RFK idea.

PapayasPapayas Join Date: 2010-07-01 Member: 72219Members
I was playing NS2 and the RFK system doesn't seem to be that good. I get 1-3 res and it is random. That shouldn't be the case.

<u>So my idea is:
</u>
Killing a Tier 1 unit gives you 1 res (Skulk, lerk, rifle marine etc)

Killing a Tier 2 unit gives you 2 res (Fade, GL, Flamer marine etc)

Killing a Tier 3 unti gives you 3 res (Onos, E.X.O. Jetpack(?), etc)


And it will be constant and not random anymore.

Comments

  • subshadowsubshadow Join Date: 2003-04-21 Member: 15710Members
    This will also make fades appear a bit later in the game + it's more logical.

    I like it.
  • PapayasPapayas Join Date: 2010-07-01 Member: 72219Members
    edited June 2011
    and everything will also remain at the same speed.

    because as you tier up the things to buy will cost more but you will also get more res if the opposite team are doing as well as you.

    3 res for tier 3 will be kind of useless unless you keep on dying and wasting your res. killing tier 3 would be used more to re-buy your items than to tier up.
  • OutlawDrOutlawDr Join Date: 2009-06-21 Member: 67887Members
    edited June 2011
    I was just thinking of making a similar thread (plus that we should get res for doing other things as well). Only thing I would change is move Gorge (with upgrades) and Lerk to tier 2, Fade with upgrades to to tier 3.

    Basically anything that cost more than 10 pres is "tier 2" and gives +2. Anything that cost more than 50 pres is "tier 3" and gives +3.

    I would also add giving +0 pres for killing a newly spawned player. Basically spawning gives players a 15 sec rfk grace period buff. This would prevent farming newly spawned players that don't even have a chance to respond (not a huge problem....but you really shouldn't get points for that). More importantly, it also allows defending players to aggressively push attackers out of a base...without letting the other side farm points. Upgraded or buying anything immediately cancels the grace period. This would allow for comebacks, since attackers drain their pres conducting the assault, while defenders can keep banking it for a counter attack.
  • xVisionsxVisions Join Date: 2009-07-03 Member: 68021Members
    The point system seems shoty as well at this point. I don't get why sometimes when you build you get points.. sometimes you don't. Assist points as well i think would be desired for kills/structure kills/building. No resource points for assists though unless its a onos or heavy marine or something
  • KuBaNKuBaN Join Date: 2002-11-16 Member: 8979Members, Constellation
    <!--quoteo(post=1852520:date=Jun 14 2011, 02:40 AM:name=Papayas)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Papayas @ Jun 14 2011, 02:40 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1852520"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I was playing NS2 and the RFK system doesn't seem to be that good. I get 1-3 res and it is random. That shouldn't be the case.

    <u>So my idea is:
    </u>
    Killing a Tier 1 unit gives you 1 res (Skulk, lerk, rifle marine etc)

    Killing a Tier 2 unit gives you 2 res (Fade, GL, Flamer marine etc)

    Killing a Tier 3 unti gives you 3 res (Onos, E.X.O. Jetpack(?), etc)


    And it will be constant and not random anymore.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    This hardly scales properly with the buy cost of these units or the difficulty to kill one. Better off to use their assigned point value as some sort of multiplier (obviously with a ratio less than 1 since the weakest unit is 5 points). This doesn't take into account the weapon a Marine has on him, but then I don't think it should.

    Also, no disrespect, but "the RFK system doesn't seem to be that good; it's random and that shouldn't be the case," seems like sort of a shallow argument and doesn't do much to convince anyone of that fact.
  • PapayasPapayas Join Date: 2010-07-01 Member: 72219Members
    Well, instead of having res for the weapons that the marines are carrying maybe it should be based on time. Of course it would need a little bit of adjusting but it could work.
  • OutlawDrOutlawDr Join Date: 2009-06-21 Member: 67887Members
    edited June 2011
    <!--quoteo(post=1852594:date=Jun 14 2011, 10:46 AM:name=xVisions)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xVisions @ Jun 14 2011, 10:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1852594"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The point system seems shoty as well at this point. I don't get why sometimes when you build you get points.. sometimes you don't. Assist points as well i think would be desired for kills/structure kills/building. No resource points for assists though unless its a onos or heavy marine or something<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    I believe you get points for building if you are the player that contributed the most. Building assists don't get points.

    +1 pres for assisting to kill a Onos or Exo is an interesting idea. It would fit in with the comeback incentives defenders should get. Everyone gets points for killing one of these ultimate game finishers, but they don't get points for killing freshly spawned players. I like it.

    Marines should receive +1 res for building new structures. Doesn't matter if they were the top contributor or assisted with only 1%. This is to reward defenders and commander 'helpers'. I think its perfectly fine if 7 marines at the start of the game stick around for 30secs to help build the IP, armory, plus one other building... and then all receiving +3 pres for the their trouble. The drawback is that they are not scouting and preventing alien expansions (and getting kills). It can't be abused, since its limited by Tres. It would be horribly inefficient for a commander to spend Tres on building for the purpose of just to giving his players some extra pres. It promotes marines to stick together and work together. Its a win-win.

