Author Topic: [Resolved, essentially] Upgrades again  (Read 2110 times)

Offline Mánagarmr

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,251
  • if (isInRange(target)) { kill(target); }
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #30 on: September 15, 2016, 06:37:51 AM »
Simple stat upgrades are pretty boring, tbh. I'd rather be without such things at all. MkI for everyone!
Click here to get started with Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports.

Thank you for contributing to making the game better!

Offline kasnavada

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #31 on: September 15, 2016, 07:09:33 AM »
Simple stat upgrades are pretty boring, tbh. I'd rather be without such things at all. MkI for everyone!

Hum, well. I used to think that. Well balanced they add a lot to the game. I remember a time where I played starcraft. With the right offensive upgrades (protoss), dark templar one shotted zerglings, and with the right armor (zerg player), they didn't. In fact a lot of situations were the same, in the game... I thought it added a lot to the game. Of course the balance there is going to be waaay more refined than what's possible for AI War II. Not the same money, quantity of dev, units, and players involved. But still, it removed the "simple upgrades = boring" idea from me.

Offline Misery

  • Global Moderator
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,011
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #32 on: September 15, 2016, 07:28:06 AM »
Quote
2) From what Chris seems to have in mind, the goal doesn't seem to make a monstruously upgraded ship that has little in common with the base one, rather to enable "base" designs to tweak, and evolve somewhat if necessary against whatever new tool the AI unlocked. I like this vision, a lot. It would not revolutionize the role. You'd have "fighter A" and "fighter B", but both would recognizable as fighters, following the idea that mk1 and mk2 are fighters despite having wildly different stats.

The problem with this is that there's no way to represent that visually, and uniformly.  "Fighter A" and "Fighter B" would still just look like "Fighter", basically.   The Mark system actually didn't do that:  There were 5 marks, EVERY ship that had multiple versions used the exact same 5 symbols (making it super easy to look at and grasp, and this was very, very important) and each mark ONLY represented an increase in base stats.  None of them were "Well at this mark you get 50 armor, but at THIS mark your speed increases and you don't have the armor, but this ship over here does different things at each", which is what you'd get with this new system, and is a huge part of the problem.  With the Mark system, you always always knew that II was better than I, and III was better than II, and so on, each meaning pretty much JUST increases in HP and attack power and general basics... very easy, and totally uniform across all ships. "The next level is better and there are 5 levels" is the one and only thing you need to know about the Mark system. When you unlock your next level of bombers, they're just outright better than the last, period. But there's no way this new system could do any of that, considering the absurd variety of possible upgrades.  It couldn't be uniform, and there'd be too many things to remember because each is not necessarily better than another within the same set of upgrades for a ship, and trying to represent it visually would be a bloody mess.

Having all sorts of different upgrade effects without an easy-to-instantly-spot visual effect in a game as complicated as this one is not a good idea; that's why the first game didn't do this whatsoever.   This goes for player ships and/or AI ships. 

It works in something like StarCraft because the game as a whole is completely different.  StarCraft is EXTREMELY focused on micro and small battles between unit groups, and things like build order.   AI War, on the other hand, doesn't even remotely come close to playing whatsoever like StarCraft; you've got LOTS of different maps to deal with all in one campaign all at the same time on an overall galaxy map, there's asymmetry between different groups, there's tons and tons of special structures, there's just outright TONS more things and much greater complexity from a non-micro standpoint.  There's an enormous amount of things to deal with.  Wheras in StarCraft you tend to be super-focused on A: your base, and B: a few groups of units.... and that's it.   The complexity doesn't come from the same source types as it does in AI War.    And lastly.... you don't get even remotely close to the unit scale with StarCraft as you do with AI War.  200 units in StarCraft is quite a big amount.  In AI War, it's hardly anything at all...  With so many possible things all over the place to look at and mentally grasp, it's important to keep each individual one as distinct as possible, PARTICULARLY from a visual standpoint.

Ugh, if I keep going on about this I'm going to make less and less sense... sorry if this all seems more garbled than usual.  Posting kinda close to bed time here.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2016, 07:29:59 AM by Misery »

Offline kasnavada

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #33 on: September 15, 2016, 08:11:15 AM »
Having all sorts of different upgrade effects without an easy-to-instantly-spot visual effect in a game as complicated as this one is not a good idea; that's why the first game didn't do this whatsoever.   This goes for player ships and/or AI ships. 

