Split the cluttered progression_design.md and content_design.md into
separated documents by role:
- docs/balancing/rules.md - design rules and principles (moved from
progression_design.md, which is removed)
- docs/balancing/targets.md - the chosen base numbers: run shape,
factory curve, threat ladder (achieved
values adopted), combat anchors, pacing
anchors
- docs/balancing/derived.md - current tuned state of all derived
numbers, mirroring the configs
- docs/balancing/process.md - pass order, tuning discipline learned in
arena rounds 1-5, tools, next-round
checklist
- docs/balancing/history.md - chronological record: decisions, numbers
pass, calculator bugs, arena rounds,
pacing pass
- docs/balancing/README.md - index, status, open action items (moved
from progression_design.md)
content_design.md slims back down to actual content: footprint gating,
hull grids, gating matrix (module names updated to railguns), and the
production tree structure with its fiction - numbers, anchors, arena
logs, and pacing all moved to docs/balancing/. Stale references in the
config comments updated to the new locations.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01DyCu8vwChKMbLJQ3xosYEN
Round 1 findings: concentrated fleets won all four equal-threat
cross-tier matchups flawlessly; glass destroyers beat armored; repair
escort beat raw numbers flawlessly; two stations annihilated a 3x
threat swarm through 200 m approach fire; team 1 won all three mirror
matches (possible sim bias, recorded as action item 6, plus action
item 7 for HP-margin logging).
Knob changes, deliberately few for clean attribution: concentration
tax on m/l gun DPS (railgun_m damage 17 -> 14, railgun_l 70 -> 52),
armor_plates 640 -> 1000 HP (~31 HP/threat: killing removes enemy DPS
while surviving merely delays, so HP must be cheaper than DPS), repair
25 -> 12 HP per cycle (~1 HP/s per threat: in-combat sustain removes
enemy DPS and must be priced like DPS), station range 200 -> 120. Gun
ranges untouched; if concentration still wins flawlessly in round 2,
the range ladder is the next suspect. Anchors and findings documented
in content_design.md; fitted threat values are unaffected by stat
changes, so the arena suite counts stay valid.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01DyCu8vwChKMbLJQ3xosYEN
Derive all combat stats from documented anchors (content_design.md,
'Combat stat anchors'): weapon DPS ~0.6 per threat with a mild size
discount traded for range (railgun m/l damage 17/70), hull HP at 15
per hull threat (drone 60 up to capitals 15500), armor at a 20/threat
premium (armor_plates 640 HP), repair at ~2 HP/s per threat (25 HP per
cycle), salvager range fixed to 60 m with cargo 20, and a monotone
mobility ladder (the placeholder drone was the least agile ship).
Stations anchored to 'a fresh station holds one early parity wave';
enemy level 0 matches the player station and scales per push. HQ 5000
HP. scrap_despawn_seconds 30 -> 120 so capital-sized scrap drops are
collectable.
Rewrite balancing.toml as the canonical 12-arena suite: class mirrors,
equal-threat cross-tier matchups with counts from the verified threat
values, a two-to-one decisiveness check, armored-vs-glass and
repair-escort doctrine matchups, and station assault. The carrier
arena is expected to lose until drone launching exists (hangar is dead
threat) - documented, not stat-compensated.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01DyCu8vwChKMbLJQ3xosYEN
