Messages

1

Feature Requests / Re: Autoresolve Mechanics - Use Statistics

« on: September 19, 2011, 09:19:35 pm »

I still don't see how it can be manipulated. If you play a bunch of easy missions, it would only affect the easy mission resolution, not the hard.

2

Mapping / City Map Disembark Issue

« on: September 19, 2011, 10:19:53 am »

I can't play the "Big City" missions because I can't get my troopers out of the transport - there's usually one next to the... road? that can move out, but the guys standing in the open sides of the ship show blue for all movement options, and they then block in everyone else.

I'm on Linux, and I don't know what else you need for a bug report / diagnosis.

3

Feature Requests / Re: Autoresolve Mechanics - Use Statistics

« on: September 19, 2011, 09:42:20 am »

I think I'm still failing to communicate this idea to you. How could this result in easy missions making auto-resolve think hard missions should succeed? You'd have different statistics for each.

The motivation is to make sure I never have to repeat a mission unless I want to or do not have consistent performance on it.

The result of the mechanism is that if I consistently always win a given mission with a given difficulty level with a given soldier/equipment combination, auto-resolve should result in a win when I go to play that mission again.

The mechanism is that the game adjusts the auto-resolve valuation of equipment and soldier combinations based upon actual real game data, as the game is being played.

I dig what you're saying that auto-resolve should result in a worse outcome, but don't make me play the same mission fifty times, especially if the outcome is always the same. If I want to, I want to, but don't make me.

4

Feature Requests / Re: Autoresolve Mechanics - Use Statistics

« on: September 18, 2011, 11:34:14 am »

If there are no (of insufficient) statistics available, either don't allow auto-resolve, or don't use the statistics to determine it.

Here's my issue: I love sniper rifles. I'm pretty sure I'm losing these missions because the game's valuation of them doesn't take into account how well I use them; that is, it just thinks "These are game-start gear, and so aren't up to par with mid/late game missions.". Maybe I'm wrong, but that's going to happen.

The idea behind taking statistics into account isn't to replace the classic designer-set valuation method - it's to adjust it. If I, as a player, suck or rock at using this or that equipment, have the game notice - the idea is that the auto-resolve resolves it as if *I* played the mission. I mean, how often have you been surprised by how a player uses or does a certain thing; how effective this or that is in their hands? Don't try to predict the effectiveness of everything ahead of time - take the data the player is giving you, and use that.

I don't see how your abuse case works, and I don't see how it's any less abusable than it is now. I save before every mission (takes about a second and a half, esc-save-click-enter-esc-continue), and if it goes really poorly, I just reload. Bam, ensure a win. If you mean, retry until whatever random element is in there gives me the number I need to win - any system with randomness has that issue, and, to be frank, I'm not suggesting any. I think you should have some, but it's not inherent to this strategy.

The generalized rule of game design I'm working off of is to never *require* a player to do a something they consistently succeed at. If they enjoy it, by all means, let them repeat to the end of time, but when they stop enjoying it? Don't require them to. When I've curb-stomped the same aliens (or near enough) on the same map for the fifth time, don't make me do it again. And if the auto-resolve thinks I'll lose, when I have always won, you're effectively making me do it again, or not at all.

TLDR: Take all those things you're talking about into account - soldier skills, equipment, and a bit of randomness, and then adjust based on how well that formula would have predicted the battles I've already fought. So let's say every time I walk into battle with what the formula thinks is winning, I lose, and every time I walk in with something it things should lose, I win, it should flip it's expectations. Make sense?

5

Feature Requests / Autoresolve Mechanics - Use Statistics

« on: September 17, 2011, 11:30:37 pm »

So, in late (mid? I ran out of research, but there's mention of stuff here that I haven't seen?) game, I started using auto-resolve almost all the time (honestly, got bored...), but I noticed that, well, it's not very accurate in my success rates. Terror/harvester missions, and even some crashed/landed UFO, I lose, but if I actually play them, I win with no deaths and usually no causalities at all.

Blah, blah, blah -

I'd like auto-resolve to take into account my success rates on similar missions, as a baseline. So - You have a data space of what each side brings to the fight, and you have the outcome of those fights. Look for the most similar fights that were fully played, make some guesses about the differences between this fight and those (more/better aliens/equipment), and use that to tweak the average outcome of those similar fights - more/better aliens, take more damage, worse/fewer, take less. If the system doesn't think it can make an accurate resolution, grey out the auto-resolve option, so that it can get a data point there. Added bonus - I know that any fight I can't auto-resolve has some new element.

Am I making sense?