Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Adraius]

I don't mean 'intended' in the sense there is a bug or unexpected mechanical interaction; I'm wondering if the way players... well, me specifically, but likely other players, too - are using Storage Units in a way that is detrimental to game balance or flow.  I know you said somewhere (I can't find the reference now) that inventory size was intentionally made very small, and from a game design standpoint I can see why: it encourages the player to participate in one of the core gameplay loops in Cogmind - you get parts blown off and must find some way to replace them, for which the game provides a number of interesting options - killing and looting, searching stockpiles, raiding Transporters, fabricating new items, etc.

Well, one of the key pillars in my victorious combat run was doing everything I could to subvert the need to scramble for parts.  It required significant planning, and I still had to participate in gathering the items at some point in time, but I when I needed replacements (e.g. mid-battle or immediately post-battle), I already had them on hand.  I'm pretty sure you understand why this is important, but I'll explain anyway: like any build, combat builds have a lot of interdependent parts, and they tend to get shot at lot.  There's some flexibility in the face of damage, but a critical failure (usually, loss of all attached items of that type) in either power generation, propulsion, weaponry, or to a lesser extent heat dissipation generally results in the whole build collapsing unless a replacement is immediately available.

Obviously, storage units are meant to help mitigate this (among other uses for them), but I'm less sure it was intended to facilitate inventory sizes of >20 - I set a personal record in my victorious run when I peaked at an inventory size of 32, which let me carry multiple spares of everything, plus a number of situational modules like hackware and corruption purging utilities.  One piece of supporting evidence I have that this may not be intended is the design of the inventory view - it simply wasn't designed for viewing large numbers of items at once.

I'm not advocating for a change here - it was glorious carrying around so many items, and we don't yet, at very least, have a meta where 'more storage units = win'.  But I want to have a discussion about it.  I wrote this mostly posing it as a question for Kyzrati, but I'd like to hear everyone's opinions on storage units and their effect on the game.  Thoughts?

[Kyzrati]

I know you said somewhere (I can't find the reference now) that inventory size was intentionally made very small

For reference, I explained the inventory management design in a dedicated blog post here.

Obviously, storage units are meant to help mitigate this (among other uses for them), but I'm less sure it was intended to facilitate inventory sizes of >20 - I set a personal record in my victorious run when I peaked at an inventory size of 32, which let me carry multiple spares of everything, plus a number of situational modules like hackware and corruption purging utilities.  One piece of supporting evidence I have that this may not be intended is the design of the inventory view - it simply wasn't designed for viewing large numbers of items at once.

All very true. Aside from what I've written before on this subject, the general idea is that if you are capable of carrying more spares, you probably should. This essentially forms a divide between faster builds which can't carry as much and heavy combat builds which can, as one player described it, "carry the world." That said, I usually go with about a 12~16 size--32 is insane --but by the end of the game I can see how the heaviest builds can quite easily be running around with huge amounts of space.

And no the UI isn't really built to facilitate management of large inventories due to its 10+2 max list size.

• On the mechanics side, one possible tweak so that it doesn't get too out of hand is to further raise storage unit mass. They do, after all, allow you to carry much more than their own mass once full.
• Another option: You can benefit from no more than a single storage unit; I'm not sure that's in the spirit of the game, though there is somewhat of a precedent in that you can only benefit from one of certain types of utilities at a time. I do like the intermediate "I can't find a big unit so I'll use a couple smaller ones in the meantime strategy.
• An interesting third option (though it would involve quite a lot of work): Add a special "full inventory" mode to facilitate management, where a larger window opens parallel to your parts list (to the left of it).

I imagine others have viewpoints similar to your own. (?) Other opinions?
[/quote]

[zxc]

Regarding flight builds I think storage units are balanced. You can avoid combat effectively enough that carrying spare parts is not really optimal, though maybe with the introduction of traps this may change.

With combat builds, I absolutely think carrying storage units is necessary, unless perhaps you have some sort of ideal gear setup that you're unlikely to attain in most games. Not sure how balanced it is as I've only just started playing combat runs.

[Adraius]

Thanks for the thoughts.

And no the UI isn't really built to facilitate management of large inventories due to its 10+2 max list size.

