UFO:Alien Invasion
General => Discussion => Topic started by: BTAxis on February 12, 2008, 12:53:05 pm
-
This thread is meant for me to present the new soldier stat increase system and for everyone else to discuss it.
BASICS
The new system is an implementation of this (http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Proposals/Attribute_Increase) wiki proposal. Soldiers gain "experience" in combat vor performing various actions. As a result, their stats will rise, at an increasingly slower rate. Experience is gained and stored for every individual stat.
ASSUMPTIONS
These are the assumptions I made when writing the proposal and the code. Important to note is that these assumptions ar of the finished version of the game - not 2.2! So if an assumption clearly conflicts with 2.2, don't go off telling me I'm wrong, because I'm not talking about 2.2 here.
- Soldiers have an expected career length of 100 missions. That is to say, a soldier that is in active service, going on a majority of the missions, is expected to participate in about 100 of them over the course of the game, without being killed.
- There will be missions with less than or more than 8 aliens.
- XP will increase even outside missions, as a result of training facilities. Most XP should be earned in combat, however.
CAPS
These are the XP caps. A soldier can never gain more XP on a mission than the XP cap, no matter how much XP he earns from his actions. The caps are based around a "target" increase for the skill over 100 missions. For example, speed is set to increase by 15 points. To find the amount of XP x the soldier must earn to increase by 15 points the calculation is:
log 15 / log x = 0.6
log x = log 15 / 0.6
x = 10 ^ (log 15 / 0.6)
x = 91 (rounded)
This would mean an average of 0.91 per mission. Unfortunately, code limitations disallowed me from using floating point numbers for the XP values, so I do the division by 100 internally, and work with the calculated value.
Laziness, so here's the switch from the code (comments added here only):
case ABILITY_POWER:
return 46; //target 10
case ABILITY_SPEED:
return 91; //target 15
case ABILITY_ACCURACY:
return 290; //target 30
case ABILITY_MIND:
return 290; //target 30
case SKILL_CLOSE:
return 680; //target 50
case SKILL_HEAVY:
return 680; //target 50
case SKILL_ASSAULT:
return 680; //target 50
case SKILL_SNIPER:
return 680; //target 50
case SKILL_EXPLOSIVE:
return 680; //target 50
case SKILL_NUM_TYPES: /* This is health. */
return 2154; //target 100
USABLE STATISTICS
In an attempt to prevent people from suggesting unworkable alternatives, here is the struct of statistics that is used to calculate the XP values. If it isn't in here, it isn't counted. I took the liberty of removing a few lines for stuff that can't be used, for the sake of brevity.
/* Movement counts. */
int movedNormal;
int movedCrouched;
/** Kills & stuns @todo use existing code */
int kills[KILLED_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of kills (aliens, civilians, teammates) */
int stuns[KILLED_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of stuns(aliens, civilians, teammates) */
/**
* Hits/Misses @sa g_combat.c:G_UpdateHitScore. */
int fired[SKILL_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of fired "firemodes" (i.e. the count of how many times the soldeir started shooting) */
int firedTUs[SKILL_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of TUs used for the fired "firemodes". (direct hits only)*/
int hits[SKILL_NUM_TYPES][KILLED_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of hits (aliens, civilians or, teammates) per skill.
* It is a sub-count of "fired".
* It's planned to be increased by 1 for each series fo shots that dealt _some_ damage. */
int firedSplash[SKILL_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of fired splash "firemodes". */
int firedSplashTUs[SKILL_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of TUs used for the fired "firemodes" (splash damage only). */
int hitsSplash[SKILL_NUM_TYPES][KILLED_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of splash hits. */
int hitsSplashDamage[SKILL_NUM_TYPES][KILLED_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Count of dealt splash damage (aliens, civilians or, teammates).
* This is counted in overall damage (healthpoint).*/
int skillKills[SKILL_NUM_TYPES]; /**< Number of kills related to each skill. */
int heal; /**< How many hitpoints has this soldier received trough healing in battlescape. */
FORMULAS
Power: Currently fixed at 46. I didn't see a point in coming up with a formula as long as power is unused.
Speed: 1 point for every space moved. 2 points for every space moved while crouched. 1 point for every 10 TUs spent using weapons.
Accuracy: 20 points for every hit scored on an enemy. Only one hit can be scored per use of a weapon, except for splash weapons. 30 points for hits with sniper weapons.
Mind: 100 points for every enemy kill.
Close: 150 points for every hit on an enemy. One hit per weapon use, except splash.
Heavy: 200 points for every hit on an enemy. One hit per weapon use, except splash.
Assault: 100 points for every hit on an enemy. One hit per weapon use, except splash.
Sniper: 200 points for every hit on an enemy. One hit per weapon use, except splash.
Explosive: 200 points for every hit on an enemy. One hit per weapon use, except splash.
Health: The sum of all other experience gained (after caps), divided by two.
CALCULATION
After a mission, the XP counts are calculated as follows. The soldier then receives XP equal to to the earned value or the cap, whichever is smallest. Then the stats are updated as follows:
new value = start value + (total XP / 100) ^ 0.6
Where "start value" is the value the soldier had when he was recruited.
NOTES
- The system is not intended to force the player into action or into a specific strategy. The XP cap is there to prevent "training abuse", and the formulas are intended to allow any soldier who pulls his weight to reach the cap easily. In short, if the player plays normally, his soldiers should grow at an optimal rate. But soldiers sitting around in the dropship will not get free buffs.
- I will not get away from the XP system or the power of 0.6. I like the system, it's flexible and I think it's a good game mechanic. The power of 0.6 makes sure no veteran soldier will ever be surpassed by a newer soldier, even if the newer one had better initial stats, as long as the veteran keeps training.
- I will, however, adjust the formulas according to suggestions made in this thread, if I think it's an improvement. If I do not, no amount of arguing will convince me, so please don't keep hammering on the same idea.
- There is discussion about changing the actual set of abilities. I am aware of this, so please don't bring that into this discussion if possible. If such a change comes to pass, the relevant formulas will be added or removed.
-
AWSOME! Can't wait to try it out... lol When Can We have it??? lol *Drools*
-
It's in the current SVN trunk. It will NOT be in 2.2.1, because of networking and savegame issues. 2.3 at the earliest.
-
Maybe add some very small weapon XP for just shooting? Either per TUs used on firing, or per shots fired. Of course, that may lead to soldiers emptying their clips at nowhere each mission, but with XP reward for such being small and base training facilities available such activity can be made a waste of time and ammo. The good side is that soldiers that provided supressive fire or engaged enemy, but failed to score a hit, would also get some consolation prize.
Also weapon XP could be available once per each alien hit. So hitting the same alien repeatedly with the same soldier wont give you XP. Otherwise the last alien on the map would be constantly flashbanged and fired at with the weakest or least efficient weapons. Or just bombed with flashbangs until those run out, giving soldiers steady Explosive XP bonus.
Also more Mind XP could be given if an enemy is stunned and captured alive. Also kills bonus on Mind are better be limited to enemy kills only, otherwise recruits with poor stats would also be taken to missions to serve as training targets. And maybe give a small bonus for detecting an alien (one bonus per each living alien, none for successive detection of the same ones).
-
Also weapon XP could be available once per each alien hit. So hitting the same alien repeatedly with the same soldier wont give you XP. Otherwise the last alien on the map would be constantly flashbanged and fired at with the weakest or least efficient weapons. Or just bombed with flashbangs until those run out, giving soldiers steady Explosive XP bonus.
