View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue May 22, 2018 9:33 pm



Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Resource Cost Changes 
Author Message
DARKie

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:47 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post Resource Cost Changes
So they are upping the price on most everything. Found a post by Higby on Reddit that explains some of it. I see what they are trying to do, I just worry that it will push the sides into further imbalance as those that hit the resource cap a few times switch to the overpop factions so they don't hit it again.

I do think they need to up the resource pop incentives dramatically. Make it so that if you are 20% down in pop, you never have to worry about resources during the fight, whereas the larger pop (yea, VS at night!) have to worry more about it.


Anyway... here is the post:

Quote:
First of all, as usual we appreciate all the discussion on this, seeing a lot of valid concerns. I wanted to address a couple of them.

1 - We've run the numbers too, of course. We're looking at average resource income and spend rates across multiple roles, i.e. people who play tanks primarily, those who play air primarily, those who play lots of stuff, etc. We've found that in general the resource income is about 3-4x the resource spend rate for most players, with a few exceptions. Not only that, but most of the time most players are CAPPED on aerospace and mechanized resources, including those who play those roles primarily. This is leading to resources being largely irrelevant. The only one that this isn't the case with is infantry resources, where you can spend without using, so more people manage to use those resources effectively without "wasting" their by earning while capped.

2 - The purpose with resources is to be limit the flow of force-multipliers being used, vehicles, explosives, etc. If you're upset that you can't chain pull tanks over and over every 5 minutes, I don't know what to tell ya. That's kind of the entire purpose of the resource system to limit players from doing that. It's never been the intention that tanks and aircraft are always available and you never have to "do without", however, our current tuning basically allows for that - making resources, and therefore one of our strategic drivers largely irrelevant. Did you know you actively earn resources by fighting in certain areas, in addition to the passive gain? Most people don't since resources don't really matter. If you want to get tanks faster, you can do that by fighting more in mechanized resource hexes. Mechanized resources are usually more plentiful outside of warpgates too so sunderers and MBTs, the backbones of forming a push are earned earliest. None of this matters or is important in the current meta - hopefully this tuning starts to make that gameplay surface a bit more.

3 - I know you're not saying this Roy, but just so everyone else sees it - this isn't a "Resource System Revamp" it's just a tuning pass. We still have longer term plans for more systematic adjustments to the resource game, including changes to the way you acquire and utilize resources. This tuning is an attempt to see what we can do to make resources more relevant in the current system without waiting several weeks for the new game systems to be coded and tuned. We also want to see what a more restrictive resource model feels like so we can refine the design direction for that larger change. These type of resource adjustments are fast and tiny changes to game data and are easy for us to adjust and even remove if it proves to be as bad as the doomsayers think it might be.

4 - Currently resources and XP are boosted by being under-populated. Of course hardly anyone realizes that resources are boosted since they don't matter very much right now, but they are. We are considering greatly increasing the resource side of that bonus, meaning that under-populated empires will have a lot more availability to spawn vehicles. I'm sure the first thought is "if we're zerged back to the wg we're screwed anyways so this doesn't help", and that's true and is already the case. Yes, if they're pushed back all the way to WG, this won't be as huge of a benefit, but if you're under-pop while you're being pushed back it could matter a lot. Being able to out-pull vehicles, MAXes and consumables while you're fighting to hold territory as an under-popped empire could hopefully prove to be an alleviation of the population imbalance pain that some players are feeling on a couple servers. edit: since I know someone will show up to bring up that if you're evenly popped and pushed back to WG you'd be hurting - that's true, but that's kind of the point. This is the component I'm personally least comfortable with.

Once again, the goals with this tuning is to make resources more relevant, decrease the time that players spend 'capped' on vehicle resources, limit chain pulling powerful force-multiplier vehicles such as MBTs, and, ideally, to allow under-popped empires to leverage force multipliers at a higher rate than their over-populated rivals while actively contesting territory.
At any rate, I'll take the concerns to the team, and we'll continue to discuss. I agree there are some big issues to watch carefully with this type of change.

The good news is it's a very simple change to implement, iterate and even to revert if needed. Like so much in Planetside 2, "TheorySiding" and mathematical models only get us so far (both ours and yours), it's really impossible to accurately predict the actual results until we can see it played by real players in real situations.

_________________
Image

Active (PS2)
Calisai (Tech Test/Alpha/Beta/Release) - Mattherson (Youtube Channel)

Retired (PS1)
Calisai (Emmy VS)
Calisi (Markov TR)
Calisi (Konried TR)


Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:10 pm
Profile WWW
DARKie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2004 11:37 pm
Posts: 953
Location: Wisconsin
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
I think this will be a net benefit for a lot of us who are skilled with the vehicles we pull. This will mean that we are overrun less with shear force that 'skill' just can't overcome.

Last night was a prime example (albeit just 1 person) of what can happen. Phunk kept pointing out one guy that would hit us with a reaver, die, pull a lib and hit us again, die, and then repeat the cycle again. 1 nub wasn't an issue, but multiply that by 10 or 100 and those nubs can be an issue in those vehicles. With the changes, the noob horde SHOULD be less armed. Though us with our l33t skills should remain unaffected.

