1 faction discussion thread

[CarRepairer]

Quote:
A faction has a feel across its factories.
This is the heart of Cars objection. He wants the factions to have a 'feel', a 'consistency' like special weapons or abilities. IE, another fluff argument.

No it's not fluff, it's actually gameplay. I will give a concrete example:

I am arm and my opponent is core. He is porcing in various places and spamming shieldlinks. There's the usual arty to keep his energy drain going. But arm's best counter to shields is EMP, which can quickly drain some shields to nothing. Now whatever arm factory I have, (excluding the vehicle fac, unfortunately) has some sort of EMP weapon I could use to exploit the shield. This is a consistency that is defining a general strat of using EMP against shields.

And even so, there is also a non-gameplay fluff side to the consistency: models, animation, sounds, explosion graphics, all of which have nothing to do with gameplay. And this fluff is still important too so don't deny it even for a second. It would kill the game for me to lose the character we have built up with arm and core visuals - plenty of which is your doing with spherebots.

Tech share is not the only argument for it. I just hate how you keep talking about a limited unit set, it's just wrong. Most games are teamgames, it's very easy to steal tech in FFA and you don't even play 1v1. 1v1 games use the identical units because the special abilities aren't balanced at a 1v1 level, the techshare games would exploit any meaningful 1v1 abilities that come into play before the game is decided.

I'm sorry but yes that is the core of the argument for having different factions. If you think limited unit sets are truly an illusion then why do so many people not agree? I'm sure the true pros can exploit the different unit sets, but even then I still see a difference between starting arm and getting arm after you start the game (in 1v1, ffa, planetwars).

To summarize:

Different factions are interesting because of their limited unit sets. Because it's about choosing a different character in every game. But...

Some are saying that limited unit sets are an illusion because we can employ gameplay mechanics to get any unit (sharing, rez, capture) - this may be true to some extent, but at different levels in different game types. And we have the ability to alter these game mechanics.

[luckywaldo7]

You keep bringing up the same examples. I already listed the entirety of the interesting differences between the two.

I mean, shields are limited to core now and arm has cloakers, and that is a really fun difference, but that is almost the only fun difference in the game. The other two general differences are emp vs fire/gravity, and at vs jumper

Seriously, try to find some interesting differences outside of those, and you will find nothing.

Besides, these differences often lead to imbalances more then anything else. Look at emp vs shields. Emp trumps shields hard. Does core have anything to trump cloak? And don't say tremor, a single unique expensive unit available only in one lab can hardly be counted as a reliable counter. Having a special ability of 1 faction trump a special ability of another is just lame, unless you are making an rps out of special abilities.

You also don't seem to understand how factories limit you in much the same way factions do, although all your examples do seem to involve cloak or shields in some way. Maybe you are worried about cloak and shields being less unique when they are available to anyone anytime? I think its worth considering making them only available as units from a lab.

id prefer more factions and meaningful long term choices (no lab reclaiming and swapping at will) with smaller unit lists than a ton of factories in one faction.

Because tbh even in huge team games you wont use even half of what your faction has to offer in a normal game.

so yeh along the lines of what pxtl said :p.

Id prefer to work with what i got to try to beat the enemy rather than if enemy makes this factory i go this factory if enemy goes this other factory i reclaim my factory and build something else. Thats boring shit gameplay IMO

Ofc some of that goes out of the window in big team games with con sharing (tbh disabling con share would be awesome) but in small team games and 1v1 it would be great.

I agree with more smaller factions. Best would be a bunch of small, unique, interesting factions that shared redundant units (like static defenses). And then maybe to make the game more interesting we could add a mechanic that allows you to chose a second faction farther into the game, to open up to a greater variety of units as the game progresses. That would be awesome because you could experiment with faction combinations and it would keep the players on their feet because you would not be able to assume their disadvantages based on their faction.




As far as what you say about factories go, I have mixed feelings about factory reclaiming. On one hand, it allows for more fast-paced and mixed gameplay. On the other hand there is something lost in strategic choice when you can switch facs so easily.

Although there is a loss when you switch facs like that. You get a full metal refund, but no energy refund and it costs the same bp to reclaim it again as when you built it. So the trade-off is a change of tatics against 500 energy and 1000 bp.

Although admittedly energy and bp are in general far less valuable then the same amount of metal.

