Author Topic: Possible Changes to armour - your thoughts!  (Read 25879 times)

Daithi

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1250
Re: Possible Changes to armour - your thoughts!
« Reply #15 on: August 08, 2017, 02:42:37 PM »
1) That's an interesting solution. Only, wouldn't damaged components require icons too?

Yeah, adding dimensions to challenge isn't necessarily a good thing. It's just that an armour mechanic provides natural opportunities without additional programming. For example, that ceramic-like piece makes the user invincible on the first hit, but afterwards practically shatters. Another one can be so hard to target (high CTH rating) that nuking or using a shotgun (air. AOE) may end up preferable. Then a liquid-like (the faster the impact the better protection -> huge ranged % reduction) makes a slow hammer an attractive prospect. Or a fortified grenadier with so encumbering suit that in a turn can only either move (like 4 tiles max) or throw a grenade, but he's so greatly protected (high explosive % resist and DR overall) that low damage hits are practically ineffective. Or something around targeting different body parts. Etc.

They would. I'm not opposed to getting additional artwork, some will be necessary anyway. It will require a modification of an existing artwork. In the event that this question relates to one of my objections relating to armour, it's worth keeping in mind that having to get 4-6 drawings per armour class is just one of the objections. Others include muddying the waters in the form of the difficulty in predicting damage types, the click tax of changing armours based on what *might* be a better choice for the current challenge, and the potential need to maintain multiple armours. Guessing here, but additional armour types seem to be an important addition from your perspective.

If that is the case, I don't feel as strongly about it. Not opposed to adding an additional armour type, if it can offer a sufficient benefit in relation to the resource cost, but multiple types, each with their own upgrade tree is highly unlikely - we're just too resource limited to push out in every direction, and if we try, it will be to the deteriment of the game, and will increase the already considerable strain from developing a game of this scope with such a small team.

2) Ok, then it's like in the middle or towards a common occurrence I guess -> players may see merit in armour-damaging strategies.

However, it would be useful if some variety across gangs and equipment tiers is still possible, even for armours of regular troops. If something like all-round protection is common, it's not so great for battle pacing.

Obviously I don't know about tiers. So just random general suggestions:
-- A higher tier may not necessarily mean better gear in all parameters.
-- You may prioritize one type of upgrades more for a while.
-- Some things may even downgrade at the time.
-- I recall you said a gang AI may be able to react to players being a nuisance by upgrading equipment. Would be also possible (not sure if desirable though) that it may choose between some upgrades / rackets based on what we often used against them in the recent past? I don't mean on each tier. On the contrary, something like just once or twice per a whole game but having very distinctive effect, would be neat.

Edit: Heh, all I wanted to say was practically: make the ascending road bumpy.

Some gear variation is built in, though it may not be apparent yet as there are big holes in terms of the final number of items. As mentioned, have an idea for adding variance to both the defensive and offensive capabilities of enemies, and in relation to what it adds, it's less resource intensive than making multiple, multi level armours for enemies, which is less work intensive than adding player armours. It's unlikely to happen before Steam EA release though.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2017, 11:40:34 PM by Daithi »

ushas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
Re: Possible Changes to armour - your thoughts!
« Reply #16 on: August 09, 2017, 02:22:39 AM »
1) That's an interesting solution. Only, wouldn't damaged components require icons too?

Yeah, adding dimensions to challenge isn't necessarily a good thing. It's just that an armour mechanic provides natural opportunities without additional programming. For example, that ceramic-like piece makes the user invincible on the first hit, but afterwards practically shatters. Another one can be so hard to target (high CTH rating) that nuking or using a shotgun (air. AOE) may end up preferable. Then a liquid-like (the faster the impact the better protection -> huge ranged % reduction) makes a slow hammer an attractive prospect. Or a fortified grenadier with so encumbering suit that in a turn can only either move (like 4 tiles max) or throw a grenade, but he's so greatly protected (high explosive % resist and DR overall) that low damage hits are practically ineffective. Or something around targeting different body parts. Etc.
They would. I'm not opposed to getting additional artwork, some will be necessary anyway. It will require a modification of an existing artwork. In the event that this question relates to one of my objections relating to armour, it's worth keeping in mind that having to get 4-6 drawings per armour class is just one of the objections. Others include muddying the waters in the form of the difficulty in predicting damage types, the click tax of changing armours based on what *might* be a better choice for the current challenge, and the potential need to maintain multiple armours. Guessing here, but additional armour types seem to be an important addition from your perspective.

If that is the case, I don't feel as strongly about it. Not opposed to adding an additional armour type, if it can offer a sufficient benefit in relation to the resource cost, but multiple types, each with their own upgrade tree is highly unlikely - we're just too resource limited to push out in every direction, and if we try, it will be to the deteriment of the game, and will increase the already considerable strain from developing a game of this scope with such a small team.
Daithi, thanks for sharing your thoughts, but I must apologize. Seems I unintentionally mislead you. Have taken your answer that we won't loot armours of enemies (that we'll get materials instead) for granted and build upon that. So asking about icons was only musing whether, in comparison to looting armour components, is looting more often but damaged components worth the effort (more icons and crafting support on your side and item handling on our).

