Survivors! Recently, we held a Q&A session with the development team to answer your questions and address your suggestions regarding balance in Crossout. Here is the second and final part of the answers.
Spelling and punctuation of the questions is preserved. We would like to add that we tried not to publish duplicate/repeat/similar questions and answers in this collection. You can see the full versions of the questions and answers on our discord server in the “QA-session” channel.
Note that the second part consists of questions and answers is from the English version of the Q&A session. Therefore, some questions and answers may overlap with the previous part.
Q: Weapons do too much damage overall, which causes armor to get destroyed too fast.
We spend time designing elaborate armor structures, but it doesn't make our vehicles last much longer. There are also items amplifying damage, such as the Catalina or the Jackie.
Reduce weapon damage. Or at least make stacking armor add bonus armor part HP depending on the % of occupied attachment points. E.g., +50% HP at 100% occupied attachment points. Which would especially benefit sloped parts - and that would add a little realism, because sloped parts are used in tanks to deflect projectiles.
A: We do not plan to reduce the average damage in the game, the current values of build survival time in battle are satisfactory for us and suitable for dynamic and fast battles. Not so long ago, we experimented with increasing the resistance parameters of structural parts, and it had almost no effect on battle time. A significant increase in durability of parts will result in hits having no visible effect on the enemy. If some combination of parts severely stands out in terms of average damage in battle, we make adjustments.
Q: I believe the lack of frequent balance changes is a problem with balance.
I'm going to keep this as short and sweet as possible. Each subpoint could be developed further, but I don't want to take up too much of your time.
Firstly, the problem presented by the infrequent balance changes we receive is how stale the game gets after over a month of playing the same sort of things. No one likes it, and you see people complaining non-stop across all forms of social media. While you could argue that you're waiting for enough data to be gathered to make more informed decisions on how to nerf something or to see if anything pops up in relevance in these metas, I would argue that after the first two weeks of any balance sweep, the meta is settled and does not change until the next patch. The next part of this problem is that players know the balance patches are infrequent enough that they simply join in playing these metas. This perpetuates the issue of staleness in the game even further, as more people are obviously going to play whatever is strongest, knowing that the amount of time this build type will be strong is long enough to recoup the initial investment and then some. As I already stated, this is a problem because it hurts build diversity. Lastly, with the current format of balance changes, it's extremely difficult to make the correct adjustments. Since they are infrequent, the changes often do one of two things: either the change is not enough and does nothing but make the build a bit weaker or changes the wrong parameter due to lack of understanding, or it completely guts a build to the point where it becomes unplayable.
I believe a good solution to all of the above problems would be to make more frequent, minor balance changes to the game. I think that every two weeks is a pretty reasonable timescale. This would be beneficial for the game for the following reasons:
More frequent changes allow for finer tuning of balance adjustments. There will be fewer instances of something being under- or over-nerfed, and if you miss the mark with the first round of changes, it's only two weeks until you address it again. These changes should almost never exceed a 5% adjustment to a couple of parameters at once, unless it's absolutely and obviously necessary. Players, knowing these changes are coming, will also think twice before jumping on meta bandwagons and may instead choose something they are good at and enjoy playing, compensating for their build being weaker with the additional proficiency they gain from playing their build more frequently than others. This would further build diversity. I would love to go more in-depth with everything, but message character limits are preventing me from doing so. However, I look forward to your reply and thoughts on this. This developer question format is great for the longevity and health of the game, and I appreciate you taking the time to interact with the community on these matters.
A: We have no plans to significantly increase the frequency of balance changes. Gathering statistical data, designing changes and their initial testing takes time, and can’t be done in one week.
Q: “Bricks”, ground vehicles with over 7500hp going 80km/h is a problem
It requires zero skill to move forward and bump into others. It is everywhere. We can no longer play legs and hovers as before. People are leaving because of them “bricks” being everywhere.
Making a change to speed depending on the weight of vehicles (for every 5000kg, -5 km/h) or unlock the limit cap of hover speed AND make legs unable to be pushed around (with more power). What do you guys think and do you have any plans to adress this issue?
