Print

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

[Decker]

I don't like hacking as it is currently implemented. Here is my typical interaction with a terminal.

Terminal: Hello there!
Cogmind: Ugh. Another terminal.

Optimal play: wear all hackware, then connect.
Boredom/risk tradeoff: just connect and see if something's good.

Terminal: Access main available! I'll also taunt you by showing your inactive hackware.
Cogmind: Disconnect.
Cogmind: *Scroll down* *Wear hackware* *Scroll down* *Wear hackware* *Scroll down* *Wear hackware* *Scroll down* *Wear hackware*

Cogmind: Access main.
Terminal: No.
Cogmind: Access main.
Terminal: Nice try.
Cogmind: Access main.
Terminal: Lockdown incoming! Lockdown incoming!
Cogmind: Alright, I'll be back.

Optimal play: go hide in the closet to avoid accidental shots on the terminal. Count the time it takes to trace off. Pause carefully, surveying the environment.
Boredom/risk tradeoff: walk some paces away, hold 5, hope for the best.

Terminal: Welcome back!
Cogmind: Access main.
Terminal: You wish.
Cogmind: Access main.
Terminal: Lockdown incoming! Lockdown incoming!
Cogmind: Sigh.

*Go sulk in cooldown jail again*

Terminal: You and I again!
Cogmind: Access main.
Terminal: Close but no cookie.
Cogmind: Access main.
Terminal: Oh, alright. Third door to your left down the alley.
Cogmind: *Shoot terminal* *Scroll down* *Wear back item* *Scroll down* *Wear back item* *Scroll down* *Wear back item* *Scroll down* *Wear back item*


I don't know what the best solution is, but...
1) Don't make me wait.
2) Don't make me scroll.
3) Don't make me part swap excessively.
Streamline the game!


My suggestions:

A) Remove all timers from all machines. Machines are single-use only. You want more uses? Steal credentials from operators, conveyors, mainframes, or whatever.

B) Hackware works from the inventory. You could add a time/matter tax for plugging in the hackware, e.g. "press A to connect your hackware". That gives time for the operator to lockdown the machine. But, I'd rather the hackware just worked directly from the inventory. KISS.

[Kyzrati]

This has worried me from the beginning, because true optimal play will require that you waste time on boring activities, and it's a rare case where I've not fully addressed it. The current system exists as it does because I want it to be a highly flexible tool, and it is, but with that flexibility comes a greater chance for abuse.

Note that the hacking system is still incomplete and I have also wanted to explore solutions for these issues for a while now, it's just not high on the list of priorities at the moment.

Regarding reconnects, there is actually a mechanic at work that I attempted to use in preventing optimal time-consuming strategies: Every time you are detected and then reconnect to the same terminal, even after it is no longer tracing, your chances of detection go up incrementally because you've hacked there before. So it actually gets progressively more difficult to hack the same machine. I think making this more apparent, as well as incrementally increasing the difficulty of the hacks themselves (something I thought might be going to far), will be a simple and effective way to prevent single machines from being overly useful. (I should also remove the cap--right now I've capped the maximum number of connects that will affect the detection rate.)

That particular change doesn't cover the swapping issue, though.

I have considered for a long while the possibility of getting rid of hackware as it currently exists. Having it work from the inventory would go against the general principles of the core mechanic, however, and is something I'd like to avoid. (I'd make an exception if inventory space was truly limited, but we don't really want to do that.)

What about making collected hackware a permanent part of your core? That's one option I've mulled over since its inception, though it would require making these components even more rare and difficult to acquire. This also goes against the core mechanic, but in the interest of steamlining we do need to take some action.

To throw another wild idea out there: What about making them permanently occupy a slot, but be impossible to lose?

What I really wanted was for hackware to actually require a slot, but hoped that the player would keep it attached rather than always swapping it out. That's a poor expectation since they do little for you in combat, although that has been changing over time, and will become a more important aspect as the world grows and you may be fighting alongside allies more often. Multiple types of hackware aids in certain combat situations.

To specifically address the other two comments:

1) Don't make me wait.

Waiting for any reason is supposed to work against you in its own right, and it generally did a very good job of this before when there were many more hostiles. Since Alpha 1 the game has become significantly easier, however, and that combined with players' higher skill levels means you may not mind waiting around longer even if it means a few more encounters. This will sway back in the other direction a little bit in Alpha 5 because I've halved the effect of Alert(Purge).

