Fleet commanders
Commanders that gain XP , which can be traded for rank and traits.
I am sure the idea has been discussed, I am not familiar with any arguments pro or con. So... why not? |
Re: Fleet commanders
How would they benefit from XP (I assume it's not the same XP as the one that's already in the game)?
And what would the traits be like? |
Re: Fleet commanders
Well, you all saw my original post, only a couple of sentences, I was trying to avoid the long post... forgive me!
I have heard lots of people complaining about XP. I have been an XP player myself for years, first Xan then Cat. I'll be honest, I am not entirely happy with XP's current status. Maybe is time to revolutionize the XP concept. For example, instead the player itself getting an XP score, these commander(s) will be the one(s) accruing the XP (and the player's score may/would get a corresponding bump up in score [old style]). Maybe each player should starts with 1 commander (for equality's sake) with the lowest rank and 0 XP, who accrues XP and an the round progresses, players may "upgrade it"; i.e. players can trade the commander;s XP for rank and traits, for example: for starters: (and just to give a ramdom Xp amount, lets say each would cost 5k XP and u can only have one of each trait) travelling-time focused traits: -1 in-gal def, -1 in-cluster def, -1 universe defense, -1 in-cluster attack, -1 universe attack battle focused traits: -1 init, +1 armour, +1 guns, etc miscellaneus: (1) a "trickster" (mess up a % of FA readings; the more XP the more altered the scan) (2) a "Base Defender" something like +1 init, +1 armour, +1 guns (3) an "alliance hero" -1 alliance def travelling time Other ideas: 1) XP may also be traded for rank for the Commander (e.g., captains, coronels, marshalls, etc), the higher the rank, the bigger the fleet the commander can actually command. If a poor commander is assigned to a large fleet (value wise) which he cannot handle (each rank can handle X amount of value fleet) then none of the traits apply. 2) compound positive traits with negative ones, etc... 3) The concept can evolve, and we could include goverments that allow multiple commanders and some that allow none 4) a cov op to kill or at the very least incapacitate commanders (for fiction's sake: make sick, put him in the hospital) for one night, 5) a scan to figure out commander traits, etc... 6) commanders die if the entire fleet is wiped out 7) A new commander is automatically recruited for replacement if the planet's commander is killed in battle 8) maybe later on, as the concept evolves, people can fire and hire commanders to and from a universe pool (sort of like the universal market) 9) Minister's commanders get automatic trait(s), whatever they might be 10) maybe even introduce Alliance Commanders, whose traits will spread to any fleets from alliance targeting the same galaxy 11) The traits list may not be all inclusive from tick 0, but may grow larger as the round progresses parallelling or even dependent on the techs and buildings that are researched & built and as the fleet size grows larger. 12) Rank the top 100 commanders in the universe. Perhaps such concept could redefine the purpose for having XP - beyond XP whoring for score ranking (e.g., players would have an incentive to work for XP since it may substantially contribute to their strategy beyond mere score ranking; however, it will create an incentive for XP whores to trade in some of their hard gained XP for the sake of better commanders, and thus balance out the XP to Score gaps in the universe) It is a rich concept, which can be made simpler to start with and evolve as we get used to it. Again, this concept will have to be slowly and painfully tuned, as will bcalcs... I am sure there are tons of people outthere with many valid arguments against such an idea, the main one being obviously much added complexity to battle outcome prediction. But maybe there are a few players who would like to at least experiment with the concept... which by the way I am drawing from Hearts of Iron. The main problems I foresee are (1) First, how to figure the XP v. Value problem for XP gain purposes, I will keep thinking about this. (2) Secondly, maybe there is heavy uncertainty in battle calculations if such are done without the additional Commander's Scan. SPECIALLY with multi-fleets on both sides. But, as long as the info for the commanders in factored in, there should be no problem predicting outcome. And perhaps, we could make it, that only the Highest commanders on each side actually "commands"... that way we simplify the calculations... it would be all a matter of sorintg and noticing the commander in chief and adding his traits to the bcalc, all other commanders' present would not contribute any "battle traits" (I say battle traits cuz timetravelling-traits would have been presumably used by then or not used yet if they only apply to travel back to base [e.g., -1 ETA, or -4 ETA back to base) Finally, I know PA is a game about math and politics. And I also know some of the best things outthere are the simplest things. This doesn't change the fact that (A) we can introduce this concept very limited at the beggining, give people the choice to choose 1 trait to start with and thereafter make it very costly to gain greater rank AND almost prohibitive to trade Xp for a second or third trait. Maybe PA is ready for such a concept. Just an idea, I expect heavy criticism |
Re: Fleet commanders
The basic concept is interesting. It would be neat to see it implemented in a beta.. Just doubt appoco & crew would want to be assed into writing up the code.. lol
but cheers for having a good imagination! |
Re: Fleet commanders
Unfortunately I have to agree with Koloth, the idea has a lot of merit, and especially with a passport system that would allow you to take your fleet commanders from one round to the next this idea could be very cool. But given the current state of affairs with PA, it ain't happening in the foreseeable future.
