[Abandoned] Research & Conquer

[TaCktiX]

I've been doing some thinking about R&C 2, or as I'm now calling it, Technology & Empire (ucwutididthar?). 8p is a definite, supersize is a definite, but from there I haven't gotten much further. I'd like to include more tech, perhaps stuff that didn't make the cut in R&C, and perhaps evolutions of R&C's tech to account for changes in the XML / balancing concerns we dig up in beta. One thing that's been picking at my brain is the fact that I'd like to have T&E "later" in the timeline than R&C. R&C went with steampunk, a hyper-advanced version of the Victorian Era. I was thinking about post-WWII 50's, with its futuristic look to things while thanks to time itself looking slightly anachronistic.

[natty dread]

I've been doing some thinking about R&C 2, or as I'm now calling it, Technology & Empire (ucwutididthar?). 8p is a definite, supersize is a definite, but from there I haven't gotten much further. I'd like to include more tech, perhaps stuff that didn't make the cut in R&C, and perhaps evolutions of R&C's tech to account for changes in the XML / balancing concerns we dig up in beta. One thing that's been picking at my brain is the fact that I'd like to have T&E "later" in the timeline than R&C. R&C went with steampunk, a hyper-advanced version of the Victorian Era. I was thinking about post-WWII 50's, with its futuristic look to things while thanks to time itself looking slightly anachronistic.

Why not jump ahead to future and do a cyberpunk theme...

[TaCktiX]

Because I have a third idea that I want to take from the 60's-era spy movies: Espionage & Intrigue. It's very much on the barely-sketched. So I'd like T&E to fall between E&I and R&C (I love my ampersands).

[ender516]

I've been doing some thinking about R&C 2, or as I'm now calling it, Technology & Empire (ucwutididthar?). 8p is a definite, supersize is a definite, but from there I haven't gotten much further. I'd like to include more tech, perhaps stuff that didn't make the cut in R&C, and perhaps evolutions of R&C's tech to account for changes in the XML / balancing concerns we dig up in beta. One thing that's been picking at my brain is the fact that I'd like to have T&E "later" in the timeline than R&C. R&C went with steampunk, a hyper-advanced version of the Victorian Era. I was thinking about post-WWII 50's, with its futuristic look to things while thanks to time itself looking slightly anachronistic.

So, like Disneyland's original Tomorrowland, or the Jetsons, with flying cars, jet packs, meals in pill form, and so on?

[TaCktiX]

Yup.

[OliverFA]

If anyone has any idea of the timeframe for implementing the suggestion to expand the number of players beyond 8 (to 10 or 12, say) (see viewtopic.php?f=535&t=113234), it might tell you if you should skip the 8 player version and jump directly to 10 or 12.

I've been doing some thinking about R&C 2, or as I'm now calling it, Technology & Empire (ucwutididthar?). 8p is a definite, supersize is a definite, but from there I haven't gotten much further. I'd like to include more tech, perhaps stuff that didn't make the cut in R&C, and perhaps evolutions of R&C's tech to account for changes in the XML / balancing concerns we dig up in beta. One thing that's been picking at my brain is the fact that I'd like to have T&E "later" in the timeline than R&C. R&C went with steampunk, a hyper-advanced version of the Victorian Era. I was thinking about post-WWII 50's, with its futuristic look to things while thanks to time itself looking slightly anachronistic.

I am afraid you two are being a bit optimistic I have no hopes for all those changes to come soon So I am not sure it is worth to work like if they were going to be available sometime soon.

But I hope that I am wrong Is just that I am afraid I will be right

[TaCktiX]

I can say with certainty that an XML update is on the way. How much it contains, what it contains, I don't know, but now that clickable maps are out it's next on Lack's list. And sadly, it's required for us to put this map up for Beta.

In other news, cancel what i said about the Jetsons and the 50's. I was walking through O'Hare's terminal today and realized that I'd forgotten a lovely portion of history: steel. I snapped this photo to show what I mean:

Click image to enlarge.

We're talking rivets, welds, girders, and the lovely bit about the Roaring Twenties working as a background. Seeing as T&E is a progression from R&C, going with a very idealized industrial look would work wonders for its theme.

[OliverFA]

I can say with certainty that an XML update is on the way. How much it contains, what it contains, I don't know, but now that clickable maps are out it's next on Lack's list. And sadly, it's required for us to put this map up for Beta.

Really? That's some big news! Specially because the "capital update" is still more or less "recent". This would mark a change in tendence, which is good.

[natty dread]

*crosses fingers* conditional autodeploys, conditional autodeploys...

[ender516]

Hey, if you are going to wish, wish big: triggers (conditional anything!)

[carlpgoodrich]

Great to hear about possible xml updates! and TaCktiX, I really like that you're already thinking about the next one... can't wait!

