not notice them.

I also decided that I want to balance my weapons internally, which means for me that the balancing is not based on global variables set by the level design a.k.a. the ammunition available. A lot of games feature dominated weapons but force the player to use them because the ammunition he finds for better weapons is rather spare which sometimes work in survival horror games but I personally think it limits my choices as a player and takes away room for interesting decisions.

I also want that all weapons should work the same in multiplayer and singleplayer modes, because I think the system gets intransparent for the player if weapons behave differently in each mode.

Third Step: Define your weapons’ attributes

In the next step one should make a list of all attributes concerning the behavior of weapons. I will write more about this step in the next part.

 
 
Comments

Martin Nerurkar
profile image
Welcome to the world of Gamasutra :D

Owain abArawn
profile image
In terms of game play, what is your opinion of shooters that employ assault rifes, machine guns, or similar high powered weaponry that require multiple center of mass hits to bring a target down, when in actuality, one round from weapons like these, even in an extremity rather than in the center of mass, is sufficient to kill or incapacitate a person?

This is my biggest complaint about current FPS games, which gives rise to the bunny hopping run and gun scenarios rather than realistic combat tactics.

Ethan Verrall
profile image
There are FPS games that have tried the more realistic approach (the Rainbow Six series comes to mind, but there are a couple others), but the problem is, generally the more realistic you go in terms of actual health and guns, the less "fun" the game becomes.

Luis Guimaraes
profile image
CS is an exemple of relatively good weapon balancing, also UT is excelent in the situations thing.

Blake Nicholas
profile image
Problem with rainbow six is they give you too many grenades to start out with that are 1 hit kills so about half the players die from grenades each match.

As for CS, that is the best example of balanced guns. AK47 is king once you learn how to use it, but a noob that picks it up can miss someone that is 3 feet away from them. M4 is usually better than the AK47 in mid to close quarters unless the AK47 user is a pro. MP5 is a headshot machine for a rusher at close quarters, and is viable at mid to far range, but not advised. The TMP/Mac10 is a beast in close quarters in the hands of a good player. Often times given the same skill level the right gun wins for the range used. The SMGs usually win close quarters even against the AK47 while the rifles will always win at far distances (if the SMG user is dumb enough to even try to fight someone like that). Those guns I mentioned are all pretty balanced, but then comes the useless guns like the UMP and scout (due to existence of awp). Overall though I feel the guns in CS had a lot more personality than many shooters today. For instance most of the time in shooting games today as long as it's an automatic rifle it does the job just as good as anything, making all the other guns unnecessary unless they offer some extra functionality (sniper, or secondary effect as is the case in games like Resistance).

John Mawhorter
profile image
CS actually has terrible weapons balancing as loads of the guns in the game are utterly useless, but in terms of the guns people actually use (Deagle, M4/AK, AWP, P90, Shotguns, MP5) they are all very balanced for their roles/cost. The perfect balance in CS is rather accidental actually and I think would be difficult to recreate intentionally, but we can only hope to try. The reason the guns in the game are so good is they all have different recoil patterns which have to be mastered individually. A lot of modern shooters have more straightforward recoil patterns for all of the guns in the sense that switching from one gun to another doesn't change things very much.

John Mawhorter
profile image
I'd like to add that I agree with your general design aims here and it's nice that you have provided solid reasons for the choices you're making. Looking forward to the next article!

Ivan Kanev
profile image
nice start, looking forward to the next article too :)

Martin Nerurkar
profile image
The issue I have with realistic weapon and damage models (ie one shot to body is likely to kill, or at least incapacitate you) is the high degree of frustration this causes. You get hit by a random stray bullet and you die. This high lethality doesn't leave you any time to react and feel like you have a chance. Often you die without even knowing who killed you. These deaths are very frustrating.

Even players of regular FPSes where the sniper-rifle can one-shot-kill someone can understand this. You die and you had no chance to retalitate. It's alright if it happens only rarely but if it is a common occurence, then that just ends up bugging the hell out of me.

Jakob Berglund Rogert
profile image
"but I personally think it limits my choices as a player and takes away room for interesting decisions" - on the other hand, interesting decisions are born out of limitations of resources.