|
Re: Fleet commanders
Well the idea is great, alot can be done with that. Unfortunelatly this would increase the difficulty of multi fleet battles, as each fleet will have it's own commander which it's own traits. This can make it next to impossible to predict the outcome of a battle within a reasonable time
Quote:
That's against the concept of a new round. Everything is reset. everyone starts new from the scratch. Just imagine if someone has kept his commander for 4 or 5 rounds. Now let this player battle a new one. The new guy won't stand a chance if his fleet isn't much more bigger. This would certainy exclude newcommers from playing pa. |
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
Also if fleet commanders were made to cost resources to maintain you could make it graded based on the FCs rank. So better ones cost more, and assumedly players could activate/deactivate them as they will. In addition you could make it so fleet commanders could only have certain traits, and as they got XP each player could customize his fleet commanders for certain skills. I think there would be a lot of room for modifications that would add to PA in an interesting way. |
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
This idea does have merits, sure - but not to carry something over round from round. That IS defeating the purpose of a reset, no matter HOW you look at it. And selecting 'a flagship' is redundant as you don't have a ship-by-ship control to begin with. And the way the game works you can't just say 'Oh, if they're all destroyed then the flag ship would be destroyed, if not he lives'. This is a game of statistics and math, not personalization of ships. You can't paint them, name them, or designate a flagship that only gets destroyed if everyone else does. It's virtually a mathematical impossibility to guarantee that if every fleet that got attacked and made it away with just 1 ship, that that ship would be the flagship. That's just womanlogic. IF there was a 'flagship' then to keep it Planetarion-based and not Wishfullthinkingarion-based there'd have to be some kind of 'random' factor as to whether the flagship was destroyed in battle. And, going by the nature of this suggestion, this would then be made entirely redundant (to re-use the term). The traits you mentioned are also considerably naive. Your suggestions for "battle focused traits" show a clear lack of understanding of the way statistics work, and how they 'balance out'. And, reading further into your longer post Aedolaws, I really hope this is not a serious thread. "4) a cov op to kill or at the very least incapacitate commanders (for fiction's sake: make sick, put him in the hospital) for one night" To be honest, after this I really can't take anything else you've said seriously, so refuse to comment further. |
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
As for "battle focused traits" I didn't want to put down specifics, but things like a 5% increase in armour, 5% EMP efficiency increase, etc would be they types of increases a top level FC would give. I don't see what is unreasonable about this type of trait at least in theory. In terms of keeping FCs from one round to the next. Contrary to your statement this does not entirely defeat the purpose of a reset, as everyone still starts at 0 score/roids/ships and if good FCs are expensive to maintain they don't become a factor until later in the round. There are always ways to balance things out and to simply reject any idea, whether it turns out to be a good idea or not, without giving it full consideration is foolishness. |
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
By implementing this system I think you will be giving caths a even harder time with even more waves incoming. Not only will empires who attack cath have 0% ship loss guarantee they will also have 0% chance of losing their commander. |
Re: Fleet commanders
This idea is great, and im sure as soon as they manage to finish a simple portal we should get this in full swing :)
|
Re: Fleet commanders
In fact, this is one of the more interesting ideas of lately. Why? It provides an alternative use for the XP. It allows the XP to gain a "use" and an attraction to gather XP besides score - in fact, with refining the idea you could totally forget about XP contributing to score at all. What you would need, though, is to find a balance in it all. And definately, allowing "commanders" continue from round to another is most obviously a bad choice as it leaves new players behind the existing ones, and generally breaks the scheme where a round gets reset and everyone starts over again. As the commanders would bring "benefit", it's obvious that allowing the benefit to stockpile exponentially over rounds is a bit of a dead end.
What comes to the idea itself, as Kenny mentioned, the poster probably has little clue about how the fine tuning should be implemented, but that doesn't destroy the idea itself, necessarily. Commanders wouldn't require anything to be implemented into the combat engine specifically, so it wouldn't necessarily directly involve balance issues there (as what comes to adding new "ship types"). Here's a few "more realistic" options for a "commander". Scales up as you pay more XP. Perhaps one that increases salvage gains by 2, 4, 6, 8, 10%. Perhaps one that increases the distortion in unit scans by 3, 6, 9, 12, 15%. One that increases maximum asteroid cap by 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5%. These are technically "outside" the combat core. Inside the combat core, you could implement minor extras. Obviously, altering initiative is way too heavy, but increasing armor by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5% isn't that massive. Or maybe a two-bladed sword. Increases damage by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5%, decreases armor by 2, 4, 6, 8, 10%. By giving a variety of different options, you'd make different types of commanders situational. Race specifics. Maybe one that regenerates 2, 4, 6, 8, 10% of ships that die stealing after combat. Or a 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25% reduction in E/R of the enemy ships. By limiting the amount of commanders available, and limiting the development, and making it "costly" you'd come down with having to select between one great commander or a few lesser ones. There's restrictions and refining in the idea that need to be done, but overall it sounds like an interesting idea to me. And I'm usually very critical. |
Re: Fleet commanders
passport system - carrying advantage from one round to the next, NO.
