Grid Sage Forums

Cogmind => Ideas => Topic started by: zxc on September 20, 2015, 08:07:31 PM

Title: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on September 20, 2015, 08:07:31 PM
'Problems'

I am pretty sure legs and wheels are underused by most players (and perhaps hover too). Wheels being underused I don't see as a problem however.

Right now the combat run meta is to ignore mass entirely and equip whatever you want while using only the two starting slots for treads. This is because adding more treads doesn't really decrease movespeed as the penalty stat is so low.

With legs, by being close to your mass capacity your movement speed slows to 115 or even slower. This reduces the effectiveness of legs since many 100 speed robots start to outpace you. Given that treads also reduce your recoil and have more integrity, you would either prefer to switch to treads or switch to faster propulsion such as hover/flight.

Suggestions

I simply suggest that additional legs/treads don't increase the movespeed delay (slow you down). So, if the legs say movespeed 100, then so long as you are within your support limit, that will be your speed. This is to buff legs in a slightly indirect way and to incentivise tread-users to upgrade some propulsion slots and to stay beneath their mass support limit. To incentivise the latter even further, I also suggest a small increase to tread penalty, say to 25.

Edit: Another way to rebalance treads would be to make each active tread reduce recoil on each weapon in a volley by say 4%, so that two active treads would reduce recoil by 2% less than currently (which is 10% for having ANY active tread). This would incentivise using more treads to reduce recoil further. However, not many weapons have recoil right now, and their recoil values are quite low. Relevant interesting but perhaps major change suggestion: increase across the board both kinetic weapon damage and recoil, so that the tread recoil reduction effect is more relevant while maintaining status quo kinetic weapon balance for other forms of propulsion.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on September 20, 2015, 10:20:43 PM
After seeing what you all are loading onto your treads, I can get behind an increase in the overweight penalty on those. The main issue is I felt that runs counter to logic--tanks with more treads can both carry more and move hella fast. But game mechanics are more important so if it needs to be done, it will. Of course, that's also solved if we go as far as to say that multiple treads don't slow you down while remaining within your mass limit. I think this might have too drastic an effect on play though, since you'll be pressed much harder to stay within your limit--as soon as you go over it the change in speed would feel much more pronounced. The current system is more flexible and eases you into the slower speed effect :/. I don't really want the support limits to feel like hard limits, which they don't for now, and that's why everyone's happy to let them go over a bit (but make no mistake, doing so is still detrimental to your chances of survival!).

As for legs, I'm not sure we have enough data to say anything one way or another. I personally prefer legs, even for combat runs, because you can carry a lot and they're still fairly fast. Not for fleeing but for both repositioning during combat and generally getting around. Part of what causes treaded Cogminds to end up in prolonged engagements is sticking around in one area too long, or just taking forever to move around and gather loot, explore rooms, etc. Legs don't have as much of a problem with that, since you can efficiently move to a better area for fighting that is less likely to attract attention, while still supporting all the armament you need to achieve victory in the given battle.

For recoil I wanted to start with a simpler system, but a per-tread effect is probably a good way to go, especially now that they've had the massive integrity boost. Maybe -3% per slot.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on September 20, 2015, 10:34:24 PM
The current system is more flexible and eases you into the slower speed effect :/. I don't really want the support limits to feel like hard limits, which they don't for now, and that's why everyone's happy to let them go over a bit (but make no mistake, doing so is still detrimental to your chances of survival!
I agree. However, this new system need not feel like a hard limit. My point is that by making treads be a fixed speed while under support limit and variable while over support limit, you essentially have a choice: carry less stuff but move faster; or carry everything you want but move slower. Right now you pretty much move slowly no matter how much you are carrying when you have treads. If I'm carrying everything I want, it doesn't make much difference whether my move delay is 200 or 250. However, if I'm going to carry according to my support limit, I'd expect something like 150 or 175 move delay.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on September 20, 2015, 10:44:54 PM
With two treads as you're using, carrying within your support limit is 165, within the range you cite.

What I mean by the jump is, for example, if you're using three full-loaded treads @ 150 speed, then go overweight by just a tiny bit, suddenly your speed is 195 (or 225 if we raise the mod!), rather than being 150 > 165 > 180 > 195 as you add the extra treads, which give you the ability to carry significantly more.

Treads are too powerful to be faster (or better retain their max speed). And there is a difference between 200 and 250--in my opinion being 25% slower is pretty significant.

