Home » PLAYER'S HQ 1.13 » v1.13 General Gameplay Talk » Gaps in Tactics gameplay
|
|
| Re: Gaps in Tactics gameplay[message #336896]
|
Tue, 21 October 2014 16:45  
|
|
| Deleted. |
 |
Messages:2663
Registered:December 2012
Location: Russian Federation |
|
|
My thoughts on tactics in ja2 1.13
The AI cannot fight against opponents he does not see them currently, so in the open terrain the sniper squad with good optics will not leave AI any chance. Also the AI cannot use binocs for recon, and he will not try to approach the source of noise crawling and hiding, instead it will run to you and die.
One good solution I often use is increasing view range to smth like 18-20 and disabling view bonuses from scopes, leaving only binocs for recon. Also good approach for binocs is making them guns, like in aimnas mod, so that they require additional APs when raising.
Also interrupt system is not well balanced, for example you will receive interrupt on sight, but if you already seen this enemy, he can run in front you safely. Another not good thing is that you always receive all your AP in interrupt instead of getting only small amount, so you can only take cover or shoot prepared shot.
One possible solution to this is limiting APs for interrupt and implementing something called "reaction fire", when you will automatically shoot at watched enemy or selected tile if certain conditions met, for example similar system was in Incubation game. But that requres some coding.
Yes, there is thing called IIS, but it's much more complicated than stock system and it also has it's own flaws.
Another thing that can be improved is current suppression system.
There are the following problems:
First, the suppression tolerance is calculated as level*2 + modifiers, it usually means that when you land in omerta, your merc will have smth like 1-3 tolerance, and enemy has 15-18 tolerance level, making the whole suppression thing to work mostly against you.
Also, due to the way NEARBY_FRIENDLIES_AFFECT_TOLERANCE option implemented and the fact that you are nearly always outnumbered by enemies 3-4 times and more, you will usually have much lower suppression tolerance than enemy. So I disable this option in my games.
Another not good thing is that cowering level is tied to the current suppression tolerance, so your starting character will not only take more shock and lose APs, but also he will become cowering from 1-2 bullets. It would be good to set cowering level to smth like MAX_SHOCK/2, so with default values it will be 15(+modifiers) for all soldiers, making suppression system more balanced.
Also it would be good to add some AI effects for suppression, but is all again requires coding.
As for current implementation, i use the following options for better balancing of system:
SUPPRESSION_EFFECTIVENESS = 120
SUPPRESSION_SHOCK_INTENSITY = 100
MAX_SUPPRESSION_SHOCK = 20
SUPPRESSION_TOLERANCE_MAX = 15
SUPPRESSION_TOLERANCE_MIN = 5
NEARBY_FRIENDLIES_AFFECT_TOLERANCE = FALSE
CTH_PENALTY_PER_TARGET_SHOCK = 1
MAX_CTH_PENALTY_FOR_TARGET_SHOCK = 10
MAX_CTH_PENALTY_FROM_SHOCK = 50
SHOCK_REDUCES_SIGHTRANGE = 0
COWERING_PENALTY_TO_SUPPRESSION_TOLERANCE = 1
AI_SUPPRESS_MIN_MAG_SIZE = 20
AI_SUPPRESS_MIN_AMMO_REMAINING = 10
NOTIFY_WHEN_PINNED_DOWN = FALSE
MIN_DISTANCE_FRIENDLY_SUPPRESSION = 30
I also alter APBPConstants in the following way for more dynamic playing (no full suppression from one shot)
AP_MAX_SUPPRESSED = 16
AP_MIN_LIMIT = -20
AP_GET_WOUNDED_DIVISOR = 4
unfortunately, most of the tactical gameplay problems (except some mentioned options changes and possible game mechanics improvements) have their source in limited AI, that wasnt changed much since old 2085 release.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Gaps in Tactics gameplay[message #336949]
|
Wed, 22 October 2014 01:04
|
|
 grim |
 |
Messages:344
Registered:July 2006
Location: France |
|
|
@Sevenfm
Interesting input, nice to read.
@Ablomis
Concerning marksmanship, i had similar concerns some time ago. In NCTH, it's become more "knowledge of how to shoot a firearm" actually. A gun enthousiast may know everything of weapons and how to shoot them, yet, if he has shaking hand (dex), a disability to anticipate (wis), or is feeble so can't handle the recoil (Str), he won't be accurate at shooting.
To compare several mercs you have to compare all those stats and choose what type of shooter you want, as those stats don't work on the same part of shooting process. It may be hard but i think it's interesting and gives even more uniqueness to each merc. By the way, many game mechanics were very obscure in JA2. One part of the fun was discovering them and trying to understand the underlying system.
Report message to a moderator
|
Master Sergeant
|
|
|
|
| Re: Gaps in Tactics gameplay[message #336975]
|
Wed, 22 October 2014 14:31
|
|
| Cardinal |
 |
Messages:45
Registered:September 2014 |
|
|
I asked a similar question regarding MRK stat importance in another thread.
My main issue is that dexterity wasn't originally meant to represent "shaking hands" when calculating cht, at least not to this extent.
I think that instead of making mercs more unique it actually waters them down, and contradicts original merc designs.
A couple examples:
Old system
Ira - good dex - good at "menial" assignments i.e. medic, low mrk - terrible shot
Hitman - bad dex - bad at menial assignments, high mrk - good early game shooter
Two completely different roles
In NCTH they are both mediocre shooters, and Ira becomes a better marksman a lot faster. (Ok, Hitman got the deputy trait but still)
Razor - his high dex meant he was great at melee, but a terrible shot with 50 mrk.
Steroid - low dex means he's a somewhat slow mechanic, high mrk - good shooter.
In NCTH they're both mediocre shooters, with razor becoming a better marksman faster than his original role intended.
NCTH reduces the difference between early game good and bad shooters, making them all mediocre and puts more emphasis on the physical stats than was originally intended, imho.
[Updated on: Wed, 22 October 2014 14:55] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Corporal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 19 06:35:37 GMT+3 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01048 seconds
|
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
