CRS mod pre production talks

[Iluvalar]

The Cooler Research System mod gonna be a total reconstruction of the tech tree. Here is what are my main aims for that one.

Meta-tech tree. On top of the normal research tree, there will be a meta-research tree with extremely long research that lead to different "era". The equivalent of now T1,T2,T3... Each era will have it own set of building. Maybe not all the buildings, but a portion of it will change. Those buildings will be marginaly superior to the previous ones but it will give a sens of upgrade and continuity into the game. (players slowy replacing their alchemist laboratory form renaissance era by a today lab (for exemple).

Each era will therefore act as a mini-NRS like tech tree. A little set of ~3 weapons (mg,cannon,rockets), some bodies, some new research paths (new power upgrade line) and some exclusive stuff for each sets (cyborgs). Each era will be extra minimalistic, but specially tough to be fully operational as a stand alone for competitive gameplay.

I hope I will be able to create alternative sets. In other words, on top of the line apocalypse=>scav=>T1=>T2=>T3=>T4, there will be an extra option when players from the modern set do not develop radioactive weapons. And so, the players would, when that scenario happen, chose another path than the scavengers where they stay in their big buildings and develop another story line...

Other features :
Simplified (but functionnal) armor layer : More expensive weapons will always be more brutal. The light bodies will have the best armor of all. Therfore, we'll have an extra simple cycle : light>medium>heavy>light>... That will be consistent throughout the entire game. Allowing me to have smaller amount of weapons in each era without drawback.

Normalized weapon modifiers V2 : We'll have 6 main weapon type and 6 main propulsion type all in a perfectly symetrical circle. cyborg=>wheel=>track=>htrack=>structure=>hover vs ap=>flamer=>anti-tank=>all-rounder=>bunker buster=>mortar.

Weapon modifier based upgrades
Instead of MG dmg ugrade, there will be anti-personnal dmg upgrade. For 2 main reasons :
1- That will not segregate users from one set to another. The mg player will be able to use an upgrade from T3.
2- That unleashed my capacity to multiply the number of different lines without asking devs to increase them in hardcoded side.

Increase HP (like CGE mod)...
increase HP will increase the life expectancy of the units which will then increase the time during which they are in a good or a bad strategic position (behind tankers/better armor type, flanking, etc...). The players will have more time to correct the situation before it's too late. And therefore, it will open a "tactical" type of play.

to be continued...

[aubergine]

I like the idea of eras, it will give much clearer indication about when you're moving in to the next tech level. It would also mean that enabling a tech level could become much easier in rules.js.

Some related ponderings I've had on tech levels:

* viewtopic.php?f=30&t=9536#p105312
* viewtopic.php?f=35&t=9486
* https://warzone.atlassian.net/wiki/disp ... +tech+idea

BTW, I hope you will make regular releases of the mod to the forums so people can follow progress and try it out.

[Iluvalar]

From 'MP Imbalance Solutions: No Play Data. What's the point?'

IOWs......

Because of the extremely rudimentary state of Command and Control of multiple combat groups, maneuver is restricted to bumbling babysitting via monolithic, symmetric vectors. This makes in theater conflict possibilities super simplistic thus the over-focus on the predictable, pattern identification, of pre-conflict, non-combat GPMs.

I believe he is right. Sure, we could hope for devs to improve the AI, but there is another way around... HPs gonna be seriously increased in CRS as a result, each units gonna hold their position in the battle for a much longer time, which will probably enforce the players into modifying them more often.

I also announce that the damage and rof upgrade will probably be based on weapon modifier only. ultimately, that mean that the laser (anti-personnel T3) will beneficiate from the mg upgrades (anti-personal T1) and vice-versa.

[Iluvalar]

I saw aubergine talking about faction and era in other posts. I'll explain more in details how it will work in CRS.

The back bone of the tree will be the era line. Just like in CTT. The CTT approach create a very interesting effect : The sets will be independent to each others, plug-and-play and I'll do my best to make the description script easily modifiable for beginners. In other words, other players will be able to help me creating new stuff. That era line will cost 2 standard researches per steps

So each era research will unlock a bunch of standard lenght research for different "sets" containing a CC and some basic buildings. And a mini NRSlike research paths with the bare minimal weapons choice (3 weapon lines) and some of the normal research but not all. For exemple, I might not make a thermal armor line in T1 or power upgrade, etc...

How it will balance :
1-Everything in the set will start a tiny bit stronger ~1/3 of a research
2-The CC cost will be big (but very easy to build) so it will cover the small building upgrades it represent.
3- The inner progression of all the research line will be upgraded just like if you had a power upgrade and spent that much on research.
4-To enforce players in staying in a particular serie (T1,T2,T3) instead of jumping everywhere (T1,F3,M2), there will be a "synergistic" research. That will be free or nearly free and that will refund the cost of the set to the player. For exemple, the T2 set could give a free power module to the T1 players but not to others.