Like I said in the notes, the system is intended so this is not necessary.
Also kills bonus on Mind are better be limited to enemy kills only
Yes, I meant every enemy kill. Fixed.
-
Nothing for being shot at, or getting hit? I mean, courage under fire and all that...
Also, I'm not sure what the status of panic or mind-control functionality is yet, but it would be nice if those counted to. For example, resisting a panic attack, or successfully mind-controlling an enemy.
As a quick aside, I was thinking it may be nice for n00bs to be able to start their own training missions, perhaps with dummy or baton rounds if those were implemented. This would help total newcomers to UFO and UFO:AI learn Battlescape controls and tactics, and account for (some of?) the "training facility" skill/stat improvements.
Otherwise it looks good to me! ;D Many thanks,
nemchenk
-
Well, some points from my side.
As I understood it the weapon skill/accuracy system relies on different weapon categories and "performed hits" (i.e. successful effective use of the weapon).
My logic would be that the XP bonus should depend on the spread rather than on the category (a weapon with higher spread in the same category is more difficult to use effectively thus training with such a weapon would more likely improve the accuracy than with an idiot-save autoaim rifle :D ). A sniper rifle will more likely produce a hit than a machine gun at the same distance. Snipers seem to be slightly overpowered to me (even though they have less rounds/TU).
This "a hit rewards" thing in the first step leads to a systematic in which soldiers who are already good at shooting will be rewarded with more XP than a rookie soldier but that is countered because of the logarithmic structure (am I right on that?). The logic of course would be that it is easier to get a poor shooter to an average level than an average shooter to an expert level. That is exactly how it is intended and working using these formulas, right?
Overall I think it is a logic and accurate piece of good work. I'm eager to test it.
-
The logic of course would be that it is easier to get a poor shooter to an average level than an average shooter to an expert level.
I haven't the studies' references to hand, but I believe this is exactly how humans learn. It gets progressively harder to get better at something the better at it you get. If you see what I mean... :)
-
I think it would be sensible if certain occurrences can negate the points in certain areas.
For instance a soldier that panics would loose "mind" XP (amount depending on the length of his panic attack).
It seems reasonable that he could even lower his "mind" stat by killing civilians, or worse fellow soldiers. This might send a soldier on a downward psychological slide, but wouldn't that really make the alien invasion feel serious?
Also being wounded could negate the "health" XP gained. This should probably be weighted towards serious wounds. Being slightly wounded wouldn't matter much, but coming back from a mission nearly dead could erase any "health" gains.
I think these kind of changes would tend to make the soldiers feel more like real people.
-
It seems reasonable that he could even lower his "mind" stat by killing civilians, or worse fellow soldiers. This might send a soldier on a downward psychological slide, but wouldn't that really make the alien invasion feel serious?
No argument surely, but... How often is a soldier going to kill civilians or own troops? It may happen by accident a couple of times, of course. But how much is that on the bigger picture? Unless the penalty was excessive, it would never get noticed by the player. And I don't see much point including a mechanic that has virtually no impact.
The getting wounded part would probably work, though.
-
The system really looks great. Cant wait to test it! :)
If I understood it correctly, there is no way to implement it into the current, cause it will break the save options?! I wouldnt mind an occasional crash, just to want to use this system!!
-
It would mean your saves from 2.2 would not work anymore in 2.2.1. That's unacceptable for a bugfix release. It also would break multiplayer compatibility, I believe.
-
No argument surely, but... How often is a soldier going to kill civilians or own troops? It may happen by accident a couple of times, of course. But how much is that on the bigger picture? Unless the penalty was excessive, it would never get noticed by the player. And I don't see much point including a mechanic that has virtually no impact.
The getting wounded part would probably work, though.
"but... How often is a soldier going to kill civilians or own troops?"
I don't know, but i presumed it would happen more often when the psychological side of combat is more thoroughly implemented.
I've only seen it happen once... a guy tossed a grenade, it bounced back, wounded him and killed a bystander. Then his moral dropped to 0, he went berserk and killed another bystander. Other than that i've never seen the "moral" have any effect on the game at all.
But i presume "moral" is supposed to have an impact of gameplay, and therefor it ultimately won't be so rare for a soldier to go psycho. And it would be weird for my grenade-thrower to come out of that mission with a "mind" stat boost simply because he killed a couple aliens earlier in the mission.
-
But i presume "moral" is supposed to have an impact of gameplay, and therefor it ultimately won't be so rare for a soldier to go psycho. And it would be weird for my grenade-thrower to come out of that mission with a "mind" stat boost simply because he killed a couple aliens earlier in the mission.
Actually, I also don't know exactly how morale will end up working. It's worth giving some thought to.
-
I do not totally agree on the logic behind the hitpoint xp loss on injuries.
While you do not get much training on physical endurability during a single mission but merely by steady training between missions the contribution of psychological stability ("tough guy mentality" to tolerate pain) is more like experience with "getting over something" according to my experience. In this case injuries could rather contribute to more "health". A serious injury could permanently remove some health though - this should not depend on "xp" - as a reflection of permanent/long lasting injury in my opinion.
You often learn more from your mistakes than from your success. That would generally counter most attempts to eradiate XP by collateral damage or whatever incidents. I would suggest PHALANX guys are genrally tough and mentally stable guys and able to learn from things that messed up like every good soldier should do.
-
You often learn more from your mistakes than from your success. That would generally counter most attempts to eradiate XP by collateral damage or whatever incidents. I would suggest PHALANX guys are genrally tough and mentally stable guys and able to learn from things that messed up like every good soldier should do.
To be clear: what i suggested is that wounds taken in combat can cancel out any gain the soldier might get to his "health" stat. Or in a more cruel implementation actually lower the health stat.
It's not about "learning". It's about the health of the soldier's body, which is always lower after being blown apart, then reassembled in a hospital.
-
Power (strength) should have a role in determining melee damage, the range of equipment a soldier can use, the impact of armour encumberance, spread/recoil management of certain weapons, and the maximum distance of thrown objects. Increasing it would result from the participation of a soldier in activities immediately related to the concepts influenced by this attribute (throwing objects, moving while encumbered, etc...).
That said, health experience consequently, should stem from a combination of speed and power experience, and should be penalized for injuries suffered (penalties starting out small, but getting exponentially larger as injuries compound). If such injury is severe (50% or more of max health lost), all health experience for that mission is lost, and permanent health loss occurs, to an extent based on both the severity of the trooper's injuries, and the trooper's pre-reduction maximum health (people who are initially healthy to begin with tend to recover from lasting injury much better than those who are not).
Mind experience should also be derived from use of support equipment and gear (e.g. Medikit), and have an influence on the extent of their success and TU costs (in so far as I understand it as both an amalgum of both strength of will and intelligence). Mind experience should also be gained from successfully resisting panic or using/withstanding psionic attacks (when they are implimented).
Misses with weapons should be rewarded, initially granting smaller bonuses at lower experience levels relative to hits, and larger ones at higher experience levels relative to misses. This is because you tend to learn more from success as an inexperienced individual than you do as an expert. Success for the greenhorn, whether by skill or chance, often contains a wealth of lessons and common denominators that when throughly analyzed, can result in a quantum leap in understanding, as opposed to the much slower, iterative advance that comes through learning through failure, which tends to offer fewer valuable insights. The pro in the meanwhile, has a fairly intimate understanding of proper technique and approaches. He learns more through failure, because it typically highlights weaknesses in his robust methodology which can be acted upon to further improve it. Success by contrast teaches him little, emphasizing instead the value of what he already knows to be of worth.