What about symbols at the side of the "mark" indicator then ?
You'd have the ship, like before, then the mark, a bit on the left, and one to multiple differentiated icons, showing upgrades ?

If no upgrade, only the mark in the middle.

Offline Misery

  • Global Moderator
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,011
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #34 on: September 15, 2016, 08:22:35 AM »
Probably would be too much.  The symbol of the mark system works because there's only one on any given ship.  But if there were the possibility for a bunch more, you'd get this hideous blob of symbols (probably of different colors, too) going all over the place, and the more ships in the area, the worse it'd get, depending on how much upgrading had been done. 

Offline Tridus

  • Master Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,305
  • I'm going to do what I do best: lecture her!
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #35 on: September 15, 2016, 08:27:07 AM »
As for 80+ bonus ships in the first game, greater evil it may be, but that one's easily solved:  Just don't have redundant ships this time around.  Make absolutely sure that each individual one has a real purpose and role, and has enough difference between it and other ships before going into the game.  If it doesn't match those conditions, out it goes.   There's certainly no reason for that redundancy, after all, and nobody really likes finding the more boring ships at an advanced research station or whatever anyway, of course.

Just splitting the diffrent races off and giving them their own ships will help this. When you remove the Spire and Zenith versions of things, suddenly there's more room for a Human variant of X that is kinda like the Spire Y but a bit different, since you no longer have access to both at the same time.

For any one given race, the list of what you have should be *significantly* shorter.

Offline kasnavada

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #36 on: September 15, 2016, 08:51:45 AM »
Probably would be too much.  The symbol of the mark system works because there's only one on any given ship.  But if there were the possibility for a bunch more, you'd get this hideous blob of symbols (probably of different colors, too) going all over the place, and the more ships in the area, the worse it'd get, depending on how much upgrading had been done.

That's where I think that Chris wants to, by design, to keep the upgrades, and therefore the icons, to about 2 or 3 max.

Offline skrutsch

  • Newbie Mark III
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #37 on: September 15, 2016, 09:08:26 AM »
Quickie question:  If hardening means "double health", then what does "The equivalent of 3x hardening built in" mean?  Is that 3 doublings, so 8 times the original HP?

p.s. I think the term "hardening" is a useless complication and would like to just say "6 times HP" or whatever we mean.

Offline kasnavada

  • Hero Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #38 on: September 15, 2016, 09:17:18 AM »
The upgrades can't be taken twice, AFAIK.

Offline Misery

  • Global Moderator
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,011
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #39 on: September 15, 2016, 09:24:22 AM »
As for 80+ bonus ships in the first game, greater evil it may be, but that one's easily solved:  Just don't have redundant ships this time around.  Make absolutely sure that each individual one has a real purpose and role, and has enough difference between it and other ships before going into the game.  If it doesn't match those conditions, out it goes.   There's certainly no reason for that redundancy, after all, and nobody really likes finding the more boring ships at an advanced research station or whatever anyway, of course.

Just splitting the diffrent races off and giving them their own ships will help this. When you remove the Spire and Zenith versions of things, suddenly there's more room for a Human variant of X that is kinda like the Spire Y but a bit different, since you no longer have access to both at the same time.

For any one given race, the list of what you have should be *significantly* shorter.


Wait, are there going to be different races to play as?  Something like that?

I seriously cant keep up with all this stuff, so I apologize if that's been answered like 10 times elsewhere already.  That design document is always changing, and I've never actually had to work with a design document myself, even during Starward Rogue's development, so I'm a little lost in it to start with.

Offline Tridus

  • Master Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,305
  • I'm going to do what I do best: lecture her!
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #40 on: September 15, 2016, 09:35:17 AM »
As for 80+ bonus ships in the first game, greater evil it may be, but that one's easily solved:  Just don't have redundant ships this time around.  Make absolutely sure that each individual one has a real purpose and role, and has enough difference between it and other ships before going into the game.  If it doesn't match those conditions, out it goes.   There's certainly no reason for that redundancy, after all, and nobody really likes finding the more boring ships at an advanced research station or whatever anyway, of course.