2) Don't make me scroll.

This will be addressed with the alternative inventory management interface discussed previously (not sure if you've seen that one), which will apply to more than just hacking, but large inventories in general. (Alpha 5 also further increases the mass of Lrg./Hcp. Storage Units beyond proportionality with Sml./Med. units.)

Cogmind: *Shoot terminal*

[Draco18s]

Oh god, permanent upgrades.  That would be so nice.

You have no idea how often I've forgotten to accidentally de-equip a piece of hackware only to get it blown off a few minutes later.

[Decker]

Regarding reconnects, there is actually a mechanic at work that I attempted to use in preventing optimal time-consuming strategies: Every time you are detected and then reconnect to the same terminal, even after it is no longer tracing, your chances of detection go up incrementally because you've hacked there before. So it actually gets progressively more difficult to hack the same machine. I think making this more apparent, as well as incrementally increasing the difficulty of the hacks themselves (something I thought might be going to far), will be a simple and effective way to prevent single machines from being overly useful. (I should also remove the cap--right now I've capped the maximum number of connects that will affect the detection rate.)

Waiting for any reason is supposed to work against you in its own right, and it generally did a very good job of this before when there were many more hostiles. Since Alpha 1 the game has become significantly easier, however, and that combined with players' higher skill levels means you may not mind waiting around longer even if it means a few more encounters. This will sway back in the other direction a little bit in Alpha 5 because I've halved the effect of Alert(Purge).

I believe I understand what you're trying to do, but I don't think this will play out as you intend. Since waiting for the cooldown is a boring activity, the equation at work here is

   ReconnectGain > FoodClockLoss + BoredomLoss

If your proposed nerf brings the value of ReconnectGain below FoodClockLoss, then machines effectively become single-use and the problem is solved. However, there is no food clock in Materials, and there are several ways to reset the food clock. Thus, in some situations the value of FoodClockLoss will be close to zero, and then BoredomLoss with rear its ugly head.

What about making collected hackware a permanent part of your core? That's one option I've mulled over since its inception, though it would require making these components even more rare and difficult to acquire. This also goes against the core mechanic, but in the interest of steamlining we do need to take some action.

To throw another wild idea out there: What about making them permanently occupy a slot, but be impossible to lose?

How about indestructible with remove=destroy semantics? This permits upgrades, solves the excessive swapping issue, and generates a high risk, high reward incentive for Cogmind to temporarily increase its hacking prowess by sacrificing its hoarded hackware.

This could also be extended to some non-combat items to solve the tedious sensor/heat sink swapping cheese I've begun to do lately (http://www.gridsagegames.com/forums/index.php?topic=345.msg3050#msg3050) 

Perhaps the items could still be vulnerable to traps/heat/corruption.


Note: I am going to a conference next week and won't be able to read the forums. Keep up the good work.

[Kyzrati]

If your proposed nerf brings the value of ReconnectGain below FoodClockLoss, then machines effectively become single-use and the problem is solved.

Exactly, it would more or less be like it was before.

However, there is no food clock in Materials, and there are several ways to reset the food clock. Thus, in some situations the value of FoodClockLoss will be close to zero, and then BoredomLoss with rear its ugly head.

There is no way to reliably reset the food clock that doesn't come at a significant cost. You can get lucky, but you can't count on it.

The issue in Materials is one that I've considered a lot, because that's the one place so far in the game where you can theoretically hang out indefinitely. That said, it's hard enough on beginners as is, and as "beginner land" it isn't really somewhere to hang out, anyway. We'll see about that.

You're one of the best players, though, so it's good to have opinions from the other end of the spectrum since it ideally needs to work for everyone.

How about indestructible with remove=destroy semantics? This permits upgrades, solves the excessive swapping issue, and generates a high risk, high reward incentive for Cogmind to temporarily increase its hacking prowess by sacrificing its hoarded hackware.

This could also be extended to some non-combat items to solve the tedious sensor/heat sink swapping cheese I've begun to do lately (http://www.gridsagegames.com/forums/index.php?topic=345.msg3050#msg3050) 

Perhaps the items could still be vulnerable to traps/heat/corruption.

Earlier today I was updating my notes on this and went as far as saying that if we'd modify how hackware works as a part, the same changes would almost certainly be made for processors. Technically these two categories are the same thing with different names for differentiation purposes.

