Combat++

24

Comments

  • KasharicKasharic Hull, England Join Date: 2013-03-27 Member: 184473Members, Forum Admins, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, NS2 Community Developer
    edited January 2018
    @Vetinari I would have thought it would be possible to factor in maintaining a certain velocity for X amount of time before the xp starts to generate to avoid this being a thing.

    @White_Wizard rather than having an RT system, maybe a king of the hill system/a capture and hold point or something, having a few per map could also potentially force more combat scenarios to occur and would further work to prevent camping in base... of course there would still be camping, thats the nature of capture and hold, the way I envision it would be that if you don't have people there the point goes neutral automatically after X amount of time.
  • IeptBarakatIeptBarakat The most difficult name to speak ingame. Join Date: 2009-07-10 Member: 68107Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Diamond, Reinforced - Shadow
    It's another snowball mechanic, but having it based on the distance from your opponents' base instead of distance traveled would be conceptually easier to explain, as theoretically you would be getting the lowest amount of xp while sitting in your base and the highest amount while sitting in your opponents' base.
  • VetinariVetinari Join Date: 2013-07-23 Member: 186325Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver
    It's another snowball mechanic, but having it based on the distance from your opponents' base instead of distance traveled would be conceptually easier to explain, as theoretically you would be getting the lowest amount of xp while sitting in your base and the highest amount while sitting in your opponents' base.

    I really like this idea, promotes aggression. You really have to make sure your maps work out for that, though.
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    @IeptBarakat That would be easier to implement as well :D
  • ScatterScatter Join Date: 2012-09-02 Member: 157341Members, Squad Five Blue
    What I was going to do with my Assault mod (but always lose interest in due to not enjoying solving coding puzzles) was turn it into something between combat and NS2 and I think it might work for your mod instead. Effectively I wanted to create a game mode that was NS2 simplified and without commanders, but still felt like ns2 in its mechanics and economy.

    *Ditch XP and have a pres economy
    *Pres gained from capturable (stand near, capture) RTs and from kills

    Marines
    *Weapon and armour upgrades purchasable for Pres and are permanent (much like how the commander researches them permanently with Tres)
    *Weapons and equipment are reseached/unlocked for Pres and remain permanently unlocked
    *Weapons and equipment are purchased for Pres but are lost on death
    *Medpack purchased for Pres with Q medpack request, with a cooldown

    Aliens
    *Lifeforms cost Pres to evolve into, lost on death
    *Alien abilities researched for Pres (either individually, or through purchasing Biomass) and are permanent
    *Alien traits/upgrade slots (normally unlocked by more hives in regular NS2) unlocked/researched for pres and are permanent
    *Alien traits purchased for Pres and are lost on death

    This will essentially be a game that feels like NS2 but in which turtling will occur less due to the ability for the enemy to cut off your supply of Pres and thus equipment or life forms. If you don't have a proper economy like Combat the game just becomes TDM where two masses of player collide and move the front up depending on who won, leading to a pointless battle since killing the enemy results in them spawning in the place you want to attack (this making it better to not kill the enemy).
  • SantaClawsSantaClaws Denmark Join Date: 2012-07-31 Member: 154491Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited January 2018
    I agree with Scatter here. I don't really see the value in rewarding individual players with exp. If the team is just earning pres from RT's, there is never that one marine with better equipment than everybody else. It makes a lot more sense this way.

    It also potentially removes a lot of headache wrt the question of how much exp you give latejoiners? Just give them the same pres as everyone else on the team, problem solved. The whole team should have the same spending potential at all times anyway imo. Remove exp and keep pres. :+1:
  • ZavaroZavaro Tucson, Arizona Join Date: 2005-02-14 Member: 41174Members, Super Administrators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Playtester, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
    SantaClaws wrote: »
    I agree with Scatter here. I don't really see the value in rewarding individual players with exp. If the team is just earning pres from RT's, there is never that one marine with better equipment than everybody else. It makes a lot more sense this way.

    It also potentially removes a lot of headache wrt the question of how much exp you give latejoiners? Just give them the same pres as everyone else on the team, problem solved. The whole team should have the same spending potential at all times anyway imo. Remove exp and keep pres. :+1:

    This is a great idea and I think might be the best implementation.