• On the mechanics side, one possible tweak so that it doesn't get too out of hand is to further raise storage unit mass. They do, after all, allow you to carry much more than their own mass once full.
• Another option: You can benefit from no more than a single storage unit; I'm not sure that's in the spirit of the game, though there is somewhat of a precedent in that you can only benefit from one of certain types of utilities at a time. I do like the intermediate "I can't find a big unit so I'll use a couple smaller ones in the meantime strategy.
• An interesting third option (though it would involve quite a lot of work): Add a special "full inventory" mode to facilitate management, where a larger window opens parallel to your parts list (to the left of it).

Considering the potential levers you have available to tweak Storage Units, increasing their weight (either normally or by having items inside them weigh a fraction of their normal weight rather than zero) is the most apparent option, but also the least suited for the task, IMO.  My combat build cares incredibly little about weight - it's already committed to being very slow, and right now weight effects speed and literally nothing else.  One interesting option would to make weight effect something else the build actually cares about, like the number of turns until Cogmind 'settles' and gains the accuracy bonus, on account of heavier robots having more inertia.

I also thought of the '1 storage unit only' option, and immediately had a reaction similar to yours: it's a bit ham-fisted, inelegant, inconsistent, and kinda the nuclear option that the problem doesn't warrant right now.  If it comes to it, I think a far better option in the same vein is a scaling penalty (ex. to weight or 'settle time') or reduction in bonus (# of items held?) depending on how many are equipped - it's still a new mechanic, but scaling penalties/bonuses leave choice and room for interesting decisions where otherwise cutoffs like '1 storage unit only' would remove them.  And, if I may armchair game design for a moment, scaling bonuses/penalties are a good mechanic you may want to introduce elsewhere, assuming that doesn't violate your design goal of keeping the key mechanics simple.

Assuming you don't take action to reduce realistically achievable inventory sizes, I think the third option is almost an inevitable need - some builds are going to opt for tons of storage, and the game currently can't handle that very well.  The good news is that things aren't so bad, even with 30+ part inventories, that you need to spend dev time in the short term working on an inventory screen instead of new features (this is an Alpha after all), meaning there's plenty of time to figure out the best direction to go in. =)

As a point of reference, I consider the smallest inventory size I'm comfortable with going into the mid-late game to be size 14-16, which means a minimum of two storage units, and I'm only truly happy with an inventory in the 20-24 size range (e.g. two Hcp Storage Units at minimum, or three smaller ones).

Regarding flight builds I think storage units are balanced. You can avoid combat effectively enough that carrying spare parts is not really optimal, though maybe with the introduction of traps this may change.

I'm not quite able to understand what you mean by saying carrying spare parts is not optimal for flight builds.  That implies that it's superior to not be using storage units, but you said they were balanced before.  Do you mean that storage units are not required for flight builds (e.g. that they are optional)?

[Kyzrati]

One interesting option would to make weight effect something else the build actually cares about, like the number of turns until Cogmind 'settles' and gains the accuracy bonus, on account of heavier robots having more inertia.

...

scaling bonuses/penalties are a good mechanic you may want to introduce elsewhere, assuming that doesn't violate your design goal of keeping the key mechanics simple.

I agree there are some interesting possibilities in there, but I think any one of them adds a bit too much complexity.

If anything I'll probably end up looking into an expandable inventory window, which might be related to the swap mode hashed out with zxc earlier (they'll at least need to be considered together).

I think with a combination of t/m/i inventory sorting (+reverse sorting) and the [/] hotkeys, certainly keyboard users have slightly less of an issue as is. (I use 't'-sorting a lot.)

A fourth option: Inventory filtering, which allows the window to list only certain types of items as you designate.

Regarding flight builds I think storage units are balanced. You can avoid combat effectively enough that carrying spare parts is not really optimal, though maybe with the introduction of traps this may change.

I'm not quite able to understand what you mean by saying carrying spare parts is not optimal for flight builds.  That implies that it's superior to not be using storage units, but you said they were balanced before.  Do you mean that storage units are not required for flight builds (e.g. that they are optional)?

I'm pretty sure that's what he's referring to, because the weight from too much storage is not worth the hit to your speed. If you're going to be fast you want to be really fast, and if so then you're also going to want to allocate more utilities and mass to not getting hit in the first place.

[zxc]

I mean that I think storage units are not overpowered for flight builds, and if anything, underpowered (but I'm fine with that). Once you get a flight build going properly, you can pretty much avoid any damage (at least pre-speed-fix). You can find a way around the weight usually by weight redistribution items but the end result is that you are using up utility slots in order to carry additional items you didn't really need in the first place.

With traps now in the game, this could all change quite drastically. However, locating traps with a terminal hack is high success and I think maybe one of the best hacks now. Combined with the fact that using flight means 20% chance to trigger most traps, you're still unlikely to need backup gear.