-
To be clear: what i suggested is that wounds taken in combat can cancel out any gain the soldier might get to his "health" stat. Or in a more cruel implementation actually lower the health stat.
It's not about "learning". It's about the health of the soldier's body, which is always lower after being blown apart, then reassembled in a hospital.
Right to some degree. According to serious injuries I'm on your side (though this would not neccessarily influence "health XP" but merely influence health directly as you also meant I guess).
As I said already I would at least add a psychological component to "health" (pain tolerance...) because else it would not make much sense at all to be able to "train" health in combat (your body mass does not change, your stamina is trained through repeated training, not in mission performance...).
Do you disagree about a psychological component of "health"? If it's just physical I would suggest it is nearly fix because an already combat ready soldier is physical fit and will only decrease during combat and aging.
-
because else it would not make much sense at all to be able to "train" health in combat (your body mass does not change, your stamina is trained through repeated training, not in mission performance...).
One thing I would like to note is that in my opinion, simple rules are better than complicated ones. Why? Because the increase is so slow. Significant changes happen over the course of dozens of missions. The change from one single mission is barely noticeable. That makes it a issue of how the increase behaves averaged over a lot of missions, and THAT means individual fluctuations are smoothed out and become irrelevant (this is the same point I was trying to make when I replied to eleazar's comment about the mind stat). Add to that my note about it being easy to hit the XP cap every mission.
My aim was never to make an accurate model of how humans improve. It's a game mechanic. It's meant to provide for soldier growth as a result from missions in a non-exploitable way, nothing more, nothing less.
-
One thing I would like to note is that in my opinion, simple rules are better than complicated ones. Why? Because the increase is so slow. Significant changes happen over the course of dozens of missions. The change from one single mission is barely noticeable. That makes it a issue of how the increase behaves averaged over a lot of missions, and THAT means individual fluctuations are smoothed out and become irrelevant (this is the same point I was trying to make when I replied to eleazar's comment about the mind stat). Add to that my note about it being easy to hit the XP cap every mission.
My aim was never to make an accurate model of how humans improve. It's a game mechanic. It's meant to provide for soldier growth as a result from missions in a non-exploitable way, nothing more, nothing less.
True. I understand your point and I agree that it should be simple. That's why I would think of a mental stability increase through combat xp (you can't train everything in base, you need a hot deployment to feel real pressure and learn to get over the stress) rather than a physical fitness thing -the latter thing should be dealt with by another game mechanic. Serious injuries could be reflected by a permanent decrease in health but that has nothing to do with the development of a soldier through xp as I think of it.
Health increase by mission XP (not sure if related to other XP gains). Probably permanent decrease according to injury handling (that will be updated anyway as I suggest with the medikit redesign). My point so far.
-
I could agree to most of the "health reduction after being wounded"-positions due to their realism...but then:
Why do you guys want to make the game even more difficult? The power of alien weaponry increases during the game, you face tougher and more deadly aliens...and you are going to LOOSE health for barely surving an encounter...do this on some consectutive missions and you have no chance to save your hard built up 50-mission trooper, cause he has only 50 HP left and will almost die from any hit....NO FUN!
Even if you simply negate the health-xp for that mission, i dont like the GAME-MECHANISM behind it...my soldiers are supposed to become better, so that they might survive a hit from late-game superior alein weaponry...keep in mind that the missions are suposed to become more challenging as the campaign goes on. This might included more enemies, better weapons or something like this. You simply NEED these HPs to have a fair chance to survive, well a fair chance of not loosing a well built up soldier....
Conclusion: I would strongly dislike ANY penalty for being wounded, as this would force me to play even more perfect (missions without even being wounded)... For me, it is challenging enough to keep all your soliders alive during some missions, so i dont need any game mechanics to make this even harder...
Concerning Mind-increase: Regardless how this mechanism will be implemented, i think that mind HAS to improve BEFORE you actually need it. I remember one of the really old X-COMs when you got a PSI rating really late in the game...and i was really pissed off to realise that half of my elite squad was bound to be controlled due to their pityful PSI-rating...and I had to replace them. An experinced soldier should have a fair chance to deal with PSI-attacks, even if he started with a bad rating...
-
My aim was never to make an accurate model of how humans improve. It's a game mechanic. It's meant to provide for soldier growth as a result from missions in a non-exploitable way, nothing more, nothing less.
BTAxis, if I may chip in here just for a second -- surely you would like it to be intuitive, or realistic, or whatever you want to call it, right? I mean, otherwise why not do D&D-style XP points, or magic crystals, or something else? Because, as I understand it, UFO:AI aims to avoid those kinds of gimmicks, right?
So, so long as it does not interfere with gameplay, it *should* model how humans learn, but in a simplified way. No?
On the actual proposed system, what I was suggesting was you would *gain* XP for being hit, not loose it. This way, vaterans of combat would have more XP, to illustrate the effect of coolness under fire etc. Health loss due to injury is surely already there (the guy has to spend time in hospital), unless you want this to act as a sort of push towards implants? "We can rebuild him, we have the technology!" ;)
nemchenk
-
Really, you shouldn't be getting hit in the first place, and I strongly believe in some form of disincentive for suffering injury in lieu of restricting troops from participating in missions (while recovering) which would be truly annoying. Perhaps permanent reductions could be eliminated or reduced according to difficulty level, but they should exist. Honestly. If you let your soldiers consistantly suffer major injuries (which are required for hp loss, so you can make some mistakes), you deserve to suffer for it.
-
BTAxis, if I may chip in here just for a second -- surely you would like it to be intuitive, or realistic, or whatever you want to call it, right? I mean, otherwise why not do D&D-style XP points, or magic crystals, or something else? Because, as I understand it, UFO:AI aims to avoid those kinds of gimmicks, right?
In principle yes.
However, with soldier stats, you get a nasty case of realism versus gameplay. Realistically, it makes no sense for soldiers to start off with such low stats. They're supposed to be elite soldiers. By all means, they should already have a ton of XP. But is that fun? No. What's fun is seeing your soldiers grow as the game progresses. You can't have it both. There is no compromise that isn't crap. So I decided to go full-on gameplay on this one.
-
Perhaps permanent reductions could be eliminated or reduced according to difficulty level, but they should exist. Honestly. If you let your soldiers consistantly suffer major injuries (which are required for hp loss, so you can make some mistakes), you deserve to suffer for it.
For me its not about making mistakes. If you make something wrong, you deserve to be punished (gameplaywise). Agreed.
One thing i was trying to point out is, that suffering major injuries happens quite often in UFO:AI. It often takes only one hit to be close to death. Alien walks around a corner, fires its tachyon rifle once, hits and retreats, without taking any reaction fire...Even the best tactics cant pervent THAT. I agree to the fact, that getting wounded should have some effect, but for me rebalancing the medikit, and therefore causing the need for some time in hospital i ok for me...
One last thing: what is the real GAIN for gameplay/fun of changing BTAxis mechanism? It might be my own personal approach, but i dont really care how realistic a game is, as long it is fun to play.
-
Hi!!
