Empty's Weapon Rehaul Idea

Discussion in 'Feedback' started by Empty, Feb 9, 2015.

  1. Empty

    Empty Member

    Messages:
    14,912
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There's a lot of things wrong with tanks and research I think.

    1) Games don't end, tanks simply aren't powerful enough to push
    2) Tanks don't die, tanks are also too tanky, they just don't die to anything
    3) Tank combat is unexciting, tanks kill eachother so slowly research and tech is much more important than anything else.
    4) Research is confusing and focuses too much on counters rather than playstyles
    5) Overheating sucks.

    To this end I believe we should rehaul research and tank combat entirely. The following broad changes should take place:

    1) Tanks kill eachother and buildings quickly
    2) Overheating no longer prevents movement on ANY engine, weapons are still disabled
    3) To increase strategy, cannons will be bread and butter weapons, dealing good damage while generating little to no heat, while GLs, MLs and MGs will be like 'abilities' costing significant heat, but giving a significant effect.
    4) Standard equipment will not be significantly weaker, but will lack any significant advantage, this allows a losing team to claw back legitimately.
    5) Research will cost res again. Refineries are currently not important enough, games are largely undecided by refinery control and much more on research. Research won't give a significant advantage, but variety is strength.
    6) Lategame tech will end games, bases will die unless defended, commanders will be killed if undefended
    7) Armors will have different uses and functions

    To this end I've redesigned the research tree to have 6 trees:
    Electric
    Physics
    Chem
    Mechanical
    Biological
    Chassis Design

    Standard Equipment

    These trees are all simple, but also harken back to our original trees, so the change will not be too stressful for players.


    In this way Meds and LTs/AFVs are your bread and butter and can field most weapons, and if the game is too close eventually heavies will be researched and will be able to field the best weapons in the game. Meds however, will still be strong and heavies are mainly an ultimatum pushing one team or the other to victory, since one heavy can field weapons roughly as powerful as two mediums.

    this solves our problems thusly:

    1) Games don't end, tanks simply aren't powerful enough to push
    Lategame tank weapons can individually destroy bases and walls. They are also very powerful vs eachother

    2) Tanks don't die, tanks are also too tanky, they just don't die to anything
    Tank weapons will be more powerful, and armors will focus on giving different utility rather than being straight up better

    3) Tank combat is unexciting, tanks kill eachother so slowly research and tech is much more important than anything else.
    Tank weapons will not be significantly stronger than standard gear until tier 3. In addition, ability based weapons will make combat more engaging. Weaker armors let tanks die faster, and lower hull health means piercing armor is more critical

    4) Research is confusing and focuses too much on counters rather than playstyles
    All research trees are similar in layout and have clear tiers. In addition research focuses on playstyles with pros and cons rather than 'Reactive beats missiles'

    5) Overheating sucks.
    Heat will function more as a mana bar rather than a "nofunallowed" meter. It will entirely be possible to run a tank with only cannons that never uses heat at all. Overheating will not stop you moving so tanks can still retreat mitigating their weaker armor, while low heat cost cannons mean a nearly overheated tank can still engage in combat.

    Bonus objectives achieved:
    1) Anti-infantry MGs have no advanced version, 50cal has always been either OP or useless. We don't need more effective MGs, the standard ones are already pretty fucking good.
    2) GLs and MGs will be more interesting
    3) Losing teams can come back easier since tanks are more fragile and you don't need significantly more powerful equipment to be able to kill them. A standard equipment med tank should be able to kill a heavy if the heavy is not paying attention or playing effectively.


    I think this will be a positive change overall, I'd like discussion, input etc.
    I'm willing to produce art assets for explosions and do the redesign though I think I'll need assistance with balancing values since I'm not a very good driver.
     
  2. ViroMan

    ViroMan Black Hole (*sniff*) Bully

    Messages:
    8,381
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Whats is this?! The guy who makes fps gouging bloody beautiful particles for an old ass game has an interesting set of suggestions on how the game should be played?

    I just can't even...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 9, 2015
  3. Empty

    Empty Member

    Messages:
    14,912
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I had this in the dev forum but these ideas are fucking huge changes so I think the community should discuss and give feedback.
     