My first idea was to add a separate UI for parts permanently integrated with your core, and you have separate slots for that, which also evolve (and they'd theoretically be immune to damage, but space is limited and removing them destroys them, so you'd only swap out for different/better processors). It couldn't fit in the main UI, though, which I don't like, among many other issues.

By comparison I really like the sound of remove=destroy. Much less complex in terms of both implementation and understanding.

I haven't checked out your seed run yet, but on first glance it looks epic

Note: I am going to a conference next week and won't be able to read the forums. Keep up the good work.

Noted, thanks for bringing this discussion up . It's good to get it started now so that there's some more input against which to consider future changes. The system's been growing a bit in the early alphas, giving us a chance to see what it needs to be able to do and how it plays into strategies. I don't want to make any big changes prematurely, but every time I play I tell myself "yep, hacking needs work to make it a streamlined part of the game like everything else." It's certainly not where I want it to be!

[Decker]

Thanks for the answers. Two quick points.

There is no way to reliably reset the food clock that doesn't come at a significant cost. You can get lucky, but you can't count on it.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Once you've spotted a chute trap and the alert level is going high, then you may decide to take the chute instead of the exit, even if you've located it. You might as well milk a fab while you're at it.

The chute trap comes at almost no cost. It's only costly if you screw up, which is pretty unlikely if you're fast enough.

The issue in Materials is one that I've considered a lot, because that's the one place so far in the game where you can theoretically hang out indefinitely. That said, it's hard enough on beginners as is, and as "beginner land" it isn't really somewhere to hang out, anyway.

This is where the worst abuse happen, though. Farming a fab for Hcp Storage Units.

[Kyzrati]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Once you've spotted a chute trap and the alert level is going high, then you may decide to take the chute instead of the exit, even if you've located it. You might as well milk a fab while you're at it.

The chute trap comes at almost no cost. It's only costly if you screw up, which is pretty unlikely if you're fast enough.

But you have to redo the floor if you go down a chute. Good for score, bad for integrity. Of course, if you're really good then it's easier to shrug off this penalty.

We'll see on this. There's lots of room, and it's quite easy, to tweak almost any aspect of chutes.

This is where the worst abuse happen, though. Farming a fab for Hcp Storage Units.

I was wondering if that was the case. I know you guys are really bent on having those, and if anything there needs to be a logical way to prevent that particular bit of farming. Maybe the difficulty of Factory increases if you spend too much time in Materials? Not a great solution. Something to think about for later, though. Another alternative, something I've considered a few times in light of this, is to make it easier to obtain those basic schematics you probably want, so that you have no real reason to hang around. (Is there any other reason you'd hang around?)

Now that I think of it, I'm going to be adding a new feature later on that would theoretically make loitering in Materials even more valuable, so something bigger will definitely have to be done about this at least by then.

In general, no food clock, or a weak one, is bad for design here, though part of the reason this is cropping up now is that I'm gradually making Complex 0b10 easier*. That's because there will be more difficult and in some cases less predictable challenges outside the complex, and you'll need the extra leeway to see them through. However, I can't say exactly how much leeway is necessary just yet...

*(and at the same time more players are figuring out how it works)

[Decker]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But you have to redo the floor if you go down a chute. Good for score, bad for integrity.

Sometimes that works to your advantage. In my seed run, I couldn't find the exit, so I went down a chute to hunt for it on another floor with less time pressure.

Another alternative, something I've considered a few times in light of this, is to make it easier to obtain those basic schematics you probably want, so that you have no real reason to hang around.

Obtaining the schematic is easy. Milking the fab is the hard part. It's hard enough with a fab level 1 on Materials, so imagine doing it on Factory/Research with a running food clock and a level 2-3 fab. The idea is to milk in Materials (I make 6 units) and hope you'll cover the attrition loss along the way by finding more. Fabbing is generally counter-productive on Factory and beyond.

Is there any other reason you'd hang around?

Yes. In my current game I'm goofing around to milk terminals for lore and secrets. I imagine a new player would want to do the same to learn the game mechanics (I think I did anyway).

IMO, there seems to be some conflicting goals in your design for reconnect. On one hand, you want to allow it, but on the other hand, you want to make it impractical. Why is being able to reconnect so important?

[Kyzrati]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

But you have to redo the floor if you go down a chute. Good for score, bad for integrity.