A: We are aware of the problem of speed inflation, which is exacerbated as new parts and mechanics are added to the game. We have plans in place to comprehensively rework both base speeds and their bonuses from various sources. Don’t expect these changes in the next few updates, we are planning them for next year.
Q: Grizzly perk nerf will make perk NEVER load in "some games"
It is big problem, because many enemies like 3x Firebug will hit and kill cabin in 6 seconds directly shooting so Grizzly perk will NEVER load. (at max 1 time lucky if avoid cabin hits)
Similary many weapons, when vehicle is heat-up ,will be able kill that vehicle shooting just cabin before even Grizzly perk load. (example Aurora-machinegun) As example some weapons like Devourer Will make FULL shot at cabin 3000+ damage(more with jackie + mars/cata) and GRIZZLY will NOT load and decrease charge before next Devourer shot. This means Devourer can KILL any 6000 or 7000 HP vehicles shoting cabin with 2 bursts and GRIZZLY will NEVER LOAD Nerfing from 10 to 5 sec to decrease charge is ALMOST FINE because no cabin-hits only, but its too short, 7 seconds would be compromise. Example is devourer reload or any enemy slower shooting weapons that Grizzly will never load perk. Nerfing from 2 to 3 charges is FINE because no cabin-hits only Nerfing from 1 sec delay to 3 sec delay is BAD and it will kill Grizzly co-driver perk. Buff by hitting vehicle instead cabin is keeping other changes balanced, but this 3 sec delay is too long. I understand that before it was working similar, by hitting any vehicle parts, not cabin, but it still its not like Grizzly was too strong. ps. Clan War Lategame wheel Bricks have 8000/9000 HP due ultra-low-wheel-mass-high-tonnage..., but SLOW Spiders have just 6000/7000 HP this change make Spiders even more weaker. Legs need buffs like grinders Problem is also Traction of wheels, they do not need many wheels for tonnage and big traction/push
Keep all other changes/nerfs to Grizzly, but make 1 or 2 sec delay, instead 3 sec delay, also instead 5 seconds, make 7 seconds for perk-decrease cooldown.
delay is too big as 3 seconds, it need to be 1 or 2 second per charge.
A: “Grizzly” changes are aimed at weakening the so-called “bricks”, which repeatedly activate its perk due to the front location of the cabin. At the same time, the co-driver will become more useful on hovers and mechanical legs, because the cabin is hidden behind parts on such builds.
Q: Question: will there be more anti-air weapons/ hardwares?
Why: Previously the whole combat mechanic and game balance are based on ground battles. Helicopters are, let's say, totally out of the framework. They can attack from the above and can be really nimble. Although AA starfall and many other necessary weapon balances have been introduced to the game, there are still not enough ways to counter helicopters. I like the idea of air battle. It is an innovation but I really don't want it to be wasted by poor game balance.
Personal solution: I was using Nest missles a few weeks ago in the Next Step mode. It is not an effective weapon against ground builds but I found it quite effective against helicopters. I wonder whether we can remake/balance some old weapons that no one ever played, into some kind of anti-air weapons. They can be balanced by effectively counter/ distract helicotpers while not so effective when against ground builds. btw I saw today's mass testing annoucement. It is hard to say how it would affect anti-air weapons, but AA really needs a ton of ammos. (
A: There is also the “Starfall” anti-aircraft weapon, and we redesigned the aiming angles of some standard weapons upon introduction of armoured aircraft into the game. We are working on creating new types of weapons with wider aiming angles to more effectively fire at armoured aircraft. We cannot significantly change the mechanics of weapons in a single game mode, or create individual parameters just for that mode alone.
Q: Goliath today drives in 60 km/h and have a dura that lets mg's and all fast dps shoot them off, and now we even got jackie and Mars cab that boost dmg.
They do deserve more durability and we are fine with higher ps if that would come to it.
Goliath perk is also usless because the track themselfs are so big so if you put a part to them, the track is still visible and all parts attatched to goliath fall off like water applied to glue once track is shot off. PLEASE.... Do something about Goliaths!