If they were going to be any faster, regardless of the circumstances, I'd want to drop their integrity and/or support values, but the intent is for them to be really out there in terms of being on the heavy end of the spectrum.

Legs might be better than you give them credit for...
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on September 20, 2015, 11:10:29 PM
What I mean by the jump is, for example, if you're using three full-loaded treads @ 150 speed, then go overweight by just a tiny bit, suddenly your speed is 195 (or 225 if we raise the mod!), rather than being 150 > 165 > 180 > 195 as you add the extra treads, which give you the ability to carry significantly more.

What I mean is that unlocking two more propulsion slots for treads in order to just move at 195 speed (IF I stay under the support limit) is really quite pointless when I could keep it at the initial two and move at ~220 speed while gaining the benefits of two more utilities.

Past a certain move delay, moving in combat becomes a bad idea. I think below about 125 is good for repositioning, and below about 300 is decent for critical repositioning. Too much delay above that and then you're usually best off sitting and blasting everything to bits.

Anyway, this is all just stuff to chew on for now. I'd welcome input from others.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on September 20, 2015, 11:19:48 PM
Yep, we'll see what other input comes along.

Great point about sticking with fewer treads and taking the penalty to free up slots compared to the speed benefits. I'll pull together a chart and look at the balance from that perspective. A greater penalty would solve that, which would also be an argument for allowing a faster base speed under the current system.

(More tread slots also gives you some good shields as well, though.)
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Happylisk on September 21, 2015, 11:02:35 AM
I've only ever considered getting a 3rd tread slot as psuedo armor substitute, cause getting treads is slightly easier than getting armor.  However, that was before I realized how easy it is to properly loot sentries.

I agree with K that you're probably undervaluing legs.  In one of my runs I used legs for research and found the ability to reposition without taking 6 shots to the face to be very handy. 

I also want to being experimenting with a melee build.  My napkin theorycrafting makes me think that a melee build needs legs in order to be able to move more at less at pace with grunts and hunters while still being able to wield the melee weapon and wear soem armor.  With a pure melee build you'd save on matter and energy, which gives you more room to play with forcefields, swapping, and fabrication.  Throw on some sensors so you never fight in the open, and you might have something.  Slashing weapons for most enemies to lop off their weapons, piercing weapons for sentries and behemoths to deal with their hides. 
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on September 21, 2015, 09:48:26 PM
Legs might be better than you give them credit for...

I agree with K that you're probably undervaluing legs.  In one of my runs I used legs for research and found the ability to reposition without taking 6 shots to the face to be very handy. 

Alright you guys. Listen: I don't undervalue legs. I used legs a bunch of times. E.g.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Notice my 205 move delay with legs. As you can see, legs were roughly as slow as treads, except lower integrity and no bonus to recoil reduction. To make any decent use of the speed of legs, you need to unlock several slots for them and you need to carry less stuff. By doing that, you're weakening yourself in multiple ways, and all that just to move at ~150-175 speed. Not to mention how slow you'd move if any legs got blown off (and you'd have less room for spares because you have fewer utilities and need to keep mass low).

I use legs when I first start the game. They're very good on -10. I would continue using legs if you could keep their move delay at about 115 and below.

I also want to being experimenting with a melee build.  My napkin theorycrafting makes me think that a melee build needs legs in order to be able to move more at less at pace with grunts and hunters while still being able to wield the melee weapon and wear soem armor.  With a pure melee build you'd save on matter and energy, which gives you more room to play with forcefields, swapping, and fabrication.  Throw on some sensors so you never fight in the open, and you might have something.  Slashing weapons for most enemies to lop off their weapons, piercing weapons for sentries and behemoths to deal with their hides. 

Surely for a melee build you'd go with flight. I would build it very similar to my stealth builds except without some stealthy utilities and instead more armour + maybe force field + melee analysis suites. Use a piercing weapon and the speed of flight to reach enemies quickly or reposition in narrow hallways for every engagement. I'm going to try it myself. I already use melee weapons for my stealth builds, but the difference is I don't seek out enemies to kill, but instead just prey upon civilian robots.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on September 21, 2015, 11:08:54 PM
In that image you've got quite a heavy build, and are way overweight, though, so yeah not an ideal leg situation.

