Resource Model changes

ZycaR · July 2011

there was an 6 page thread about current resource model .. here is my 2Â¢ ....

Personal Resources:
(coming into personal pool ... per player)

The "PRes" will be used only in FPS part of game to buy stuff like weapons.

Team Resources:
(coming into shared pool ... per side: marine or alien)

The "TRes" will be used by commander/commanders to build stuff; upgrades; ARCs.

Energy:
(always regenerating in CC / hive ... per tech point)

The "Energy" will be used by commander to drop:
- med packs; ammo; MACs, <strike>ARCs</strike>, ... on marine side
- drifters; pustules (infestation), ... on alien side

The commander can use only energy from it's own com chair / hive.
This will like Charlie: >> more commanders == more energy to spend <<<

The last, but not least thinking:
- Hydras need to expire after time, the Hive commander can re-seed them before they die (and spend some TRes)
- The turrets will also go out of bullets .. and can be re-loaded by commander (also spend TRes)

... this re-seed / re-load mechanic is great think to draw off some TRes from pool in later games.
i.e. the aliens cower 4/5 of map and have hydras everywhere ... then commander need to re-seed each of them after some time.
the more hydras / turrets the team have .. the more TRes will be spend (and they will not stock as now)

How to re-seed / re-load ? commander must click on that "unit/building" and in menu will have button to do this action.
This can be also re-searchable (maybe in crag?)

NOTE: Commander will not spend it's own "PRes" while he/she is in comm chair/hive.
NOTE2: ARCs are attack unit (and need to be classified as building), then they will cost "TRes"

Taxen0 · July 2011

pretty much all of this has been covered in that thread.

twiliteblue · July 2011

I'm not a fan of the temporary hydra idea.

There needs to be limits on the number of non-player units (Whips, MACs, ARCs, Hydras, even Drifters). Otherwise the players have to spend too much time fighting AI units rather than other players (imagine 20 ARCs on the Marine side...).

Sewlek · July 2011

you also have to keep in mind of team size scaling. in a 16vs16 there can be much mor ehydras, simply because more marines means faster hydra kills. if 10 hydras are placed in a 4vs4 then there should be allowed 40 hydras in 16vs16 (in case you make ai limitations)

twiliteblue · July 2011

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Schimmel @ Jul 1 2011, 07:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1857507"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'>You also have to keep in mind of team size scaling. In a 16vs16 there can be much more Hydras, simply because more marines means faster Hydra kills. If 10 Hydras are placed in a 4vs4 then there should be allowed 40 Hydras in 16vs16 (in case you make AI limitations)</div>
I guess mobile AI (MAC, ARC, Whip) controlled units should be treated differently from stationary defense (Sentry, Hydra). My idea original concerned limiting number of ARCs and MACs based on number of players, which I feel would cause imbalances especially in pub games. Stationary defense should be limited per area, as they cannot relocate.

In regard to structures having too little health large games, but are too tough in smaller games, one solution would be to dynamically scale their health, based on the team size. However, rather than changing the health of every structure on the map each time a player joins/leaves the game (which could be buggy, as well as inefficient), player vs structure damage can be calculated via a function, which reduces damage structures take as more players join the server. This will allow dynamic effective health scaling without significant changes to strategic balance, as static defense cost Team Resources, which does not scale based on team size.

For example, when there are less than 12 players on a server (6v6), players deal 100% damage against structures. But when the game grows to become a 16v16, players would gradually deal reduced damage against structures.

smokingman · July 2011

The ARC could be a PRes item that any marine, including the comm, could purchase from the robo factory. They would still be a commander controlled asset. This might lead to more interesting late game scenarios, where marine players would have a choice of ARC, exo or jetpack to spend their hard earned res.

OutlawDr · July 2011

Here is what I am starting to think would be best for NS2.

....But first we need to acknowledge that there are some things that are not affected by team size. Whether its 6v6 or 16v16 it doesn't matter. Perfect example are extractors/harvesters. Their constructions is dictated by the map and not by team size.
Then there are some things that are affected by team size. Medpacks are the perfect example for this. The more players, the more medpacks you will need.

Instead of 'Pres is for players, Tres is for commander'...this is how I would make it if I were DevKing:
Tres is for items that are not affected by the number of players.
Pres is for items that are affected by the number of players.
Just drop energy as a major resource.

Tres is dependent on extractors/harvesters number, and is not affected by team size.
Pres is dependent on player number, and scales with team size (call it player resource or something if you are hung up on the name).

Then the trick is to see what is and isn't affected by team size and price accordingly. I am starting to realize the problem with the res model is that certain things are not priced according to the res type they should be priced as, and commander pres is not scaling properly due to various issues.