    I'm also against trying to turn it into a res game or adding king of the hill mechanics. Just keep the mode as simple as possible. Also, I wouldn't change the core gameplay much, else it's not Combat, but something else entirely.
  • FroztyFrozty SWEDEN Join Date: 2012-01-22 Member: 141596Members
    edited January 2018
    The closer you get to enemy base, the more exp you get? If rines camp in base, they get less? Or make an item drop in the middle of the map, turn it in at your HQ & the team get free exp ( equals 2-3 kills ). Super easy to force a camping team to rush mid, make / create an objective.
  • IeptBarakatIeptBarakat The most difficult name to speak ingame. Join Date: 2009-07-10 Member: 68107Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Diamond, Reinforced - Shadow
    Zavaro wrote: »
    I'm also against trying to turn it into a res game or adding king of the hill mechanics. Just keep the mode as simple as possible. Also, I wouldn't change the core gameplay much, else it's not Combat, but something else entirely.

    My feelings on this 100%.

    I hope that Combat stays close enough the same so we can port over or remake old classic combat maps and not have additional layers of frustration in regards to balancing said maps.

    Some of the ideas is just making it NS2 without the commanders, but you might as well just play NS2 and not be a commander if that is what you want.
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    To me it seems like there is a split on how it should be implemented. There will always be those who want the mode to be similar to original combat and there are those that want more of a team based mode, like ns2 without commanders. I think when I set out to start this mod, the goal with to bring back the combat mode and I'll more than likely lean that way for this mod (with incentives of course to prevent base camping, etc). I do love the idea of ns2 without commanders and it sounds like we at least have a partial implementation of that with NS2 Assault. My proposal is that we implement both.

    @Scatter what is the current status of NS2 Assault? You made it sound like you may have hit some road blocks, lost interest. Is the source on GitHub? Is it possible for me to contribute? I'd like to see both of these implementation ideas succeed to a final mod state, Combat++ and NS2 Assault respectively. I imagine there's code that can be shared between the two projects as well.

    On a separate note, I just about have the cooldowns for consumables working. Should be posting a quick video for that later on today.
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    Here is the cooldown example:
  • deathshrouddeathshroud Join Date: 2010-04-10 Member: 71291Members
    edited January 2018
    Nintendows wrote: »
    This is awesome!

    FYI the ns2 combat mod was recently licensed under the MIT license, so you might be able to use some of the code/assets from it: https://github.com/AlexHayton/NS2Combat

    Does this mean people can start using ns2 combat code in their ns2 mods? cause i really want devour

    XP should be awarded based on life form and its intended role, eg healing building gorge stuff should reward a gorge with xp.
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    Does this mean people can start using ns2 combat code in their ns2 mods? cause i really want devour

    I believe that's the original ns2 combat mod before it went standalone. It's released under the MIT license so it should be good to use.
  • ScatterScatter Join Date: 2012-09-02 Member: 157341Members, Squad Five Blue
    To me it seems like there is a split on how it should be implemented. There will always be those who want the mode to be similar to original combat and there are those that want more of a team based mode, like ns2 without commanders. I think when I set out to start this mod, the goal with to bring back the combat mode and I'll more than likely lean that way for this mod (with incentives of course to prevent base camping, etc). I do love the idea of ns2 without commanders and it sounds like we at least have a partial implementation of that with NS2 Assault. My proposal is that we implement both.

    @Scatter what is the current status of NS2 Assault? You made it sound like you may have hit some road blocks, lost interest. Is the source on GitHub? Is it possible for me to contribute? I'd like to see both of these implementation ideas succeed to a final mod state, Combat++ and NS2 Assault respectively. I imagine there's code that can be shared between the two projects as well.


    Current state I have to check but there's a few technical challenges that did stop me, happy to discuss them with you. Sound like you might be making a lot of the framework that would work for me also.
  • NousWandererNousWanderer Join Date: 2010-05-07 Member: 71646Members
    edited January 2018
    No xp for 'distance traveled' please, but the idea of incorporating a RT mechanic as a team xp modifier is interesting.
  • KasharicKasharic Hull, England Join Date: 2013-03-27 Member: 184473Members, Forum Admins, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, NS2 Community Developer
    There used to be a mechanic in vanilla that was removed due to it not working for vanilla gameplay that I think could be reused to solve this problem.

