Grid Sage Forums

Grid Sage Forums

  • November 21, 2024, 05:48:28 PM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

LINKS: Website | Steam | Wiki

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion  (Read 20607 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
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2015, 06:34:02 AM »

I read in the manual that the hit chance is 10% lower if the target is flying. I am unclear on the interpretation of "flying" in this context. Does having an active hover unit count as flying? Do you need to be moving? Does that apply to shots against Cogmind?

My current propulsion setup is 3 legs plus 1 hover unit that I fetch from fallen programmers. My idea is to switch to the hover unit in combat to reduce incoming damage (paired with an +dodge item eventually, which IIRC defines flying as hover or flying propulsion). I activated full stats and there appears to be no difference whether the hover unit is active or not.
Logged

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2015, 06:46:57 AM »

"Flying" is when it says that in your HUD, i.e. you (or they) have active flight propulsion. So hover doesn't count; it's not as mobile. For the flight bonus you don't have to be moving--that's a separate modifier.

Pretty much all mechanics throughout the game work identically between Cogmind and other robots (corruption is a notable exception--you're inherently more resistant to its accumulation than they are).

Maneuvering Thrusters do work for either flight or hover, though, and even legs (to a lesser extent).

Your strategy would have to use a flight unit to get the highest bonus you're looking for.
Logged
Josh Ge, Developer - Dev Blog | @GridSageGames | Patreon

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2015, 07:01:17 AM »

That said, in light of that particular usage it might be necessary to change the rule such that flying builds only get the dodge bonus if they moved the previous turn, or perhaps get half the bonus (+5%) if they were stationary.

I don't mind Cogminds getting benefits by swapping around free propulsion, but a combat build carrying one flight unit for the dodge bonus is a bit too meta, and outright better than either Cloaking Devices or Maneuvering Thrusters, not to mention even more effective when combined with them.

Too meta, don't you all think? Or are there enough mitigating circumstances in this case that it's not unquestionably the best choice? (E.g. flight parts are weak, requires extra propulsion rather than a more versatile utility slot...)
Logged
Josh Ge, Developer - Dev Blog | @GridSageGames | Patreon

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
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #28 on: October 13, 2015, 07:30:14 AM »

I'll let you know once I tested it in real conditions. So far I see three problems with this setup:
1) Flight units are rare.
2) Flight units are fragile and have high coverage (so are cloaking devices and maneuvering thrusters).
3) Flight units provide no recoil bonus.

Logged

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2015, 07:45:50 AM »

1) Every Swarmer carries two, and Swarmers are not rare ;).
2) I was looking at the stats and while this is true, the listed alternatives have about twice as much coverage on average, so are twice as likely to be hit.
3) Very good point, and definitely a deal-killer for kinetic users. Viable for thermal/EM, though.

In any case, we'll see how you fare :D
Logged
Josh Ge, Developer - Dev Blog | @GridSageGames | Patreon

Happylisk

  • Sigix
  • ****
  • 2nd place in the High Scores category during Alpha Challenge 2015 2nd place in the Best Escapes category during Alpha Challenge 2015 Achievement leader in at least one category during Alpha Challenge 2015 Participated in the Alpha Challenge 2015 Shared a Confirmed Combat Win Weekly Seed Participant
  • Posts: 264
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #30 on: October 13, 2015, 10:42:52 AM »

A late game build with all EM/thermal and 2 treads + 1 flight unit to switch to during combat is pretty cheddary.   Cloaking devices and thrusters are rare - flight units are def. more common, and I would gladly swap out one less utility slot to make my third propulsion slot a substitute for cloaking.  I'm definitely in favor of changing that. 

You could make the flight dodge penalty not apply if you're overweight. 
Logged

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 Participated in the Alpha Challenge 2015 Achievement leader in at least one category during Alpha Challenge 2015 Wiki Contributor Weekly Seed Participant
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #31 on: October 13, 2015, 09:14:33 PM »

Oh hey, I only just now noticed your avatar, zxc.