Sometimes that works to your advantage. In my seed run, I couldn't find the exit, so I went down a chute to hunt for it on another floor with less time pressure.

That "sometimes" is by design, though. I wanted there to be multiple reasons that you might even decide to intentionally jump down a chute (which also helps with it not being devastating to a run's progress for less experienced players).

(Again, lots of possibilities for tweaking here, just pointing out the intent.)

Fabbing is generally counter-productive on Factory and beyond.

True, and this is something I will eventually look into changing (there are other related issues to handle first).

IMO, there seems to be some conflicting goals in your design for reconnect. On one hand, you want to allow it, but on the other hand, you want to make it impractical. Why is being able to reconnect so important?

I don't want to make it completely impractical. I want to make it impractical on a sliding scale depending on how effective your build is at hacking, and how much time you want to risk at a given location.

When you're effective enough, the ability to more freely reconnect allows you to do much more with a single terminal. (The planned addition of a feature to essentially "wait until nearest terminal trace has ended" will also make reconnections that much less annoying.)

[Eloden]

I think that would be a great idea to make some utilities "fixed" to the core. Where when you get a better version you can either upgrade an old one or take an empty slot.
I would still think they should be susceptible to major damage but more protected than in the utilities slots.

An idea might be to give them a chance to be affected when you receive core damage, maybe after a your core gets lowered to a certain threshold. They would then be double protected  by the general coverage mechanic (same as the core) and then also by the core integrity. Additionally it might give EMP weapons another use target instead of "just" adding corruption.

Two problems I might foresee. It will be important to decide what items would fit into that category. Secondly how they will be lootable from other robots as one of the core design concepts is that all rules that apply  to cogmind should also be reflected in other robots.

[Happylisk]

Very important topic, glad Decker brought it up.

I'm definitely guilty of Materials farming.  There's no food clock there, so if you know what you're doing you can hang around basically indefinitely.  If I'm playing with an intent to go far, I make sure I get schematics for Hcp. Storage units (sometimes other things too, but always that one).  On -7 I'll do an Index(Fabricator) hack and go to work.  Since getting a feel for the lock out mechanic, I never get locked out these days (again, only possible due to the lack of a materials food clock).

I have a solution to this fabbing problem.  You're not really going to go to town cranking out armors or targeting computers or whatever in Materials.  If you're abusing the lack of a food clock, you're probably doing it for storage units.  Why not have a guaranteed cache of all types of storage units somewhere in Materials?  That alone would probably kill the need to farm.  You could also consider adding this cache and then outright cutting out fabricators in Materials.  It would be appropriate in some ways if Fabricators only started popping up in Factory. 

Also, there's another hacking scum that hasn't been brought up: machine familiarity.  One thing I do in materials is hit up every terminal I can find and try to pull off as many hacks as possible per machine (sometimes even doing multiple "lose the trace" sessions), even if I don't really need the hack.  By artificially increasing my familiarity, I've found that I've been able to consistently increase my hacking success rates later in Factory.  This is easily the grindiest thing I do in a game otherwise remarkable for its lack of grinding opportunities. 

[Kyzrati]

how they will be lootable from other robots as one of the core design concepts is that all rules that apply  to cogmind should also be reflected in other robots.

For this bit, my assumption was that I'd still want to try having them continue working in the same way as they always have for other robots. You'd be an exception, so that you could still obtain the parts normally. But that would be a headache to implement and is best avoided. This is one reason I kinda like the "remove==destroy" mechanic for all processor/hackware type items. (Although that, too, goes somewhat against the core mechanic of unlimited interchangeability, we could consider it a special mechanic for what are obviously a rather unique case among parts.)

If you're abusing the lack of a food clock, you're probably doing it for storage units.  Why not have a guaranteed cache of all types of storage units somewhere in Materials?  That alone would probably kill the need to farm.  You could also consider adding this cache and then outright cutting out fabricators in Materials.  It would be appropriate in some ways if Fabricators only started popping up in Factory. 

I've been considering doing almost exactly that, which is why I was asking if there was any other reason players are hanging around Materials. It's thematic, and if it helps cut down on time required for getting a particular repeat build started then it's not a bad idea.

Only having Fabricators beginning from the Factory is a fairly good idea, too.