It does seem that towards the end of the game legs become less viable for heavy builds (and you definitely want more than two), but their capabilities benefit a medium-weight play style. Still, I see they can use a reduction in their penalty to make them more viable once you have a ton of slots. I'll review them along with the treads.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Happylisk on September 22, 2015, 06:30:32 AM
Surely for a melee build you'd go with flight. I would build it very similar to my stealth builds except without some stealthy utilities and instead more armour + maybe force field + melee analysis suites. Use a piercing weapon and the speed of flight to reach enemies quickly or reposition in narrow hallways for every engagement. I'm going to try it myself. I already use melee weapons for my stealth builds, but the difference is I don't seek out enemies to kill, but instead just prey upon civilian robots.

getting off topic so I'll keep it short.  In theory, flight is probably best for melee.  You could probably still have decent enough armor with weight redistribution utilities.  I guess my thing is, if you're already going flight why go out of your way to kill enemies, when you can fly past/around them? 

It's possible that pure melee is just suboptimal in every situation, and it's meant to be used situationally.

Going back to treads vs. legs: one small positive for legs is that they have less than a 100% chance of triggering traps.  So there's that. 
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on September 22, 2015, 06:35:03 AM
if you're already going flight why go out of your way to kill enemies, when you can fly past/around them? 
If you're playing Cogmind why go combat at all when you can stealth/speed past things?

It's possible that pure melee is just suboptimal in every situation, and it's meant to be used situationally.
I doubt it but it might require very specific tactics (like treating all combat situations like a SpBe and all enemies like centaurs).

Going back to treads vs. legs: one small positive for legs is that they have less than a 100% chance of triggering traps.  So there's that.
Really stretching for possible benefits I see :P
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on September 22, 2015, 08:13:09 AM
Melee was intended as a trusty backup or for situational use, not a pure way to tackle the game (evidence A: no multi-wielding), though I imagine it would be fun with the right parts. I've had some seriously deadly hovering and walking melee builds before, mostly out of necessity at the time.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Happylisk on September 22, 2015, 10:47:05 AM
That's what I figured. I know what a good melee guy would look like (fast, 2 improved melee suites, armor, weight distribution, cloaking, thrusters), but it seems like there's no way you could handle part replacement given the necessarily small inventory size.  Unlike a tread fiend, you're not gonna be slapping on 3 Hcp. storage units. 

Even if you could zip right up to units fast enough so they don't shoot you, melee attacks aren't that fast.  You'll be taking damage unless you one shot the target. 

None of this is a problem of course.  In a game with things like black hole launchers, yeah it's not a surprise that running around exclusively hitting people with a stick (even a plasma stick) is not optimal.  It'd be cool all the same to ascend with a melee build as a challenge run.

In conclusion, no need to nerf treads in any shape or form, these are not the droids you're looking for, move along. 
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on September 22, 2015, 11:57:35 PM
In a game with things like black hole launchers, yeah it's not a surprise that running around exclusively hitting people with a stick (even a plasma stick) is not optimal.
Among the Derelicts there are whispers of objects still held in Quarantine...
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Draco18s on September 23, 2015, 09:08:07 AM
None of this is a problem of course.  In a game with things like black hole launchers, yeah it's not a surprise that running around exclusively hitting people with a stick (even a plasma stick) is not optimal.  It'd be cool all the same to ascend with a melee build as a challenge run.

Someone hasn't watched SAO2! :D
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on September 23, 2015, 09:17:36 AM
When it comes to nuclear-level swordplay, I think Bleach beats SAO2 :P
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Draco18s on September 23, 2015, 09:22:58 AM
Probably fair, I just haven't seen Bleach, so I'm not terribly familiar.
Still though, Kirito picked a sword as his main weapon in a game fundamentally about guns.  And then proceeded to show everyone how the game is supposed to be played ("You're supposed to anticipate the prediction lines").
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on September 23, 2015, 09:26:37 AM
To be fair, I haven't really watched much SAO2, hehe. From that angle it's more appropriate here, for sure! :)
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Draco18s on September 23, 2015, 09:31:08 AM
I think its in the first ep of GGO.
But yeah, that's pretty much why I referenced it. :)
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: fernsauce on October 01, 2015, 05:43:56 PM
My 2 cents:

It feels kind of awkward that additional propulsion slots slow you down on the ground. I mean, I kind of get it, but in practice it means weird situations like when you go from 70/40 weight, equip a third treads, end up at 70/60 weight and are slower than when you started. Slots are a pretty huge investment - if your return on that is at best a tenth of a move per turn and at worst a handicap you're going to probably go for utilities instead.