P.S. Props for taking a picture of all the security cameras at the airport. I don't think they look down at that at all

[OliverFA]

Hey, if you are going to wish, wish big: triggers (conditional anything!)

If this is a new tendence, and updates como regularly, then it's not so important which specific update is coming

[natty dread]

I've also been speaking with lack about the possibility of making an efficiency to the way the game engine handles collection bonuses, which might be of use here... For now though, I think we need to keep hold of the horses a little while longer...

Ok, I've been thinking about this because I'm working on a new map which will also be huge in the XML department unless we get some updates... plus, of course I want to see R&C in play as well

Anyway, in order for the "efficiency" to be of use here, it needs to fill certain requirements...

For example, R&C has lots of collection bonuses where you have to hold a certain territory (the research) to activate the bonus, and the amount of bonus is determined by how many of the "collectible" territories (eg. mines) you hold.

So the efficiency should take this in account. If it simply adds a functionality in the continent -tag that allows for variating bonus value, it won't be of use here, because the bonuses are coded so that the continents that contain the "collectible" territories all have a bonus value of 0, and they only get a bonus value in another continent, which also contains the research territory.

So rather the functionality should be added that allows the continent tag to specify two groups of territories (or continents): one group is territories that must be always held to gain the bonus, and the other group is the collectible territories which determine the bonus value.

For example, we could add the sub-tag "collectibles" which would go under "continent". So for example we could code it like this:

Code: Select all

<continent>
  <name>Research bonus 1</name>
  <components>
    <territory>Mine research</territory>
  </components>
  <collectibles>
    <territory>Mine 1</territory>
    <territory>Mine 2</territory>
    <territory>Mine 3</territory>
    <territory>Mine 4</territory>
  </collectibles>
  <bonus>1</bonus>
</continent>

// in this example, there's 4 collectible territories and one activating
// research territory. so in practice, the game engine would first check
// if all of the components are held, and if so it would count how many
// (if any) collectibles are held, and multiple the bonus by that
// amount. You could also still use the <required> tag for the
// components, but it would not have any effect on the collectible
// territories.


So, probably you guys have already thought about this and taken things like this in account... but just in case you haven't, I'm hoping you'll start doing so now

[TaCktiX]

We have taken that into account in our drafted proposal to Lack. Collections will have optional required territories for the bonus, extending our current capabilities a good bit as well as making R&C do-able.

[natty dread]

We have taken that into account in our drafted proposal to Lack. Collections will have optional required territories for the bonus, extending our current capabilities a good bit as well as making R&C do-able.

That's good to hear!

As it also makes a certain other map doable...

[OliverFA]

We have taken that into account in our drafted proposal to Lack. Collections will have optional required territories for the bonus, extending our current capabilities a good bit as well as making R&C do-able.

That's good to hear!

As it also makes a certain other map doable...

Please let me know when you start working about that map. I am very interested

[OliverFA]

We have taken that into account in our drafted proposal to Lack. Collections will have optional required territories for the bonus, extending our current capabilities a good bit as well as making R&C do-able.

If that means that an update is going to be developed for this map (well, not only for this map, but motivated by this map) well... that's an honour

[natty dread]

Please let me know when you start working about that map. I am very interested

I already am. It's in the drafting room.

[OliverFA]

Ok, it has been some time without taking care about the map. As it seems that we still will have to wait a little more, I will write some comments about the techs and review them once again:

Standing and Mobilized Army, Secret and Open Conscription:
Everybody agree on them. The only issue is correcting research values during beta (if needed).

National Pride:
Doubles the Homeland bonus. And there is also consense about it. Issues here are correcting research values and the homeland bonus (so not the fact that this research dobubles the homeland bonus, but the homeland bonus itself).

Doomsay Device:
We also agree about it. And similar to the previous techs, the only issues could be the research and autodeploy values, but we can't tell if the current values are right until we play some beta games.

Basic and Advanced Mining:
We also agree about the concept. The map says +2 per mine for Basic Mining, but I feel this to be maybe too high. I would prefer basic to be +1 and advanced +2. Of course, research cost would be halved acordingly.

Zeppelins:
I also don't feel comfortable with the bombard mines thing. The problem is that I also understand that we have discussed a lot about it and this was the best thing we could come up with. But I see it more as "the less bad solution" than as a "satisfactory solution".

The problem is that conceptually it seems a bit strange being able to bombard random points in map but dsitributed all across such map. I think it would make more sense making it bombard the 25 closest territories to the palace (as the homeland was seen too few territories). This is not an hex map, but the "surrounding area" can still be determined quite easily. This would make it a defensive tech.

Propaganda:
Initially it was supposed to make foreign homelands workable, but later it was seen as a rather pointless tech. So we turned it into a capital booster. But I am still not happy with it.

I am thinking about a different concept, which I think fits the "propaganda" theme. My proposal is limiting the maximum number of armies that can be taken from territories to 50. If we take into account that the maximum bonuses are:

Without tech: 58
With Secret Conscription: 87
With Open Conscription: 174

This would male Propaganda something interesting to research with SC and a must have with OC.