Also, there's another hacking scum that hasn't been brought up: machine familiarity.  One thing I do in materials is hit up every terminal I can find and try to pull off as many hacks as possible per machine (sometimes even doing multiple "lose the trace" sessions), even if I don't really need the hack.  By artificially increasing my familiarity, I've found that I've been able to consistently increase my hacking success rates later in Factory.  This is easily the grindiest thing I do in a game otherwise remarkable for its lack of grinding opportunities. 

Yeah, machine familiarity doesn't really belong in the game, to be honest. It's literally the only "persistent stat" (albeit somewhat hidden) that you have control over in the game.

Ever since Alpha 1 I've been planning to do something about that, but have kept waiting until the rest of the game was more mature and a larger "hacking overhaul" took place, as per this very thread title

I think familiarity should probably just be removed outright. I was originally going to change its range of applicability because as is it's a bit too specific, but even in doing so it would still be susceptible to the same tactics. This change would also entail removing the handful of Hackware parts that have to do with familiarity. I like the theory of being better at hacking machines and/or robots if you do it often enough, but if it just leads to grindy behavior then why bother :/

On that topic, what do you all think about Trojan(Botnet)? Too abusable? Annoying? Okay as is?

[Draco18s]

I agree with the removal of familiarity. Is a relatively small bonus, but often can make a difference,  IF the player knows how it works, which isn't always the case. I was playing along with some friends and one of them made the comment that "familiarity is always zero, I don't understand how to increase that." It turned out that it was based on the exact configuration of the terminal, of which there were many.

[Sherlockkat]

I like the idea of making hackware a permanent upgrade to the core. First, some background. I am not the best at this game, but I am not the worst either. I can typically make it to late midgame (Factory -5,-4) and sometimes, early lategame (Research -3).

Based on my experience, it feels like hacking is not really worth it unless you have a critical mass of good hacking gear (like a couple of deep network scanners or quite a few hacking suites). As a someone who doesn't farm for specific items, I usually make do with the storage units that I find. Commonly, this is something along the lines of couple of med storage units or something like a large storage, med storage or if I am really lucky, a HCP storage along with some other storage unit. This really factors into what I pick up. I would always pick up something that will improve my survival over a piece of hackware. This is also amplified by the fact that hackware are typically rare and typically appear in isolation. As such, I never pick up enough hacking gear to hit a critical mass.

Another observation is that except for alert(purge), the return of investment in hacking is usually some kind of mid/long term informational advantage (like exit locations, location of key machines). However, the capital required (typically in the form of hackware) is usually quite steep. You need inventory slots, utility slots, need to spend time playing the boring swapping mini game in front of the terminal etc. So, it feels like something that is so low impact in the short term needs to consume less of your of resources (again, referring to inventory space/utility slots). AAAND, that's why I think having hacking be some kind of permanent stat upgrade to your core to be a cool idea.

One way of doing this would be to have some kind of limited-use machine that you can find which reconfigures the core and makes our little robot computer literate. It can provide with hacking bonuses which we would have to choose from (like prediction bonuses, +10 to indirect hacks, easier trojan installation, multiple trojan installation on the same machine and such stuff..)

Again, this is coming from someone who isn't the best at the game. So, take it with a grain of salt.

p.s: Lot of this applies to fabrication too. Fabrication is typically low impact relative to the time/resource investment required. I prefer not to carry a matter storage container and spend 50 turns around a fab for a couple of improved assault rifles which is gonna get blown away in the next firefight.

[Kyzrati]

I was playing along with some friends and one of them made the comment that "familiarity is always zero, I don't understand how to increase that." It turned out that it was based on the exact configuration of the terminal, of which there were many.

This was one of the first things I've wanted to change, assuming that familiarity remained in the game. A per-system bonus is a bit specific. It was another byproduct of me wanting to make familiarity important yet unimportant

@Sherlockkat: That's a good way of looking at it, and I agree with most of that analysis as the game stands now (which is why I've wanted to change it, somehow).

One drawback I now see to permanent/semi-permanent upgrades is that players would then likely spend the early game attempting to fabricate the relevant parts, because they'd be quite valuable if once equipped you couldn't lose them. I guess we'd have to make them still losable in combat (possibly on core damage, for example, as mentioned earlier).

[zxc]

When you're effective enough, the ability to more freely reconnect allows you to do much more with a single terminal. (The planned addition of a feature to essentially "wait until nearest terminal trace has ended" will also make reconnections that much less annoying.)