_________________
Image
__________________________________________________
xfire = darkfed


Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:29 pm
Profile
DARKie

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:47 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
Fed wrote:
I think this will be a net benefit for a lot of us who are skilled with the vehicles we pull. This will mean that we are overrun less with shear force that 'skill' just can't overcome.

Last night was a prime example (albeit just 1 person) of what can happen. Phunk kept pointing out one guy that would hit us with a reaver, die, pull a lib and hit us again, die, and then repeat the cycle again. 1 nub wasn't an issue, but multiply that by 10 or 100 and those nubs can be an issue in those vehicles. With the changes, the noob horde SHOULD be less armed. Though us with our l33t skills should remain unaffected.


True, but my point is this could cause a problem with the overpops. Those nubs, when they can no longer pull vehicles on NC/TR, may move to a server that they have population. Mattherson VS is one of those factions. Thus exacerbating the population problem already giving us issues. I'm afraid that we are going to get more and more polarized population centers. If you like playing TR, waterson is your server, VS... Mattherson, NC... Connery... etc.

These changes by themselves are not bad, if they were combined with other things. They need to up the %age resource gain incentives. Make it so that a faction with only 20-25% population can chain pull vehicles without worry, while a faction with 60% population has to be very, very careful. This will help (but not solve) the fact that you WILL lose your tank if you are constantly going against 2-1 or 3-1 odds... no matter how skilled you are.

We're lucky in that we have either near equal pops or overpop. However, I remember those days after the Mag nerfs where NC was at 40% and we were 20-25%. Pulling mags during that time was equally frustrating in that they performed horribly, and we were always outnumbered.

We have a resource system in place that promotes the pushing of a faction off of a continent. However, We have no end-scenario when that happens. Right now, getting warpgated is a frustrating experience for players.

1) You continue to stay on the cont and try to get out (getting farmed due to not being able to get enough tanks, etc.),
2) you move to a continent which is also not balanced (either in your favor and boring, or not in your favor and just as annoying)
3) you log off (either to play different server, or stop playing for the night)...

Remember in PS1 how boring it was when we just got pushed off a cont, and the NC/TR were still on a cont fighting... was pretty much a ghost until the other fight stopped, or we attacked something they valued more. That something is Indar... what do you think any faction could do to pull guys off a good Indar fight right now?

This will not help the pop imbalances.

Maybe after a week of annoying resource issues for the TR/NC... and whining on the forums, SOE will hotfix bumping up the resource modifiers for the under-popped factions. Hopefully that will draw some of those nubs from VS to the other factions so they can still pull their poorly piloted vehicles with abandon.... feeding us the sweet, sweet nectur of nub vehicles we love so much. :twisted:

_________________
Image

Active (PS2)
Calisai (Tech Test/Alpha/Beta/Release) - Mattherson (Youtube Channel)

Retired (PS1)
Calisai (Emmy VS)
Calisi (Markov TR)
Calisi (Konried TR)


Last edited by Calisai on Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:17 pm
Profile WWW
DARKie
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2004 11:37 pm
Posts: 953
Location: Wisconsin
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
Yeah, I agree Cal. I suppose my comment was more focused on our outfit engagements rather than at a macro level. At a macro level, I do agree. The current resource system is like a snowball of depression for a losing faction.

_________________
Image
__________________________________________________
xfire = darkfed


Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:22 pm
Profile
DARKie

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:47 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
Fed wrote:
Yeah, I agree Cal. I suppose my comment was more focused on our outfit engagements rather than at a macro level. At a macro level, I do agree. The current resource system is like a snowball of depression for a losing faction.


I even feel it being bad for me at a micro level. I like it when the nubs on NC keep pulling those lightnings, 1/2 vannies and sundies and running them towards my mag with abandon. Stop those guys from pulling... and the vehicle farms are going to dry up. :(

_________________
Image

Active (PS2)
Calisai (Tech Test/Alpha/Beta/Release) - Mattherson (Youtube Channel)

Retired (PS1)
Calisai (Emmy VS)
Calisi (Markov TR)
Calisi (Konried TR)


Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:30 pm
Profile WWW
DARKie

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:47 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
Okay... Moving my response from the TE Thread over to this one. Once It hit 4 paragraphs of ranting, I figured it wouldn't really do to have it in the other thread. Better suited for this one.


PhunkSauce wrote:
As for the resource system, I honestly don't have a strong opinion. I still don't have a good feel for it after GU11, yet to see if it works well now or not. I know vehicles were too easy to chain pull prior to the update, maybe this is the right fix, maybe it isn't. I do know they've got a resource revamp lined up for sometime in the near-ish future, so we'll see what that brings.


Resource Rant incoming:

[rant]

The few days I have played with GU11 so far have been VERY frustrating to me. I have 24,941 of my total 48,570 certs (51.3%) devoted to the Magrider. Last night... I lost my first Mag quickly (it happens), and was looking at a 5 minute wait for my 2nd Mag. Lost that one to a NC zerg that I didn't know was coming. Then I was looking at a 20 minute timeframe to pull another Mag. That's 25 mins of waiting for about 2-3 minutes of driving.

