Random thought that ill probably work on soon. Why not just simplify all the trees Weapons -Cannons -2slot -3slot -Arty Cannons -Machine Guns -Missile Launchers -New Shit? Engines -Fission -3Phs -AdvCl -Bio -etc. -New Shit? Armours -Compo -Refle -Regen -etc. -New Shit? Chassis -Medium -Heavy -Arty -New vehicles!?!?!? (Simple script edits to spice up stuff) Misc -Turrets etc. A layout a bit like this, i'm sure most of you would get the idea. Balance out all the times to accommodate of course. but i believe it would remove all the unnecessary naming "advanced this" "something that" sort of thing and give new commanders a much easier time figuring it all out. Opinions?
I think that would take out some of the tactical play of research if I think thats what your aiming on doing, but I will say the current tree could do with a good checking over and redo some of the branch descriptions.
I mean, the whole tactical risk taking factor of research has been gone for a long time so might as well go ahead with this.
im currently working on something to simplify the research, basically 2 'packs' that have basic equipment for everything and each have 3 more packs in them for the next tier of stuff. and those each have 3 long research game enders with each tier, the differences between packs increase, thus choices are more influential later in the tree.
oh the shitstorm i earned when i suggested this years ago :D admitably we still had costs, so the change was bigger as you could pay in parts. but this still is a thing with the above suggestion, just with time as sole cost. if you say "add prerequisites" you neglect that some items share them. and those "bundles" also is a reason why you get other research from that tree. yet i still think its more comprehensible. all this prerequisite stuff is rather artificial (tho ofc you "pay" in steps, not as a whole, this still sticks) if you want to account for that youll need code support (a "simple" restructuring should work without). if reserach code is touched id also like to see prerequisites such as "you cant get heavies before you didnt research x other items". the sole reason why id want that is more diversity and less "go straight to x heavy design, med is just a stop on the way because it doesnt take that long".
hm, i was thinking more about it. there is another thing it takes away aside of "stopping points" for research. and this is "bundled research". why do you decide for a tree? you decide because it contains the most useable collection items in your situation. you cannot afford to open all trees before you go to chassis, it would cost you way too much time, so you accept some less ideal items for one great item. so far the theory, its not always true in all balancing iterations. yet this should not be neglected. if you compensate with additional prerequisites or bonuses in your suggested "ordered" research tree it would basically stay the same as now. it has a difference tho, its comprehensible even for a completely new player. if you tell a new player "we need another weapon" how is he supposed to tell where to look. but if the trees would say "weapon, armor, engine, ..." it couldnt be more obvious. but we should be careful with such changes. it often has a less obvious negative impact on the game. much like removing research cost. it was in good intention, but i think it took away from the game so much. it also makes heavies possible early even tho you field a ton of other vehicles. a true heavy rush once meant just very few vehicles, the vf was locked a lot because you needed the money for research AND tanks afterwards. and im not talking about situations where shit went sideways, but rather balanced rounds.
my point exactly, this is to help out newer players more, and with very few good commanders left, i want to encourage newer players to try out commander. And this new system would make it much easier for them to understand where to get what. Of course i will balance out all the timings to accommodate for this new layout.
Research is about compromise. You go to the tree with the best armour but you have an average tier engine, or weapon. Or perhaps you want the best weapon but your tanks will be low armoured as a result of this. The changes you have proposed would simply mean people cherrypicked everything they wanted. There would be literally the same research every game, far moreso than we have now. I do not like this idea and I never have.
There is no compromise much anymore, becuase every good commander knows what they want, so they go for it, not caring how long it will take.
not exactly, i do think and i tried to point that out (not enough i guess), that what i called "bundled research" is an important element in balance. it allows to weight pros and cons - its very important for choices, it makes less good items available.1 this should not be taken away. but i also think its possible to mimic this by lets say reseaching Abs gives a small bonus towards the research time of HE CN. wheter this is better or worse, i cannot tell. im actually only not opposed to this, because i think it would simplify the game where its arbitrary complicated. i dont think its a good argument to say, "it isnt like that" in this context. if it isnt, it should be made this way again, because the general concept its great. btw its exactly how i research, i try to minimize time to get useable heavies (unless someone on my team insists on some cheap, often map based, tactic like early VF apc rush or straight HEMG/DUAPCs). only after i have them i go for the best items - i do that since always and it works quite well. i lost a bit of track which item is good against which, today i just use what i get, i find most items useful in one way or the other - or rather lets say, i can use most items, its only my choice as comm anyway. except for fission on light vehicles, which is very close to completely unuseable with a ping greater than 100.