OutlawDr · July 2011

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (twiliteblue @ Jul 1 2011, 10:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1857519"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'>In regard to structures having too little health large games, but are too tough in smaller games, one solution would be to dynamically scale their health, based on the team size. However, rather than changing the health of every structure on the map each time a player joins/leaves the game (which could be buggy, as well as inefficient), player vs structure damage can be calculated via a function, which reduces damage structures take as more players join the server. This will allow dynamic effective health scaling without significant changes to strategic balance, as static defense cost Team Resources, which does not scale based on team size.

For example, when there are less than 12 players on a server (6v6), players deal 100% damage against structures. But when the game grows to become a 16v16, players would gradually deal reduced damage against structures.</div>

This could be a big issue with scaling and not one that an improved res model can solve. However the way I see it with more players there are also more defenders protecting and repairing structures...at least alien side with gorge healspray, which is why marines really need welders. It might not scale perfectly, but it scales well enough without needing to implement special game rules.

Sewlek · July 2011

im going to adjust the resource model for my <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=114263" target="_blank">balance mod</a>, someone has any wishes / ideas?
I was thinking about making a clear distinction between T.res and P.res:

everything a comm does that a player cannot buy / achieve costs T.res (or energy). the comm can spend his P.res only on
things a ground player could buy aswell (life-forms, weapons, equipment)

edit: ah, and therefor rfk should give T.res and P.res

GreatOmnipotentDictator · July 2011

I'm partial to a system where all the res is controlled by the commander (at least, on the marine side). However, if you want to split up the ressources into Tres/Pres, you should to find an alternative for players to spend Pres on other than weapons/evolutions. Secondly, you need to find a way of letting the commander side of things also scale with the number of players, so that support abilities are not overpowered in small games and useless in large ones. There are 2 ways that I see of accomplishing this: either let Tres scale (with a "bottleneck" resource, maybe), or make the abilities scale by themselves (such as a AoE healing rather than a medkit).

Sewlek · July 2011

i will change the resource model for version 1.5 of my mod to the following:

since alien comms now have a possibility to dump their personal res, I'm fine with them :) life-form eggs cost personal res, "skulk" eggs (for re-spawning only) cost team res, everything else costs energy or team res (as before)

marine commanders will spend team res for everything, except of weapons and equipment (jetpack, exosuit) will cost personal res.

I will change RFK so it will add team res along with personal res. I think that fixes the scaling problem of dropable eggs, medpacks, ammopacks, catpacks (not in the game yet), and it will speed up games a little bit (an obvious dominant team would dominate just more). I liked that mechanic in ns1 and there it fixed the medpack problem.

since you have as a commander more resources available, you are able to place more structures / eggs / medpacks. its up to the comm to decide if he wants to spam defense structures.

To prevent stalemates (read: prevent marines bunkering up, since they can afford refilling sentries with ammo with RFK) I consider adding the following mechanic:

command chairs will have a "refill sentry" ability, which costs energy. you click that ability, then click on the sentry you want to refill. if you have too many sentries, you cannot maintain them with 1 command chair only, since you would run out of energy. this would even promote building command chairs for the marines, I like this side-effect.

Stop reading here if you are not interested in more in-depth informations :)

This will not prevent marines to simply recycle out-of-ammo-sentries and build new sentries, but this can be addressed by reducing the resource gain from recycled sentries. So overall, the marines should not be able to build -> recycle -> build -> recycle etc.... RFK SHOULD balance that out.

Meaning: You should not be able to maintain your end game bunker by RFK, or even let it grow bigger. if the sentries cost now 15 res, and you get back 2 res, that leaves you with addition 13 res required to build a new sentry. now you get some small amount of res from your extractor, and some amount from rfk(i would say all together 20 res per minute). If a sentry would be out of ammo after 20 seconds, you would not be able to apply the "recycle -> build -> recycle" strategy, leaving you with a constant drain of energy from your command chair and with a lack of 19 res required per minute to maintain or grow your "bunker".

now, the command chair can refill a sentry once per two minutes, that would leave us with 13.5 res per minute required to grow your bunker. that could possibly be achieved by rfk luck, but well, if the aliens are too stupid and "feeding" the marines, its their own fault :)


edit: After thinking through this system a few times, I decided that "reloading" a sentry should require interaction with a marine / MAC on the ground. The commander can stock up 1 additional round to a sentry, after the sentry fired all bullets from the loaded round, it will switch to an "unbuilt" state rather than inactive (90% built for example). if the sentry has stocked up ammo, mac or marines will be able to "build" the sentry ("unbuild state" will not be triggered if no stocked up ammo is present). That increases little bit more Marine / Commander interactions and you no longer have to "babysit" your sentries. you simply can stock up additional ammo when you have time to do so and you see the sentry is soon out of ammo.

Resource Model changes

Comments