Just splitting the diffrent races off and giving them their own ships will help this. When you remove the Spire and Zenith versions of things, suddenly there's more room for a Human variant of X that is kinda like the Spire Y but a bit different, since you no longer have access to both at the same time.

For any one given race, the list of what you have should be *significantly* shorter.


Wait, are there going to be different races to play as?  Something like that?

I seriously cant keep up with all this stuff, so I apologize if that's been answered like 10 times elsewhere already.  That design document is always changing, and I've never actually had to work with a design document myself, even during Starward Rogue's development, so I'm a little lost in it to start with.

Yes. Short version: You can play as Human, Spire, or some kind of Neo-Zenith (original Zenith being pretty much extinct, right?). Sounds like play styles will differ between them, such that the Spire may get their huge ships and draw a disproportionately large AI response because of it. Also suggested that there will be a thinning out of all the ships on the Human side to spread them out more amongst the factions, so the Human side won't have a zillion Spire/Zenith ships (but someone could mod them back in pretty easily to the Human faction if they wanted to).

Long version: http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,19129.0.html
« Last Edit: September 15, 2016, 09:44:03 AM by Tridus »

Offline skrutsch

  • Newbie Mark III
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #41 on: September 15, 2016, 10:37:25 AM »
The upgrades can't be taken twice, AFAIK.

Oops, my fault for not being more clear.  (It seems I'm incapable of asking a "quickie question", sigh.)

In section 8.a Player-And-AI Ship Designs, the Spire flavor of the Fighter, the Bomber, and several other ships reads  "The equivalent of 3x hardening built in."  This should be reworded to clarify if Spire is a 6x or 8x health increase, or whatever else was intended.

Online Cinth

  • Global Moderator
  • Core Member Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,527
  • Volunteer and occasional contractor
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #42 on: September 15, 2016, 10:52:30 AM »
The upgrades can't be taken twice, AFAIK.

Oops, my fault for not being more clear.  (It seems I'm incapable of asking a "quickie question", sigh.)

In section 8.a Player-And-AI Ship Designs, the Spire flavor of the Fighter, the Bomber, and several other ships reads  "The equivalent of 3x hardening built in."  This should be reworded to clarify if Spire is a 6x or 8x health increase, or whatever else was intended.

It's an unnamed tech that has the effect of 3x hardening.
Quote from: keith.lamothe
Opened your save. My computer wept. Switched to the ST planet and ship icons filled my screen, so I zoomed out. Game told me that it _was_ totally zoomed out. You could seriously walk from one end of the inner grav well to the other without getting your feet cold.

Offline skrutsch

  • Newbie Mark III
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #43 on: September 15, 2016, 11:00:41 AM »
Quote from: skrutsch on Today at 10:37:25 AM
Quote from: kasnavada on Today at 09:17:18 AM
The upgrades can't be taken twice, AFAIK.

Oops, my fault for not being more clear.  (It seems I'm incapable of asking a "quickie question", sigh.)

In section 8.a Player-And-AI Ship Designs, the Spire flavor of the Fighter, the Bomber, and several other ships reads  "The equivalent of 3x hardening built in."  This should be reworded to clarify if Spire is a 6x or 8x health increase, or whatever else was intended.

It's an unnamed tech that has the effect of 3x hardening.

Um, and what does "3x hardening" mean?  If a Human ship has 1000 health, does that mean that the Spire version with "3x hardening" has 8000 health (i.e. doubled thrice) or 6000 health (i.e 2000 x 3), or what?

Evidently "hardening" is hard, for me at least :)

Offline skrutsch

  • Newbie Mark III
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Upgrades again
« Reply #44 on: September 15, 2016, 11:03:54 AM »
In section 7.b Tech Upgrades there are 14 listed, so far.   Pumpkin's "hedge" mentioned some other things that might be good to consider as tech upgrades.  I'm not arguing merits of any of these either way, just making a list:
- deployment time
- teleport
- tachyon
- projected AoE
- beam AoE
- refactoring (tractors)
- paralyzing (tractors)
- self-damage
- self-destruct
- self-replicate
- AoE
- vampirism

My opinion here at the moment is "the more the merrier", using tech costs and Pumpkin's "tech bush per ship type" to keep things organized and prevent/discourage OP combinations.  But if the modders wanna create a self-replicating beam AoE vampiric teleporter I'm all for it.