And regarding weapon realism - I think the industry has been to keen on following the (practical in that it's "tried and true") certain form of first-person-shooter abstraction of gunfights, brought on since games like Quake. Someone slightly creative could work out different abstractions and game systems, creating new dynamics or game procedures. For example cover-heavy weapon-based conflict systems and traditional wild-west gunfights have yet to see a bright and awesome real-world implementation (unless I'm missing a significant title here).

Daniel Helbig
profile image
@all
Thanks a lot for the comments. Highly appreciate that you are interested in the subject.

@the realism debate

I personally think that the grade of realism depends on two factors. First the setting. The scenario your game takes place defines in which borders you can create your weapons and how they must work. A realistic setting will not allow that your enemies will take a lot of bullets but it will also prohibit that you're weapons have special abilities. The difference between weapons will not be strong because they have to operate within tight rules set by your scenario. Otherwise you will destroy the immersion. The other factor is you're target group. The higher the grade of realism the more skilled your players need to be to actually handle the weapons. This doesn't mean that a realistic approch is less fun, it just means that less players will be able to solve your challenges. A multiplayer game based on competiton can have a more realistic appraoch because competition is all about personal skills. But a singleplayer game where you aim at a high FLOW experience for the player should have a skill level which suits there skills so they are not too frustrated or bored.

@Martin

I agree with you but I think you also have to destinguish between realism affecting the behavior of enemies or the player. It is totally ok to be able to kill an enemy with one precise shoot. But if they con do the same thing to you it is highly frustrating. If a player has no information to foresee a failure he had never the chance to make the right decision. The problem begins when you design for a multiplayer mode because than you want to avoid that players can die without a warning without taking away this ability for skilled players. I think the only chance is to have a fair match-making system.

@Luis Guimarães B.N. and John Mawhorter

I agree in regards of UT which has very different weapons where each one is the most effective in certain situations but I tend to agree with John Mawhorter on CS. Im my memories CS weapons were balanced between the different types of weapons but within these categories most weapons are dominated and are not used by the players.

@Jakob Berglund Rogert
The problem is when the limitiation is so strict that the game forces you to use a weapon so that you have less interesting decisions. Most games have such strict limitations because their weapon design features lot of dominant weapons which are better than the rest. Resident Evil 5 is a perfect example for this. Most weapons are clearly dominated by another weapon but you still will use them because you want to save ammunition for a situation later in the game which maybe harder than the current one. You cannot use the weapon which would be best for the situation because you don't have enough information and you fear that if you use this weapon now you will struggle later. I am always frustrated at the end of such a game because I end up with lot of health items, ammunition, grenades and whatever which I could have used in earlier situations but saved for the credits. I know you can take weapons into the next session but I think you cannot design a game with the premise that the player will play it twice.

Daniel Helbig
profile image
PS: I also gave some comments on the realism issue in the second part of the series.

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DanielHelbig/20090705/2233/Weapon_Balancing_based
_on_Gameplay_Situations_Part_two.php

Martin Nerurkar
profile image
I was thinking more in terms of multiplayer. It's true what you say that it's empowering and cool when enemies die easily but the player is much more hardy - for example he has a regenerating health bar, which his enemies don't. I believe a lot of modern "realistic" shooters (Rainbow Six Vegas springs to mind as a prominent example) use this system.

Martin Nerurkar
profile image
Also in regards to CounterStrike, there is the balancing factor of Money. Even the worse weapons see some use, at least in the beginning of the round. Also the sole existence of money REQUIRES the game to be different. If more expensive weapons weren't better, they'd be broken and wouldn't be bought. So an imbalance of weapons is built right into the game.

Luis Guimaraes
profile image
Ya the "regeneration" time is something to prevent the player from restarting the level over and over, since most games draws and entity avatar that can't just be replaced by another nameless character. So the player cannot die and come back for more.


none
 
Comment:
 




 
UBM Techweb
Game Network
Game Developers Conference | GDC Europe | GDC Online | GDC China | Gamasutra | Game Developer Magazine | Game Advertising Online
Game Career Guide | Independent Games Festival | Indie Royale | IndieGames

Other UBM TechWeb Networks
Business Technology | Business Technology Events | Telecommunications & Communications Providers

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Contact Us | Copyright © UBM TechWeb, All Rights Reserved.