    You used to only gain res while alive, combine that idea with "distance from base" and you now how a mechanic that would prevent base camping.

    the further from your base you are, the more xp you gain, you only gain this type of xp while alive.

    If this were to be used alongside the "kill for xp" and the other similar mechanics combat used to have, it should stop people sitting still for most of the game.

    if you also had the xp you gained from killing someone adjust based off of how long they have been alive, you would be rewarded more for killing the stronger players, which could balance out the snowballing.
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    edited January 2018
    @Kasharic
    Kasharic wrote: »
    There used to be a mechanic in vanilla that was removed due to it not working for vanilla gameplay that I think could be reused to solve this problem.

    You used to only gain res while alive, combine that idea with "distance from base" and you now how a mechanic that would prevent base camping.

    the further from your base you are, the more xp you gain, you only gain this type of xp while alive.

    If this were to be used alongside the "kill for xp" and the other similar mechanics combat used to have, it should stop people sitting still for most of the game.

    if you also had the xp you gained from killing someone adjust based off of how long they have been alive, you would be rewarded more for killing the stronger players, which could balance out the snowballing.

    This is pretty much what I'm going for, or at least, will be trying out first. I'm going to implement a "distance from base" idea, but I was thinking of doing it as a modifier for xp earning actions rather than a slow xp gain over time (though I could see why that'd be useful for less skilled players). I'll probably try out both approaches and see what works. If the "xp over time based on distance" approach were used then you are correct, I would not supply that XP while the player is dead/respawning.

    When I was working on some of the scoring mechanics, I did come across the code for vanilla that modifies the score earned per kill based on how long the opponent had been alive. I was already thinking about adding this idea into Combat++ as well. Thanks for reminding me and reiterating that point!
  • HandschuhHandschuh Join Date: 2005-03-08 Member: 44338Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Community Developer
    edited January 2018
    About the snowballing issue:
    If I remember correctly from ns1 Combat:
    - If I stood close to a kill (basically assist) then I get XP as well
    - If my Level is far below that of my teammates I get some "lowlevelcap" so a "rookie" still get's upgrades
    - Supporting like welding gave XP per Second...

    Somethings might be mods, but it was quite popular
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    Handschuh wrote: »
    About the snowballing issue:
    If I remember correctly from ns1 Combat:
    - If I stood close to a kill (basically assist) then I get XP as well
    - If my Level is far below that of my teammates I get some "lowlevelcap" so a "rookie" still get's upgrades
    - Supporting like welding gave XP per Second...

    Somethings might be mods, but it was quite popular

    I don't think I give XP just for standing near a kill right now. However, XP is given for assists. Assists are treated the same way they are in NS2. If you do any damage at all to a target, and are not the one that deals the final blow, you get an assist. In addition there is also a skill point award for 'x amount of assists in a current life'.

    Not sure about the low level cap thing. I'll need to think about how that would work.

    There will be XP given for welding. It wont be per second, but it will be handled the way damage is currently handled. There will be a really low threshold for how much welding need to achieve XP. To explain better, I'll use damage as an example. Currently the damage threshold amount is 20 and there is a damage modifier of 0.5. Every time the player accumulates 20 damage they are awarded XP which is damage * modifier, 20 * 0.5 = 10 xp. So as you continously shoot something (Marines), you will see the XP accumulate as if you are being rewarded over time (though time is actually not factored in). Welding will work the same way. If you are welding something, you will see the XP go from 10 to 20 to 30, etc until you finish/stop welding.
    Vetinari wrote: »
    I mean, at some point you just gotta let the better team win, too.

    This is exactly right.
  • SantaClawsSantaClaws Denmark Join Date: 2012-07-31 Member: 154491Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited January 2018
    Vetinari wrote: »
    I mean, at some point you just gotta let the better team win, too.
    Well as I said to IeptBarakat , you cannot avoid a snowball effect in a game that has an economy (in this instance in the form of exp).

    So it's not about removing the snowball, that can't be done even if you tried - it's about making it snowball the team, instead of a single player. Why is the strongest player on the server also getting the strongest gear? Everyone on their respective teams, should have the same points to spend, and then you allow the winning team to snowball, instead of the winning player.

    The most skilled players will still topfrag even if they don't have a gear advantage over their teammates, I promise.