Plus, so long as you either have speed or stealth (sensors + interpreters), you can explore most floors quite safely and re-gear up.

Also, repair stations really are sweet. They're the main stations that I make use of other than terminals. Scan/fabs are too finicky with the need to first acquire a schematic, then have a matter container, and only then attempt to make an item.

Side note Kyzrati: I only recently realised [ and ] scroll through the inventory. I thought [/] referred to /, which does nothing just yet.

[zxc]

Funnily enough on my last win I had about 70 mass support with flight propulsion and I could've had 100+ but had no need of it. That's a whole bunch of HCP storage units! I did actually use one for quite a while until it was destroyed by a stray crit and I didn't have extras. Combat flight should be possible with the right items. I briefly considered it on -3 / -2 but sticking to a combat avoidance style I considered a more guaranteed win.

[Kyzrati]

True that 70-100 is pretty awesome, though I'll be more worried about it if and when more players are capable of replicating your success . It's not so easy for the average player to juggle that many parts towards the end, so I believe this might just come down to a question of skill. We'll see how usage evolves over time, and this issue will likely be revisited at some point; thanks for the info.

It's not a good thing if the #1 strategy ends up being always finding ways to maximize your inventory size, so we might need a limiting factor to prevent extremes and more tightly control the challenge. Still, certainly there's a lot of skill involved as is (which is why winning players aren't so common), since expanded inventory just gives you access to more parts, and doesn't guide which parts you take or what you choose to do with them.

[zxc]

Indeed I've mostly avoided storage units in most of my games, and in my combat runs I've been using just one HCP storage unit and one spare in my inventory. Looking at Adraius's success with stacking multiple HCP storage units is interesting. By doing that you can carry loads of redundant parts, and maybe thereby reduce the effect of RNG on your game. Combat runs seem to go fine enough until you reach that critical stage where you have suffered enough attrition that you can't sustain a functioning combat robot anymore, and then you just die (or in my case, run around naked for a while and then die).

I found a whole cache of +30 mass capacity units, and a +50 one! It was entirely unnecessary to use so many but it was really cool to see how drastically it could change the possibilities for your robot.

I think that maximising storage using flight propulsion is not a good idea unless/until you find a lot of +capacity utilities like I did, and even then I don't think it's better. But for a combat robot using treads I can see that maximising storage might be the best route. One more target analyser, or 12 spare parts? Easy choice.

[Kyzrati]

I found a whole cache of +30 mass capacity units, and a +50 one! It was entirely unnecessary to use so many but it was really cool to see how drastically it could change the possibilities for your robot.

Hm, that Exp. prototype is sounding mighty OP

But for a combat robot using treads I can see that maximising storage might be the best route. One more target analyser, or 12 spare parts? Easy choice.

When you put it like that...

It would seem a possible fix is to reduce (possibly drastically) the amount that non-small units allow you to store. Those numbers in particular are straight from the 7DRL, and didn't undergo the same scrutiny that much of the rest of the items and general mechanics did. That happens to be another solution that wasn't brought up earlier, and could simultaneously help alleviate the potential for incredibly long inventory lists.

[zxc]

On the topic of storage unit reform, I'd like them to be more durable. Maybe it is part of the balance for them to be an achilles' heel of a Cogmind relying on one though... I always carry a spare when I can and Adraius has been spotted with inventories full of them

I also think the small storage units are essentially useless. It uses up one utility slot (and some mass) to increase inventory capacity by two. I'm not sure if that is ever worthwhile except for the briefest moment at the start of the game, and even then, only until you find another utility.

Increasing the mass of HCP storage units I think did nothing regarding their balance, as combat Cogminds with two treads are going over carrying capacity anyway, and moving during combat is almost never feasible with treads in the first place. It did however hinder the viability of HCP storage on non-tread propulsion users. Unintended target for the nerf?

[Adraius]

Indeed I've mostly avoided storage units in most of my games, and in my combat runs I've been using just one HCP storage unit and one spare in my inventory. Looking at Adraius's success with stacking multiple HCP storage units is interesting. By doing that you can carry loads of redundant parts, and maybe thereby reduce the effect of RNG on your game. Combat runs seem to go fine enough until you reach that critical stage where you have suffered enough attrition that you can't sustain a functioning combat robot anymore, and then you just die (or in my case, run around naked for a while and then die).