You can achieve this by making terminals single-use and have effective hacking equipment reducing tracing enough that you get the equivalent of multiple uses out of it in one go.

I would also be in favour of making terminals have a persistent trace that doesn't expire, and having it so that closing and reopening a terminal has no adverse effects (the trace doesn't progress unless you make hacking actions).

[Kyzrati]

I like those ideas. At the same time, that would remove some of the system's overall flexibility enabled by resetting traces. But if few are taking that option once the food clock kicks in anyway...

[Happylisk]

I'm personally strongly opposed to making hackware slot directly into the core, or destroyed on remove, or anything like that.  What I love about cogmind is that every part has the same underlying mechanics - you pop them into a slot, there's a matter fee, there may or may not be energy/heat costs, and off you go.  Taking one type of item and hard coding an exception to it is an indication that that subset of items is flawed and should be rethought within the existing parameters of the game, not that an exception to very clear cut rules should be added. 

I thought about this a lot last night.  My personal view is that all hackware should be removed, and should be replaced by new Trojans and Brute Force hacks.  You mentioned botnets - I've played around with them before and I like them a lot.  When you think about it, the botnet hack is kind of like a substitute for a deep network scanner and a hacking suite - but only for one level, no fiddling with parts, and I'm assuming it raises the security level, so you have interesting trade offs besides tedium.

One can imagine a whole host of Trojans that make hacking stronger but at a cost.  For example, a trojan hack that significantly increases the chances of all hacks on one machine, but results in a large security spike and the deployment of an investigation or even assault squad every single time you use that terminal  thereafter.  Or something like Trojan(Decoy), that slows detection rates on all machines of that kind of the level, again with a security cost. 

[Kyzrati]

I agree with your sentiment, for sure. I'd be wary to make what amounts to a change to the core mechanic. We do need to keep come up with viable solutions, so everything's on the table for now.

My personal view is that all hackware should be removed,

That's something I've been thinking, too, ever since playing early builds, though by then it was too late / too early (depending on how you look at it) to make any sweeping changes. We're getting much closer to a better position from which to adjust the system, though.

and should be replaced by new Trojans and Brute Force hacks.  You mentioned botnets - I've played around with them before and I like them a lot.  When you think about it, the botnet hack is kind of like a substitute for a deep network scanner and a hacking suite - but only for one level, no fiddling with parts,

That's an interesting idea.

I can see it somewhat reducing the number of dynamic options for hacking since there is a fairly wide variety of different hacking utilities, but honestly another reason I was thinking of removing them was because all but a smaller subset are truly useful--there are too many kinds--you can barely carry enough of the core types, let alone consider using a bunch of secondary types as well. This is also why with subsequent builds I've been trying to increase their secondary functionality, and give them combat bonuses as well. Still, probably not good enough.

Of course, by removing them we also have to consider how this affects the robot hacking situation. Not a lot of players hack robots yet, but this will be a more viable strategy in the future, I believe (or at least I plan to work towards making it one).

and I'm assuming it raises the security level, so you have interesting trade offs besides tedium.

Actually they don't right now, but I guess they could if we needed them to. At present only brute force hacks increase presence, while Trojans more logically remain undetected and therefore have no impact on presence. After all, factors that your opponent doesn't know about shouldn't affect how they react to you--if they knew about the Trojan it would be removed, right?

One can imagine a whole host of Trojans that make hacking stronger but at a cost.  For example, a trojan hack that significantly increases the chances of all hacks on one machine, but results in a large security spike and the deployment of an investigation or even assault squad every single time you use that terminal  thereafter.  Or something like Trojan(Decoy), that slows detection rates on all machines of that kind of the level, again with a security cost.

Again it seems kinda weird that something which shouldn't be detectable in order to remain effective is going to increase security, but that issue aside it sounds like such a system could become rather complex and possibly be difficult to balance as a result. We wouldn't know until the details were worked out, of course, just a thought.

Oh man, so much to think about.

[Decker]

Thanks for all the comments.

Very briefly, I like zxc's proposal. The food clock effect could be integrated using the heat mechanic (trace thresholds). Cogmind can shoot when it's hot, but there are consequences.

The event-based pause command is a can of worms. I've yet to see a game that has successfully integrated that with ESP.

Kyzrati Edit: I've locked this thread to continue the discussion from an organized starting point here.