    EDIT: As someone who used to topfrag almost always in both vanilla NS2 and NS2:combat. My experience is that it's increasingly boring to play against a team that simply overfeeds you in combatmod. You get jetpack shotguns while your team mates are still on A2+medpacks - and you one-man army the enemy. Combat mod was designed in such a way it fed the strong players instead of challenging them. It's a fundamental flaw in my view, at least in what is supposed to be a non-competitive/casual/practice/training mode. If it's a competitive mode, it makes more sense, I guess it would be nice to hear what your ambition level is like for this mod @White_Wizard ?
  • IeptBarakatIeptBarakat The most difficult name to speak ingame. Join Date: 2009-07-10 Member: 68107Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Diamond, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited January 2018
    SantaClaws wrote: »
    Everyone on their respective teams, should have the same points to spend, and then you allow the winning team to snowball, instead of the winning player.

    I'm not opposed to trying a version where the level is shared throughout the team and everyone gets awarded the same points even if there is a hard carry. I just don't want to see the gamemode change drastically from the old combat formula.

    Though team size should affect how much influence a single player should have in terms of team xp gain.

    For instance if the player level was directly translated into a team level format with a xp gained reduction depending on the team size, then the amount of team xp gained per action in a 12v12 would be half as much than of a 6v6.

    Which I think would be important to keep the gameplay normalized despite team sizes.
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    I've been brainstorming an idea having a 'rally' objective. This would be a team objective and thus everyone on the team would gain XP from completing the action.

    I think it could work like this. Take the map tram for example. Say the Marines have built up hub (perhaps an armory, PG and some sentries). A member of the alien team sees this and invokes a rally command on hub. The whole team is notified to participate and are given a short time span in which the rally order must be completed. If the alien team in this example is able to complete the rally order (by say dealing 50-75 percent damage to all Marine structures at that location) then everyone on the team gets XP for successfully competing the rally order. Perhaps bonuses for those who actively participate or are actually in the area.

    This would provide a mechanism for pushing areas since there is no commander giving orders.

    There would need to be criteria of course for when a rally order can be used. The XP given would also need to scale with the number of enemy structures at a location and how much damage was done.
  • SantaClawsSantaClaws Denmark Join Date: 2012-07-31 Member: 154491Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    SantaClaws wrote: »
    Everyone on their respective teams, should have the same points to spend, and then you allow the winning team to snowball, instead of the winning player.

    I'm not opposed to trying a version where the level is shared throughout the team and everyone gets awarded the same points even if there is a hard carry. I just don't want to see the gamemode change drastically from the old combat formula.

    Though team size should affect how much influence a single player should have in terms of team xp gain.

    For instance if the player level was directly translated into a team level format with a xp gained reduction depending on the team size, then the amount of team xp gained per action in a 12v12 would be half as much than of a 6v6.

    Which I think would be important to keep the gameplay normalized despite team sizes.
    You raise a problem that is actually independent from the team model. In regular combatmod the timings will be affected by playernumbers as well. The more players there are, the easier it is to level up, and you can reach the tech explosions even faster.

    But in an RT model, you precisely do not have this. P-res is accumulated only as fast as the RT's generate it, no matter how many players are on the server. So you will never need any measure to normalize the gameplay (economy wise at least) in terms of playersizes, unlike the exp-model.
  • IeptBarakatIeptBarakat The most difficult name to speak ingame. Join Date: 2009-07-10 Member: 68107Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Diamond, Reinforced - Shadow
    SantaClaws wrote: »
    SantaClaws wrote: »
    Everyone on their respective teams, should have the same points to spend, and then you allow the winning team to snowball, instead of the winning player.

    I'm not opposed to trying a version where the level is shared throughout the team and everyone gets awarded the same points even if there is a hard carry. I just don't want to see the gamemode change drastically from the old combat formula.

    Though team size should affect how much influence a single player should have in terms of team xp gain.

    For instance if the player level was directly translated into a team level format with a xp gained reduction depending on the team size, then the amount of team xp gained per action in a 12v12 would be half as much than of a 6v6.

    Which I think would be important to keep the gameplay normalized despite team sizes.
    You raise a problem that is actually independent from the team model. In regular combatmod the timings will be affected by playernumbers as well. The more players there are, the easier it is to level up, and you can reach the tech explosions even faster.