    The opposite should be true for aliens. Aliens receive +1 pres for helping to destroy a marine structure (maybe +2 for larger structures). Doesn't matter if they were the top damage dealer or assisted with only 1% damage. It promotes aliens to be more aggressive than marines, but also to stick together. On the flip side marines should receive pres anytime an ARC destroys an alien structure, and the marine is close by defending the arc. Marines escorting an ARC to an alien strong point and defending it is the ultimate in Marine teamwork, and it should be rewarded.

    I just think RFK+ can be used as a carrot to encourage players to do things they should be doing, and it can be much more than just random res points for kills.
  • BacillusBacillus Join Date: 2006-11-02 Member: 58241Members
    edited June 2011
    Unless there's some assist system I can't see any point in rewarding high tier target kills. Those cost a plenty of res already, no need to further drive the dying team down. There might be some slight chance to feed one player the RFK, but I think that's getting quite luck based considering how chaotic the higher tier target kills usually are.

    The slight extra RFK for higher tiers can be used if the endgame res demand is bigger and the devs want to speed things up or so though. It all depends on how they want to build the late game, I think.

    The randomization depends on the rest of the game, I think. In optimal case the game itself allows enough variation in timings and such through build orders, stable RFK and all that and there's no need for randomization. However, if the game itself doesn't allow enough variation, slightly randomized RFK becomes an option to create some manageable variation. Whatever suits the plan, I guess.
  • OutlawDrOutlawDr Join Date: 2009-06-21 Member: 67887Members
    edited June 2011
    The best argument for 'scaled RFK' I believe is to stave off the 'rich get richer' steam roll matches. The more dominating the team is, the less res they get compared to the other team for kills.

    Sure, giving +2 pres for killing SG, FT or GL wielding marine may not be percisely scaled... but current RFK doesn't take anything into account. A fade can get +3 for killing a marine as pops from an IP.

    Im not sure how scaled RFK would further drive down a dying team. A dying team is probably not going to have many high tier units anyway compared to the winning team. Plus high tier units seem like they are geared for assaulting and ending sieges, and not necessarily for defending them. End result is that the dominating team will get less res per kill, compared to the dying team.

    <!--quoteo(post=1852607:date=Jun 14 2011, 11:30 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Jun 14 2011, 11:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1852607"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The slight extra RFK for higher tiers can be used if the endgame res demand is bigger and the devs want to speed things up or so though. It all depends on how they want to build the late game, I think.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    This is true.
    But it needs to be said that there is a difference between a boring drawn out stalemates, and long close games. Stalemates are already decided games, but the players are going through the same repetitive motions ..until the "losing" team finally dies...though usually never ending (currently that is marines at final base with turret spam, while aliens send wave after wave of fades). A long close game with comebacks, would be marines trapped at their base, and the aliens assault with fades and onos. If marines lose, they lose (no turret spam to keep the game alive). If the marines win, its a huge momentum shift, and marines push the aliens back. Quick games can still happen, but we shouldn't encourage quick blowouts.

    If random RFK is needed to make the game varied, then then we have problems. It not going to appeal to the competitive players. Scaled RFK would also be casual friendly, since it mitigates complete steam rolls by hardcore players.
  • SgtHydraSgtHydra Join Date: 2007-11-29 Member: 63046Members
    There should also be an assist bonus when bringing down a fade or onos.

    Nobody's gonna one shot any of those, thus having one person take all the credit makes little sense.
  • BacillusBacillus Join Date: 2006-11-02 Member: 58241Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1852617:date=Jun 14 2011, 05:49 PM:name=OutlawDr)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (OutlawDr @ Jun 14 2011, 05:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1852617"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The best argument for 'scaled RFK' I believe is to stave off the 'rich get richer' steam roll matches. The more dominating the team is, the less res they get compared to the other team for kills.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Yeah, that's a good point. In general I don't like the idea of preventing a team from falling down too much, but it can be useful sometimes. At least for me it goes to the fine tuning and how volatile and merciless you want the game to be.

    <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If random RFK is needed to make the game varied, then then we have problems. It not going to appeal to the competitive players.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    As a competetive player I don't particularly like the idea of randomization, but then again I'm somewhat willing to let things go in NS' case if that's necessary. NS economy isn't very complex in general, so a lot of the timings were very simple and rigid when you knew how to calculate. Randomizing the timings is never the nicest thing to do, but at least it added quite a bit of extra challenge to commanding and adaptation within a game.

    It's great if they can keep the commanding challenging and rewarding without resorting to such trickery. However I think given the history of random RFK in NS1 and the necessity of finding challenges in strategy and commanding I don't see it as a completely horrific no-go as it would be in most other games. But as said: preferrably no randomization.
  • HarimauHarimau Join Date: 2007-12-24 Member: 63250Members
    <!--quoteo(post=1852598:date=Jun 15 2011, 12:01 AM:name=KuBaN)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KuBaN @ Jun 15 2011, 12:01 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1852598"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This hardly scales properly with the buy cost of these units or the difficulty to kill one. Better off to use their assigned point value as some sort of multiplier (obviously with a ratio less than 1 since the weakest unit is 5 points). This doesn't take into account the weapon a Marine has on him, but then I don't think it should.

    Also, no disrespect, but "the RFK system doesn't seem to be that good; it's random and that shouldn't be the case," seems like sort of a shallow argument and doesn't do much to convince anyone of that fact.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Well, I think the OP is a good first approximation, and maybe that's all that is necessary.
Sign In or Register to comment.