Another solution for this stupid ass tank problem

Discussion in 'Feedback' started by Paradox, Dec 18, 2016.

  1. Paradox

    Paradox I am a gigantic asshole who loses people's hard wo

    Messages:
    6,926
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think I Found it guys, I really do.

    So if we distil the problem of the tanks it comes down to this
    - We have too much resources
    - We have no limit on tanks
    - Tanks come into play too early and then the optimal tactic is to spam them
    - Infantry are too weak vs tanks



    -> What I suggest is
    In mechanical we make a new tree, called logistics. When you research that you are allowed to build APCS and gain 5+ vehicle limit. The standard is set at 3 or 5 or what ever you guys want. Every other research adds another +3 vehicle limit? or + what ever arbitrary number you want.

    What does this fix-> it makes it so tanks come into play slowly. It slows down the early and midgame, it makes you have to weigh the benefits of either getting early heavy tanks, or more medium tanks or other research

    This solves infantry are too weak vs tanks too BECAUSE with the new upgraded rpgs you can choose between either upgraded rpgs or more tanks etc etc.

    This is a great idea. I think. Lets talk about it, break it down. Perfect it and then let the dev team completely neglect good gameplay ideas.

    Also make logistics cost money to solve the problem of too much resources? ( optional idea )
     
    A-z-K likes this.
  2. VulcanStorm

    VulcanStorm Developer Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree... This would limit it. However there are other things to consider.
    1. With a lower vehicle limit, wouldn't people be more inclined to steal tanks, or just sit around in the VF and wait?
    2. Early game? Armour is so weak that infantry can deal with tanks easily. It's often a risk to drive it towards a few grens...
    3. The death of the infamous APC rush?
    But since each server has a different tank limit... Why not make it 2 researches?
    Start off with 1/4 tank limit, then research to 1/2 tank limit, then research to the full tank limit.
    This way it's relative to server capability.
    Each one taking a lot of time to research obviously.

    I like the idea of forcing commanders to "shop around" to get more tank slots though. So they have to keep researching...
     
  3. Xyaminou

    Xyaminou Member

    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In my opinion the only solution to the "tank problem" is in a word, multicrew. Having multiple persons per tanks instead of just one in a very large tank. Even if it's just having a gunner this would halve the amount of tanks. Like in battlefield other vehicles could have multiple gunning position, it makes for great teamplay and decreases the need to have so many tanks, instead it becomes more interesting to have multiple people in one tank to cover every angle and increase the survivability of the vehicle.
    However this cannot be achieved in the current state of Empires.
     
  4. Ranger

    Ranger Member

    Messages:
    706
    Likes Received:
    67
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not interested in tank limit. I'd prefer vehicle production time which could be reduced through a research called "logistics" if you want lol.

    I agree with Xya. Such combat would be nicer than anything we have so far.
     
  5. Sgt.Security

    Sgt.Security Member

    Messages:
    3,137
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    0
    1: Mobility.
    2: Rekts infantry.
    Are the core reasons.

    A low vehicle limit will just make people camp in VF and/or "GG nubs got vehicles"
    It's not going to do us any good. It also makes no sense to keep that limit for early-game only.

    We should make it so that people don't HAVE to get vehicles.
    Vehicles should maintain their superiority (as they cost resources and it's why you get refineries), but you shouldn't be a walking sandbag when you are not in a vehicle.
     
    Tama likes this.
  6. Tama

    Tama Developer Staff Member Web Developer

    Messages:
    684
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Vehicle limits are not going to help, and waiting for vehicles to be built sounds like great fun, too.

    It would be pretty nice; but can you think of anything decent apart from "just having a gunner"? That's all I've ever seen in other games.

    What do you mean? In terms of development; it's not trivial, but it can be done. Or did you mean it wouldn't work in the game for some other reason?
     
  7. Xyaminou

    Xyaminou Member

    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Let's take the example of battlefield because after all, it's the roots of Empires. In battlefield jeeps have machine guns mounted on top, sometimes even 2 of them, having the same in Empires would make for more useful jeeps, and more reason to stay in them. But let's not kid ourselves, even in battlefield you tend to bail out of jeeps as soon as possible. Another example from the modern era of battlefield 3 and 4 are IFVs. IFVs have a driving seat, a gunner seat, and 4 passangers who can still shoot out of their window making it hard to sneak up on the vehicule. Now for something closer to what we have in Empires, is battlefield 1, in battlefield one there are tanks or "landship" as they called them in WW1 with 5 seats, 1 driver and 4 gunners.
    You have to remember that the initial NF Heavy is close to these and the original model had 2 extra cannons, one on each side.
    The BE heavy model has two turret opening so you could very well imagine having 2 machineguns mounted on top one of them isn't practical because of the cannon rotation, but it's just an example.
    Basically if someone were to apply their mind to it I'm sure they could come up with tanks with either 2 or more gunning positions.

    It's not trivial and I don't see it every being accomplished on this engine. It'd require a large re-write of gameplay elements, GUI, new models. Let's be realistic, that's not going to happen. If you have team that can do that might as well re-imagine the entirety of Empires and therefore give it a new name.
     