  4. ViroMan

    ViroMan Black Hole (*sniff*) Bully

    Messages:
    8,381
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    you... deleted the post before I finished editing it!!

     
  5. Empty

    Empty Member

    Messages:
    14,912
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well the idea is to turn the heat bar from something boring (if you're having too much fun, you have to stop having fun) into something that allows for more fun, while restricting it in an interesting way, you can have really powerful cool weapons, but you can't spam them so you wanna use them tactically, e.g. using force missiles to disrupt a tank trying to flee, or ramming then firing off your salvo, or saving a bioML til you can hit the hull on the other side.

    Shit like that, make it tactical and interesting.
     
  6. BigTeef

    BigTeef Bootleg Headshot master

    Messages:
    7,036
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Holy shit, you are actually asking for input.
    Instead of just forcing it on people and acting confused on why people are pissed.

    I like this new method development, its innovative and shows concern for the people who play the game.
    After reading what you posted here is what I have to say on your ideas.

    I think these are very fair adjustments but I must say we should hold testing sessions for the new weapons you brought up.

    And if I may suggest, a revisit to how the research tree looks.

    I don't know much on weapon balancing I leave that to the people who have got the 4 to 5 years of experience, my current issue with the game is that it just doesn't feel right like it used too. When I use tanks or the guns, nothing feels good at all compared to before the staff changes. I like the new addition of weapons and such, but I rather not have them if it meant destroying the old ones or drastically changing them. Tank combat certainly felt better before nf got over powered, and it was easier to drive them at-least for me it was.
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2015
  7. LordDz_2

    LordDz_2 Strange things happens here

    Messages:
    2,956
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I like.
     
  8. Empty

    Empty Member

    Messages:
    14,912
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think the scout changes were a desperately needed change and I honestly think everyone would have said 'no' to my changes so I think it was better to hammer it out and put it in, for the most part I think it's had a positive effect on gameplay and made the game deeper, no matter what people say.

    However for this I'm not an expert, I've played empires infantry for many years and I know it back to front, thats why I was confident in redesigning it without significant input, but I spend little time in tanks, so I need extra opinions and discussion.

    One of the key parts of this redesign is it works with the current research GUI well, it's simpler and only goes like 3 or 4 levels deep, so it's not necessary to memorise a confusing layout, every research except chassis will be identical so commanders and even players can understand it instantly, and the flaws in the research GUI will be less pronounced. I'll b e able to say "We have tier 2 bio" and everyone on the team will understand they have access to 2 slot bio weaponry.

    I'm intending to go more towards older tank balance where tanks were powerful and fragile, over many patches a lot of health creep has come in through resistances, scriptable buildings and armor tweaks, and essentially though it doesn't seem like big changes, if you compare with say 2.12 you'll find heavy tanks have nearly twice as much HP as they used to, and most weapons haven't scaled up to match that. Also buildings have gotten way tougher which makes little sense to me, the game worked fine with barracks being fragile and costing 400 res so I don't see why over the last few years barracks have gone from 100hp 400 res to 250hp and 200 res, especially considering tank weapons haven't really gotten any more poweful.

    I feel like cutting buffing up weapons and nerfing down armors to make combat much faster will reward skilled play, if you can handle your tank better than your foe you'll kill him much quicker and he'll have less opportunity to flee or get damage off that he doesn't deserve, which is a lot of what in my opinion is bogging down tank fights.

    Mainly though I just want games to end. People complain about the slippery slope but making everything impossible to kill doesn't give a losing team a chance of coming back. If a team is down to one refinery to 10 and has no vehicle factory in the lategame, they should lose in a matter of minutes. A lot of our really unpleasant matches are just matches where the losing team can hold on for a very long time but has no actual hope of winning and I think that's frustrating for both teams, if the game is over then there's no need to prolong it.
     
  9. 101010

    101010 Member

    Messages:
    996
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Loving your ideas Empty.

    In your pics it shows heavies with GL slots ???
    Was that fixed ?
    Last I checked they didn't work well with heaves. They came out at weird angles and kind of bounced off the end of the tank.
    Other then that shit looks amazing. I really like the UTIL branches.
     