Thank you for this beautiful game... I'm a great fan of ufoai, I am playing it since the 2.0 realease.
I've just finished a campaign at difficult level and I think the stats increase system works well.
My most experienced soldiers have faced about 50 different missions; one of them arrived at mind score of 76 before being killed.
The characteristic that is increased the most is mind: you get more or less 1 point of it every mission.
Accuracy also grows, but slowly: after finishing the game, a sniper can get up to 10-15 points of accuracy if you keep sending him in every mission.
Speed is really difficult to increase: I'm not sure, but the veteran soldiers gained 1 or 2 points of speed at the end of the game.
The weapon skills also get increased: more or less, you get a point for every kill with a certain weapon.
It is ok that accuracy and speed grow slower than mind, because I believe that at a certain point you will implement some mechanism to 'train' soldiers, and while you can easily increase your speed and accuracy by training, it is not the same for mind.
I have only a few points to make:
- stats don't increase if you automatically finish missions.
- I have a soldier which I use as an 'explorer'.
He carries only a pistol and a medikit, and I use him to discover where the aliens were hiding while the others soldiers cover him.
Well... after 50 missions, he didn't increase his speed stat, even if he was the one which has run the most. Maybe you should add a bonus to the experience score when a soldier discover an alien, and when he uses a medikit.
- I don't really understand what the mind attribute is for... before reading this post, I believed it was influencing the growth in other stats - for example, a soldier with an higher score in mind would increase its weapon skills faster.
-
Realistically, it makes no sense for soldiers to start off with such low stats. They're supposed to be elite soldiers.
I was going to suggest something quite quick-n-easy :) Shift the stat/skill "tags" one level down: Mediocre becomes Average, Average becomes Competent, etc. It is a bit odd to see "the best of the best of the best" have Mediocre skills everywhere ;) But this way, they are at least Average soldiers from the very start, with some Competent or even Proficient. We'd need a new rank though, as you can't get better than Superhuman! :D God-like? Anyway, you get the idea :)
-
@ufogio: You probably weren't using the latest trunk, just the latest release. The latest release uses the old increase system, which is based purely on kills.
-
"We can rebuild him, we have the technology!" ;)
:D
But do you have 6.000.000 credits left...? ::)
Anyway. The effective loss of soldiers due to crippling by too many serious injuries is a good point. I consider 0 health not necessarily as a dead body but as a loss. No matter if this guy will be burried, gets attached to machines or will be able to live a happy civil life not fit for combat again. That's enough punishment. Everyone else is not injuried to a point where he cannot fully regenerate.
How does this sound? We do not need to make it more complicated imho.
-
@ufogio: You probably weren't using the latest trunk, just the latest release. The latest release uses the old increase system, which is based purely on kills.
I just downloaded the 2.3 dev version trunk 14220. Is the new system implemented in this version? If not, is there any way to implement it in the dev version?
-
Why do you guys want to make the game even more difficult? The power of alien weaponry increases during the game, you face tougher and more deadly aliens...and you are going to LOOSE health for barely surving an encounter...do this on some consectutive missions and you have no chance to save your hard built up 50-mission trooper, cause he has only 50 HP left and will almost die from any hit....NO FUN!
The devs may correct me if i'm wrong, but while this game is supposed to be win-able it's not supposed to be easy. You are going up against an unknown and superior enemy. For the proper atmosphere of desperation, you are supposed to take casualties. That's why there's a way to hire new guys. Having multiple ways for the soldiers to be taken out of battle-fitness besides being instantly killed on the battlefield IMHO emphasizes the feel of a desperate fight.
-
No problems there, but I am with SpaceWombat on this -- non-fatal wounds are taken care of by healing. Until we get stat- and skill-improving implants, that is ;D
-
The devs may correct me if i'm wrong, but while this game is supposed to be win-able it's not supposed to be easy. You are going up against an unknown and superior enemy. For the proper atmosphere of desperation, you are supposed to take casualties. That's why there's a way to hire new guys. Having multiple ways for the soldiers to be taken out of battle-fitness besides being instantly killed on the battlefield IMHO emphasizes the feel of a desperate fight.
You are right but the same difficulty level would be met by simply saying "health = 0". Whether you cripple a soldier to a point where he simply cannot be useful because chances are too high to have a loss at a medium shot or you just take him off the list by health = 0 is not that much of a difference.
It would be slower over several missions but that's just another disadvantage in many cases as I think of it. I will make compromises saying "well, he is still a good soldier". And next time he will be pumped up a bit with xp again and then I have to pull the break and get him off the list. Just another point to let me play paranoid and avoid any losses or woundings and play every mission 5 times on average. ;)
I like better a clear cut and .
We can save code work on that one I think. In the end -as always- it is a matter of balance. If the weapons/armour balance is right you do not need to mess around with the health bar too much. It would be just another complicated variable the player effectively is not really caring about.
-
Hi,
this all looks quite complicated :)
I'd have a few request:
- The XP system should be simpler.
- I would not give XP for any movement. Failed hits would also not account for XP.
- Getting injured (and healing up too) should give a reward for the time its healed.
- I would not make any MAX XP cap anywhere, however I would make "learning" or training
more and more expensive. My reasoning for this would be that such a trained soldier
would always learn more and more, but he could benefit only a tiny tiny tiny bit
more and more. It was written that there could be a the XP cap is there to prevent "training abuse"
but I would instead make the cost grow faster - there should never be "too much
training" (if one has the time to learn... if you train in reallife, you also have to eat and
sleep a bit better normally. You cant make weightlifting and drink only beer and eat
only pork meat and then expect to go on a marathon and win it without sleeping
much :D )
Btw although it doesnt belong here, I would love to see temporary enhancements, i.e. the soldier would inject into himself some pain drugs to continue fighting, surrounded by aliens...
My main gripe is that the whole XP system seems too complicated. I am sure you guys have good
reasons for having a sophisticated XP system, but one aspect is also how new players learn a
concept, and I think the XP system could be a bit simpler than the one presented here.
The power of 0.6 makes sure no veteran soldier will ever be surpassed by a newer soldier, even if the newer one had better initial stats, as long as the veteran keeps training.
That is of course your decision to make, I have however one thing to throw in, which is that sometimes there is a little bit of luck involved too. For example, the elite sniper might be losing out to a new recruit slowly (because this recruit trains more and is smarter to learn from something, and has slightly better eyes and better genes *g*).
I just think that a tiny bit of luck should also be a factor in having benefits from constant training, and in this scenario it would be two veterans. However, as I wrote earlier that I am for simplifications, I am totally fine with capping it in such a way, after all luck adds to the complexity too (and is hard to predict, although to be honest, I dont think the system should be totally _predictable_ to a player...).
BTW I think killing or capturing an alien should give extra XP
Also how are the physical stats improved?
Last but not least, a XP system is great to have because everyone starts to care for his veteran soldier that killed 58 aliens and has trained so much that it really is a HUGE loss to not have him around anymore... ;-)
-
You are right but the same difficulty level would be met by simply saying "health = 0". Whether you cripple a soldier to a point where he simply cannot be useful because chances are too high to have a loss at a medium shot or you just take him off the list by health = 0 is not that much of a difference.
It would be slower over several missions but that's just another disadvantage in many cases as I think of it. I will make compromises saying "well, he is still a good soldier". And next time he will be pumped up a bit with xp again and then I have to pull the break and get him off the list. Just another point to let me play paranoid and avoid any losses or woundings and play every mission 5 times on average.