Yes, definitely.  With tons of storage you can maintain something acceptably functional for a long time, and extend that with salvage - but the clock is ticking, and on treads you're going nowhere fast.  I hate Programmers as much as I do because a) their corruption eventually erodes my combat effectiveness in a way that's extremely difficult to counteract, and b) I can't rely on their salvage for weapons - blasted EM resistance! =P

In fact, I got the idea of using more than one storage unit from Kyzrati's story recounting his combat build almost winning a seed run; he was using a couple storage units to haul around extra armor.   I felt like Aristotle shouting 'Eureka!' as he jumped out of the bathtub - why hadn't I tried that before!?

Keep in mind that an additional Hcp Storage Unit is only eight extra storage, though; I really could carry the world if they were 50% larger!

It would seem a possible fix is to reduce (possibly drastically) the amount that non-small units allow you to store. Those numbers in particular are straight from the 7DRL, and didn't undergo the same scrutiny that much of the rest of the items and general mechanics did. That happens to be another solution that wasn't brought up earlier, and could simultaneously help alleviate the potential for incredibly long inventory lists.

I could see reducing the capacity of storage units as a possible fix; it would alleviate the inventory view issue, and get combat builds back to salvaging more and hoarding less - hoarding is pretty strictly superior at the moment as you tend to get pristine, higher-rarity weapons, possibly cannons, and you get some choice of what damage type they are.  If you're salvaging, you have poorer options almost all the way around - come to think of it, do any enemy robots use cannons?  Salvaging is more interesting in a gameplay sense as it forces the player to adapt (and overcome), but frankly, from the perspective of the combat Cogmind, it wants to be forced to adapt as little as possible, because any adaptation will be forcing it away from what is 'optimal' for the build.

If storage units were to be made smaller, I think there would need to be some corresponding change to compensate; on top of hoarding > salvaging, a large chunk of the viability of treaded builds IMO lies with having enough storage to carry backups of everything crucial, plus - debatably - hackware.  Later in the game, at minimum, that entails two power units, one propulsion unit (before Alpha 3 this would have been two), two heat sinks (they're common salvage, but you need multiple of them, and a few unfortunate hits or a Brawler than gets in close could knock them off quickly), around five direct-fire weapons, at least one launcher, a couple armor plates, and a couple hackware utilities for reducing threat - that's 15 slots in all, and that's carrying absolutely no backup Targeting Computers or other combat utilities, or room for discretionary items like a backup Force Field (if you'running one and can find a backup), anti-corruption utilities, or other interesting items you find.

I second zxc's comments about Small Storage Units.  I only use them until I have a different utility to fill the slot on -10, then never waste a slot on them again.

On the topic of storage unit reform, I'd like them to be more durable. Maybe it is part of the balance for them to be an achilles' heel of a Cogmind relying on one though... I always carry a spare when I can and Adraius has been spotted with inventories full of them

I actually think that storage units, especially the larger ones, are pretty durable as is.  I only carried around a bunch of Hcp Storage Units that one run because Hcp. models are pretty rare, and having them early makes storage space pretty cheap.  If you read my full rant on Programmers in the weekly seed run thread, I entered -3 with every single one of those Hcp. Storage Units alive and kicking, and I was running four at the time!  Hitpoint damage didn't kill them - Programmer crits destroyed every single one of them by the time I reached -2. =(

You can also get Medium ones pretty easily by killing Transporters. (also - spoilers! - Serfs get Mediums and Transporters get Larges on -1!)

I wonder if I think storage units are fine but you think they're a bit weak because I'm used to running combat builds, which run armor, but also run a lot of weapons, which also have a very large coverage and tend to soak damage for other parts - storage units actually have a surprisingly small coverage in comparison, IMO.

[zxc]

Well I got a HCP storage destroyed by a crit and it was very awkward trying to get the parts back before recyclers took them all and while trying to kill enemies at the same time. That was with a combat build.

I'm currently trying multiple HCPs - two - and it seems quite good. I've reached -5 without breaking a sweat. Probably going to get nasty soon.

Edit: Yeah this strategy seems somewhat good.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Adraius]

Well I got a HCP storage destroyed by a crit and it was very awkward trying to get the parts back before recyclers took them all and while trying to kill enemies at the same time. That was with a combat build.

I'm currently trying multiple HCPs - two - and it seems quite good. I've reached -5 without breaking a sweat. Probably going to get nasty soon.