The second part was assuming not-looting too, thus that you wouldn't need to care, like at all, whether armours of enemies are seen useful by players or about switching. So I let myself loose over how could protection change our offensive approach. Obviously, neglected to specify the armour user is a gang underboss/lieutenant and the attackers we.

I don't dwell on individual features, more interested in how it works. Don't think types, whatever that means, are important. Whatever you go for, will simply criticize the game from that perspective. Ha, such assurance. Albeit personal preferences do cloud the judgment (such as my wish for devious foes), not here to demand things, on the contrary.

It seems you're into crafting mechanic but for players you want to focus on upgrading, one or two paths. Am I right?

Some gear variation is built in
From last week I recall walk in the park with survivalists on danger 1, then went into danger 2 one... Oho! Two with rifles, one with SMG plus others - completely swiped the floor with us. Glorious! For once forgot to check the log. Now I wonder, could there be a facility nearby?

As mentioned, have an idea for adding variance to both the defensive and offensive capabilities of enemies, and in relation to what it adds, it's less resource intensive than making multiple, multi level armours for enemies
Had your plan having armours to be part of an equipment tier system changed? I wasn't requesting that, actually, made me worried about pacing -> thus could be better to at least vary things (btw. no-armour vs. yes-armour is also variety).

Hm, does it also mean that you don't plan to give elite gang members, like [under]bosses or so, any special items apart what's given by current gang equipment level? I thought you were planning that it changes for specialists and higher gang ranks.

Anyway, looking forward to the trait system and wish you go crazy with that. No need of armours if they clash with that. Though if a trait has an armour properties it's practically an armour... Only danger is, if players perceive that you gave enemies something looking impossible to achieve.

Daithi

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1250
Re: Possible Changes to armour - your thoughts!
« Reply #17 on: August 09, 2017, 01:24:23 PM »
Hey Ushas. Sorry, it looks like I misunderstood what you meant. Thanks for taking the time to explain your reasoning. An additional type of player armour could be possible, with it's own upgrade tree. It may also be possible to offer two different final upgrades for each armour.

From last week I recall walk in the park with survivalists on danger 1, then went into danger 2 one... Oho! Two with rifles, one with SMG plus others - completely swiped the floor with us. Glorious! For once forgot to check the log. Now I wonder, could there be a facility nearby?

Interesting! Most of my testing is around features, so I wouldn't make as much general progress as you or Nomad, but it's good to find out that the system is working. A racket is very likely. Also possible that they upgraded the entire gang's equipment level between missions.


Had your plan having armours to be part of an equipment tier system changed? I wasn't requesting that, actually, made me worried about pacing -> thus could be better to at least vary things (btw. no-armour vs. yes-armour is also variety).
No, will introduce enemy armour in this update, and then adjust from there. "As mentioned, have an idea for adding variance to both the defensive and offensive capabilities of enemies" - this was in reference to the trait system. 

Hm, does it also mean that you don't plan to give elite gang members, like [under]bosses or so, any special items apart what's given by current gang equipment level? I thought you were planning that it changes for specialists and higher gang ranks.
It's probable that lieutenants and bosses will be provided specific armour and weapons when they are created. Part of the reason for this is that encounters for leaders sometimes refer to a particular weapon. This equipment will be mid to high level, and be dependent on the individual leader's combat tendencies. It's not completely nailed down yet.

ushas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 661
Re: Possible Changes to armour - your thoughts!
« Reply #18 on: September 08, 2017, 01:07:39 PM »
Some preliminary feedback for v19  (feel free to skip or wave the stick, np):
Just by playing against rank 1 & 2 troops (not looking much at numbers), the most effective it seems using rifles (aka high damage from distance). Although survivalists look to be harder to hit, it doesn't change much. But together with changes on enemy numbers and such, overall it doesn't feel bad at all. Does it makes sense when I say that even when Vigilante difficulty became easier overall, it's more fun?:)  As somebody who longs for challenge I would be interested in balancing the former, but ultimate the latter is the holy grail, isn't it...

As for allies. Oh my, that's a difference! Again not talking numbers (will look later) but impression. In the past versions, I must admit didn't want to wear protection, usually just made us invincible earlier. But not so much anymore. (guessing it's a combination of armour mechanic and enemies hitting harder)

I would say you got the deterioration rate fairly well from the get go (again Vigilante diff). If my guys get hit approx 1-2 times in a battle, may get away without spending time repairing afterwards. But it feels like you need to be gradually more cautious. Our meat shield, Ray, gets his armour broken pretty much each fight (in ~3-5 hits). Was thinking how neat would be if he can carry a spare... And indeed, found that - although we can't strip - we can change! So now he has another in the backpack and changes in the middle of the fight. (1 AP fast... I must say Sam drills his guys) 

However, more effective is to change earlier than when broken. As we're now worried about state of our protection, maybe it could be useful, for the psychological effect among others, to make the background reddening more gradual? (not now of course)