Warzone 2100 Forums

I don't like that power bonus, what would be explanation for that? It was transferred by transport from main base or it could be explained by that every mission start at some exact date so it would be possible to determine how much oil you could extract with given amount of oil derricks?

aubergine, I'm supporting bonuses for those who achieve additional objectives, like don't let any unit to die through whole campaign (achievable even on highest difficulty) but I'm not sure if that should be additional power (there would be need for explanation, so it would make sense), in dimpliest form it would be enough to simply give player some "rank", give medals or display it in stats in some other form. If we would have kind of morale property for units then it could be increased then.

I'm also supporting need for real difficulty levels, current mechanism should be trashed, there is no real difference between normal and hard. Additional units are good for start, they could also use heavier propulsions and better weapons since they don't always use the strongest variants possible for given faction.

Per wrote:I also added a bonus power on mission end, equal to what you would get if you had spent all that time drilling for oil on your existing derricks with a 25% bonus to power income. (Too much?)

Maybe a 10% bonus would be more fair? In any case, this would certainly give some incentive towards players to finish missions sooner, though they could choose to instead draw out the mission to try to "farm for experience".

Shadow Wolf TJC, there could be better solutions for that issue, like one or combination of:

• dynamic unit limit (increasing over time), maybe also for active defensive structures;
• maximum power limit (optionally requiring to research and create special unit / structure to increase it);
• introduce morale property (used to calculate unit skill, I believe that it works that way in Earth 2150) which would decrease if mission would take too long;
• make enemies in next mission weaker somehow (since they will have less time to prepare).

I'm chipping away at my own variant of the cam1a script, in which the script starts by defining mission objectives -- both mandatory ones required to complete the mission, and optional ones that give bonuses.

For example, I have code in there that adjusts time limit based on difficulty setting. And, if player collects all oil barrels (there are 9 in cam1a) before the time limit is reached, they get a time extension (which again depends on difficulty level).

With the awesome scripting API we now have, which recently seems to be getting powerful new features added on an almost daily basis, I think we have many more options available to us.

We could, for example, have a transport fly in to deliver some extra power, troops or technology. We could, for example, ship in an experimental tank with new weapon, body or propulsion.

As for the power bonus that Per put in, I personally think it's a good idea. The 25% increased production only applies to the bonus, it's not an ongoing boost (production levels remain normal until you get power module later on). Having that little bit of extra power is a nice incentive to get the mission done quickly.

Rman Virgil wrote:.

Exactly what Black Project did with his "Hardcore Campaign Mode Mod", just give it a difficulty setting of "Insane"... is my suggestion.
.

Will have to find this mod... the base difficulty settings though are not that much to go by though as it only affects the amount of damage inflicted by the players (or AIs) weaponry. Additional difficulty settings such as cheats and extra power for the AI have to be done within the campaign scripts.. not sure what else could be accomplished with it though, but just adding a new difficulty level won't make a huge difference w/o adding new scripting.

We could probably rather have a look at the "enchanced single player" mod (also by Black Project), where he, for instance, makes sure AI players don't run out of money; that makes the levels much more interesting without much changes in the data, so this could be nice for an insane difficulty.

NoQ wrote:We could probably rather have a look at the "enchanced single player" mod (also by Black Project), where he, for instance, makes sure AI players don't run out of money; that makes the levels much more interesting without much changes in the data, so this could be nice for an insane difficulty.

Yeah, he did change a ton of data in "Hardcore".

@ LA: It's very much worth playing and the attatchment for dl should still be in his thread. It was a fresh experience even if you played the original 100 times and way more satisfying when you prevailed. Another bonus to the experience was tangible insight into Commanders and the way foward to their enhancement for viable winning use in competitive MP.

Links for "Hardcore" and "Enhanced":

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=2777&hilit=hardcore+campaign

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=8504&p=89153&hilit ... ign#p89153

.

On the subject of milking power - while the following idea isn't campaign-specific what about scripting a maximum power level? E.g. an "if (current_power > X) current_power = x;" sort of thing.

Zarel's Improved Campaign planning should be mined for any and all useful suggestions.

Ah, that's a very useful topic dak180, thanks for linking.

Zarel's ideas about power cap and removing time limits in most missions sound good.

But will it seem odd to players that there is a limit to their power reserves. Maybe the power reserves could be limited by number of power gens? Each power gen could store X power, so max power reserves = num power gens * X. Power upgrades could not only increase output, but also increase storage capacity of a power gen?

As for removing the time limits, I've heard several people say that the only thing that made campaign challenging in some places was the time limit. I guess to compensate for time limit removal, better enemy AIs and other mods (eg. power or damage adjustments) will be needed.

Regarding introducing ski tech in to cam, that will surely lead to some heated discussion about balance.

I still very much like Per's idea about giving bonuses for completing missions early / quickly. Maybe all these concepts could be used, in varying degrees throughout the campaign where applicable?

aubergine, such way would be surely more logical, although then power generator would need to be far more expensive or have structures limit, such one should be enough then: Also there was some discussion in the past:
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=5376&hilit=battery

First thing i noticed was that you can't build tanks or trucks unless you build a command center; but when you do, you don't really need to design them.

That's not like it used to be; is it intentional?

NoQ wrote:First thing i noticed was that you can't build tanks or trucks unless you build a command center; but when you do, you don't really need to design them.

That's not like it used to be; is it intentional?

It is not intentionally differently from original.

Something I was thinking about earlier today at the doc's office ...

- What if the New Paradigm in the eastern half of the zone send "harassment forces" at the player during Alpha 1 and Alpha 2? We already have a NP Sensor who runs off at the beginning of Alpha-2 (if the player storms the new area immediately!), why not have something more substantial in the area allied with the Scavengers?

Well, the NP should be met only later; i think it's a part of the story. If the project meets a strong enemy so early, it would ... think differently? I really like how in the beginning of the alpha campaign we travel around the world, encounter and destroy pathetic scavenger bases, and then - bah! - you are in contravention of the new paradigm, you see med cannon mantis tracks progressing towards your main base, and all you have been having so far is hmg/lc/mortar viper halftracks.