Spring RTS Engine

NeonStorm wrote:Currently most mods use some sort of exponential growth:
Zero-K: Overdrive
BA/TA/Nota/... T2 mexes and makers.

--- I want to see some very different games too. Example: ---

"BA/TA/Nota/... T2 mexes and makers. => exponential growth" is not truth in case of NOTA. First, noone win NOTA match via eco rush, theres nothing like eco-rush. Second, metal makers are just cosmetical thing in eco-model.

Try to play it on proper map with 15-25 metal max! for each player and much more space for manuvering.

Mostly true.

What is a good map? Pemsterland_2v2v2v2?
( But it has no real base-spots except your start spot )

And you need a lot of space - enough that you need each defense tower 3-5 times _per base_!
Which increase the steam-rolling effect (exponential growth of strength/possibilities-difference between you and your enemey) as incoming enemies can't get stopped effectively.

In Nota it is also good to have all units in one spot and attack together - no need to distribute your army about equally over your front or among reclaimers, especially on maps like pemsterland.

---
Imagine these time requirements:
1 asteroid-collector: 0.5x s move/deploy, 0.5x s reclaim.
2 asteroid-collector: 0.5x s move/deploy, 0.25x s reclaim (0.25x s time saved)
3 asteroid-collector: 0.5x s move/deploy, 0.125x s reclaim (0.375x s time saved)
Except you create multiple collector-groups which each need their combat unit support.

Now imagine all fights happen outside well fortified bases (where most asteroids are), but the defenses need an energy supply from nearby geos (be inside the shield), so that you can't porc on the whole map without an expensive fusion + extra shield for a small outpost (which don't cover the map and is mostly usefull to retreat facing an armbush, repair units far away from your main base, rebuild reclaimers, reload pads, intel, etc.

Bases/outposts should be a lot easier build than destroyed before T3 units are available, as they are not extracting any metal by themself and enemies can easily go around.

I don't think exponential means what you think it means..

smoth wrote:I don't think exponential means what you think it means..

Neon, maybe you should get your own tumblr or something if you're going to insist on writing down every irrelevant detail on every random topic that floats through your jumbled mind.

Note: I'm referring to pretty much any post you've made here or on the ZK forums, not just this thread

Forums are there to communicate - if you don't like some thread, just ignore it.
Please don't turn this thread into another Ban-him-thread.

Or do you want users to register new nicks just to avoid "get insulted"? Maybe some bias don't let you see those thread/posts which are good.
That is how it appears to me.

ZK is not working for me. 91.0 is excluding mostly linux users - I even get GL_UNDERRUNS from zk-devs absolute competent code.
I would play games and not write threads if there would at least be one game around with no T2 mexes, no makers (or overdrive) and fixed base income which enough players play to get some MP game running.

Maybe you should help me to understand what _exactly_ let you have so much hate.

NeonStorm wrote:I would play games and not write threads if there would at least be:

• one game around with no T2 mexes
• no makers (or overdrive)
• fixed base income
• which enough players play to get some MP game running.

no makers, no T2 mexes, fixed basic income, ok good good, which enough players.. DAMNIT..

yeah about that, not happening. Gundam at it's pique had about 20 people playing it per day. Your requirements negate the last one, the whole economy bit, all the current popular games are based on TA. So well, you are going to see that economy. Which had those elements. You could go play CT but no one plays that. Well, you could always go download gundam and play against the survival spawner(do a portable install and it'll run where the current doesn't effect it) and at least tell me if that economy was closer to what you were looking for. Of course expect that rare crash to happen!

Anyway YOU can post ALL the IDEAS you want. People can only move so fast and they are not going to change the core of their game(ta based projects). I am not starting my next project until I am happy with my groundwork(go read my thread in art and modeling to see where I am with that). I am pretty much taking gundam's economy and research and adding all new art. just rather than spend 5years doing art and script I want to develop something to cut a bunch of the redundant work out.

Neon, you're killing us. Linear and Exponential mean two VERY different things. Here a couple examples.

Yes, I know that this is not accurate, sue me. I'm just trying to get the point across to him.

ex·po·nen·tial growth
noun
1.
growth whose rate becomes ever more rapid in proportion to the growing total number or size.

Linear growth continues to increase at the same rate, whereas exponential growth increases at an expanding rate.


Linear growth

1+1=2
2+1=3
3+1=4
4+1=5 ...

Exponential Growth

1x2=2
2x2=4
4x2=8
8x2=16
16x2=32

Hopefully this helps to illustrate.

I really didn't read his stuff, but there are better ways to draw functions:
Linear function: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3*x%2B5
Polynomial function: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x%5E3%2Bx%5E2%2B2
Exponential function: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3%5Ex

4+1=6

Please stop breaking Forb.

Nice, you were the first one to notice FireStorm_

Maybe I should explain it without "exponential" or "difference in strength" ...

