Cogmind > General Discussion

Should there be a corruption threshold before data loss occurs?

(1/5) > >>

Happylisk:
I think corruption is a smart mechanic that's handled well in the game.  Once you become moderately corrupted you begin to suffer heat spikes, misdirections, parts fall off, and energy drains.  Mostly harmless fluff, but in the right (or wrong) circumstances this can cause a fight to go south.  You also have weapons failing to cycle or even worse firing randomly.  You can't play cogmind without quickly learning to never carry a launcher around equipped while corrupted.

The one aspect of corruption that I think has some problems is data loss.  The worst offender, maprot, has already thankfully been removed.  Data loss as it remains essentially takes two basics forms.  One, you forget what parts are.  As a mechanic I think it works.  After you play long enough, you know what parts enemies are dropping after a fight.  What this mechanic really does is it forces you to make a decision when you encounter stockpiles.  Maybe those unrecognized devices are advanced force fields, maybe they're field recycling units.  You can strap one on to find out and restore the loss data but that will cost matter and, more importantly, time.  It forces the player to make a strategic decision with food clock ramifications, so I think it works.

My big problem with data loss  is that it can destroy data that's effectively irreplaceable.  Some of the best rewards in the cave branches are the derelict logs.  A log that gives you a branch entrance, zone layouts, or index(machine) for a future floor is huge.  The problem is, it's so easy to lose this data, even in the face of extremely trivial corruption. 

An anecdotal example:  I was in the proximity caves on -3, looking for the exit to research.  I found a log giving me the entrance to Testing on -3.  That's a huge bit of data!  I bumped into a programmer who gave me 2% corruption.  I slapped on my system restoration module and made for the exit.  In that interval I still managed to suffer two "data loss" corruption events.  On -3, I did not get the intel reveal for testing, and had to find it the hard way.

Maybe that was exceptionally bad luck, but I feel like it's way too easy to lose data from derelict logs due to corruption.  The whole point of branches is that they're high risk / high reward scenarios, and if the rewards can be that easily lost, they're much less desirable.  I know that the derelict logs aren't the main rewards in each cave branch, but they're certainly big reasons why I go in in the first place. 

While there are anti corruption devices in the game, I don't think that solves this particular problem this given how easily data loss can occur.  A system restoration module can take hundreds of turns to get rid of corruption, and walking around with a corruption screen to block corruption effects 1) is not guaranteed to work, and 2) handicaps your combat abilities.  They're certainly useful devices, but they're not going to prevent you from suffering the occasional data loss effect.  As it stands, even with anti corruption utilities, as little as 1% corruption in caves can result in you forfeiting extremely valuable intel.

tldr: People are inherently loss adverse.  They'd rather not lose something they already have than gain something of equivalent value. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion).  It's a bummer to lose a branch reward, even if a minor reward, due to an RNG mechanic.  My suggestion: Put a corruption threshold before data loss occurs.  Even 5% would do it.  If you're running around caves super corrupted that's one thing, but if it's extremely minor corruption it'd be nice to avoid corruption effects that are in essence irreparable. 

zxc:
I didn't know you could lose derelict log data through corruption. That sounds harsh.

I like the idea of thresholds for different corruption effects. This adds an even greater meta knowledge component though which I don't like. Perhaps, as you get more corrupted, you experience worse corruption effects a greater proportion of the time (as well as experiencing effects more often).

Another thing that can bug me is how even 1% corruption completely trashes your sensors if you don't have a signal interpreter. I think it could be more gentle than that. Plus, rare false alarm ?s on the map are probably more interesting and confusing than just littering the map with them all the time, but you'll never experience it in that way, only the spammy way.

The other thing is accidental firing, which can be EXTREMELY HARSH in the wrong places, and can happen with just 1% corruption. If that started happening past 5% corruption say, it would not be as ridiculous.

DDarkray:
I always thought the data loss corruption loses only your item memory. I'm suspecting the Derelict Log you retrieved is showing you the exits found within Testing branch, not the exit to the branch.

zxc:
I think it tells you the location of the exit leading to Testing as Happylisk says.

Happylisk:
Derelict logs simply give you a hack selected from a list applied to a future level (the hacks being zone layouts, component/prototype stockpiles, security intel (ie sentry locations), machine index, branch/main access/exit points, etc).  In the same way you can lose data obtained from hacking a terminal, you can lose data obtained from these logs (ie future free hacks).  Easy to replicate.  On a factory level pull off a hack like Index(Terminals) and then let yourself get corrupted.  Eventually a data loss corruption will erase that terminal intel.   It's quite a bummer.

I've been mentally keeping track of the interplay between derelict logs and corruption for awhile.  I am 99.99% sure that corruption can erase derelict log info.  If I'm wrong Kyzrati will chime in.  It's also worth noting that if there's some confusion among veteran players like us about this mechanic, you have some opacity here that needs addressing.   

While I proposed a threshold before data loss occurs, zxc's weighting proposal works too.  As it stands, it seems like all corruption events have the same chance of occurring, and higher corruption merely 1) increases the frequency of corruption events, and 2) decreases the chances of successful hacking .  One solution to this problem is to make the worse corruption effects (data loss and FCS firings) have a lower chance to occur at low corruption levels.  Regardless of whether you use a threshold or weighted chance dependent on corruption level, you can avoid meta knowledge problems by 1) mentioning this in the manual, and/or 2) having a friendly robot in Zion mention this mechanic. 

zxc brings up a good point about the shooting corruption effects.  My first serious attempt at a research branch ended because of a weapon triggered by corruption around you know what.  I was barely corrupted, so that is quite the harsh result.  Yet another reason to address the worst corruption events happening at trivial corruption levels.   

There's a third solution besides weighting or thresholds: remove data loss as a corruption event except for the loss of item memory.  I didn't include this in my first proposal, since I thought it might be too extreme, but I do thing that intel lost is a not fun mechanic.  It reminds me of item destruction in DCSS: a not fun experience that was rightfully removed.  No one likes losing stuff because your number came up on the RNG lotto.  Note that item destruction in Cogmind is completely different: the entire game revolves around item destruction, and it clearly works as a mechanic.  I agree that data loss is very flavorful, but flavor should always take a backseat to mechanics and gameplay experience, and once a feature ventures into "not fun" territory it needs looking at.

Upon reflection, I realize I said something in my OP that was not correct.  The loss of derelict intel is not irreplaceable.  Because these logs are just free hacks, you could replace any loss intel (with the exception of the unique zone layout logs) by simply pulling off the hack on the next level.  The thing is, a pure combat build is not going to easily be pulling off top tier hacks like Access(Main) or Index(Machines), especially once you're in the research levels.  That's why losing the intel from these logs is so depressing!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page