In general speed calculation feels weird on the flight end, too. The marginal benefits of 1/2/3 imp flight units are 3.333 moves per turn (base), then 1.666 moves, and finally a full 5 moves per turn. Maybe it would be better if there just was a base "speed value" and "speed bonus value," and applied the slowest speed value first, then the rest as bonuses? For flight units this would probably mean more modules needing to be equipped for the mythical 10 delay shit, but possibly also 10 delay being more achievable without the 3x prototype build. It would also mean that you could be allowed to stack as many flight units as you wanted, because you wouldn't hit a "0 move delay" point where the game breaks. I have no idea if this would overall work out, but it feels like it would be easier to understand than the current calculations.

Also: wheels seem really worthless, but I can't really tell because there are so few wheels in the game. In general, though, their durability seems far too low to justify them (even on -10), and I think you are literally better off with 1x overweighted hover units than wheels, in almost every possible way. At the very least, I think wheels should have a 0 penalty for additional modules, since they're the middle of the road option.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 01, 2015, 09:16:13 PM
Thanks for the input! I do want to take a look at a lot of aspects of propulsion, starting first with some smaller adjustments (as opposed to sweeping changes).

The overweight tread situation you describe is sort of a bug I've been planning to address for the next version. It only occurs when overweight--the game already takes into account surplus active propulsion during underweight scenarios (and ignores them), but at the time I didn't realize it would be an issue while overweight as well.

I agree that flight especially has some weird things happening with it, though don't quite understand the system you describe, or how moving two to three times as fast is a "marginal benefit." Maybe I'm misunderstanding something there?

Regarding wheels, their worthlessness is intentional. This is brought up from time to time because it's not necessarily obvious, but from a design standpoint the idea is that wheels are easy to obtain (only maintenance bots use them) and useful only as a last resort. Giving them 0 penalty could be an option, though, depending on what adjustments are made to the rest of the system.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: fernsauce on October 01, 2015, 10:45:52 PM
I agree that flight especially has some weird things happening with it, though don't quite understand the system you describe, or how moving two to three times as fast is a "marginal benefit." Maybe I'm misunderstanding something there?
I meant marginal as in the benefit for each additional unit. You get 5 extra moves in a turn for a third prototype flight unit, while your second flight unit gives you significantly less. In terms of proportions, a 3rd flight unit doubles your speed while the 2nd flight unit increases it by 50%.

Essentially the number of propulsion units linearly affects your turn delay, which means they interact with how fast you can actually move in a weird way. The graph for moves/turn for imp flight units looks like this, (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=100+%2F+%2830+-+10x%29+for+x+in+[0..2) or for the prototype hover units, like this. (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=100+%2F+%2840+-+5x%29+for+x+in+[0..4) It would make more sense if these graphs were linear, but that would probably be somewhat difficult to achieve. Also, it would definitely make everything significantly uglier on the numbers side, which would suck.

That said, I still think that even disregarding all that, Imp. Flight Units and some of the other early flight prototypes should be scaled back in terms of their speed in exchange for later flight prototypes getting some of that. Even just changing them to 25 speed / -5 per extra would make them slightly faster at 1 unit, the same at 2, and then requiring 4 units to get the maximum speed. I don't think that the whole blazing fast style should be discouraged, but I do feel like you should have to invest a bit more to get it. Right now, it's just a matter of whether or not you can get those early prototypes, and frankly given that they show up on floor 2, you definitely can.

Regarding wheels, their worthlessness is intentional. This is brought up from time to time because it's not necessarily obvious, but from a design standpoint the idea is that wheels are easy to obtain (only maintenance bots use them) and useful only as a last resort. Giving them 0 penalty could be an option, though, depending on what adjustments are made to the rest of the system.
Ah, okay. I thought from their presence in the scrapyard that they were supposed to be a worthy alternative to your other propulsion choices, but it does make sense for them to kind of suck relative to the other systems. I do think I found prototype wheels once, but I never made use of them.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on October 01, 2015, 11:00:47 PM
I like how the current flight units stack right now, though I am open to changes. What I don't like, however, is that the best flight units are actually the lowest rated ones. Imp. Flight Units are the best ones I've seen, with the most energy/heat efficiency and 10 move delay for equipped just three of them. This means that it's actually rather important to get the Imp. Flight Unit schematic early on so you can make more of them later, when more of them become impossible to find.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 01, 2015, 11:11:37 PM
I do think I found prototype wheels once, but I never made use of them.
Ah that's right, there is one type of prototype wheel that no robot variants actually use. It's just got a lot more integrity than other wheels and supports a good bit more, but is still sub-par compared to other propulsion (it's made of a special material that appears in the late-game).