I like better a clear cut and .
Wombat, if you're getting this same soldier repeatedly injured to such an extent that health loss is triggered each time, then that is precisely what you deserve; a debilitated cripple. It really isn't that hard to avoid serious damage to your troops on most missions, especially once better armour is researched.
-
this all looks quite complicated :)
You don't really have to understand the rules in this thread to play. If i'm not mistaken, all you need to worry about is using a soldier, and his stats will increase at the maximum rate. If you want him to get better at sniping, use him to snipe aliens.
But "training" (by which we mean doing things irrational repetitive things, like repeatedly stunning and hurting an alien with your weakest weapon to make extra XP) will generally not do any good.
You've asked a lot of questions that are addressed in this thread. Please read it from the start.
-
Wombat, if you're getting this same soldier repeatedly injured to such an extent that health loss is triggered each time, then that is precisely what you deserve; a debilitated cripple. It really isn't that hard to avoid serious damage to your troops on most missions, especially once better armour is researched.
I hope you are right, it is still a matter of balance. Over 40-50 missions I fear it will be luck dependent, though. Just my opinion for now, we'll see what will happen if balancing is done.
If it turns out to be a wearout for veterans I pray for a switch to bottom-fixed health.
-
I hope you are right, it is still a matter of balance. Over 40-50 missions I fear it will be luck dependent, though. Just my opinion for now, we'll see what will happen if balancing is done.
If it turns out to be a wearout for veterans I pray for a switch to bottom-fixed health.
Between advanced armour, sound tactics and functioning cover generators like the smoke grenade, I don't think serious injury should be too common. We will see though. My biggest concern at present assuming this system is implimented is the perhaps too sudden appearance of plasma blasters and particle weapons (these typically show up before nanocomposite armour is researched).
Further on the subject of health, I think that max health values in excess of 100 (which we'll assume is an average or baseline), should afford minor percentage based universal damage reduction proportional to that excess. This reflects the general toughness of a trooper, and the truism that those in superior health can not only suffer more equivalent injuries without a fatality relative to someone less robust, but can also endure and weather wounds better too (smaller odds of complications, and the intact remainder is typically more capable of functioning).
-
I like the new proposed system. If anything, I'd add a slight accuracy/weapons boost for misses, as has already been stated. Unfortunately, how would the game differentiate between a miss on a targeted alien, and just random firing on walls? (Or even a hit on an alien that is not targeted?)
Perhaps an alternative proposal for the mind stat could be that it is increased slightly for almost any action, not just kills. This rewards supporting roles such as stunning an alien, using flashbombs or smoke grenades, being a medic - in general, teamwork skills. Perhaps this could even be extended to simple things like sighting an alien or civilian, rewarding scouting.
Unfortunately, some of these are in the list of usable statistics, which makes them unworkable for now.
Edit: Another thought: It could be that the underlying rules themselves can be complicated, as long as they're described simply. For example, saying "Firing at aliens will increase accuracy and proficiency with that weapon class," even though the actual increase is determined by some formula using the soldier's hits, misses, and existing mind, accuracy, and weapons skill. Anyone interested enough to know the exact formula will be able to understand and take advantage of the system quantitatively. Anyone who is only interested in the simple formula sees the direct results of his actions anyway qualitatively. (ie: That person sees that soldiers who take more shots at aliens tend to get better stat increases)
-
/me agrees with Psawhn :)
-
Edit: Another thought: It could be that the underlying rules themselves can be complicated, as long as they're described simply...
True: And sometimes it takes some fancy maths to make numbers do what humans naturally expect.
-
Wait...STRENGTH isn't used yet? Why not?
don't weapons and equipment have weight?
IMHO, STR should influence accuracy with heavier weapons, throwing range and speed when moving under heavy load.
Basicely sum up the weight of all items carried and use it to calculate STR increase. You can throw in the number of squares moved ..hm..
Maybe (total_weight * squares_moved)/100.
hmm, an average soldier would carry..let's say 40-50kg...maybe movement under weight could be tracked separately..After all, just standing there carrying 100kg is also making you stronger, but moving is a bigger strain on the muscles.
Also, why does speed increase more if moving chrouched? Speed is increased by running, not by walking slowly. Over-cautious players that never run with soldiers would get bigger speed increase than soldiers who run from cover to cover.
-
It really isn't that hard to avoid serious damage to your troops on most missions, especially once better armour is researched.
It's not that easy either. All it takes is one lucky shot from a alien ...one-hit-kill weapons, remember?
If soldiers are more easily crippled/killed, then you should balance it back somewhat by faster healing and/or training rooms (expensive) that increase the skill gain while in base.
-
IMHO, STR should influence accuracy with heavier weapons, throwing range and speed when moving under heavy load.
I dont agree that it should influence accuracy with heavier weapons. Either you are strong enough to handle a weapon or not.
Strength should also not affect the throwing range too much but i agree - throwing a 100 kg stone will differ if the guy weighs 60kg or 160kg ;)
I however TOTALLY agree about carrying load. I see this all the time, women arent as good carrying stuff compared to men simply because
they are weaker ... so I assume this has to do with MUSCLES ;)
-
Really, you shouldn't be getting hit in the first place, and I strongly believe in some form of disincentive for suffering injury in lieu of restricting troops from participating in missions (while recovering) which would be truly annoying. Perhaps permanent reductions could be eliminated or reduced according to difficulty level, but they should exist. Honestly. If you let your soldiers consistantly suffer major injuries (which are required for hp loss, so you can make some mistakes), you deserve to suffer for it.
you say it as if it was easy. Chance to hit means just that - chance. My sniper with 90% CTH might still miss, while the alien shooting at me from the other side of the map with a plasma rifle might score a great hit - *puff* there goes most of my health.
Keep in mind that alien weapons do a heluvalot of damage. Your soldiers loses at least 50% health, in most cases it's closer to 80% or insta-death. Having to heal him like crazy, pull him back and then send him to the hospital to recover is already penalty enough.
-
Note that right now there are only 2 different armours in the game for the player to use. There will be 5 more. In addition, the aliens currently uyse their entire arsenal right off the bat. In the future they will not start using the really powerful guns until a while into the game, so the player can be expected to be better protected by that time.
-
The devs may correct me if i'm wrong, but while this game is supposed to be win-able it's not supposed to be easy. You are going up against an unknown and superior enemy. For the proper atmosphere of desperation, you are supposed to take casualties. That's why there's a way to hire new guys. Having multiple ways for the soldiers to be taken out of battle-fitness besides being instantly killed on the battlefield IMHO emphasizes the feel of a desperate fight.
Are you telling me I'm SUPPOSED to loose my dear elite soldiers? and what's fun in that please?
I mean, I guess it partially comes down to how you play.. I currently have 5 bases and soldiers in every one of them (defense teams). I got 2 teams that get sent to some missions - 1 elite team and 1 backup team. I don't tolerate casualties in the elite team, but I do get losses in other teams from time to time. That's how I like it!
If you now try to twist the game so I MUST take heavy loses that it ceases to be fun. Period. No amount of nice twinkly features will fix that.
You can change the hospital/injury system a bit - medikits can heal up to 2/3 of health. If the soldiers health has fallen below 50%, when he's back at base his health 8even if healed with medikit to 2/3) will fall back to 50% and he'll have to recover in the hospital. That ought to put heavily wounded soldiers out of comissions for a bit longer, while not being overly restrictive.
