Grid Sage Forums

Grid Sage Forums

  • November 21, 2024, 02:05:38 PM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

LINKS: Website | Steam | Wiki

Author Topic: Remove some positive feedback (spoilers)  (Read 1720 times)

Decker

  • Cyborg
  • ***
  • Shared a Confirmed Stealth Win Bug Hunter Supported Cogmind Alpha Access 2015-2017 (Prime Tier) Weekly Seed Participant Shared a Confirmed Combat Win
  • Posts: 172
    • View Profile
Remove some positive feedback (spoilers)
« on: December 25, 2015, 07:11:17 PM »

Positive feedback: a process that occurs in a feedback loop in which the effects of a small disturbance on a system include an increase in the magnitude of the perturbation.

In Cogmind, the alert level has a strong positive feedback, by design. As the alert level rises, enemies appear more frequently, which causes the alert level to rise even more. Thus, a major goal in the game is to ensure that the alert level stays as low as possible through the course of the game.

I like that mechanic. It provides a nice risk/reward tradeoff when playing for score. However, I feel there's currently an unbalanced aspect to it.

In my last game, I had a terrible time on -3. I wrecked half the place until I finally found the exit. The alert level shot up. Despite that, I went up to -2 in a relatively good shape (full inventory, etc).

Reflecting on what I should do next, it occurred to me that luck, not skills, was the more important factor at this point. To my knowledge, there are 4 things that could save me.
1) Finding the exit quickly.
2) Finding a terminal and driving down the alert level significantly.
3) Finding a chute trap.
4) Finding a garrison and be able to enter it.

All those actions have low odds of success. There isn't much time to find anything with ARCs that keep deploying, and corruption builds up fast. My combat build is designed to make the most out of that situation (it's fast and resilient), but the RNG has to cooperate eventually. I tried to enter two garrisons (~30% chance per hacking attempt) and hack some terminals (I had an improved scanner) but they would have none of it. I died. In my experience, that pattern occurs quite frequently.

When the alert level shots up, the player gets punished a lot. Getting to an exit is a major achievement in those conditions. However, a bigger challenge awaits on the next level, and the level beyond that.

Getting parts blown up help, but not enough to get rid of the alert level doom. So the player has very little control on his fate anymore. I don't think that's fair.

I would prefer if the influence decreased a lot more when reaching the next level (i.e. on evolution). I'd also gladly trade two of my slots to drive down the influence down to zero when changing level. Those nerfs would make the game easier, but I think that's a good thing. The player already had his challenge when the alert level shot up.

Perhaps the bigger issue is that terminals are so difficult to hack on Research and beyond (even with decent hackware).

Logged

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Remove some positive feedback (spoilers)
« Reply #1 on: December 25, 2015, 07:28:51 PM »

I don't think changes are necessary at this point, because the late game especially (where you as an experienced player are generally encountering this situation) will have significantly changing dynamics by the time the game is done.

Your current difficulties are more a product of Cogmind being incomplete, and I'm designing for the whole picture, not just the piece you have now.

Remember that we're missing most of the mid- and late-game branches, which will change everything. You'll be able to add several important new approaches to getting you through Research. But I can't go into details because mega spoilers. Let me just say that the entire late-game experience will be quite different from what you have now.

Also, your current list is not entirely luck-based even without branches, since you can both prepare yourself in advance to better tackle those issues, and some more changes to the main complex are still coming, things that will affect how those elements play out. (In the next version, for example, you will see many more machines in the mid- and late-game floors. Plus we're going to have many important hacking changes that will make that approach more reliable, at least for those willing to focus on it.)

Spoiler: Trap Distribution (click to show/hide)
Logged
Josh Ge, Developer - Dev Blog | @GridSageGames | Patreon

zxc

  • Cogmind
  • *****
  • 1st place in the High Scores category during Alpha Challenge 2015 1st place in the Best Escapes category during Alpha Challenge 2015 Shared a Confirmed Combat Win Shared a Confirmed Stealth Win Kyzrati Patron Bug Hunter Achievement leader in at least one category during Alpha Challenge 2015 Participated in the Alpha Challenge 2015 Wiki Contributor Weekly Seed Participant
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
Re: Remove some positive feedback (spoilers)
« Reply #2 on: December 25, 2015, 10:31:43 PM »

Some loosely related thoughts follow:

I noted how combat was more RNG-based than a stealth/speed approach some time ago. While it's a problem right now, the game is incomplete and I trust that future additions will fix this.

My last game reached a very long dead-end on -3 due to it ending in a locked branch, so at least in that specific case the game will be much better with the introduction of that branch.

The positive feedback or death spiral of alert levels is actually really cool, even though I keep getting caught out by it.

I've entered two garrisons so far and from those experiences, I think garrisons are quite a lot easier and more rewarding than staying on a floor like -3.

I am still a bit miffed about parts being blown up reducing alert level, even if it makes a kind of sense.
Logged