I'm sure the flight mechanics would have been better to begin with if I was better at math ;). Keeping the numbers very simple on the player side has definitely been one of the goals, though designing a system that is both flexible and scalable, while behaving the same across all forms of propulsion, proved difficult.

I like the idea of changing prototype flight units to use 25/-5 (and of course increase their limit to 4), thanks. Originally with those I was thinking to make them extra special by allowing you to go extremely fast with even fewer of them than other types, but as you show, and as other players have been using them, they're a bit too good (most notably once combined with Weight Redistributors, which are almost too effective).

I like how the current flight units stack right now, though I am open to changes. What I don't like, however, is that the best flight units are actually the lowest rated ones. Imp. Flight Units are the best ones I've seen, with the most energy/heat efficiency and 10 move delay for equipped just three of them. This means that it's actually rather important to get the Imp. Flight Unit schematic early on so you can make more of them later, when more of them become impossible to find.
Yep, that one has been on the list for the next version update since you brought it up. I'll look into addressing it with the other propulsion tweaks--the changes will be broader than just that one.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on October 01, 2015, 11:19:55 PM
What I'd like (and what currently exists, but only sort of) is if the player has the choice of stacking flight units in order to gain insane speed, or the player can equip a minimum number (2) in order to gain a very fast speed in combination with keeping many utility slots open.

By stacking flight units (3-4 or maybe more?) you have energy/heat issues so you must devote even more slots to maintaining it. This would become more of a 'speed' build, outrunning everything.

By using just 2 flight units, you need to use support utilities to carry everything, but you will in general have fewer energy/heat issues and you will have more slots open for cool utilities. This would become more of a 'stealth' build, outrunning some (most) enemies while avoiding/losing others (swarmers, programmers).
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 01, 2015, 11:26:56 PM
Hm, I'd like to think a possible component of the upcoming tweaks could be to reduce the flight resource costs, but most are already at only 1 or 2! Part of the problem there is there isn't enough granularity given that flight units start to stretch the rules with their insane speeds (being able to move so many times in one turn). I don't want to get into decimals--everything's supposed to be integers--otherwise I could halve the costs.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: sve9 on October 04, 2015, 09:44:00 AM
One thing that I think is strange about flight units is that often in stealth runs the higher level flight units are just flat out worse for you than the low tier flight units. Since most people support their mass with weight redistribution units anyways, the support of the flight units doesn't really matter, and the speed remains the same no matter what tier of flight unit you look at. The higher tier flight units also take more energy and produce more heat than low tier ones, so I tend to just try and stick to using basic flight units in my run. I don't know if there's a way to fix this without making speed builds completely broken though, so there's that.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Adraius on October 04, 2015, 06:01:51 PM
I don't have a whole lot to add here, most of my thoughts have already been said, but I want to chip in that my thoughts generally mirror zxc's with regard to flight unit stacking, the oddly high value of low-level flight units and treads vs. legs.  On the last point last point, it comes down to the fact that I haven't yet found a way to make gaining a mid-range move speed worth losing 1-3(?) utility slots and a whole lot of weight tolerance (e.g. big gunz and piles o' storage, two pillars of my strategy).  This is with the major caveat that I'm not convinced it's impossible, though - I don't think I'm paying enough attention to optimal positioning with an eye towards making likely routes to me lead through choke points whenever remotely possible and/r defensive positions always within reach, and my experimenting was interrupted by my honeymoon with Starsector.

P.S. I do like the idea of removing the move delay increase for multiple wheels; it makes logical sense to me given the wheel's great simplicity compared to other movement systems, and gives them a nice silver lining without disrupting their place as plentiful but disposable and low-value.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 04, 2015, 07:31:34 PM
One thing that I think is strange about flight units is that often in stealth runs the higher level flight units are just flat out worse for you than the low tier flight units. Since most people support their mass with weight redistribution units anyways, the support of the flight units doesn't really matter, and the speed remains the same no matter what tier of flight unit you look at. The higher tier flight units also take more energy and produce more heat than low tier ones, so I tend to just try and stick to using basic flight units in my run. I don't know if there's a way to fix this without making speed builds completely broken though, so there's that.
I believe there is some room to make low-tier flight worse, but the main problem comes from the goal of trying to keep most propulsion units of the same type with the same base speed. The system can get even more confusing if those values are allowed to vary. The idea is that different values are averaged together, but it gets pretty complicated once you add in other features like overloading. Part of the complication comes from internal factors, not necessarily from a player's point of view, since the game can do all the heavy lifting. I'll work on it.