  8. Kidpaler

    Kidpaler Member

    Messages:
    738
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Red Orchestra 2 had great tank mechanics I thought, when they worked. You had a driver, a commander to spot, a gunner, and a machine gunner. Every role could be filled by a person except for the loader.

    Specific crew could die to certain hits, which resulted in another role having to cover for it. That, or you opted for a bot to drive the tank by your orders.
     
  9. complete_

    complete_ lamer

    Messages:
    6,438
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    0
    the main problem is too many resources. its due to the change in the player multiplier years ago. its too low until the multiplier kicks in and then way too high once it does kick in.

    there was ideas kicking around about running tests with different values to find a sweet spot but nothing came through, and i doubt it ever well
    i posted a topic with an easy solution that developers didnt even bother to post in to at least say they didnt want to do it

    when it comes to tanks i think this suggestion could work... its mostly map specific as some maps dont play well with too many or too few tanks (the overload of res just makes this problem more obvious). a question i have is how much would this extend the actual game though (one that currently goes for 40+ minutes regularly)?
     
    Neoony likes this.
  10. A-z-K

    A-z-K Member

    Messages:
    3,241
    Likes Received:
    215
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Resources are probably the only thing that noticeably changed gameplay IMHO.
    Resources and Tricksters scripts, specifically engines which made trees distinct and added valuable depth to tanking.

    I like this idea as a concept, I think it wil potentially make tank use more strategic and make medium vs heavies a decision. But if resources don't scale somewhat in-line it may just mean that the mid game is extended and the late game still results in a tank clusterfuck because teams will be storing up resources and once they level their logistics out will have a big bankroll.

    Commanding seems pretty risk adverse, it seems hard to convince people to make big early pushes now.
     
  11. Paradox

    Paradox I am a gigantic asshole who loses people's hard wo

    Messages:
    6,926
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The only counterargument I constantly keep hearing is that people will sit in the vf waiting for a tank when theres a limit.


    But when you limit tanks by res you think theh wont sit and wait?

    Both are limits, both need time to give you a tank. When resources run out in this patch I either sit and wait in the vf or I go on foot. Exactly the same would happen when logistica get implemented, i would sit and wait.


    And fuck if you think about it, im more inclined to sit in the vf and wait for the tank when im resource limited cause I know i will get a tank soon. Whilst if im cap limited im uncertain since iduno if my comm will researcch more logistocs or when a tank will die


    TLDR ABSOLUTE TANK LIMIT AND RES LIMIT BOTH CAUSE SHITBAGS TO WAIT IN VF NICE ARGUMENT.
     
  12. Paradox

    Paradox I am a gigantic asshole who loses people's hard wo

    Messages:
    6,926
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    0
    People are not used to teamwork anymore and havent seen any so they dont know if its effective. Bitches scared shitless of losing their tank. Pub games NEVER end with apc rush or tank rush anymore. Fucking sad.
     
  13. A-z-K

    A-z-K Member

    Messages:
    3,241
    Likes Received:
    215
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Either people may wait in the VF if there is some kind of limit or they may just spam tanks and waste res if there isn't.
    It's really not much of an arguement and wages is there for productive players to get tanks first anyway which was the whole reason for it.

    I don't think it's ever healthy for the fun factor to build games around the worst case scenario for new players.
    Just accept it that not everyone is going to play at a really high level and make decisions around what would be the best game, people learn.
     
  14. Lazybum

    Lazybum :D Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    4,827
    Likes Received:
    190
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Jokes on you, next pug I plan on lowering resources and having an economy themed pug. I was kinda waiting and hoping trickster would do that vintage pug, but it seems a bit dead in the water.

    In any case I really don't see this suggestion actually changing much in the end game and not too much in the mid game, where the tank spam is the most problematic. Early game it's hard to convince people to spam lights, and grens can still kinda sorta deal with lights anyway. Or rather, light tank spam is actually fun, everything moves fast, tanks do die easier, lights can't deal with infantry as well as mediums so infantry have an easier time surviving and fighting against them. I would say early game for empires is just fine, I don't feel like any part of it really needs to be touched(outside of more 1 slot weapons) and I fear some suggestions kinda like this might hinder it in some way.

    Mid and late game though everything is slower, tanks take a huge beating and grens can't deal with them very well(i know rpg damage is getting buffed from research next patch but I don't know how effective it will actually be). It just stalls out a bit. If you wanted to have less tanks on the field late games is the better place for that, which is why I made the suggestion of tank tickets ages ago so you'd end up with less beefy tanks. Came from this thread, which is similar in idea but different in execution. Funnily enough I got a lot of the same complaints, vf waits. I also got "Big tank fights are fun." That's not untrue, but I would say that's only true on open maps.

    As pointed out in that other thread, while it would certainly limit tanks it doesn't limit the endless resources that can happen on maps. That really is the thing that needs fixing. I'm still a fan of the idea of having less heavier chassis to lighter ones, because it would be one way to help give meds and lights more use, but economy should be the deciding factor of all this. It should be the most easily understood metric after all. Considering players don't actually have to do anything it wouldn't surprise me no one knows the cost of a tank and why they are losing...
     