    But in an RT model, you precisely do not have this. P-res is accumulated only as fast as the RT's generate it, no matter how many players are on the server. So you will never need any measure to normalize the gameplay (economy wise at least) in terms of playersizes, unlike the exp-model.

    Yes I acknowledged the issue with player counts, and the measure is to precisely keep the old exp model in check rather than go full blown RT system of standard NS/2.

    When I think of Combat I think of smaller maps, with more emphasis on pure combat rather than trying to run around capping RT's on mineshaft, and it'd be a shame to have those already recreated NS1 combat maps go to waste if we actually are able to use them.
  • SantaClawsSantaClaws Denmark Join Date: 2012-07-31 Member: 154491Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited January 2018
    When I think of Combat I think of smaller maps, with more emphasis on pure combat rather than trying to run around capping RT's on mineshaft, and it'd be a shame to have those already recreated NS1 combat maps go to waste if we actually are able to use them.
    I'm imagining the same. There's plenty of room to put RT's on those maps. I wouldn't advocate for combat on mineshaft or tram. You don't need (or want) 3 separate lanes and 8 RT's on a combat map.

    The RTs should be placed in one lane which would lead to the enemy base anyway.
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    When I think of Combat I think of smaller maps, with more emphasis on pure combat rather than trying to run around capping RT's on mineshaft, and it'd be a shame to have those already recreated NS1 combat maps go to waste if we actually are able to use them.

    @IeptBarakat Can you point me to some of those recreated combat maps? I'd like to start giving those a test if possible.
  • HandschuhHandschuh Join Date: 2005-03-08 Member: 44338Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Community Developer
    Handschuh wrote: »
    About the snowballing issue:
    If I remember correctly from ns1 Combat:
    - If I stood close to a kill (basically assist) then I get XP as well
    - If my Level is far below that of my teammates I get some "lowlevelcap" so a "rookie" still get's upgrades
    - Supporting like welding gave XP per Second...

    Somethings might be mods, but it was quite popular

    Not sure about the low level cap thing. I'll need to think about how that would work.

    I think the main-intention was not only for the rookies to have not such a different level to the team, but rather if you join later to the round you still have a chance to compete with your team or rather agianst the enemy team.

    If you have for example an enemyteam with lvl 20 average, and your team is lvl 20 as well...
    If you join with Lvl 1 or if you're afk, and you don't rise at some point, you'll just leave the game again, since there is zero chance to get even one kill or supportkill.. without ANY Upgrades
  • GhoulofGSG9GhoulofGSG9 Join Date: 2013-03-31 Member: 184566Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver, Reinforced - Supporter, WC 2013 - Supporter, Pistachionauts
    edited January 2018
    I always felt like combat needs a nemesis system. So if you kill somebody over any over again they give less xp and killing your nemesis grants bonus xp. That way you can limit how much a very good player can get ahead of everybody else.

    I have never thought about base camping as an issue in combat thanks to the end game phase (can't repair/heal structures, lastly command structures take damage over time) which ultimately always ended the game after about 20-25 minutes.

    Also the late join and comeback bonus xp never really became a problem in the round I played because it still kept those players below the team's avg xp. Removing the personal level kinda takes away from the combat mode which to some degree is also about competing with the other teammates.

    @White_Wizard For the combat maps have a look at http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=82684884

    Edit: Some of the maps may need http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=474696302 to run.
  • White_WizardWhite_Wizard United States Join Date: 2018-01-01 Member: 234742Members
    I always felt like combat needs a nemesis system. So if you kill somebody over any over again they give less xp and killing your nemesis grants bonus xp. That way you can limit how much a very good player can get ahead of everybody else.

    I have never thought about base camping as an issue in combat thanks to the end game phase (can't repair/heal structures, lastly command structures take damage over time) which ultimately always ended the game after about 20-25 minutes.

    Also the late join and comeback bonus xp never really became a problem in the round I played because it still kept those players below the team's avg xp. Removing the personal level kinda takes away from the combat mode which to some degree is also about competing with the other teammates.

    I think the nemesis system would be a great addition. I'm also starting to get a pretty good idea on how to handle late join/comeback XP.

    I have a question about the end game phase. At what point is it enacted?
Sign In or Register to comment.