Edit: Yeah this strategy seems somewhat good.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Oh, yeah, always carry a spare storage unit with you for exactly that circumstance, so at least you can pick up the items that got dumped post-battle.  The Recyclers make it a pain, obviously, but instead of firing single warning shots, once I've gotten to the lower levels, I try to kill them outright with a pair of cannons or so when feasible.

Nice battlefield there. =P Trust me though, they get bigger!  I'm more impressed by the seven weapons, and running off of only two slots of heat dissipation no less!  Next time I start a full combat run I might try another gun or two in exchange for utilities, then. (I've run with five weapons max)

[zxc]

Oh yeah, I've seen larger battlefields, this is just where I saved and hopped off to bed. Yeah I went with a smaller number of weapon slots in my 18k run but this one I'm trying out more weapon slots and ignoring most utilities  that aren't armour / storage / heat.

[Kyzrati]

On the topic of storage unit reform, I'd like them to be more durable. Maybe it is part of the balance for them to be an achilles' heel of a Cogmind relying on one though... I always carry a spare when I can and Adraius has been spotted with inventories full of them

More durable?!?! Storage units already have an integrity that's way out of proportion with other parts, combined with a relatively low coverage (this is by design, because I know they're important and losing them is an annoying/big/sudden change). I think they're at the right level for combat builds, where they're rarely hit and can take quite a beating since you have so many other large parts as well. They're no doubt hit more often when flying a lighter unarmored build... In either case, I usually carry a spare and swap it in before losing the one that's attached. The main challenge is how to react on the off chance you lose one to a critical hit (as you note), though I don't think I'd want to remove that possibility as was done with part rejection and blade traps.

And yeah, Adraius is definitely the one who precipitated this discussion after "figuring it out" while reading my earlier seed run.. you min-maxers!

Increasing the mass of HCP storage units I think did nothing regarding their balance, as combat Cogminds with two treads are going over carrying capacity anyway, and moving during combat is almost never feasible with treads in the first place. It did however hinder the viability of HCP storage on non-tread propulsion users. Unintended target for the nerf?

I do think the idea of fast robots also using Hcp. units is a bit out of hand, but if I do reduce their capacity overall I'll probably drop their mass back to what it was.

I second zxc's comments about Small Storage Units.  I only use them until I have a different utility to fill the slot on -10, then never waste a slot on them again.

That's fine, since remember that some parts are not optimal for Cogmind, they just happen to be something that other robots are using for themselves.

come to think of it, do any enemy robots use cannons?

From what you've seen, only Behemoths. On that note, have any of you ever met the Z-Series?

Cannons are really deadly, so they're reserved for major threats. Most of the cannon-wielding and other truly dangerous robots will be coming for you in future releases--you ain't seen nothing yet

Seven weapons is pretty insane, zxc. I've never seen that many on one Cogmind before. It does present some interesting possibilities--Behemoths probably look at you and want to run

[zxc]

Oh I'm trashing behemoths. They are nice and easy to hit, and each has gone down in two volleys so far. Hunters are harder, and programmers are a bit annoying.

I like the idea of flight users being able to run HCP storage units if they have the right rare items for it (like I did). Don't rule out cool ideas so hastily! It's not like HCP storage gives a large advantage to flight users like it does for tread users, according to... well... me.

I have not met the Z-Series. And I'm upgrading slots as I go along, depending on what I seem to be needing. Maxing out weapons slots was not my intention but my number of utilities seems fine enough, and I don't seem to need more power or propulsion, so more weapons it will be!

My biggest concern is that my two equipped HCP storage units are damaged, and I think I only have one spare. That and I'm running a touch low on spare armour. I'm actually trying to avoid combat where possible, at this stage.

[Kyzrati]

I like the idea of flight users being able to run HCP storage units if they have the right rare items for it (like I did). Don't rule out cool ideas so hastily! It's not like HCP storage gives a large advantage to flight users like it does for tread users, according to... well... me.

Noted. I'm making any rash moves here--the storage mass change was just something that was long in coming, so I thought I'd throw it in there and see how things turned out. Obviously that on it's own didn't stop you from winning

I'm liking the idea of a somewhat reduced storage capacity and restoring their former mass.

[Adraius]

Avowed min-maxer here, guilty as charged!  And no, I haven't ever encountered the z-series.  I've only ever seen one x-series, if those are related.

[Kyzrati]

Ah yeah there are the X-series specialists as well. There will be more opportunities to see Z-Series later. They only appear under special circumstances, perhaps too special, but that's the way they were designed into the lore.