We shouldn't be striving to help out new players for the commander role so much. We need to help them out in infantry/tank combat, but not commander. By doing this suggestion we are dumbing down the entirety of Empires, much like Call of Duty has dumbed down their game in the effort to appease little children and make it easier for them and look at what's happening now to that game. While it is hard to help Newbies com, they get plenty of experience at night and I've seen plenty on servers by themselves learning what things do and how to use the com vehicle. It's a steep learning curve, but again the commander rate for newbies is probably 1 for every 50 that join that actually enjoy it and we should continue to let them enjoy it by having actual work for the com to do. Empires has a niche, a specific niche that appeals to the RTS players and the FPS players. The RTS players LOVE commander role and the whole experience should not be dumbed down.
lowering the bar for accessibility does not neccessarily mean to dumb something down. and sorry, but how has CoD been dumbed down? is that even possible? how was any of them not just a generic overhyped shooter? (except for the SP campaigns up to i think CoD3 if that was MW1 - CoD2 campaign was great loved it. the acog in bo1 was cringeworthy considering the time it played in)
From the first call of duty, it has been dumbed down compared to MANY other shooters. Red Orchestra is a great example of an FPS that is hard but won't dumb down the play style to appease younger children. But over the years Call of Duty has just gotten... easier to play. It's hard to explain but a lot of people agree its been dumbed down for younger kids.
i used to like this idea because it was simple and easy. but now im kinda against it, for the reasons that trickster said also even though it does simplify the research, too much choice on what to get could confuse people. so its not much different than what we have now
well if it isnt massively different from what we have now that's fine, but its ment to make the layout simpler, rather then the understanding
the problem is balancing not research! the arguments are already told, some items could be split or put together - like spliting HMG and Depleted Uranium and pack the later somewhere matching in the "Physics" research category! also some stuff like bio rockets&mg or explosive tipped mg & shells can be put together and just increase cost or put somewhere deeper in the tree also maybe infantry weapon research could be something worth thinking about but the general structure of the research tree is okay - it is a gameplay feature and if you simplyfy it that way it gets really fast very booring and you could completly skip that and put all the research into techtiers together! xP the techtree descriptions are already detailed enough - the real issue is the pure worthlessly of some stuff wich leaves only a few options that are worth the effort of research! (someone who don't know the game enough to know what is worth to be researched and have spend time on training servers to try research strategy out should just not command!)
and also put rails and bio cn too for 'balance'? let's keep the remains of logic in game, the research is in these categories because of 'science type' used to research these, don't fuck with us
lol, that was just my point! i think you misunderstood me, i mean bio mg&rockets together and explosive mg&shells together - because they are the same weaponary - additionally i don't understand why explosive tippet bullets has its own category... - maybe for research balance okay, fuck logic then xP but the uranium depleted ammo makes no sense to me being researched with the HMG - should be an alternative to each other - eighter deadly to infantry or medium good multirole to hit vehicles just as hard as infantry!
Well, the research path is optimized for better balance, not your 'logic'. As the example you provided, DUMG is with HMG because the HMG wouldn't been researched that often. And please, I'm not asking you for your age but please do use less emoticons (using XD unironically ended like 2~ years ago)
...and now ask you why ;-) age doesn't matter that much - have seen many ppl older than me and still refusing to learn even the basic lessons of life - but luckly know also ppl that are younger than i that can still surprise me with theire sharp minds though some ppl told me to be a wise man in a young body, its always depend on the point of view! - there some points where i just don't care if ppl take me serious, so stop trying and be-eeee-eing (maybe/possibly) kind human! ;P or ignore me - that are the 2 choices you have! (but to be fair, atm i imaging myself indeed younger than i am - but you asked for it, i can't withstand such opportunitys! :D) Post scriptum: "someone without expression is not only boring, but also a natural disapointment and potential threat for life" - raw&shortened translation of a philosophic consense made about the dynamic of social life (maybe a bit "sharp", english isn't my favorite language when it goes to more complex themes - but its simpliness allows easyer communication
