Role Persistence
KuBaN
Join Date: 2002-11-16 Member: 8979Members, Constellation
Join Date: 2002-11-16 Member: 8979Members, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">Equipment and Role Costs and Upkeeps</div>I was wondering, assuming the devs will allow Marines to pick up their own dropped equipment (or at least weapon), is there any comparable mechanic for the Aliens? This led to an idea: What if role changes were a little more permanent?
<ul><li> Purchasing Evolutions/Equipment costs fewer P.Res, but each time you die and respawn you incur an upkeep cost to retain the equipment.</li><li> This "loadout" is kept until you alter it or do not have enough resources to afford a respawn (then your loadout defaults back to vanilla Marine/Skulk).</li><li> Weapon Mods (Nerve Gas) and Form Evolutions (Carapace) remain single-spawn purchases.</li></ul>
FOR EXAMPLE (I do not necessarily endorse these values!):
<!--c1--><div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><!--ec1-->Tech Cost Upkeep Lifeform Cost Upkeep
Rifle 0 1 Skulk 0 1
Shotgun 15 10 Gorge 7 3
G.Launch 20 10 Lerk 15 15
Flamethrow 20 10 Fade 30 20
Minigun 25 5 Onos 50 25
Jetpack 10 15
Exosuit 10 5<!--c2--></div><!--ec2-->
+ Players can evolve/purchase sooner at the cost of fewer respawns, or later at the risk of being a weaker lifeform for a longer period. This will create tense meta-games of "evolutionary chicken" between players/squads fighting over the same territory over a number of respawns. Whoever evolves/upgrades first has the momentary advantage, but also starts draining resources sooner. If your tactics aren't working, do you continue with your loadout until you run out of resources, or do you admit defeat, count your losses, and try something else?
+ Less punishment for new/starting players, with more appropriate risk/reward ratios for higher-tier purchases
+ Reliability of role information over longer periods of time lets you more easily analyze and adapt to player strategies/skills.
+ Provides opportunities for players to counter-pick their roles, and for counter-picked players to counter-pick, etc., etc.
+ Higher-tier investments become more valuable. Cheaper units remain more expendable.
+ Allows for easier balancing (if Shotguns ARE in fact OP, increasing their Upkeep allows them to keep the punch they pack, but limits the number of times a player can respawn with one)
<ul><li> Purchasing Evolutions/Equipment costs fewer P.Res, but each time you die and respawn you incur an upkeep cost to retain the equipment.</li><li> This "loadout" is kept until you alter it or do not have enough resources to afford a respawn (then your loadout defaults back to vanilla Marine/Skulk).</li><li> Weapon Mods (Nerve Gas) and Form Evolutions (Carapace) remain single-spawn purchases.</li></ul>
FOR EXAMPLE (I do not necessarily endorse these values!):
<!--c1--><div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><!--ec1-->Tech Cost Upkeep Lifeform Cost Upkeep
Rifle 0 1 Skulk 0 1
Shotgun 15 10 Gorge 7 3
G.Launch 20 10 Lerk 15 15
Flamethrow 20 10 Fade 30 20
Minigun 25 5 Onos 50 25
Jetpack 10 15
Exosuit 10 5<!--c2--></div><!--ec2-->
+ Players can evolve/purchase sooner at the cost of fewer respawns, or later at the risk of being a weaker lifeform for a longer period. This will create tense meta-games of "evolutionary chicken" between players/squads fighting over the same territory over a number of respawns. Whoever evolves/upgrades first has the momentary advantage, but also starts draining resources sooner. If your tactics aren't working, do you continue with your loadout until you run out of resources, or do you admit defeat, count your losses, and try something else?
+ Less punishment for new/starting players, with more appropriate risk/reward ratios for higher-tier purchases
+ Reliability of role information over longer periods of time lets you more easily analyze and adapt to player strategies/skills.
+ Provides opportunities for players to counter-pick their roles, and for counter-picked players to counter-pick, etc., etc.
+ Higher-tier investments become more valuable. Cheaper units remain more expendable.
+ Allows for easier balancing (if Shotguns ARE in fact OP, increasing their Upkeep allows them to keep the punch they pack, but limits the number of times a player can respawn with one)
Comments
that's the problem.
Keeping the free default weapon kit would be better for players who like to change their kit more often.
sure, you changed the costs... but that's still a problem nonetheless.
Allow marines to buy equipment (and aliens to choose skulk upgrades) while waiting to re-spawn.
that's the problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The upkeep would not be deducted until a Marine went to an Armory and attempted to purchase the weapon again. The point is to encourage repeated use of the same weapon to make matchups more predictable while also limiting the number of higher-tier weapons on the field.
<!--quoteo(post=1842239:date=Apr 24 2011, 10:29 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Apr 24 2011, 10:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1842239"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think this idea would work better if it increased the cost of the weapon/alien rather than deducted an upkeep. For example, the PRes cost of a shotgun would go up 10 PRes for every player currently with a shotgun. That way, if you wanted to be the third player with a shotgun on the team, you need to pay 35 PRes rather than 15. It would even out weapon/alien classes a bit more.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Have to agree with you here, you might be on to something...