  15. Sgt.Security

    Sgt.Security Member

    Messages:
    3,137
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Honestly we should probably normalize the resources gain on all maps.
    Not saying they should be the same, but at least not "5 res/sec on this map and 50 res/sec on the other map".

    But as long as tanks rekt infantry, resources/vehicle number limit will not solve the core issue.

    Even if vets do get more vehicles because of wages, you'll just end up with nubs using 30 tickets because they will be even weaker sandbags when not in vehicles.
     
  16. Lazybum

    Lazybum :D Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    4,827
    Likes Received:
    190
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One could possibly presume less tanks means more vets with revive on the field, or even grens dealing with tanks. But yeah you have a point.

    I'm not actually big on standardizing res flow on maps, I like my poor maps and having some rich maps. I just question some of the rich maps, like streets or slaughtered. These maps don't have a lot of room for tanks which are really the only thing to be spending loads of res on, so it seems silly to have high res on them.
     
  17. VulcanStorm

    VulcanStorm Developer Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    0

    What is deemed a "high" res rate?

    Considering heavy tanks cost between 1000 -> 1400 res each. So lets say about 1300res.

    Then with 6500 res stocked up... that's only 5 heavies.
    How fast do heavies die? Especially to other heavies?
    Its possible to lose a 1300res tank in 5 secs... Depending on the other player.

    So with 20 res/sec... it would take 65 secs to get enough resources for a heavy. So about 1 per minute... That seems about right for me...
    Considering how many players we're talking here, 10+ players per team? Then that's 10 mins to give all of them a new heavy tank from res alone...

    For a team with only 10 res/sec, then that's 2 mins to get a heavy tank... Which seems like an eternity when there's 3 heavies sitting outside your base, and you haven't got any.

    (Of course wages and recycling come into play here, but its the refs we're discussing?)
    ________________________________
    Perhaps there is a different problem though?

    Maybe its the resource stockpile? I mean, it takes time to get heavy tanks normally between 20-30 mins for a pub game. But the refs are all captured quickly, so the extra resources are stockpiled up.
    Which can seem like a lot of resources when you say "wow, look at our 10k res"

    So perhaps the solution is similar to what supreme commander 2 has... veterancy...

    Currently each refinery only has a fixed output.

    So what about "Refinery Veterancy"
    Where the output of a refinery increases the longer it remains alive (up to a maximum obviously)

    This would incentivise disrupting resource flow in game, make scouts more useful with sabotage (hooray?). And would stop this massive stockpile of resources over time... But still allowing for the same amount of refineries to exist. (obviously the player count multiplier would need tweaking)
     
  18. Polyesta

    Polyesta Member

    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I was playing earlier under the Alias of Scrub<3

    Way to much tank conflicts IMPO, at one point it came down to what team had enough resources and they would just tank spam, when originally it was more fun when infantry and tanks were working together. Instead of having some Tier of tanks, or some sophisticated mechanism. Why not make a separate class that's limited, and only increase's when a certain amount of players are on the server.

    (0/3) Tank Commander's

    and allow another slot of Tank Commander open when teams increase by 2 or 3 players.

    You could even add rank as a variable of being a tank commander, so players would have to earn the position to play it.
     
  19. Lazybum

    Lazybum :D Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    4,827
    Likes Received:
    190
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't even know what you mean by tank commander. If it's just the ability to drive a tank and other classes couldn't that's a terrible idea. Only other thing I could think of is like a squad lead for tanks, but that just sounds pointless.

    A heavy a minute is a ridiculously high number of heavies. Especially when it's not hard to keep a heavy alive past a minute, decent players can keep them going for at least 5-8 minutes.

    I won't disagree that there's res stock piling through out the match, but it's not like res isn't constantly being spent on buildings and tanks through out the match. If anything the fact that a commander doesn't have to restrict res usage at all during a match and has more then 6k res for heavies is a problem. I understand what you mean by refs increasing res as time goes on, I just have this feeling it will hurt losing teams more, and while there's a bit of merit in disrupting res flow we already have that, taking down a ref or even damaging them really help to decrease the res the enemy team has.

    Like I said though, I don't mind high res on open maps, tanks are more liable to die and generally bases are constantly being rebuilt on open maps. There's a lot of res usage on them. Then we have maps like slaughtered, where generally that base will stay there until heavies finally break through and destroy it, or someone manages to sneak or rush an apc by and kill it with infantry, a rare sight indeed. So I question why this map has high resources, I would wager it would work better if res flow was halved. Then it's a little less about tank spam and grind in sbend.
     
    VulcanStorm likes this.
  20. Paradox

    Paradox I am a gigantic asshole who loses people's hard wo

    Messages:
    6,926
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Vulcan storm, 1 tank every mminute, or every 2 mintues is still quite high.

    1minute goes faster than you think when you are playing the game. Over a course of 45 minutes. Thats 45 heavy tanks WITHOUT wages.
     
    Polyesta likes this.

Share This Page