@Adraius: Supporting mid-range speeds will start to look more appealing when treads get slower.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Adraius on October 04, 2015, 07:41:27 PM
@Adraius: Supporting mid-range speeds will start to look more appealing when treads get slower.
Dammit. =P Okay.  Is that a thing that's definitely happening?  If so, what form is it likely going to take?

Actually, is there a list of broad changes that have been discussed and will likely be appearing anywhere? (or can I get a brief summary, pretty please?) Ex. I've heard of an EM resistance increase and Thermal vulnerability for Programmers, but I can't find where that originated. nvm, just read Happylisk's winning combat run =)
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 04, 2015, 07:54:21 PM
@Adraius: Supporting mid-range speeds will start to look more appealing when treads get slower.
Dammit. =P Okay.  Is that a thing that's definitely happening?  If so, what form is it likely going to take?

Actually, is there a list of broad changes that have been discussed and will likely be appearing anywhere? (or can I get a brief summary, pretty please?) Ex. I've heard of an EM resistance increase and Thermal vulnerability for Programmers, but I can't find where that originated.
Those two were discussed at some point in the tournament thread.

I can't say yet exactly what will happen to treads, though my impression as per our discussion and my own observations is that making them slower will solve most of the issues without introducing other problems. It could depend on what happens to other propulsion... I don't have any details yet, for this or other tweaks, because all I've done so far on that front is take down notes from all the discussions. They'll be referenced after I reorganize and prioritize all that info for implementation, and I might drop a proposal here depending on how sweeping the changes look.

I do continue updating my notes based on ongoing discussion, but in the meantime before each release I prefer to add new stuff before tweaking old stuff. And I haven't even gotten to the latter yet for Alpha 4--the tournament really put us behind on that. I should post a progress update soon.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Adraius on October 04, 2015, 08:07:39 PM
Ok.  I'm worried about tread speed because it's already a large factor in how I die - I can't loot and scoot fast enough, so I chain-battle Programmers or other squads until corruption, Programmer Poisoning, and/or general lack of parts does me in. (or I find an exit, obviously) My "time battling/looting" to "time pushing forward" ratio already feels pretty crazy.  That's why I'm looking at legs as a propulsion system in the first place.  I'm not sure how much slower treads can be while remaining viable.

Keep in mind that I'm just saying "I don't know" - they might be fine, or it might make them entirely nonviable in Research and beyond.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 04, 2015, 08:41:40 PM
I understand your style, and will take that into account, yes :)

Part of the challenge of open development is observing and accounting for individual player behavior while at the same time seeing the game as it can play under optimal conditions.

You certainly play at a far end of the spectrum, so that's a good metric for understanding what happens at that point.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on October 04, 2015, 09:39:23 PM
Making treads slower as a whole (and removing the extra slow-down with additional treads) is one way of doing things. But if this is combined with nerfs to HCP storage units, it could get ugly for the combat-minded player.

I wonder if you could simply increase the penalty rating for treads a decent amount and remove the slow-down with additional treads. That way, if you use just two propulsion slots and stack a lot of heavy gear, you WILL be slower than before (250-300 perhaps?). However, you could counter-act this by using more propulsion slots to keep under the support limit (170-200 speed perhaps?). Do the same with legs and let them be about 100 speed while under the support limit and ~250 while well over it.

Then there would be roughly three distinct options:

1. Use two slots for treads, stack as much power as possible, and be very slow (250-300 speed).
2. Use multiple slots for treads, keep under the support limit, and be slow (~175 speed).
3. Use multiple slots for legs, keep under the support limit by avoiding some of the heaviest but strongest gear, and be medium speed (~100 speed).

Using two legs and going overweight should be a poor option. As should using wheels, although currently I don't think there is ever ANY situation where I'd equip wheels, they're that bad.

Then for hover units you use multiple slots for 30-50 speed with more specialised gear and lesser firepower. By the way, currently hover units are a much greater strain on energy and heat than flight units, because of their slow movement compared to flight.