The implementation would need to be clear, though, otherwise new players will get confused about the basic cost of each weapon/alien class. For example, on the armory/evolve screen, I'd put in a 3 column space next to each weapon/alien class that contains
Col 1: Base cost
Col 2: Current additional (upkeep) cost
Col 3: Total cost to purchase
So, following with my shotgun example, it would be
Columns: Col 1 - Col 2 - Col 3
Cost: 15 - +20 - 35
I like this. One of the biggest problems in NS2 is every marine can get shotguns pretty much every spawn. In NS1 shotguns/HMG were rare unless the marines were dominating. This little change would balance it out a bit more.
The only way marines can bypass these options to allow more weapons, and quicker access to weapons, force the commander to drop weapons.
It will force the commander to spend HIS res.
marines depend more on the armory now than the actual commander, pretty big issue. Either applying a limit on certain weapons per team or returning the armory to most basic form, any weapons above tier 2 can only be gotten from the commander. I like to see the commander larger role in supplying his marines.
Col 1: Base cost
Col 2: Current additional (upkeep) cost
Col 3: Total cost to purchase
So, following with my shotgun example, it would be
Columns: Col 1 - Col 2 - Col 3
Cost: 15 - +20 - 35<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Having more than 2 players with a shotgun would be prohibitively expensive. If NS2 ever ends up with "massive" 16v16 matches... shotgun rush? Nope, you're f***ed.
One way to achieve what KuBaN is proposing ("role" persistence) is to simply lower the cost of buying the last-bought weapon. A "Regular Customer discount", if you will.
You could still do a shotgun rush, it just would be really expensive. The point is to encourage a greater distribution of better weapons/alien classes. Also, the values can be changed to scale better with playercount, the above was just an example.
One minute your a HA train raping alien hives, when 5 onos rape you. Upon respawn you all get given Jetpack HMGs and rush another hive, the aliens evolve to lerks and fades to take you down.
Then low on res you smash out a bunch of shotguns and run to the last hive, where the still alive fades and lerks try and beast you again!
If we lowered costs here, and ballsed costs there it would just either totally ruin this, or make games feel very linear and stale.
I think we should just keep it how it is, the aliens have ways of defending every tactic and vice versa, lets not try to gimp them from trying any tactic or defending from any tactic.
I suppose your right with regards to the op. My suggestion is to change it into a mechanism that promotes role diversity.
But I'm saying that if you did want more role persistence, lowering the cost for the last-used weapon would, very easily, encourage it.
So, simply put:
More role persistence: Lower the cost of the last-used weapon; requires some code.
More role diversity: Flatten the costs of all equipment: make the costs more similar and maybe lower; only requires number-tweaking.
Marine weapons cost all the same or relatively the same flat rate and the upkeep is the expensive part after the first time use it'd increase in cost each time and lower each time the weapon isn't bought either over a set time period or per life.. Doesn't make much real-life sense, but if you wanted weapon diversity this would probably force it a bit, it'd also reward not dying so often to keep your role cheap.
I suppose the same or similar could be done to Kharaa, but I'm not sure that would go as well since they work differently.
Marine weapons cost all the same or relatively the same flat rate and the upkeep is the expensive part after the first time use it'd increase in cost each time and lower each time the weapon isn't bought either over a set time period or per life.. Doesn't make much real-life sense, but if you wanted weapon diversity this would probably force it a bit, it'd also reward not dying so often to keep your role cheap.
I suppose the same or similar could be done to Kharaa, but I'm not sure that would go as well since they work differently.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or how about this, and if I'm repeating someones idea I apologize, all lifeforms/personal marine purchases start at a flat or very similar cost. The more that weapon/upgrade or lifeform is bought the more expensive it gets for anyone new who wants to buy it. The caveat is if you already purchased the weapon, it will cost the same for you as long as you stay with the weapon. This way it encourages both role diversity and role persistence while still allowing people to switch things up. When someone changes weapons the cost drops for the following people in that same weapon bracket. This encourages people to stay in the same weapon bracket in the hopes of the price dropping for them.
The trick would be implementing it so it is extremely clear how it works for new players.
Maybe use a multiplier. So something like very every person who buys the weapon it cost 20%(.2) more expensive for the next person.
So shotgun cost if three people have have it will be 60% more expensive. (15 * 1.6 = 24)
Even though its my own personal cost and res which this goes under I evolve to lerk for the team. Even though I'm a way better fade.
Perhaps this is all it needs from marines, rather than keeping your personal res to yourself, just a quick buzz on the microphone to the commander and ask him based on what he/she can see what weapon would they like me to use?
Thing with marines is shotguns early on especially are often pure beasts anyway, most skulks will drop to one shot, so being a solo shotgunner will win out and the decision is simple. I mean this doesn't help at all given what you guys are talking about, but leaving it upto a bit of teamwork is much simpler to program for :)
I think an alien should be able to destroy a weapon after a kill to prevent it from being retrieved. Maybe get a point, or not.
This right here is one of the biggest and most straight forward way of solving this problem. If the commander had some sort of mechanism to flag what weapons he wants marines to have on the field I think we would see more role diversity and persistence. It would also connect the commander more directly to the soldiers on the field. My answer to this was to allow the commander to literally choke the amount of weapons a armory can dispense and have out at once.
A three option system for the marine commander was an idea I mentioned before:
The first option, the commander can hard limit the armory to allow only two flame throwers on the field at once, and so on.
the second option, the commander can soft limit the armory so it only shows recommended weapon load outs, but doesn't force marines to buy certain weapons.
the third option is an open armory in which marines can buy whatever they want without any guidance what so ever.