How nice of mendonca to make the perfect custom avatar just for you 8)

It really is 8)

You could make the flight dodge bonus not apply if you're overweight. 

This is a nice, simple solution. One side-effect I can think of is when you have a flight build and come across some swarmers, and you equip your explosive launcher which puts you overweight and loses you the dodging bonus. That might not be a bad thing however.
Logged

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #32 on: October 13, 2015, 10:18:58 PM »

Elegant solution, indeed. It could have the stated launcher reaction side effect, but I agree that's not really a bad thing.

This talk is also making me want to have a composite defensive mod indicator on the HUD...
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 Participated in the Alpha Challenge 2015 Achievement leader in at least one category during Alpha Challenge 2015 Wiki Contributor Weekly Seed Participant
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #33 on: October 13, 2015, 10:24:16 PM »

This talk is also making me want to have a composite defensive mod indicator on the HUD...
Now that you've brought it up, we will not be satisfied until it's added!

I can live without it for some time though. Not a critical feature, but worth thinking about where it would go.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2015, 10:26:07 PM by zxc »
Logged

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #34 on: October 13, 2015, 10:30:07 PM »

Yes, I'm wary of saying anything unless I intend to add it ;)

I believe such a feature would be very helpful for players who are still learning the game--less so for those who already know about the various factors that contribute to evasion. Not critical, though, which is why it wasn't included to begin with.
Logged
Josh Ge, Developer - Dev Blog | @GridSageGames | Patreon

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
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #35 on: October 14, 2015, 08:29:00 AM »

Upon testing, I think that the 10% dodge bonus for using one flight unit in a combat build is a little abusive. I found biomechanical wings which had a coverage of 5 and integrity of 20. With such low coverage, those wings last for a very long time even with low integrity. Losing some coverage/integrity and recoil benefits is an issue however.

I like Happilisk's solution to the problem. I think the bonus should only be reduced by half when overweight though. I also like the solution of the bonus not fully applying when stationary.

I found maneuvering thrusters with coverage of 80 and integrity of 10. That amounted to 6% of my total coverage. So the part lasts for about 16 incoming shots on average. IMO that's useless for a combat build. I suggest boosting the integrity a bit and massively reducing the coverage (same for regular cloaking devices and many of the other utilities). Perhaps making the thrusters uses a propulsion slot could lead to interesting dilemmas on slot usage.

More generally, I find the combat utilities only become useful in the late game. Earlier in the game, Cogmind is slot-starved, total coverage is lower, and utilities provide a pesky bonus like 4% targetting, 5% cloak, 6% dodge. In the late game, Cogmind has better coverage so utilities last longer, and do provide a meaningful bonus like 12% targetting, 20% cloak.

I tried the flight unit trick along with two advanced cloaking devices (+50% total dodge bonus) and it did make a noticeable difference. Hunters had about 35% hit chance. I should have waited and collected 3 cloaking devices and a force field to really make the most of it. Individually, I think advanced cloaking devices do not last long enough to be really useful.

If you find the right gears, it's fun to fight on wings. I fought a while on four slots of wings, killing and outrunning grunts. There are not enough wings around to keep this going forever though. Eventually I went back to legs.
Logged

fernsauce

  • Unaware
  • *
  • Weekly Seed Participant Shared a Confirmed Stealth Win
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #36 on: October 14, 2015, 11:35:27 AM »

Maybe 50% bonus if you're overweight, but only if you are still within like twice your weight capacity. Anything more than that and you presumably aren't going to be doing much maneuvering.

Do cloaking units stack? I was pretty sure they didn't, but I honestly haven't really tried to test it. That would seem a little broken though.

Fighting with wings is interesting. You really want to make the most of your high movement, fighting only in locations that heavily advantage you like narrow chokepoints and using the cleaner bots as robot shields. Point blank shots with overloaded energy weapons / multishot weapons can instantly destroy a lot of the less durable robots like programmers if you build well. Ideally, you use your better tactical positioning and overkill to minimize damage taken, especially with items like Particle Chargers and such. But it's still hard because no matter what you have a lot of items that if destroyed can really cripple you, and trying to overcome weight problems with redistributors just means you have more equipped items that are liabilities (and weight redistributors that give more than 10 mass support are difficult to replace).