Regarding flight units, you can move Imp. Flight Unit to rating ~*7 or so and appear only at the endgame. They can retain their low support value as their only downside, and maybe the integrity as well. For other early flight units, heat can be increased rather safely to make them worse without making them useless. Later flight units really do need to be more attractive from an energy/heat efficiency POV. I also think you can introduce endgame flight units which keep their current poor energy/heat values but have better speed (25 base, -7 additional to about 8 speed?). This allows for a speed specialised build which requires good power and good heat dissipation to run.

Flight options (this is more of a continuous scale than two discrete options but anyway...):

1. Use two slots for flight units, stack mass support utilities and go for a stealth build where you avoid nearly everything and outrun most enemies.
2. Use multiple slots for flight units, use multiple heat sinks and power amplifiers and go for a speed build where you can outrun all enemies.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 04, 2015, 09:52:29 PM
That's mostly in line with what I'm thinking. Thanks for the reference.

By the way, currently hover units are a much greater strain on energy and heat than flight units, because of their slow movement compared to flight.
But this is also highly dependent on how much you're moving. By comparison I believe flight gets a lot more costly when you're constantly zipping around.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: fernsauce on October 05, 2015, 10:57:00 AM
The whole cost while idle is kind of weird in practice. You're better off turning off your propulsion units whenever you are stationary. Which ends up being a lot of micro for frequently little reward, but definitely worth it if you're fighting for extended periods of time. You can't really eliminate them, though, or pack them into movement, because some propulsion units give you combat bonuses while active. It's awkward.

Storage units could be worked on. I think maybe splitting up where you find them would help - right now you find all storage units in -10 because they're all rating 1. More efficient (in terms of weight) would be nice for some lower capacity ones (since they're kind of neglected), but 16m/8inventory seems like a good one slot compromise for the ultra-heavy builds.

Also - I feel like overweighted hover units might actually be surprisingly useful for a combat build. You can load up to 2x capacity and still be under 100 speed all the time, and 3x capacity is comparable to having 3 weighted legs. The only drawback is durability, but otherwise they're comparable / possibly even better than legs in some aspects. Plus, since you're overweighting yourself, you can toss on Weight Redistributors and get double mileage out of them, ignoring the fact that weight redistributors tend to explode. Things start getting really ridiculous if you can snab prototypes with -10 per slot and 30 penalty, because then you can go to like triple overweight and still be moving faster than any walking robot while *probably* carrying more than them.

Finally: on Imp Flight Units, in addition to all their other strengths, they also have a *really* high capacity for when you find them. With 8 weight when your normal units are half that (and VTOL modules are just 5), you can really dodge a lot of the normally brutal energy / heat problems associated with being a bird. The way I tend to play Materials in my stealth runs these days is usually something along the lines of flying around with a pair of reactors, a trio of flight units, and two of the heaviest cannons/shotguns + spare launcher to blast the shit out of anything that gets in my way, which is way way more effective than it deserves to be.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 05, 2015, 05:40:10 PM
The whole cost while idle is kind of weird in practice. You're better off turning off your propulsion units whenever you are stationary. Which ends up being a lot of micro for frequently little reward, but definitely worth it if you're fighting for extended periods of time. You can't really eliminate them, though, or pack them into movement, because some propulsion units give you combat bonuses while active. It's awkward.
It is awkward from a min-maxing point of view, though I think it would be equally awkward without that mechanic, for different reasons including the one you mention. The addition of a single hotkey to disable and re-enable all propulsion at once would probably make micromanagement much less of an issue, yeah? This was a suggestion from zxc I want to add for Alpha 4. (Also another key to do the same for weapons.)

Also - I feel like overweighted hover units might actually be surprisingly useful for a combat build. You can load up to 2x capacity and still be under 100 speed all the time, and 3x capacity is comparable to having 3 weighted legs. The only drawback is durability, but otherwise they're comparable / possibly even better than legs in some aspects. Plus, since you're overweighting yourself, you can toss on Weight Redistributors and get double mileage out of them, ignoring the fact that weight redistributors tend to explode. Things start getting really ridiculous if you can snab prototypes with -10 per slot and 30 penalty, because then you can go to like triple overweight and still be moving faster than any walking robot while *probably* carrying more than them.
This is what I've found, too. Hovering can be really effective at combat, but not so good (due to low integrity) that you'd want to stick around for long battles. I think it works pretty well where it is right now, but maybe not a lot of players are using it (?).