-
I dont agree that it should influence accuracy with heavier weapons. Either you are strong enough to handle a weapon or not.
Yes, but the stronger you are, the easier it is to keep the weapon steady when fireing..less wobble...better control.
-
I have a question.
While this xp gain is based on a soldier not dying, what are the odds my soldiers will not die through an unlucky event, assuming I don't simply reload when I loose a soldier.
If the odds are high that a soldier will die before completing 100 missions, then I would expect either training to be easier, or alternativly, a way to get new soldiers who already have some xp, to reflect the national armies experience against the aliens providing a more skilled baseline of troop than the initial start.
I would expect that xp to be less than a surviving soldiers xp of course, but I would also expect there to have been some xp gained by a soldier.
-
Hi BTAxis,
Been checking the changelog and realised that you have this topic started to explain the XP system.
Did not meant to blog-dig, but it was in the latest changelog update on the main page.
I would like to check with you if this has been updated as per your initial conceiving of this concept? Implemented?
Reason for me asking? I have been studying the advancement process vs ranks and medals and stuff, realised that there is a 0.6 everywhere and wondering if this is arising from this initial concept. :D
Thanks.
:D
-
I have a question.
While this xp gain is based on a soldier not dying, what are the odds my soldiers will not die through an unlucky event, assuming I don't simply reload when I loose a soldier.
If the odds are high that a soldier will die before completing 100 missions, then I would expect either training to be easier, or alternativly, a way to get new soldiers who already have some xp, to reflect the national armies experience against the aliens providing a more skilled baseline of troop than the initial start.
I would expect that xp to be less than a surviving soldiers xp of course, but I would also expect there to have been some xp gained by a soldier.
btw, i feel exactly the same way about it.
the reasoning could be that a fresh phalanx recruit who has some military background should be able to pick up the basics of shooting at aliens in just a few missions, like 2 or 3 missions, and after that the progress would not be significant.
that's why i would also suggest that soldiers could make quick progress an just a few missions, enough to become more or less almost as useful as 100 missions veterans.
i feel it is too much rpg (*wink* @odie) if you cannot afford any casualties.
-
One possibility to offsetting the loss of a quality player would be to make new recruits start with higher stats as the game progresses, maybe an average of your best 10 guys or something. Even tie it to the difficulty level, with easier modes using few people while harder modes would use more people to keep values lower. Example:
Hard - averages 50 best players. The recruit pool is watered down by lower stat base-watchers.
Medium - averages 20 best players. New recruits would be based mostly on your best two teams.
Easy - averages 10 best players. New recruits would be based mostly on your best team.
Or something to that effect. This mainly kicks in in end game and offsets the penalty you encounter when you lose a high quality player and sets it up to bring a new recruit up to speed faster. Having terrible soldiers to recruit from only tends to encourage save/reload. I've always felt this was appropriate in a game like this because those soldiers in the recruit pool represent the troops, which will also get better as the war progresses and everyone learns how to battle the enemy, not just the few elite teams going into direct conflict. The ground troops will also learn more about them as our knowledge filters down to them. At least by my theory.
I also don't mean exactly the same as the team members you've lost; there should be some penalty for losing a member and that adds to the challenge. Some percentage would be required of the average. Doesn't have to be complicated, just balanced enough so that the new recruits are not as good as your best.
And sorry if this sidetracks the thread. Just an idea that's indirectly related to the stat system in general.
-
One possibility to offsetting the loss of a quality player would be to make new recruits start with higher stats as the game progresses, maybe an average of your best 10 guys or something. Even tie it to the difficulty level, with easier modes using few people while harder modes would use more people to keep values lower. Example:
Hard - averages 50 best players. The recruit pool is watered down by lower stat base-watchers.
Medium - averages 20 best players. New recruits would be based mostly on your best two teams.
Easy - averages 10 best players. New recruits would be based mostly on your best team.
Or something to that effect. This mainly kicks in in end game and offsets the penalty you encounter when you lose a high quality player and sets it up to bring a new recruit up to speed faster. Having terrible soldiers to recruit from only tends to encourage save/reload. I've always felt this was appropriate in a game like this because those soldiers in the recruit pool represent the troops, which will also get better as the war progresses and everyone learns how to battle the enemy, not just the few elite teams going into direct conflict. The ground troops will also learn more about them as our knowledge filters down to them. At least by my theory.
I also don't mean exactly the same as the team members you've lost; there should be some penalty for losing a member and that adds to the challenge. Some percentage would be required of the average. Doesn't have to be complicated, just balanced enough so that the new recruits are not as good as your best.
And sorry if this sidetracks the thread. Just an idea that's indirectly related to the stat system in general.
Very nice Idea!!! I totally agree with that.
Obs: I prefer Bettlescared idea, but this would lead to a complete reformulation of the actual new soldier stats generation. Alternatively we could add a fixed (Min=x, Max=y constant) experience to every stats multiplied by the game month to new soldiers (eg. 10th month of the game, new soldiers would get the month experience constant multiplied by 10).
This would require some testing to ensure recruits would never be generated better than a veteran soldier, but enough so that veteran soldier deaths don't have a huge impact on the game (causing to simply load game).
Again not as guaranteed and balanced as the average of ur top solders minus a constant percentage. Just less coding work.
-
Excuse me folks,
I think this was long already in the developer's plan to be the way it is now.....
My point in this dig into the thread was to clarify with the original concept developer (BTAxis) whether it was in place already as planned.....
Sorry to disappoint u folks, but i dun think this was meant for further discussions...... (And yes, to a certain extent, this HAS an element of RPG, just not the role playing part, but incremental XP / stats part).
:D
-
Well, just my 2 cents...
Anyway, I think there is a plan for a training facility in the future. Maybe rokies could train faster than veterans, balancing veteran loss (but never as good as a veteran).
-
Well, just my 2 cents...
Anyway, I think there is a plan for a training facility in the future. Maybe rookies could train faster than veterans, balancing veteran loss (but never as good as a veteran).
1) If u saw Psionics training, it aint animore - Trashed Psionic Training (http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Base_Facilities/Psionics_Training_Room)
2) If its base training - Training Simulator (http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Base_Facilities/Training_Simulator), then it is still in place.
If its point 1, forget it.
If its point 2, then its still severely not worked on yet, cos there are other more impt stuff at moment the devs are working on. ;D Taking a look at Whats written for the concept of training (http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Proposals/Training_Programs) and u will know why. :D
Maybe u wanna help write up a proposal on training? :D
-
I meant #2. Too lazy to add it to wiki, I'll just post here:
My sugestion is just that training gets very fast xp at the beggining and then start to get slower and slower xp increase until almost nothing. The rate that it slows down should be adjusted by how many months of gameplay has passed, to adjust for the progress of the game. That would raise rookies fast to almost veterans levels at any point of the game. ofc, real veteran survivors should be always better than trained rookies to reward survival.
The wiki text as it is written now can pass on the wrong idea. That facility should cost good money, ofc. But should never be a "skill shop".
-
I meant #2. Too lazy to add it to wiki, I'll just post here:
My sugestion is just that training gets very fast xp at the beggining and then start to get slower and slower xp increase until almost nothing. The rate that it slows down should be adjusted by how many months of gameplay has passed, to adjust for the progress of the game. That would raise rookies fast to almost veterans levels at any point of the game. ofc, real veteran survivors should be always better than trained rookies to reward survival.