Other advantages to change of sets will be circumstantial, another set might contain THE perfect counter to your opponent, or contain the body set with a very high thermal armor you are looking for. etc. So hopefully there will be mixed strats as well.

To resume : A player will desire to advance in era, but only if he plan to use a plenty of technologies from it. If you try to jump to T3, the T2 will be free anyway, but not the other sets. On the other end, the new component lines will be shorter than in NRS. The end of your components line will happen during the course of the gameplay. That will be the final argument to jump another era or 2.

[aubergine]

Giving players power in MP games will cause desync.

[Iluvalar]

Giving players power in MP games will cause desync.

I said : free power module. But I hope the devs will solve that one soon because I also plan advanced economical features like in NRS.

[aubergine]

Economics and a post-collapse world seem to be at odds with each other :s

[Iluvalar]

Who said the world will collapse at the same year each game ?

[Iluvalar]

Now that you make me really think about that, I believe there will be 3 types of sets :

1- Aggressive : With low priority in defence
2- Balanced : Right dose of defence and offence. Better suited than aggressive.
3- Pacific : Economical / research / alternate kind of victory. They will lose against aggressive sets...

The CRS campaign might start in the modern3 sets, that is purely pacific. You will be teached to build commercial center and recreational park near your housings to produce more income . The mission 1 will end by you building the intelligence agency building (the special modern 3 building). That will inform you in mission 2 that one of your neighbour is in good way to research the apocalypse 1 set. An aggressive set with radioactive weapons. You will be informed that if you want to survive, you can't chose the "futur 1" set and you must chose between : apocalypse set yourself, the retaliation set (balanced) or the WW III set (a comtemporary from your set that is already researchable).

The apocalypse set will lead to scavengers and the retaliation set will lead to the project...

[Rman Virgil]

.

There's a lot of complexity here. In elegant design this will be under the hood with the player able to learn, in ways that are more fun than frustrating, the set of decision making winning combos. The richer that set, the more enduring the game. The less frustrating and more enjoyable the learning process, (and where intuiting is rewarded) the more popular the game. After all, the essence of a game is a voluntary effort to overcome unnecessary obstacles.

Back to this complexity.

There are a lot of nuts and bolts here and implementation details. All necessary to creating the mod but hard to relate to in the context of this simple question:

"How is this all gonna make for a lot more fun in game..?"

In designing maps and mods for WZ I use what I think of as a reverse engineering protocol.

I ask myself this question upfront and throughout the designing and implementation:

What set of winning warfighting command strategies (and tactics) am I trying to make feasible in-game by my design(s)...?

And from the vast storehouse of available resources to guide me, I have settled on the following 4 to guide and inspire me:

(1.) "The 33 Strategies of War" by Robert Greene

(2.) "How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Conflict" by Ivan Arreguín-Toft

(3.) "Dominant Battlespace Knowledge" by Stuart E. Johnson, Martin C. Libicki and Admiral William a. Owens

(4.) "Asymmetric Warfare: Threat and Response in the 21st Century" by Rod Thornton

Why these you ask...? The answer is simple. Because they are endlessly compelling if you have any interest in battlefield command.

So in sum...

I think peeps would have a better chance of appreciating your design proposals if you could correlate them specifically to the above question, which I'll recap....

What set of winning warfighting command strategies (and tactics) am I trying to make feasible in-game by my design(s)...?

.

[Iluvalar]

Ok let's recap

First there will be 3 type of size : cheap, medium, expensive. Cheap beats medium that beats expensive that beats cheap. Each weapon line will have one of those 3 attributes. One could therefore prefer "zerg rush" or massive tanks. As they like to play.

Second, the 6 propulsions types : wheel, htrack, track, hover, cyborgs and structure will all be upgradable a playable. Some propulsion might work better for some weapon + body combo and make better synergy. But overall, each of them will be playable.

Hopefully, the set mechanism will allow new modders and 3D designers to join me in my race to fill the increased 3.1 research and weapon limits. As long as we have a 3d model and overall idea of the weapon stat, the auto-balance script will do the rest and your weapons will be guaranteed to make an appearance in the game.

That era and sets system is coherent and consistent overtime. This mean we'll have the same kind of gameplay and neat balance in T2 and T3 but also in T0,T4 and even before or after.

This mean a lot more replayability in my eyes since we dont need to all become specialist of the T1 set only, with 3 weapons to chose from...

finaly, the HP boost will allow players to have more time to spend on formation. Deciding which units go front or back, if you flank or if you gradually give up more land in order to reorder your units, etc...

[Rman Virgil]

.

Clearly creative and very promising in the way a fresh WZ play experience. Well executed too, no doubt, when the time comes. Hope it gets the attention it deserves with lots of folks checking it out from your initial release going foward & giving you useful feedback in return so you can continue its refinement.

.

[Iluvalar]

Thanks you to make me retrospect my ideas. Helps making stuff clearer.

2 All others : I'm still in pre-production phase. That mean, it's the time for you to come here a tell what you really disliked about NRS. And the things I should, or should not do...