I would support removing reclaim of finished units and bring scrap back instead. That means you would get only 2/3 metal refund. That would also solve the exploit of reclaiming adv fusions just a bit to prevent them from exploding, without having to make nanoframes explode at 80% (which i have never liked).

[Pxtl]

Best would be a bunch of small, unique, interesting factions that shared redundant units (like static defenses). And then maybe to make the game more interesting we could add a mechanic that allows you to chose a second faction farther into the game, to open up to a greater variety of units as the game progresses. That would be awesome because you could experiment with faction combinations and it would keep the players on their feet because you would not be able to assume their disadvantages based on their faction.

That sounds like advocating 1-faction + more expensive factories, but greater factory differentiation.

But that does, ultimately, mean that there are no factions in the late-game.

[CarRepairer]

Seriously, try to find some interesting differences outside of those, and you will find nothing.

First of all, those are great differences even on their own. Second, there are others for example core's use of impulse and gravity, the difference in striders and mega defense towers (anni and ddm), differences in gunships. Third, it is our goal to have more differences

You also don't seem to understand how factories limit you in much the same way factions do, although all your examples do seem to involve cloak or shields in some way.

Here is the disagreement. Where you say "same ways" I say "somewhat similar ways." The difference between factory and faction is where we diverge. Yes factories are somehwat like mini-subfactions, but they should be more similar to eachother than to foreign faction's factories.

I would support removing reclaim of finished units and bring scrap back instead. That means you would get only 2/3 metal refund. That would also solve the exploit of reclaiming adv fusions just a bit to prevent them from exploding, without having to make nanoframes explode at 80% (which i have never liked).

I agree with this 100% as I have said it before.

[SirMaverick]

I would support removing reclaim of finished units and bring scrap back instead. That means you would get only 2/3 metal refund. That would also solve the exploit of reclaiming adv fusions just a bit to prevent them from exploding, without having to make nanoframes explode at 80% (which i have never liked).

Actually ever used (replay?)?. You would need some bp to do this (20% reclaim) and have less e. Not sure if that will help anything.

[CarRepairer]

I would support removing reclaim of finished units and bring scrap back instead. That means you would get only 2/3 metal refund. That would also solve the exploit of reclaiming adv fusions just a bit to prevent them from exploding, without having to make nanoframes explode at 80% (which i have never liked).

Actually ever used (replay?)?. You would need some bp to do this (20% reclaim) and have less e. Not sure if that will help anything.

You missed his point (it was a bit confusing the way he said it). He's not saying people are reclaiming stuff to 79%. He is saying that with scrap we didn't require this 80% hack, which is an arbitrary number that no one would know about it. But that argument is off topic here.

[Google_Frog]

Currently the 1faction tests have 8 land factories. Air, gunship, bot, amph/stealth, all terrain, hover, vehicle and tank. 5-6 of those starts will be viable which is like having 5-6 sides to start with. The current setup has about 2 starts as hover/amph suck and the bot/vehicle factories are very similar.

There's no reason factory can't be more expensive, we have facplop to take care of the expense of the start factory. Expensive factory would make the first factory choice a lot more important but with 1faction it would also be possible to add factories as the game evolves. I like the idea that people can start off with a plan in mind then slowly add factories as the diversity becomes valuable enough, this is not particularly important with the current low factory cost though. It would enable people to potentially use the full toolbox for a game with a lot of possible strategies.

I also don't like 100% reclaim efficiency. It's just too much flexibility. For example if you're about to get raided cons can quickly make a few llts which can be fully reclaimed afterwards. Aircraft could be reclaimed after the enemy has too much AA. You should be able to reclaim but I don't think bp + E costs enough for how powerful reclaim can be. I would like to try 50% efficiency. The change is 1 number in modrules.

[Otherside]

i would never be happy with multiple factories as "factions" the whole point of a faction is to play to your strengths and cover your weakness's. It is true that all factories have there strengths and weakness's but they do not have the feel of a faction and if build menu's of cons are going to be indentical it totally loses the feel.

Each of the current factions factories do have there individual strengths and weakness's but on a whole Core are bulkier and arm are more stealthier/lighter as a general feel and even thought statics are quite similar for both factions they to differentiate at some levels. Playing Core and Playing Arm is different.