  10. D.D.D. Destroyer

    D.D.D. Destroyer Member Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    9,509
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I can't imagine those changes too well and I'm not sure if I'll like them, but I think I'm okay with seeing them in-game.

    What's the worst that could happen anyways :rolleyes:
     
  11. Empty

    Empty Member

    Messages:
    14,912
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We can probably do some quick model changes to make GLs work.
    I do intend to give heavies a GL slot, as an additional 'ability', since I want heavies to be very powerful lategame giving them lots of weapon slots allows them to have lots of variety and support capability (GLs are meant to be support roles like stunning and doting areas)
    The idea being that if you have decked out heavies you can give them the perfect loadout you need to solve your problem and therefore draw the game to a close.

    I'm not fully sure of how it's all going to work in the small scale yet myself. But unless you're commanding the main changes that will affect you will be:

    1) Tanks dying faster
    2) Bases dying faster
    3) Research decisions not being as important (there is no 'right' or 'wrong' tree, how you use your gear is more important than what it is)
    4) The return of upgraded RPGs and APC spawn research
    5) Jeep nerf
     
  12. D.D.D. Destroyer

    D.D.D. Destroyer Member Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    9,509
    Likes Received:
    111
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I take it all back 4) is amazing and I want it
     
  13. Paradox

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

    Messages:
    6,926
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Litterally game saving suggestions. I'll make a huge post when I have time.
     
  14. LordDz_2

    LordDz_2 Strange things happens here

    Messages:
    2,956
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since APC Spawns now are being researched and placed in the bio tree, will it be renamed birth tanks and we can have that as an attachment for the apcs?
     
  15. Ikalx

    Ikalx Member

    Messages:
    6,210
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Firstly, I like your trees. They seem like a good approach and a much better system overall. I do believe we used to have a system that was more about differences and play styles than jackpot counters, and although we always had composite, its drawback was actually quite legitimate because it fed directly back into resources being useful. I'm not saying it was the best way to go, but it worked.

    For #1 how quickly are buildings dying here? I have to say, one of the unhappiest jobs is repairing, because you're taking incoming damage at the same time as trying to save something. Something that usually a lot of your team doesn't give a damn about, even if it's the spawn that'll secure the area. Building on the other hand can be quite relaxing, but repairing rarely gets you any accolades, even if you save the team (yes, you can save the team repairing!).

    For #4, I think to make things work the way you'd like standard armour needs to be about 20% lower in the HP department. Everything else will probably work out ok though.

    At #5 I'm tempted to recommend using research points instead, but I'm not actually sure how basic res would work in the new system, so it might work out naturally.
     
  16. A-z-K

    A-z-K Member

    Messages:
    3,241
    Likes Received:
    215
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is a much better system than we have now.

    I think research costing res isn't necessarily bad but I think it should drip away res (say 1 res point per % complete for example) - it still makes ref points more important but it isn't as punishing to a broke team that could really do without being completely immobile right then or not being able to drop a barracks into freshly contested places. It allows commanders to keep researching. If you run out of res the research stops.

    I think the problem of repair-orgies is probably just best fixed with a cooldown on the tool's recharging. Have a cool down of a couple of seconds after it runs out and then have it start charging slowly and speed up as it goes. I've always though of the "calculator" like a weapon and thought it should have a high burst compared to sustained healing thing going on.
     
  17. flasche

    flasche Member Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    13,299
    Likes Received:
    168
    Trophy Points:
    0
    upgraded rpgs are a pointless bandaid and not working out. noone would argue to make assault rifles to weak to fulfill their job reliably unless you have a certain upgrade. an its you, one of the founders of the "grenadiers first" steamgroup. i disappoint.

    something similar to APCs. without spawns they are completely pointless vehicles unless you buff anti-vehicle mgs to a level where its gonna be apc only tactics -we already had that and it was shit. (thus it have been reverted)
     
  18. flasche

    flasche Member Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    13,299
    Likes Received:
    168
    Trophy Points:
    0
    upgraded rpgs are a pointless bandaid and not working out. noone would argue to make assault rifles to weak to fulfill their job reliably unless you have a certain upgrade. you, one of the founders of the "grenadiers first" steamgroup. i disappoint.

    something similar to APCs. without spawns they are completely pointless vehicles unless you buff anti-vehicle mgs to a level where its gonna be apc only tactics -we already had that and it was shit. (thus it have been reverted)

    also, aside of this research thing you completely left out infantry-vehicle balance so in the long run this will change things but not fix problems.
     