Change perk into dura for guns atleast so we can have guns that stick up over goliath track without being degunned cuz golis drive in 60 and todays finwhale bricks or hovers zoom by and unfairly degunn. They are NOT fit for todays gameplay.
A: We will consider your suggestions for changes to “Goliath” as part of balance changes.
Q: Fin whale is destroying game balance
Fin whale is a very large part of the cause of the current (very unfun) meta. You guys nerfed shotguns because of "brick" type builds, but they just switched to other weapons. It wasn't the shotguns, it wasn't the cabins, it wasn't the wheels. It was, and still is, the fin whale engine. 50% effective weapon durability and +25% speed to heavy cabins is too much, and people are leaving the game because of it.
Remove the resistance from the perk, or massively lower the speed increase. Just do something to nerf this engine.
A: We believe that the problem with these builds is not the “Fin whale” alone, but a combination of factors (part placement, co-drivers, perks, high speed), which we are gradually fixing.
For example, the current changes aim to solve the problem you described by fixing “Buggy wheels”, co-driver “Grizzly” and reducing some speed bonuses.
Q: Fix the significant speed decrease when using legs on slopes
Greetings! I have conducted to all my abilities tests that show mechanical legs have difficulties climbing uphill.
Something that other movement parts (like hovers or wheels) don't suffer from that much. In order to clearly visualize it, I prepared a spider with 14 Bigrams and additionally, one ML that slows down vehicle to 50 km regardless of their mode. The test have been done before Bigram nerf, which made them even worse at traversing hills. Also, from what I've seen, the "speedometer" doesn't show the actual speed but rather how much speed the vehicle is "accelerating" to move (say, when going uphill with 50 km, the vehicle doesn't actually move at such speed, but once it reaches the top, assuming there's flat terrain forward, it will in fact move 50 km). Despite legs being already slower than most movement parts and having a huge hitbox making them very susceptible to damage, because of their slowdown on hills, certain maps like Fortress give unfair advantages against non-spider builds, while other movement parts don't have much difficulty climbing hills.
A: We will review this problem and, if deemed necessary, make changes to the mechanical legs climbing small slopes.
Q: Balance problem: Impeller's perk doesn't provide any benefit to coaxial rotors. I've done several tests with a timer, and it does not affect yaw at all, or at least not noticably. That includes when placed both close to and far from the center of mass.
Why it's a problem: For a part that players must pay to acquire and also that adds 430 power score, it should provide very noticable benefit when having it on your vehicle.
Solution: Increase the yaw rate bonus that the perk provides to at least double of what it currently is, but maybe more than that.
A: We will study the effect of “Impeller” on the behaviour of coaxial rotors and increase the effect if necessary.
Q: ML Legs deserve perk buff from useless one to usefull - needed balance - useless perk problem
They need buff, because this perk add nothing for this forgotten movement part. ML-200 vehicles already use HVY cabins mostly and are stable for impulse/recoil so perk is useless.
Like community already voted for suggestion for buffing their perk, they need buffs. Community already voted they need buff. Do you plan buff them by changing their perk to usefull for durability/resistance similar to Meat Grinders?
Change ML-200 perk for some resistance based one or any other good perk, also little more tonnage is needed so no need 10+ of this massive bad-mass-hp-ratio legs. (cause if loose any leg tonnage/push is too low already to fight bricks)
A: We will consider changing the perk of the “ML 200”, as well as increasing their tonnage. This may require adjustments to other parameters of these legs.
Q: Raijin balance
Raijin is being "rebalanced", not "nerfed".
This time, the "Destructor" nerf is representative, and only the obvious nerf list is confirmed. Important specifications were nerfed significantly, and there is almost no compensation.
However, Raijin's actual nerf is adding 1 energy and increasing the reload time. This is not a big nerf. Raijin's energy consumption is so low that adding 1 will barely change anything. (PS also hardly increases.) There is not much difference in the reload time if you upgrade it, and the benefit you get is a damage boost that is several times greater. This is not a nerf. To get this level of compensation, there should be a clear nerf, such as adding 2 or more energy or reducing the bullet speed. Raijin is still very unfair.
