The Blood Cellar

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bring back the News !

Posted by KGJV, Jun 10 2015, 01:34 PM

BRING BACK THE NEWS SECTION HERE !!! whistle.gif


Scaling the economy: the missing currency

Posted by KGJV, Apr 20 2011, 03:56 AM

One particular difficulty of balancing Allegiance cores is tuning the balance with the number of players.

There is no scaling system 'per se' atm so there are a lot of issues due to team sizes. For instance, cap ships are usually overpowered with small teams but often very weak with large teams. on the contrary, the more people playing, the more tp2, sbs and galvs are better.

Tentatives to 'scale' things have been made mainly by tweaking the price of some ships and/or some special equipments.

The fundamental issue is that the economy doesn't scale at all. Whether you're playing a 1 vs 1 or a 100 100 , the economy behaves the same.
Miners are the same, yield the same amount of money per time and things you can buy cost the same price. Even the 'payday' is the same.

And that's normal because this is the RTS aspect of the game and you want it to be predictable. If for instance, the prices were scaled to the number of players that would be a nightmare for commanders , making difficult to plan ahead investments.

So 1vs1 or 100vs100, you still want you miners to yield the same cash and your "PW damage 2" to cost the same.

So how can we scale things then?

Well 1st, what needs scaling actually ? Mainly it's the ships and parts that cost money.

So a 'simple' solution would be to introduce a secondary currency, one that scales with the number of players. And then core devs would set for each object in the game which currency it uses (eventually even both).

This is much like traditionnal RTS games where you have often more than one currency (they are called resources usually), like food, wood and gold for instance.

In Alleg there is only 1 resource, the dollar (although there is He3, it's not used directly and it's always converted to $ so it's basically the same resource).

What is missing is a 2nd resource, one that is very tied to the total number of players.

That 2nd resource should be independant of the 1st one. It could be earned directly by the players either automatically like a payday or thru their action (kills, scouting, salvaging stuff?). It could and should be managed by someone other than the commander so that he won't be annoyed by 'buy requests' anymore.

(1st draft. TBC)


RPS and RTS: missing units in Allegiance

Posted by KGJV, Sep 30 2010, 04:37 AM

I recently reread a great article on RPS system in video games.

When thinking of future evolution of Allegiance (or a future Allegiance...), one immediately think about how to balance the game.

Allegiance uses a Rock, Bigger Rock, Biggest Rock system (also known as tech race) and not a Rock Paper Scissors system like most single player/side RTS games.

And this, contrary to the infamous urban legend that 'tac beats exp, exp beats sup, sup beats tac' aka there is a RPS system.

The confusion is that that RPS aspect is placed at the tech level (tac,sup,exp) instead of being at the unit level (sfs,fig,int).

Each tech path as only ONE main unit (ship) instead of having 3 or more to produce a RPS system with the other techs.

But a RPS system works at the unit level: unit of type A beats unit of type B, B beats C and C beats A. (That a simple RPS system, a much complex system with more that 3 types can be designed).

So a possible fix to Allegiance balance would be to introduce the missing ships to each tech tree so that a real RPS system would be created.

This way no need to try to do the impossible balance "Int vs Fig vs SF" like now. Just make sure every ship type as a counter in a every tech tree. Then leave to the players the choice of which type to use depending on what the enemy uses.

To be continued ...