  19. Empty

    Empty Member

    Messages:
    14,912
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I was thinking clone vats but it might be too scifi.
    Depends what people are cool with, I'm aiming to push a more scifi theme with the advanced weapons (bio cloud, EMPs, Tesla etc) so prolly yea

    #1 I want to nerf building health to the point where you can clutch repair to save a structure, but focused fire will still take it out. Atm holding a rax sucks because the rax has so much health that even if you can't outrepair the damage it'll still take a solid minute of fire to take down which is just not fun or exciting for either team. I aim to cut it down as low as I can without allowing tanks to just roll straight over barracks. So basically either you can repair the rax and keep it up, or it's a lost cause and you'll lose it in say 20-30 seconds.

    #4 prolly yea

    #5 again, that's prolly my goal. I want research to be good but I dont want a team without armor to instalose.

    Research points are a nice suggestion but as always I work in the confines of whats available to me now, so I don't like to design unless candles says he's gonna do it. I dont want research to cost shitloads, but I would like it to cost some res. Basic gear (mk1 weapons, armor and engine) will probably be pretty cheap, but moving up to tier 2 will be expensive and tier 3 will require a nice bank of res. Prepare to restrict that VF.

    I really like the idea of research cost being a flow, I think that'll cull some painful moments. I might look into getting it done, great suggestion.
    Also with the calculator I like your idea. I'll look into making building repair fast, but drain your calculator fast as well. I think that's both a buff in keeping structures up, but sustained fire will kill you once your tool runs out, again speeding up the entire barracks assault fight.

    Who said anything about nerfing RPG for RPG upgrade ;)
    APC spawns I agree with you somewhat, it's partially in there because I think early game APCs are a little stronk (though not so strong they truly deserve a nerf, I think they're pretty fair except APCs have too much health and speed) but mainly in because I wanted a cool utility for the bio tree.

    Infantry-tank balance is fairly good as it is but in general I'll be aiming to nerf MGs since they aren't fun to fight and are dodgy at best, while sort of buffing the general weapons a tank gets. Every cannon will be as effective vs infantry as a standard cannon, or better. So essentially cannons will be usable, but you'll need to devote attention to killing infantry OR take an anti-infantry weapon (e.g. bioML or napalm)
    The biggest hit to infantry will be stunstickies no longer working as intended, since every engine will be biodiesel. I'll see if we can get some kind of manual stun effect in there but candles would be required. Stunstickies will still affect commanders at the very least.

    Try not to think of the changes as taking stuff away, but more shuffling everything about. It's hardly prohibitive to go into bio and grab APC spawns (we're talking probably 3 minutes of research there, maybe 4 and you'll have easy access to an engine straight after)
     
  20. Ikalx

    Ikalx Member

    Messages:
    6,210
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The best idea for a good medium of apc spawning is to have a slight cooldown on the ability, and have research remove that. But really... apc spawns are really integral to lots of things and removing them usually makes them highly necessary to research first...which is a bit redundant. Also having and not having them unbalances things wildly and cuts down a hell of a lot of normal infantry-based tactics you can use. APC's are basically the single best thing for team mobility, and even though they can be abused, they're still incredibly necessary.

    Edit:
    You know what I see most often? One person notices a barracks is going down, runs to repair it and calls for help. 1 more person comes. After that no one comes and 3 people are left defending a base and basically just repairing a barracks constantly. Eventually the barracks goes down, leaving no bases left for that team.

    If I didn't see people being so thickheaded so often - even though I rarely play, I would welcome what you're saying. Heck, I never liked the idea of vehicles doing near-negligible damage to buildings, and it's true it takes ages and ages to take down a building. And yet still, everyone remains at the front trying to win a tough position, while the enemy just takes out their real base.

    But maybe you're right. Maybe if people just learn that when vehicles are taking out your main you don't have 10 minutes, you have 1. Maybe then people won't waste the game trading down, or trading for nothing.
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2015

Share This Page