A: We have decided against implementing the damage increase and made additional changes. More details will be described in the next announcement of balance changes.
Q: Balance problem in your opinion:
I think SD-15 Vulture needs to be re-balanced.
Why do you consider it a problem?
With its current condition, I think SD-15 Vulture does not deserve to be a Legendary weapon. While Yaoguai seems to be balanced enough already, SD-15 Vulture in comparison, does not, I guess that's why it is more common to see Yaoguai in use than SD-15 Vulture. In terms of damage, it has less damage than its little brother Yaoguai. In terms of efficiency, it is less efficient than Yaoguai; while Yaoguai able to resume shooting old enemy or shoot a new enemy after it has lost track of old one, SD-15 Vulture will be lost forever; it can also be avoided if it missed the enemy and stick on environment or on friendly vehicles, while Yaoguai won't make such mistake.
What is the solution for the problem in your opinion?
There are multiple solutions for these problems, and I believe you (devs) are smart and wise enough to choose one (or more) of these solutions to be implemented. They are: a. Lower the SD-15 Vulture rarity to Special (since it is less effective than its little brother Yaoguai). b. Increase the SD-15 Vulture damage (probably 200% to 300%), ammo (200%), and reduce the reload time (to your own discretion). c. Give it a better homing AI (so it won't stuck on environment objects or friendly vehicles easily). d. Give it an ability to track explosive devices, homing in onto that, and the ability to bore through 2-5 pins of armor/parts, before it rest on the final part to do damage and explosion.
A: We believe that the efficiency of the “SD-15 Vulture” is within the medium efficiency of all AI weapons in the game, which we do not plan to increase in relation to regular weapons.
Q: Some weapons are OP.
Examples:
The Stillwind - too much damage that's not related to the perk.
The Whirlwind - the perk that adds bonus damage up to its full range, which is some 800-850 meters. It's particularly noticeable in helicopter battles, as well as Crater raids. I've been teamed with up to 3 tower vehicles that park at the edge and stay there for the entire raid. Even 1 Whirlwind or Stillwind user parking at the edge messes up the raid for those that fight close to the tower.
The Arbiter and the Equalizer - they're OP on helicopters, due to being hitscan weapons. Thank you for today's announcement on removing hitscan. But maybe the Arbiter's damage output will still be a bit too high without hitscan? I don't yet know either way.
The Cyclone seems OP.
Autocannon explosions a bit seem OP.
Solutions:
Reduce the damage of the Stillwind.
Reduce autocannon explosion damage.
Reduce the effectiveness of the range-related autocannon perks.
Make the Arbiter and the Equalizer non-hitscan. Great! And maybe examine the Arbiter's damage output?
In Crater raids, add an outer 'danger ring' with either some poisonous fog, or random artillery shelling, so AC users would stop parking outside of the crater, thus messing up the raid for others. Make the players resurrect by the tower, after the turrets and the first raiders are destroyed. Maybe these changes wouldn't apply when there's a group of 4 players with each having either 1 Whirlwind or 1 Stillwind, or 1 Storm (or 1 Rapier?) on their vehicle - obviously, all 4 of them would prefer to park outside of the crater and do the entire raid from there.
A: “Stillwind” and “Whirlwind”: these autocannons are statistically medium and do not require changes to their parameters. We will consider changing or replacing the “Stillwind” perk with a more appropriate one.
“Arbiter” and “Equalizer”: we will monitor the efficiency of these weapons after the hitscan changes are released, and make adjustments if necessary.