Tietäjä's comments are very strong. as a former avid HOI player and current avid PA player i can see how PA can borrow strongly from this game dynamic. but instead of % increases and decrease to dmg and arm, make them absolute (integer numbers to avoid decimal place hell). to answer the comment about cath flaws - they would need the strongest cov-op commander killers/"make sick"ers and would have to become the games natural cov-oppers. to allow consistant denial of these traits to teh active caths. i see the character of the commanders following the flavour of the race eg terran - strong defensive, weak offensive boosts etc the HOI connection would have worked very well when PA battles took place over multiple rounds and these ideas do have merits in todays game i suggest a simple introduction terran commander +1 arm xan +1 Dam Cath +2 arm etd +3% emp res zik + 3%regeneration of lost ships, in other words lose less ships when stealing. something along those lines in a beta... might be interesting to see. balancing the advantages would be tough, thats why beta intro. i can see the need for some sort of antidote to or detection of these commanders for the defending planet. borrowing further from HOI, the commanders start at the lowest rank who can command fleets of small values to still gain the trait... they would have to trade in the xp for a increase in command rank to allow traits to carry forward to bigger fleet values. my ideas are rubbish and not thought through at all... but the thread is stimulating and i would love to see some embyonic version coming through into the main game. |
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
This is the fine-tuning part which involves interaction with the combat system. |
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
|
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
|
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
The Wyvern armor would increase by 3,75% and the leviatan armor only by 3,448% (or 8,824% for the behemoth) When looking at De the difference will be even greater 2,326% for the drake compaired to 2,083% for the demeter if this fleet commander thing should ever be implemented then i can't think of any way to get around percentages. To counter the "decimal place hell" as it was called earier we can increase all base numbers. eg a r22 banshee will cost 25k m 25k c 25k e, will have 3k armor and do 4k damage and roids will produce 250k resources per tick the only problem i can think of will be the "r3 score incident" I've no idea how the code looks today, maybe this could generate an aritmetric overflow |
Re: Fleet commanders
Quote:
|
Re: Fleet commanders
Besides, is 0.3 pp really going to bother anyone?
|
Re: Fleet commanders
Well. The idea received a better reception than I thought.
Let us simplify. [1] We should not start testing the concept with multiple commanders because it makes the whole thing way more complicated. [2] I have thought about the XP v. Value formula and concluded that it should remain as it is. [3] But, with the change that instead of the "player, "a SINGLE" commander accrues the XP. [4] If the commander is not send to/or gets to fight, THERE WILL BE NO XP GAIN. [5] The XP accrued by the commander can be traded (A) for greater rank, (B) for a "second trait" [6] Each paid account begins with 1 commander with "X" fixed XP. [7] Maybe we should start with 5 traits available to choose from, whatever they might be, one "typically associated with each race." [8] However, any race can "train" for any of it (althought we may impose a penalty [e.g, extra XP cost] to do so). [9] A player may choose from one of the traits available at tick 0 (which will require from 1 to X XP) or may choose to postpone the 'training' of the commander. [10] The player will research and build and more traits will become available; the player also will send the commander to fight and will accrue more XP... result: [11] Player "trains" the commander [12] On another newly available and more costly (in terms of XP) doctrine(trait); or [13] The player will want to choose to increase the rank of the Commander and obtain benefit of the single trait for a bigger fleet. [14] However, some may opt to keep the score gain from the XP. [15] 2nd trait and 3rd trait become prohibitely costly to attain, only XP whores will (mostly Ter and Cats I assume, maybe Xans), and then they will trade their XP for it and thus even the XP gap. [16] I thought about "the single" commander dying. Indeed, it presents a bigger problem I originally foresaw. And I have concluded it should, to start with, never die. [17] One scan [18] One cov [19] OFC, we get to name it [20] We rank them |
Re: Fleet commanders
indeed the fleet commander is a good idea.. in r16 , supremecommander and i have submit a similar idea that was rejected by pa team..
but, to add to Aedolaws post.. i d submit that there could be only 1 commander per ship size (max of 3 commander) 1 for fi/co, one for fr/de, and 1 for cr/bs.. and they cant switch from type to type. meaning a bs fleet commander got no idea how to organize a fighter formation or de fleet.. as he s specialize in bs/cr! and only 1 commander per fleet can supervise an attack fleet. so sending a fi/fr combo would not benefit from 2 commander.. the commander active would be the one for the bigger ships in the fleet. |
Re: Fleet commanders
A very basic way to implement this idea would be to allocate a Battle Commander to each fleet slot. Remove the 'rename fleet' feature and use it to name the commanders.
Traits could be gained not from XP but from the behaviour of each slot: - frequent def would gain in armour - frequent attack would gain in damage - massive roiding would gain in capping - massive killing/suicide would gain in dread (population under attack lose efficiency) - frequent recall would gain in cowardice (lowers any bonus gained previously) ... |
Re: Fleet commanders
that s a funny way to put skills in makhil :-)
but the idea of the fleet commander is to add a SMALL edge , something good and new that is beneficial to the fleet. i do love your idea! |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:00. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018