Chris Discussion

Discussion in 'Game Play' started by spellman23, Nov 5, 2009.

  1. spellman23

    spellman23 Member

    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Moved to its own thread.

    EDIT: tl;dr version: Empires doesn't/shouldn't have a strategy (RTS) component since we're all little dude going pew pew individually.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2009
  2. Z100000M

    Z100000M Vithered Weteran

    Messages:
    9,120
    Likes Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    0
    point out the important parts please

    else tl;dr
     
  3. thetim

    thetim Member

    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm going to pick out just one point (not that the others aren't important, but this one in particular struck a chord):

    "Holding one more res node will give you an ever increasing lead"

    This is, I think, the easiest place to fine-tune the slippery slope mechanism. Each additional ref should give fewer resources than the previous one did, so for example if one ref gives 10 res, the second might give 8, the third 6, then 5, 4, 3, and then additional refs give 2 each.
     
  4. Chris0132'

    Chris0132' Developer

    Messages:
    9,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Either the central resource nodes are useful, in which case you still have the problem I mentioned, or they aren't useful, in which case you may as well just remove them than add another layer of complexity to the resource model.

    There is no middle ground, it is either worth having or not, the only compromise you could make is making it worth having some of the time, but that only flips between the two problems of unneccesary complexity and undesirable snowballing benefits.
     
  5. thetim

    thetim Member

    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I disagree. There's no unnecessary complexity as it is all hidden from the player. More refs = more res, and it doesn't have to matter which refs you hold. Tapering the benefit off would serve to make the slippery slope a little less slippery.
     
  6. Deadpool

    Deadpool SVETLANNNAAAAAA

    Messages:
    2,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    is this basically saying lets turn empires into cs in spaaaaace?

    from what little i did read (wall o text anyone?) i want to say that a) empires has a commander, deal with it b) go play cs if you dont like it.
     
  7. Chris0132'

    Chris0132' Developer

    Messages:
    9,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you have it so that the central refs are unneccesary then the players are going to be conflicted because they are going to think getting the refs is good when in actuality it is probably better to leave them and concentrate on just killing enemies and not dying.

    If they are important then you have not accomplished anything, less broken is still broken.

    This is generally why you should not reply unless you have actually read it and also have the brain capacity to understand it.

    I realise this may limit the number of replies.
     
  8. blizzerd

    blizzerd Member

    Messages:
    10,552
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i made posts about the "our team is a bunch of people competing with each other for tank privileges and commander favours" problem

    nobody listened to what i had to say and everyone was like "oh wow another vet that doesnt play the game/doesn't like how awesome the game is atm and wants to make it into something else"

    :(
     
  9. Deadpool

    Deadpool SVETLANNNAAAAAA

    Messages:
    2,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    haha AW YA GOT ME! ouch, damn.
     
  10. ScardyBob

    ScardyBob Member

    Messages:
    3,457
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've said it before and I'll say it again: People play Empires BECAUSE it is an FPS/RTS hybrid, not in spite of it. Empires will never be as beautiful, balanced, or functional as a commercially produced game like CSS or TF2. Instead, it should focus on a unique form of gameplay which distinguishes it from the other bazillion games out there. The commander (RTS portion) is that defining feature.
     
  11. Chris0132'

    Chris0132' Developer

    Messages:
    9,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I should point out that almost nobody does play empires.

    So that should read 'very few people play empires BECAUSE it's an fps/rts hybrid.'
     
  12. flasche

    flasche Member Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    13,299
    Likes Received:
    168
    Trophy Points:
    0
    well i dont know if he read your post as a whole or not, but deadpool makes a good point - empires IS a teamgame. if you cant accept that, go fucking play something where team effort isnt needed ...
    sry if that might have sounded offensive, but its actually the teamwork, or better how much it is rewarding when it works out, that made me stay, join a clan and play for a couple of years now.

    the game, after this years, still is fun for me - there are epic moments i will prolly not forget for a while - damnit guys are having dreams about that mod :rolleyes:

    noone disagrees on some imbalances and other fucked up things ...

    still, i find your (chris') original post to be a very good analysis of pub games. we can draw conclusions, but the commander, research and fail need to stay or it wouldnt be empires anymore ...

    what really should be considered is that infantry needs to be on almost eye level with tanks - a tank gives you a 2nd life (plus armor and speed and lots of damage) anyway - that totaly makes up for it additionally costing resources. some of us prefer to play infantry (actually most of the better vets i see, i meet in persona on the battlefields) some of us prefer being in tanks. the absolute requirement to play a certain class (yes i consider tanks classes too here) at a certain point is something i really dislike ...

    you cant play scout because 99% of noobs think they can be epic snipers and are nothing but useless. if noobs dont play scouts they mainly go roflelol because they cant kill guys other than with the HMG. so its us more skilled players that have to build up crap as engineers while we would be a ton more helpful as riflemen or grenadiers. i dont say engies should be the noob class, i wouldnt want to force anyone to play any class - but as said, currently there are requirements for certain classes at certain points in the game - and that is shit ...

    the main suggestion i made concerning this issue is to remove building from the engineer and substitute it with buffed ebuilding. there would be the need to somehow prevent a scout to just sneak by and build up a rax somewhere behind you. maybe we really should consider to have buildings not be dropable unless in a certain range of a "owned" ref spot or built barracks (so similar to pylons in starcraft, just more predetermined)

    also commanding is a bit odd - and i think mass targets need to go, because it really really hurts infantry tactics. but removing stuff to do from the commander will make it even more boring - anyway, this can easily be fixed by some commander skills, only usable close to alive friendly units, bought with a percentage of total squadpoints and not game deciding (relatively weak).

    so ... my 3 cents ;)


    edit: i also agree with scardy bob
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2009
  13. recon

    recon SM Support Dev

    Messages:
    2,348
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If it wasn't an fps/rts hybrid, no one would play it. Uniqueness makes people play "mods".