The upside, of course, is that you can do a hell of a lot more with 20-50 move delay than you can with the 200 or so you'll get with a legs / treads build, including avoiding nastier encounters and hitting up way more interactive objects and having more time to loot from stashes.
Logged

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #37 on: October 14, 2015, 07:07:09 PM »

Regarding the flight bonus, I'd most likely want to go the simple route, rather than adding too many conditions or special cases. You either have a bonus, or you don't. How often are you guys running flight builds overweight, anyway? As soon as you're overweight you lose a significant amount of speed, the whole purpose of flying in the first place. The nerf is targeted purely at abuse by heavy combat builds, with a side effect that seems to make sense for fliers, too.

I found maneuvering thrusters with coverage of 80 and integrity of 10. That amounted to 6% of my total coverage. So the part lasts for about 16 incoming shots on average. IMO that's useless for a combat build.
You could say they're not meant for combat builds :). All evasion-enabling parts in general have relatively high coverage compared to other devices, because otherwise they're waaaay too good.

This is the same with Cloaking Devices. If you can manage to keep them protected (utility shielding? force fields? repairs? spares?) they're quite good, but designing them last longer on their own would turn them into a "must-have" part. We want to keep the number of general must-have parts to an absolute minimum.

The design trade off was: Do we make a part that provides a smaller unexciting benefit and lasts a long time, or one with a really noticeable benefit that you'll have to work to keep functioning?

Do cloaking units stack? I was pretty sure they didn't, but I honestly haven't really tried to test it.
Absolutely not. As you say that would be too effective.
Logged
Josh Ge, Developer - Dev Blog | @GridSageGames | Patreon

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
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #38 on: October 14, 2015, 07:13:03 PM »

Quote

Do cloaking units stack? I was pretty sure they didn't, but I honestly haven't really tried to test it.


... d'oh! They don't, according to the description. Sorry for the disinformation :-(
[Ninja'ed by Kyzrati]

Thus, if I understand correctly, I have to combine flight unit + cloaking + manoeuvering thrusters to get the minimum enemy hit chance. "Dodging" combines additively with cloaking, right? It's not a second, separate roll?
Logged

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #39 on: October 14, 2015, 07:16:29 PM »

Correct, all those separate sources do stack additively.
Logged
Josh Ge, Developer - Dev Blog | @GridSageGames | Patreon

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
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #40 on: October 19, 2015, 07:47:50 AM »

I'm getting the hang of stealth builds. With a speed delay of 5, the game gets much easier. Whoom!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

However, the RNG is usually not so generous and I've learned not to rely on achieving those high speeds too much. The main issue that comes up times and again is the lack of heat sinks / cooling units. They're quite rare by Research/Access. I typically have everything I need except the cooling, so I can't speed ahead and lift a lot of mass. Hover units don't require much cooling, but finding fast ones is RNG-dependent.

So where do you get those heat sinks? One option is to fight for them but that's risky and anticlimatic for a stealth build.

Two suggestions for the game:
1) Make the turn timer fractional, so it's possible to know when the turn end and when it's safe to run past enemies without them noticing. Right now I work around this by dancing in front of a door until I see the turn tick.
2) Have the 'wait' action flush the "time energy" bank to zero exactly, so the end of turn is predictable.
Logged

fernsauce

  • Unaware
  • *
  • Weekly Seed Participant Shared a Confirmed Stealth Win
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #41 on: October 19, 2015, 02:53:15 PM »

Jesus Christ that is a lot of propulsion slots. I didn't think you could get below 6 delay, but I guess hover units are magic. I tend to kinda neglect them in sneaky builds just because not being able to hop over robots always ends up getting me killed.

I'm pretty sure speeds below 10 are generally unintended (b/c even the best flight prototypes should be 10 speed at most). That said, 10 move delay is more than enough. I tried a speedrun recently and got through Factory / Research with >10 move delay in under 1000 turns, although I ended up getting killed in -1 because of some very poor decisions.