It could also affect Mines bonuses, beeing needed to go beyond 20. With 40 mines, it would make Propaganda useful in combination with Deep Mining (to use the mine beyond 11).

So, summarizing, my proposals are:
- Cut Mining to half
- Change Zeppelings to bombard surrounding area
- Change propaganda to something needed to receive very high reinforcement amounts (beyond 50 for conscription, beyond 20 for mines).

Any feedback will be welcome. At the worst case, we can use the ideas for R&C 2

[TaCktiX]

I get the feeling that Mining will change from +2/+4 to +2/+3, but I still want to wait for playtesting to prove it. Zeppelins we've run into the issue of trying to explain their bombardment range. With some work I could get something out there to illustrate it, but I like it as a counter to Mining's eventual power. Propaganda got re-envisioned as a direct way to reward people for conquering other enemies, a research that can only be truly taken advantage of if you've gone heavy conquer. So for that purpose it's rather nice.

[Victor Sullivan]

Hey, if you are going to wish, wish big: triggers (conditional anything!)

*giggles*

Can't wait!...for the XML update and this map to go into beta! And good luck with your future endeavors, TaCktiX.

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

Basic and Advanced Mining:
We also agree about the concept. The map says +2 per mine for Basic Mining, but I feel this to be maybe too high. I would prefer basic to be +1 and advanced +2. Of course, research cost would be halved acordingly.

Personally I'd like to see Mining be sent to beta testing with the +2/+4, presuming the zeppelins are kept the way they are now, since there is some consideration regarding their neutral value/bonus ratio given to their vulnerbility to Zeppelins. If Zeppelins change, then I could support the +1/+2 (+1/+3 total) option above, with an appropriate decline in neutral value, probably to around 20 or so.

Zeppelins:
I also don't feel comfortable with the bombard mines thing. The problem is that I also understand that we have discussed a lot about it and this was the best thing we could come up with. But I see it more as "the less bad solution" than as a "satisfactory solution".

The problem is that conceptually it seems a bit strange being able to bombard random points in map but dsitributed all across such map. I think it would make more sense making it bombard the 25 closest territories to the palace (as the homeland was seen too few territories). This is not an hex map, but the "surrounding area" can still be determined quite easily. This would make it a defensive tech.

If an appropriate way of graphically being able to show the bombardment range of zeppelins could be figured out, then I could support the idea of having them be switched to the above idea. That being said, personally I think I still prefer the idea of them being able to bombard the mines. I know from a conceptual standpoint it makes less sense, but I like the idea of them bombarding the mines from a gameplay standpoint quite a bit and think that it adds a nice dynamic. It also offers them up as being a kind of spy tech as well during FoW games, since it' could potentially show how much progress other players have made across the board.

Propaganda:
Initially it was supposed to make foreign homelands workable, but later it was seen as a rather pointless tech. So we turned it into a capital booster. But I am still not happy with it.

I am thinking about a different concept, which I think fits the "propaganda" theme. My proposal is limiting the maximum number of armies that can be taken from territories to 50. If we take into account that the maximum bonuses are:

Without tech: 58
With Secret Conscription: 87
With Open Conscription: 174

This would male Propaganda something interesting to research with SC and a must have with OC.

It could also affect Mines bonuses, beeing needed to go beyond 20. With 40 mines, it would make Propaganda useful in combination with Deep Mining (to use the mine beyond 11).

I find this to be an interesting idea, however I think that providing some incentive to eliminate other players is an important idea to keep going and for that reason I would suggest keeping Propaganda as the way it is now. For the second R&C, I would definitely support this idea being included, perhaps as some sort of Logistics or Communication based tech, as I could see it being an interesting way of keeping the variable bonuses such as Mining and Conscription under check a bit and would perhaps allow the tech cost to become lower.

So, summarizing, my proposals are:
- Cut Mining to half
- Change Zeppelings to bombard surrounding area
- Change propaganda to something needed to receive very high reinforcement amounts (beyond 50 for conscription, beyond 20 for mines).

Any feedback will be welcome. At the worst case, we can use the ideas for R&C 2

I think many of these ideas would work better for R&C 2 and provide some strategies that would differ from what we have here for R&C 1. All in all I think I'm happy with what we have here for R&C 1, with the one possible issue being incentive to kill other players. As is, I don't think there's enough incentive, but I think that we'll be able to come up with a solution once this hits Beta.

[-=- Tanarri -=-]

Any update on the XML update? I only ask since we've seen one update come and go and I got a bit curious.

[TaCktiX]

It's next. One minor XML update already hit the books and it'll get official coverage in the near-future, likely in conjunction with the Collections idea that'll make R&C a go.

[natty dread]

I'm curious to see how the collections tag will be implemented.