Storage units could be worked on. I think maybe splitting up where you find them would help - right now you find all storage units in -10 because they're all rating 1. More efficient (in terms of weight) would be nice for some lower capacity ones (since they're kind of neglected), but 16m/8inventory seems like a good one slot compromise for the ultra-heavy builds.
I've addressed this in a new thread dedicated to Storage Units (http://www.gridsagegames.com/forums/index.php?topic=289.0).
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on October 05, 2015, 08:18:08 PM
The whole cost while idle is kind of weird in practice. You're better off turning off your propulsion units whenever you are stationary. Which ends up being a lot of micro for frequently little reward, but definitely worth it if you're fighting for extended periods of time. You can't really eliminate them, though, or pack them into movement, because some propulsion units give you combat bonuses while active. It's awkward.
It is awkward from a min-maxing point of view, though I think it would be equally awkward without that mechanic, for different reasons including the one you mention. The addition of a single hotkey to disable and re-enable all propulsion at once would probably make micromanagement much less of an issue, yeah? This was a suggestion from zxc I want to add for Alpha 4. (Also another key to do the same for weapons.)
The key (and overall change) I want most of all is still the item swap mode. I'm sure any keyboard player can immediately see the benefit of it. And for a game that is all about inventory management, having the most commonly used function (swapping items) require two modifiers as well as a special order (equipped item, then inventory item) is just too much.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 05, 2015, 10:48:40 PM
Yep, it's going to happen. It's not a simple feature, though, so while fairly high priority it's still below a bunch of more vital (or easier) Alpha 4 stuff. I'd be doing it sooner if not for the recent decision that we need an alternative UI mode with larger characters, so I need to have that planned first and make sure the new systems are all compatible.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: fernsauce on October 12, 2015, 10:59:26 PM
By the way, I noticed some really weird discrepancies in stacking certain kinds of propulsion units.

In particular, you can reach 6 speed without overloading any flight units, by equipping 3 prototypes and a regular unit.

Even with only of the 30 / -10 prototypes, you can still get below 10, as shown in the second screenshot.

Both of these seem kind of bizarre and confusing, because I'm pretty sure just equipping a fourth prototype will give you 10 speed, which is like, less than any other combination.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: zxc on October 12, 2015, 11:06:14 PM
Huh, that is weird.

Man, I don't get how propulsion speeds work in this game. K, what have you done?!
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 13, 2015, 05:38:47 AM
It's gotten weird! :P

It started out pretty simple but then I added more mechanics since the prototype, all trying to sit on top of a system designed for the 7DRL that wasn't redesigned to give proper attention to balance across the entire possibility space.

Overall it's a more complicated a system than I'd prefer, but the intent was to create a model that would allow for plenty of flexibility (and unique parts) while also adhering to some basic rules and using no more than a handful of variables, and only integers at that...

In any case, it's still fairly well balanced in terms of overall numbers/capabilities between types, it's just a matter of getting the math to make more sense at the finer level (flight is the most egregious of the bunch, since you can fly so damn fast--we may want to slow that down). For Alpha 4, based on observations in this thread I'll be creating a spreadsheet from scratch that maps out all the moving pieces and tweak the numbers (or even some mechanics if need be, though I'll try to avoid that if possible).
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: fernsauce on October 13, 2015, 12:17:25 PM
Okay, so in my weekly seed run, I messed around with propulsion more and ran into some really bizarre behavior.

You get inconsistent results sometimes when you put the same parts on in different order. Also, there are situations where overloading a propulsion unit slows you down, and then turning it back to normal mode will speed you up again. I'm pretty sure there's something going wrong with whatever calculation goes on here. It doesn't really seem that you *should* be able to get below 10 speed without something weird - from what I understand none of the individual propulsion units can be that fast without overloading, and the end speed is an average.
Title: Re: Propulsion Rebalancing
Post by: Kyzrati on October 13, 2015, 07:38:50 PM
I don't recall where--earlier in this thread I think--but propulsion order affecting results and overloading slowdown are known issues to be fixed soon. It's due to their internal inventory order, though, something that is not even known purely from the UI. The calculations get odd where different forms of propulsion are averaged together using different base speeds and different limits. Thanks, I'll be working on it as soon as I can get some more of Alpha 4's new features out of the way!

Edit: I'm locking this thread and merging all propulsion discussion into a single thread (http://www.gridsagegames.com/forums/index.php?topic=371.0) that includes the latest experimental build which rebalances the entire system.