I can't say I've ever had a problem finding cooling. Programmers, sentries, and transport escorts all have em. As long as you aren't fighting a lot, you're not gonna lose them to attrition much, and you can get pretty good units before you leave Materials. Although you really don't want to fight programmers because they're assholes, but still, sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do. Just don't fight Hunters ever because they will always fuck you up.

Turn timer is kind of frustrating. Actually, I would personally prefer if it was *more* RNG. I'm not sure how, but it does seem kind of bad that you can just be very careful and reliably ninja past enemies. Ducking through someone's LoS should be risky, or at least riskier than it is now.
Logged

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
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #42 on: October 19, 2015, 08:34:13 PM »

Thanks for the info, fernsauce. I did take the habit of carrying along a good cooling unit in case I need one later. I'll try to do as you say and ambush one enemy.

Quote
I tend to kinda neglect them in sneaky builds just because not being able to hop over robots always ends up getting me killed.

That and you lose the nice +10 dodge bonus you get from flying. What I do is have one flight unit equipped at all time, so that if there's a slowpoke blocking the way in a corridor, I can still hop over it, albeit slowly. At least there's now a shield between me and my pursuers.
Logged

Kyzrati

  • Administrator
  • True Cogmind
  • *****
  • Posts: 4477
    • View Profile
    • Cogmind
Re: Combat Run Theorycrafting & Open Discussion
« Reply #43 on: October 19, 2015, 11:27:22 PM »

Wow, Decker, you've set a new high speed record under the current system. And certainly a new record for propulsion slots :P

As long as you can stay powered and cool, I can see that being a pretty zippy way to get around since even if you occasionally lose some propulsion the effect is minimal.

I did intend for speeds below 10 to be attainable, so I don't see anything wrong with that if the player can manage it. The theoretical limit is 3, it's just probably more or less impossible to get the necessary parts. We'll see how that does or does not change when I update the propulsion mechanics. (Side note: This thread seems to have veered off course and crashed into our Propulsion Rebalancing topic.)

Like fernsauce says, cooling is pretty easy to get via ambushes. Fighting is dangerous, but as a fast mover you can almost always do it on your own terms. (Heck, for an indirect method wait for a squad to come by and reprogram some traps, then pick up the leftovers ;))

Of course, you won't get the best stuff that way. There's also the option of fabrication, which I still plan to further improve as a system, but may not be so suitable for a build attempting to focus purely on speed, anyway.

It's interesting to hear two opposing opinions regarding the ability to pass through LOS undetected. Early on I thought about adding a chance to be discovered even while zipping through LOS, but decided the results would end up appearing pretty random, anyway (and more difficult to code), so I left it as is which keeps it somewhat unknown (except in the case of Sentries, mentioned below).

I like the idea that you can never be quite sure if you'll make it, and have to deal with the consequences if you don't.

1) Make the turn timer fractional, so it's possible to know when the turn end and when it's safe to run past enemies without them noticing. Right now I work around this by dancing in front of a door until I see the turn tick.
This theoretically should not work, because hostile robot turns have nothing to do with the turn timer--like yourself they can take their turn in the middle of game turns.

The only time it will work is with Sentries (and ones who have never moved, at that--once they've moved all bets are off), since they just sit around and wait from the beginning of the map, matching their turn exactly to the game turn counter.

As such, your second suggestion would really only be useful in the Sentry scenario, so not something generally applicable enough that we can make it a thing.

Regarding the wait command, there are a few new features to come later, including things like "wait X turns," "wait until something interesting happens," "wait until the actual tick a hostile comes into view" (i.e. "tactical overwatch"). These features will be either easy to execute or outright automatic where they can be.

What I can do is attach your suggestion to the "wait X turns" feature and the command will always stop on an actual game turn, meaning you could use it to wait 1 turn and get your desired effect.
Logged
Josh Ge, Developer - Dev Blog | @GridSageGames | Patreon
Pages: 1 [2]