The wiki text as it is written now can pass on the wrong idea. That facility should cost good money, ofc. But should never be a "skill shop".
Have u used RPGMaker before btw?
It sounds something like the level up engine system they used......
It very low gradiant for maybe first 30/100 levels, rising steeply from maybe lvl 60 onwards.
Its quite the same for alot of RPGs lvl up systems. :D
A bit like this graph:
http://www.benefactum.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/goldrush_graph1.jpg
Maybe we can consider adopting the green graph? lol. or the red.
-
Meh, just assign a more experienced soldier to the Training Lab as an instructor. like we were with doctors and the hospitals back in 2.1
training improvement is based on difference between instructor and student stats. the greater the difference (when a student score in a stat is lower then the instructors corresponding score.) the greater the improvement. as students get closer to the instructors scores the improvement tapers off.....
lets you use your veterans to bring the rookies up to speed.
thus as the game progresses and as your instructors get better and gain experiance they will be able to get the rookies up to speed faster.
if you don't want to deal with actually assigning instructors. Just have the game do a periodic check of your soldiers skills and set the level of instruction at the highest level a soldier has in that stat.
this actually simulates what we do in the military, we are ALWAYS taking time to teach each other skills and work on our training. It's all about teaching each other. and considering that Phalanx is recruiting the best of the best it makes sense that they would be teaching each other and giving each other pointers to keep themselves at their best.
and per the current written proposal... have a credit cost to cover operational costs and instructional materials.
-
Odie: Yep, thats the idea, with the exception that that the gradiant should be readjusted each month so it is still usable on late game for new recruits.
Philroi: Nice idea as well. Mechanics described seems very similar to Battlescared idea, but applied to training labs instead of recruiting mechanics. May be easier to implement and more reliable than my own. Since training lab system is not designed yet, now is the time for sux complex ideas. Cheers!
-
recruits aren't going to change in quality... already recruiting the best of the best. this gives you a diffrent method to get them up to speed that will scale with the game. and it is both realistic and reasonable. Units teach themselves. somebody does something well so he gets called on to teach it to others...
can make it as complicated or simple as you like. or even code it in stages getting more complex
a.poll existing soldier skills to create "ghost" instructor whos stats are equal to the best in each catageoy found in all your soldiers... and improve all skills according to the scale i mentioned. the bigger the difffernce the better the bonus. the closer student gets to instructor the slower the gains.
b. pick 1 soldier to teach at a time... can use all his stats and do general instruction with tiny bonuses to everthing or just pick one stat and do fucused instruction. this mon we are teaching assault, next month we will be breaking out the heavy weapons... in which case the improvements would be greater but limited to 1 stat.
c. heck you could also assign every recruit their own mentor... but thats probably more complicated then it needs to be. and way more coding then is needed....
i do like option B
-
recruits aren't going to change in quality... already recruiting the best of the best. this gives you a diffrent method to get them up to speed that will scale with the game. and it is both realistic and reasonable. Units teach themselves. somebody does something well so he gets called on to teach it to others...
can make it as complicated or simple as you like. or even code it in stages getting more complex
a.poll existing soldier skills to create "ghost" instructor whos stats are equal to the best in each catageoy found in all your soldiers... and improve all skills according to the scale i mentioned. the bigger the difffernce the better the bonus. the closer student gets to instructor the slower the gains.
b. pick 1 soldier to teach at a time... can use all his stats and do general instruction with tiny bonuses to everthing or just pick one stat and do fucused instruction. this mon we are teaching assault, next month we will be breaking out the heavy weapons... in which case the improvements would be greater but limited to 1 stat.
c. heck you could also assign every recruit their own mentor... but thats probably more complicated then it needs to be. and way more coding then is needed....
i do like option B
The simpler, the better. Assigning instructors would add unecessary codes and unecessary micromanagement. But i liked idea "a" very much. Very simple, and will work well at any stage of the game at any dificulty, and still give player an extra incentive to keep specialist veterans alive (better training for rokies). Awesome!
-
Just chiming in again as a part timer. I was just offering an idea. I like the planed method equally well if not better.
Of the options listed above, if they're on the table, I think option (B) is the most straighforward, however, the "ghost instructor" option of (A) could really be thought of as team mentorship. A new guy is recruited and everyone on the team takes him/her under their wings and crams everything they all know about surviving in the field they can think of. He gets up to speed fast and within a few missions is battle ready, somewhat equal to the overall level of the team.
In reality though, there would be some kind of classroom training from a qualified instructor that would bring new recruits up to speed, and option B is probably more representative of how a real military organization would go about it structurally.
But extending the ideas just a bit further, perhaps what really happens is a mix of A and B where people really learn by instruction and by mentorship. It may be too complicated to mix those two models, though, and just simpler to go with an assigned instructor as the main means of getting recruits up to speed.
-
you need better soldiers in later game, and your (ghost) teachers become better :) looks neat imho.
myself i would be thinking more about how combat experience would fit into it.
somehow i would assume that the rookies already know how to shoot, but shooting at aliens can be confusing, so they need to see some real aliens.
the reason for this kind of nitpicking is, of course, that you would actually need to shoot something with the rookies on the battlefield, and that would, hopefully create some appropriate minor challenges.
if it's just pure training back in the safety of the base, then it sort of seems to be almost equivalent to having a delay for recruiting.
and, btw, getting at least one soldier with lots of combat experience suddenly becomes one of the main objectives, doesn't it?
if it will be balanced so that it will not create ridiculous behavior in the tactical field, i think it would make perfect sense that you would benefit from experienced instructors in your training simulator.
-
T3 Center (Tactical Team Training Center).
For your consideration:
I am a combat soldier and I won't mince words. We need someplace to train. We have learned a metric ton about fighting the aliens but need a space to call our own so we can hone our skills. Up until now we have just been using the rooms and hallways around here to try and get the rookies up to speed. It really isn't working, we are doing everything we can but the rookies are still getting hammered out there. We have had to do it wherever we can find space and we aren't underfoot. My guys tend to bump into things, sometimes sensitive things, while moving around and there are places where that isn't a good idea, strangely those places also tend to be the only places we can find enough space to train. Navvare says one of my guys tripped in a lab and nearly upset some lab equipment and set the research team back several months. They managed to rescue the specimens in time though. He talked to the engineer and he agreed since they are tired of finding us crawling around the workshops and running into gun barrels in the dark corners whenever we bump something out of alignment and they have to go in and fix it. The two of them put their heads together and think they can rig up some fancy computer controlled and simulated shoot house of sorts for us. I won't say i understood half of what they went on about, but they say they can rig it up to handle some live fire training too. For those things it can't handle, they can rig simulated weapons that it can handle. It will also have the capability to do variable terrain and whatnot. The engineers say they will be happy to rebuild the thing if we manage to demolish it. After all, a few hours rebuilding plywood walls is nothing compared to the hours spent troubleshooting and recalibrating the power plant anytime we bump the wrong thing doing what we are doing now. The scientists say that based on the recordings from the mission recorders we all wear during missions they can rig holograms, projectors and whatnot to re-create those missions for us to train with. Claim they can rig it up as a controlled virtual reality experience or something. I won't claim to understand it, but i believe they do. Quite frankly, We don't have a good place to hone our skills. And if this thing they have in mind can do half of what they say it can, it may be just the thing. I am tired of losing soldiers and if this thing helps us to get the training we need to keep from getting blasted. I am all for it. Truth is we have a lot of experience on the team already and we can rotate through the Training Centers as our own instructors. We can be better, We can stop losing rookies every time we go out, we just need the right place to get better.
yours
Da Gruntz!
sounds like option A above was the most liked idea. Helps to solve the rookie getting up to speed problem especially and does what we want a training center to do, slightly increase the improvement of all soldier skills.