Playing 1 factory + a standard con buildlist is boring/bland barely different you lose the feel. Google and Sak are both just 1v1 players were games rarely go past 1 factory (2 if lucky) so your blinded a bit.

This IP Free rush has really gotten to your head. There are many ways to make CA better and im sure you want to go "IP Free" as soon as possible but you do have to realise what you want to do to the game will make CA not CA.

This new direction is really killing CA for me and by the looks of it, its not just me. A good game is not made quickly sure CA has been in development for over 2 years now but as ive said before the sense of urgency to be IP free is fairly recent (its only become critical in the past few months) and Dev's threatening to quit because CA is IP free are just being emo. Everyone was well aware at the start that CA would build off a *A base, If you wanted to go IP free from the start you should have just started from scratch seeing as you are now gutting and getting rid of all that what made CA good. And its even more saddening since model production is coming on at a good pace now.

[Gota]

I was told u don't have what?150-200 models?
If u make 1 ready to go model with scripting per day it will take you about half a year or so.

If you average out to one ready to go model per week that's 3 years..

Good luck.

Remove all TA models,start fresh,rename,change gameplay,get players.

[CarRepairer]

(81 models out of 247 (33%) are still Cavedog) - this doesn't include some recent ones like the rapier, so it's less than 81.

[Pxtl]

Between the 2 factions and the tremendous number of turrets and defenses, I'm sure you could come up with a limited build-list of defenses for each Con, and plus come up with some new ones - after all, except for the 2 faction-unique defenses and the pop-ups, the defense turrets are disappointingly bereft of the kind of absurd magic that CA is famous for.

And Car, how many of those non-Cavedog models use Cavedog script and textures? And how many new CA-specific models still use Cavedog wrecks?

[Gota]

(81 models out of 247 (33%) are still Cavedog) - this doesn't include some recent ones like the rapier, so it's less than 81.

How many units did you remove or did not count?
Last time i looked BA had around 350 units/buildings.

[CarRepairer]

It's all here: http://planet-wars.eu/ModelBase/Units.aspx

[Argh]

The number's a lot higher than 87, if you assume that all 3DOs were made by parties who would not be willing to accept GPL licensing of their work. You can't just steal the third-party 3DOs, though, that's not an acceptable solution.

And the Decoy Commander is Cavedog, lol.

[CarRepairer]

Both comms are remakes.

[Argh]

Ok, so they were Evolva or something.

Anyhow, my point is still valid- just because it ain't Cavedog, it's not legal for CA to take it and unilaterally call it GPL. Those 3DOs all need to get built as well, before you have two whole factions, completely modeled.

So, by my count, you have maybe half of them done.

[Licho]

CA got permission from Evolva to relicense under GPL compatible things..

[Argh]

KK, that certainly helps.

[Saktoth]

Im not going to argue this anymore, we're just repeating the same arguments at eachother. All i could say, again, is that there is more diversity, more 'locking into a set of options', in factory choice than faction choice. There is more difference between Tank and Vech than between Core Vech and Arm Vech.

So im only going to talk implimentation and practical stuff now, its beyond the point where we can convince anyone or adress any greviances (though if you have actionable suggestions, please make them).

Each factory is going to have its own 'feel' art wise and abilities wise. We keep arm vech and core bot: they become hovercraft and amphib/stealth factory, allowing us to make them even more unique while not losing any of the diverse land options of 2 factions.

I agree with google, facswitching needs to be a bit more difficult in 1faction (you should see the 1faction game we played. We used every lab except mech). Reclaim of living units should match the reclaim of corpses, and labs should perhaps be more expensive.

We can also give each factory a unique building, if we are so inclined: Im thinking cloakers here, which id like to be something you have to 'unlock' and would go well with the stealth factory.

[Pxtl]

So how many land-labs will there be in your 1fac? You're going with Arm veh, Core bots... and how many other labs? Are you looking for new "special things" to put into those other labs? Will these other labs still have distinct slope-tolerances, or will you be removing the lab=slope approach since lab=faction in 1fac?

As for the unique building, remember you've also got the stuff for defenses too - each lab having its own stun/repulse/whatever turret would be nice too. In the extreme case, you could divvy up the heavier defenses, but that would be hard to balance (1 lab gets HLT, 1 lab gets antiswarm, 1 lab gets pop-up, etc.)