Q: Tracks have no space in game outside of armor for spiders
They are not used at all while there is 6 types of them
3.1. you have to kill their use as armor, so if build with strafe movement mount heavier track, it should be send to ground and disable ability to strafe (same as u tried with hovers and wheels in past) 3.2. Second you have to look at hitbox : durability ratio in game since for example Goliath is 27x7 hitbox with 1600 dura so 8dura per box while Titan is 4x4 with 810 dura so 50 dura per box thats nonsense. Such a huge hitbox with such low dura is weakness while it should be complete opposite, tracks should work like dmg spoonge and whole meta for track user should be catching hits into tracks, but its not possible with low dura tracks and low acceleration 3.3. Tracks should be top acceleration movement so ppl can play move in->shoot->reverse kind of game.
A: After the recent changes, the efficiency of the tracks has improved.
We believe that the current durability of the “Goliath” is sufficient, as it also has high resistance percentages and can be used for vehicle armouring as the main movement part, unlike the “Titan”.
Q: Balance problem: Aggressor's perk is very odd in that it requires you to drive in a straight line.
Why it's a problem: The perk does not reflect any beneficial in-game skill or good battle tactic. When a player is playing well and circling or dodging enemies, the perk resets close to zero.
Solution: The perk should be modified to something more logical, such as the perk losing charge only if forward is not being pressed. That way players are encouraged to always be driving even if that includes turning. This modification would also fit the name Aggressor very nicely. To compensate for this, the distance to one charge activation can be 50 or 75 m.
A: We consider the “Aggressor” to be an underrated cabin that requires the player to have a certain driving style and design the build properly. We have no plans to change the cabin perk at this time.
Q: missile drones and turrets need to be buffed, they are the weakest weapons in the game, bar none
i tried any way to use them to do enough damage to get enough points, and they have little impact on the battle
Increase the accuracy and flight speed of their missiles, as well as their damage, because other versions of them hardly lose their targets with machine guns, and if they do it's even worse than the lower rarity versions, and the damage is due to the fact that the damage inflicted is much lower than with other weapons.
A: We believe the efficiency of drones and turrets is within the medium efficiency of all AI weapons in the game, which we have no plans to increase in relation to regular weapons.
Q: 1) absurd damage creep
2) nearly every single item released in the past 2 years has had some sort of damage buffing feature. even with the total ehp of builds going up over the years, the average ttk of builds has been decreasing drastically. this leads to extreme balance disparities and makes weapons extremely hard to balance since damage is being amped so much even without self buffing weapons, this is extremely evident with raijin which self buffs itself twice (perk and charge) AND can support running multiple damage buffs (codriver cab and jackie).
3) every single external damage buff (non self weapon buff) needs to be drastically reduced. self buffing weapons need to have their numbers shifted around as well, especially ones that are overperforming. reduce base damage of overperforming weapons by a decent amount, ie raijin by 33%.
A: The average time it takes to destroy an enemy has remained virtually unchanged in recent years. We are lowering the efficiency of all the parts and their combinations that stand out.
For example, the “Raijin” weapon and “Jackie” module will be changed in the next update.
Q: The Adapter may be underpowered, especially in light of the upcoming balance changes to the machineguns.
The range and projectile speed may need adjusting to compete with certain machineguns, especially helicopters using the Adapter or the Equalizer. I've recently been trying to use an Adapter helicopter to counter Arbiter and Equalizer helicopters, and it's not going so great. Part of it may be due to my poor skill with the Adapter, but maybe it's also underpowered in some way(s). And When the range and accuracy of the various machineguns get increased, the Adapter should be able to compete with their improved parameters. I would at least like for it to have the same range. Currently, the Arbiter has more maximum range than the Adapter.
Increase the Adapter's maximum range to match that of the Arbiter and the Equalizer. Compare its projectile speed and accuracy with the new parameters of the machineguns, in particular the Arbiter and the Equalizer, to see if these parameters of the respective weapons are balanced.
A: We do not plan to make changes to the “Adapter”, as its efficiency is at a satisfactory level. If it decreases significantly after the balance changes are released, we will fix it.