My wish:
00..10 min: linear growth of eco and small army
10..25 min: linear growth of army, expansion, very low growth of eco with a lot of fluctuations
25..40 min: armies become more special and run assaults on under-defended outposts, eco is dependent on player skill, micro and enemy aggression, eco growth is only possible by reclaim or very high skill for map domination.
40..60 min: Siege units can wear down base-shields. Similar good players will win against each other.
60..90 min: Super weapons. All serious games will end in this time.

Fighting a player in FFA decreases your territorial control and share of territorial reclaim by demanding your attention. But your reward is combat reclaim. It depends on both player skills to counter each other - i it worth the risk or helps your enemy instead?

FFA games can take longer if more players fight for the same reclaim value and end in 1v1v1.


Ofcourse it will never be finished in the first release.
It starts with writing some basic gadgets and unit-whitelists.
A fork existing games provides you with relatively balanced units and decrease the learning curve for new players, altough converting the costs to metal for T0 and new (rebalanced) T3+ units will be a big task too (at least for a lonely dev).

There are limits to eco.. no matter how expo-lineal

UnitLimit
Buildable Space
Your Enemys

The truth is though that the expo modell holds a reward for those who know how to use it. Eco can counter mediocre tactical skills

Awww cocks my copy pasting ways have caught up with me...

Quick! Argh ninja edit to the rescue! :-D

@PicassoCT:
Maybe I am just tired about the fact I use units well and some dumb one outecoes me and rush T2 because he took somebody or some newbe donated metal to him.

Buildable Space is sure a limit how save your eco is from bombers through redundancy, no chaining, etc, but often not the real limit with T2 adv. fusions on maps with low wind.

UnitLimit always works, but it is better to limit units by:
* how many can shoot at the same time or
* how many constructors don't reclaim the rock in front of each other and make themselves more ineffective in numbers (previously I said I want something like 1/2 time walk, 1/2 reclaim for asteroids distances/value).
* how many radar/jammer, long-range visual sensors do you need? Just 1 per army if you can keep it easily :)

One limit is build power - get more outposts for more cheap, but space-inefficient energy sources, but if you have too many, you need to distribute your limited income too much and can't hold them -> enemy gets free reclaim.
You can bypass this limit by spaming T0 units (only cost metal) but you have to play well to get the reclaim back and reproduce them before the enemy gets your 100% of reclaim

Maybe I am just tired about the fact

...that a real time strategy is not the same thing as a moba?

neon your points are not making a lot of sense.

Okay, so only people who remember there math courses are allowed to participate in game design discussions? Why not atleast bend this into a intersting discussions for alternative economy models?

For example WC3s upkeep costs. Very interesting model.

And lets define economy first.
You got limited ressources:
time,
place,
ressources,
player attention

How to weave them into interesting combinations?
For example you could make the most deadliest of unit, that is only effective, if you have a hundred of them dancing in a endless circle (very attentionexpensive).. and suddenly all the remaining eco is void, as you dont have time to divert attention.

NeonStorm wrote: 00..10 min: linear growth of eco and small army
10..25 min: linear growth of army, expansion, very low growth of eco with a lot of fluctuations
25..40 min: armies become more special and run assaults on under-defended outposts, eco is dependent on player skill, micro and enemy aggression, eco growth is only possible by reclaim or very high skill for map domination.
40..60 min: Siege units can wear down base-shields. Similar good players will win against each other.
60..90 min: Super weapons. All serious games will end in this time.

Actually, Red Annihilation isn't too far away from what you're looking for.
http://springfiles.com/spring/games/red-annihilation

It has a theoretical maximum metal income of ~200 per mex. However, anything above 100 is extremely hard to accomplish. For this reason you must expand quickly and get more mexes.

It also requires much more econ micro-management and there are upgradable weapons that can end the game very quickly.

Maybe longterm tactics should be rewarded..

for example upgradeable towers who make extra damage when you specialise them on one particular type of enemy unit.

So if your opponent is luving the bomba- you can tower-deafsense him.
Allthough it could be argued that this is just fixing a symptom off unbalanced units.

zer_ver> Actually, Red Annihilation isn't too far away from what you're looking for.

The miner-gadget itself is a good thing (makes reclaim far away from your bases+outposts more difficult, if you block mobiles to directly transfer reclaim to your metal bar and rafineries to your base).

But ore on fixed mex spots makes the game "more classic" - 20k m on alien desert (per player, tested with 2 teams controlled by me) before you have enough energy for a nano-farm.

- Many mexes: Ore is continously produced and doesn't decay, thus if you can't suck it just to prevent your enemy from using it, energy / build power has "exponential growth" in the early game.

- Few mexes: Controlling a few key spots can prevent the linear growth of your enemy too easily, because you can't avoid your enemy or raid his lonely reclaimers + don't need to scout where the m is.

T2: you get much better rafeneries with better multiplicator - exponential until you have a super-rafenerie complex with mex+ 4*T2-makers and can supply energy to it.

Maybe it plays differently with very many very-low-metal mex spots and no T2 eco.