    Fun, polished and well balanced "mods" become "games".
     
  14. ViroMan

    ViroMan Black Hole (*sniff*) Bully

    Messages:
    8,381
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    so... your saying this isn't a game because its not well balanced and its not fun?

    well Ill give you the "not well balanced part" but, I believe its entertaining to play this 'mod'.
     
  15. LordDz

    LordDz Capitan Rainbow Flowers

    Messages:
    5,221
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He said that if all three parts were top, it would be a game, he never said it wasn't fun. amiright?
     
  16. blizzerd

    blizzerd Member

    Messages:
    10,552
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    i dont think the fps/rts hybridage is at debate here, the way some of the game mechanics are handled are, because they are handled boringly
     
  17. spellman23

    spellman23 Member

    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    True. After all, NS is a RTS/FPS hybrid and continues to have a larger player base after 7 years than Empires.
     
  18. blizzerd

    blizzerd Member

    Messages:
    10,552
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    yes, although empires has some of the game mechanics almost identically as NS, they work for NS and not for Empires sometimes
     
  19. Sandbag

    Sandbag Member

    Messages:
    1,172
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Chris, that is the best bit of analytical writing about empires I have read for a long time. Not just great ideas but well written. People that say tl;dr should give it a second chance.

    I agree with many of the points you've made. They're obviously coming from experience, not some bedroom fantasy of how empires should be.

    I spent a lot of time a long while ago considering how you would design and present empires to a producer such that it would be good enough to produce. I came to realise that you simply cannot have the ability of one player on a server defining how much fun the other players have. A bad commander leads to a bad game for everyone, and unlike a free mod where people are often willing to sift through the shit for nuggets of pure gaming ecstasy, a commercial game always needs to be fun.

    I think that you can't remove the commander without removing what makes empires empires. What you can do is create a base level of commanding, below which even an idiot cannot fall. This means an idiot commander should not be able to:
    1 - fail to place structures, especially refineries
    2 - fail to do research
    3 - fail to give targets

    things which can fuck a team over. for 1, refineries become free, can be placed by players, squad leaders can place structures. 2, auto and suggested research for people that don't know what to research. research queues to remove "i play the game loads so i know how to quickly get to the next correct research" advantage, revamped research tree that shows players the destinations of where their research tree leads - tonnes of these have been suggested. for 3, remove targets. All of these i could elaborate on for muppets that would discount an idea because of the finer details.

    These are things that can actually be done to the empires we play now. this post is too long now blah blha
     
  20. Deadpool

    Deadpool SVETLANNNAAAAAA

    Messages:
    2,246
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    (k so I read it this time, yes I can read.)

    Sandbag I have to respectfully disagree. The OP is a bunch of sunshine and smoke blown up our asses disguised as a coherent argument. It is full of hyperbole such as saying that one "certainly shouldn't build the entire game around the concept (commanders) because it will simply not work most of the time (it doesn't)." This is a downright false statement. The commander doesnt work? That's not the empires I know. Even with a new player commanding it is often put to effective use. Again: "So you can work to reduce the dependency of the game on a mechanic which rarely works (this is also a good reason why the toning down of ninjaing has improved the game considerably)." While I agree with your example of 9 mines, the idea attached to it is downright false.

    As for a team doing "fun" things like throwing themselves at the enemy, isn't this usually done at chokepoints, and therefore useful? If "you need to change the game so that what they want to do is now useful (in empires case an example would be doing anything other than constantly attacking) or you need to introduce new things for the players to do because there aren't enough fun things in the game" then the players in question are playing the wrong game. It's the balance between attacking and securing and defending, and perhaps more importantly seeing opportunities that make Empires fun. Fun however is subjective, and it's definition varies between individuals.

    The OP almost makes a case that "You also cannot penalise or reward an entire team for anything because teams do not exist, what you have is a collection of individual players, and a player will not really appreciate being rewarded for something he didn't do, nor will he readily tolerate being penalised for something he didn't do." The individuals sharing a collective goal become what is known as a "team" (and yes (lolbrackets) there are teams in empires, a red one and a blue one) and therefore do in fact share the fate of their teammates, unless you play this game in the way described in the OP, as an unthinking fps, it is and will remain a team game. The team based elements of the game I believe are a major draw for more mature players. I'm sure some of you can agree that the teamwork required is a draw for players who are bored of run and gun css style games.

    In the next paragraph, the author's cynicism shows no bounds. The statement that Empires "is two players facing off against each other with complex weaponry" is true, so far so good. And again: "if an empires player runs out of resources it is probably because the other members of the team didn't capture territory with him, or because the enemy attacked when he was busy, or because he was unable to defend against a superior enemy force." Also true. But this is where it goes off the rails (lul empires pun sorta) if by the statement "therefore any player who suffers as the result of a collective error will feel put upon." the author meant "abused" then man, I don't know what to tell you, people are difficult, especially humans.

    Let's face it, it takes a certain amount of intellectual dexterity to do anything more than run and gun in Empires. But that's why we play. The author of the OP is not stupid, so don't take this post as flame bait. However the tone of the original document is far too cynical to be of any use in developing anything. The rest of the OP is essentially interchangeable with any of the above, so I will stop here.

    Again, this is not flame bait, rather the informed reply to the OP that I was so politely informed was lacking earlier in this thread.

    Thanks for reading.

    Deadpool.
     

Share This Page