Q: Universal modules as Omamori/Jackie and powercreeps like Mars/Raijin
Its stupid powercreep what everyone and his mother have to use
3.1. Just stop releasing universal must have things, where is legendary power unit only for plasma weapons?, where is module for shortening charge for charge based weapons like Kaiju/Assembler? 3.2. Omamori should have been module only for heavy durability items, nothing else. 3.3. Jackie should have not exist, bcs once you release "inc dmg done" everything must have that, since every weapon deals dmg (minus acari) and on top it fkup your structure design since you increase dmg done so your balance going to plummet, You dont have healers or crowdcontrolers in game who would prefer different module to increase their healing / cc ability so its stupid releasing stuff like that.
A: We try to avoid power creep and lower the efficiency of parts that stand out, including the “Raijin”, “Jackie” and “Mars” you listed.
Q: 1)I think the balance of the game is a problem now 2) 1, the high hp board makes a small car have 8000-9000 hp, while Leviathan only has 12,000 HP. 2, the official will inexplicably introduce some mechanisms, even if the majority of players are opposed (such as today's ammo limit and hitscan mechanism). 3 Developers pay little attention to player feedback, and large scale testing of the test server is almost useless, even if the test server players are against the balance but the developers will do it (such as hovers cut height) 3)The solution is: 1, all balance content should at least be tested on the test server, I am currently very annoyed by your developers' unreasonable balance and mechanic updates. 2meta weapon should be cut, raijin devourer, this weapon itself has almost no natural enemies, I do not understand you do not cut the destructor.
A: It is not reasonable to compare an armoured car and a Leviathan based on cabin durability alone. Because of the Leviathan’s firing logic, normal armoured cars need a lot of durability for their cabins, while the Leviathan’s weapons can be shot down and you don’t necessarily need to fire at its cabin. When two Leviathans are fighting, they are on equal footing.
We justify and explain all decisions and changes to balance and mechanics in our balance changes announcements, as well as review player feedback, reports from our internal balance testing department made up of volunteers with deep experience in the game, and data from our testing within the development team.
As we said in the first part of our answers to your questions, the changes to hovers have had a negligible impact on their efficiency and have not reduced their popularity among players.
Q: Some Rockets not competetive Pyre,Trombone,Nest,Hurricane
I was testing some helicopter builts with Rockets like Pyre,Trombone,Nest and hurricane. At their current State they are not competitive,especially in Next Step Arcade Mode, there are too many ways too defend Rockets like Flock,Argus,Chameleon, They can easily been shot with Mgs, Autocannons or spark. Griffon Cabin can make them not Target anymore! There is no Chance fighting against other Helicopters even a Simple Drone Helicopter can Take you out of the Game using some of the above tools.
I think they all should be upgrade with more aiming Range if Radar is gone it doesent make sense to continue and for each:
Pyre: 20 % more Agile, more durability (current 52) > around 80 , 5-10 %faster speed Trombone : more Damage around 30% Nest: Loosing focus on Enemy all the time getting blocked by Mates or Bots or else , Aiming should be much quicker ! Hurricane: 10 - 20 percent more agile These are my “recommendation” for these rockets to make them more competitive There are no other Weapons which can be defended in so many ways as Rockets so "if" they Hit they should at least do some Damage! Best Regards
A: We believe that the efficiency of the weapons you listed is within the medium efficiency of all AI weapons in the game, which we do not plan to increase in relation to regular weapons.
Q: The tsunamis perk is underwhelming
It's an incredibly unimaginative and boring perk. Standing still for a few seconds to get a free 30% damage boost? No skill, no nothing, just stop moving for some time to deal more damage. Not only that, but it isn't even that helpful, as the tsunami still feels underpowered even with it active. Overall, not a great perk, doesn't take skill and isn't very helpful.
Give it a different perk, for example, 20% more damage for each 100m of distance. This is not only a much more useful perk, but it also incentivizes people to utilize the increased projectile speed to snipe at a distance, and it rewards them for hitting difficult shots. Also, if this ends up being too strong at longer range or abused by helicopters to deal massive damage, you can add a cap to the perk, for example, +60% max damage.
A: The “Tsunami” perk has enough of an effect on the weapon's efficiency, so we have no plans to change it at this time.
This concludes the Q&A session. Thank you all very much for your questions and good luck in the battles!