-
Nice ideas....
Now, still waiting to see what the dev team and BTAxis think of this.
1) Recruits starting stats should remain same (low) as their quality is same.
2) Conflicts is quite advanced by mid-stage, hence, we would want to need get them preped up thru training quick.
3) Mentorship system (ghost system of picking best in each genre and 'memorising it') sounds good for ever veteran imparts his knowledge to all trainees.
4) We might ask if veterans want to increase his other skills; perhaps, then again, do we want to put him into 'retraining' so he becomes a better soldier, or simply send him on further missions (to which he prob increase his expertise skills further, making him a better lecturer in that field).
5) Last but not least, we use a sorta of a gradiant graph which makes initial training faster (for noobs) and slow down as they have basic understanding and go into the 'specialisation phase' which takes a much longer time to train, or simply send em on missions!
Sounds like a reasonable summary of tots for us here so far? ;)
-
lol realistically its the easiest to code. and incorporate, which really is the ultimate test. ;)
Just set-up a function call once a month to set the training skill level for the month. I wouldn't even worry about "enrolling" soldiers in training since the reality is everyone would be swinging by to train in periods between missions. Then at the same time compare skill level of training center to trainees to determine amount skills are improved. Design a function to put the amount improved on a curve so that those with the most to learn, learn the most and those with not much to learn get very little. your other veterans might get a little boost but not much from being in training. There should be a fairly clear point in the improvement curve for individual soldiers where it becomes obvious training center improvement will never replace real combat experience for improving your soldiers. So for the rookies its great but for the vet's it is of limited benefit. and good veterens improve the skill improvement of the rookies.
the above letter can be easily re-written from Navvare's or the head engineers perspective complaining about the soldiers underfoot trying to train.... eh Winter? Though I kinda like it coming from a soldier. These guys are the ones in the fight. and while they aren't as brainiac as others, they ARE the subject matter experts in what they do... killing aliens. Reality is soldiers train all the time. especially in the more elite special forces units. so the subject of looking for a good place to train would be soldier driven.
-
4) We might ask if veterans want to increase his other skills; perhaps, then again, do we want to put him into 'retraining' so he becomes a better soldier, or simply send him on further missions (to which he prob increase his expertise skills further, making him a better lecturer in that field).
Since teachers can actually learn something from students or from preparing for the classes, status goal (max stats in the pool) should maybe be raised in 1 or 2 points so teachers can learn as well from training (although at a ridiculous slow rate...). Or maybe setting a minimum learning value.
-
There seems to be a lot of overthinking going on here. We're not going to have veteran troops as trainers, or anything like that, because it adds tons of micromanagement. Also, we already have a training building and a system for it.
http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Base_Facilities/Training_Simulator
It's just not been coded yet, like a lot of things.
Regards,
Winter
-
There seems to be a lot of overthinking going on here. We're not going to have veteran troops as trainers, or anything like that, because it adds tons of micromanagement. Also, we already have a training building and a system for it.
http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Base_Facilities/Training_Simulator
It's just not been coded yet, like a lot of things.
Regards,
Winter
Yep. Specially considering it has not been coded yet, we are just triyng to thing a good mechanics for the training simulator. And idea "a" from PhilRoi ("ghost" instructor from best soldiers stats pool) eliminates any need for micromanagement.
Unfortunately, our simulation options are limited by our lack of experience fighting aliens. So far we have only encountered the one alien race, the 'greys', and the robotic spiders we've seen on camera. Both types of alien are highly dangerous and have tremendously outperformed human troops during the engagements we've recorded. Worse, there may be more types of alien we have not yet seen and about whom we would have no tactical data. The relative performance of our troops may be impaired until we can build up a larger body of experience about how alien squads operate and communicate, and perhaps discover their goals and intentions for Earth.
All engagements involving PHALANX troops are recorded via cameras and will be turned into simulator scenarios where possible. It is highly effective for our soldiers to relive an engagement and see where they may have made mistakes or could have been more effective, and for new recruits to learn from our amassed experience.
UFOpaedia entry seems to support this idea, since new recordings from tactical missions (from experienced soldiers) would continuously add quality to the training over time.
Any base housing an armed response team needs a Training Simulator. The simulator is absolutely vital for nurturing and maintaining our soldiers' combat skills and physical fitness. The simulator also develops the soldier's individual talents and assists in understanding his or her combat experiences. Without proper training, our troops don't stand a chance of surviving in the field.
It even supports veteran skill development chance.
Obs: If there is a plan already discussed and ready about training mechanics, I either was unable to find it on forum/wiki or hasn't been made public yet.
-
There seems to be a lot of overthinking going on here. We're not going to have veteran troops as trainers, or anything like that, because it adds tons of micromanagement. Also, we already have a training building and a system for it.
http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Base_Facilities/Training_Simulator
It's just not been coded yet, like a lot of things.
Regards,
Winter
Hi Winter,
I believed we all are aware of this Training Simulator (http://ufoai.ninex.info/wiki/index.php/Base_Facilities/Training_Simulator) already. :D
So far, in the proposal, nothing much mentioned except that the simulator will be based on whats seen in mumbai.
I believe that as the time goes on, where Phalanx soldiers meet more bad-ass in conflicts, these can be further incorporated into the TS (Training Simulator) which results in the scenarios some of us mentioned and discussed earlier.
Maybe in line with that proposal idea, it wont be the soldiers who will be doing the trainer's roles?? But specialised combat specialist / tacticians who will analysed each battle and incorporating this into the TS - which means: We can still have our scenario (of basing the baseline training standards based on average of top 10 soldiers for eg), yet for the storyline's sake - its really done by these tacticians and simulator's.
:D Its 4.31am, and i just came back from helping out as a first aider at our national day's parade.... so i ma be not making good english sense here. :D Just dropping a quick furthering of tots so u folks can discuss further. :D Toodles.
-
So far, in the proposal, nothing much mentioned except that the simulator will be based on whats seen in mumbai.
I believe that as the time goes on, where Phalanx soldiers meet more bad-ass in conflicts, these can be further incorporated into the TS (Training Simulator) which results in the scenarios some of us mentioned and discussed earlier.
Maybe in line with that proposal idea, it wont be the soldiers who will be doing the trainer's roles?? But specialised combat specialist / tacticians who will analysed each battle and incorporating this into the TS - which means: We can still have our scenario (of basing the baseline training standards based on average of top 10 soldiers for eg), yet for the storyline's sake - its really done by these tacticians and simulator's.
Clearly you haven't read the article. It expressly mentions that all tac missions performed by PHALANX are recorded and used for constant reviews and updates of infantry tactics. At some point we also want all battles to be replayable at will through the Training Simulator.
There's no point in expressly mentioning who trains whom or how it happens. Training happens, and the player's imagination can fill in the rest. As for the system, thank you, but we never take design ideas off the forum.
Regards,
Winter
-
dead topic. :D it's already figured out no need to waste time on it.