Yea, it might limit the amount of vehicles on the field. Maybe it's a good thing overall for the game. If this keeps happening to me, however, I'm not going to keep sitting around footzerging or sniping while my resources build. And that's for an Alpha Squad/ Full Membership/ VS (over-popped with good amount of territory) player. Imagine how a no-boost, non-member, Mattherson TR must feel about trying to pull a Prowler? I have 2441 certs put into the acquisition timer... completely useless now...

They better find a way to help the dedicated drivers pull what they want, otherwise those drivers will go away. Combined arms does not mean, everyone should be forced into doing those combined things. Combined arms means finding a way of letting those who want to do certain things allow them to specialize in those things... while keeping a good number of all things on the field. I'm hoping they will add resource reduction to the acquisition tree, I have no problem putting certs into being able to pull my preferred vehicle.

Even then, It has already changed the way I use my vehicle. I can no longer be as aggressive as I want to be... Especially with the changes to the Saron making the Mag a more Close-Qtrs style of play. You tend to lose more tanks just in terms of putting yourself in high-reward high-risk situations. I do not enjoy sitting on a hillside and shelling 200m+ away. I liked the Saron changes... now... with the combined Resource changes, I see them as a HUGE nerf. We already have the worst long-range maingun... now our secondary can't even compete with the NS version at long-range.

Also, as we lost territory on Esamir last night (due to population imbalance, they had like 60% pop) we lost more and more resources per tick. It got to the point that I was gaining 22 mechanical every 3 minutes. The system is built to give momentum to the larger territory holder... to help push the other faction off the continent. That's wonderful... IF WE HAD OTHER CONTINENTS TO BE PUSHED TO. They need to suspend this system until more continents and locking go into effect. Its a great idea... when that's the end-goal of a continent. Right now they don't have that end-goal in place... so it's just going to frustrate and cause people to leave.

TL;DR Overall, my initial opinions of the resource changes are not very good.


What my opinion comes down to is this... they are nerfing my playstyle. We've already seen this with a few other old darkies.

There is no sneaky infiltrator in PS2, if that's your playstyle... why bother putting massive time into this game. No backline goals or objectives, nothing but killing as infil. (one of the things I used to love to do)

There was a time when dedicated infantry play was very frustrating. I think it's gotten much better, but I understand when those who were dedicated to that playstyle stopped playing.

With all the AA, Air got very frustrating to play as well for a time. Again, I think they are working on it but during that time period, I understand if people stopped playing a lot if that was the only thing they enjoyed doing.

One thing that bothers me about this particular change is... It STOPS you from being able to do what you want. It doesn't discourage you from it, doesn't annoy you from doing it... IT JUST PLAIN DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO DO IT.

Sigh.

[/rant]

_________________
Image

Active (PS2)
Calisai (Tech Test/Alpha/Beta/Release) - Mattherson (Youtube Channel)

Retired (PS1)
Calisai (Emmy VS)
Calisi (Markov TR)
Calisi (Konried TR)


Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:15 pm
Profile WWW
Alliance Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:13 am
Posts: 27
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
Two solution I can think of that SOE won't do because it requires more work!

1. On all three maps depending on how many tech-plants you have it should decrease the cost lets say 25 resource per tech-plant to all Vehicles empire wide. Right now there is really one purpose for having the tech-plants, amp stations, and bio-labs they add little benefits. (Farms not included in benefits) They should add other mechanics to them that gives the empire more of a reason to capture/defend them besides "hur farming time #Goonfarm". It's not just the ESF/MBT costing more it's the game itself. Amp stations should decrease heat on turrets yes but also decrease timers to Vehicles by 10 per amp station capture sure it's not alot but it's something. Bio-labs should decrease max timers/cost SOE is just being lazy not thinking outside the box.

2.Depending on how far the front-lines is from the warp-gate pulling from the warp-gate should cost less reasoning be your pulling tanks from HQ basically so why not cost less.

(BETA MAP GO)

Image

The way I kinda think it should be. It's safe yes to pull from warpgate and should cost less because look at the travel time from warpgate to front-lines your still in danger from ESF and Libs getting to it. ALSO TEAMWORK YAAA (WHATS THAT?! IN PS2) it might encourage smaller outfits like DARK to help out bigger outfits say GOKU or NNG they can request smaller outfits to go back to warp-gate and grab some tanks to help them push out.

_________________
Image


Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:57 pm
Profile
DARKie

Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2004 1:16 am
Posts: 2802
Location: Pensacola, Fl
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
I think the problems you're running into Cal actually stem from the cert system, not the resource system.

From the on set they dev's decided allow everyone in the game to have full access to all vehicles from day one. This sounds good on paper, because it allows even the newest players to "experience the whole game", rather than grind for certs to buy the coolest toys (they abandoned this model for guns, I suppose because they decided they needed to make money somewhere). The problem is now you have to balance the cost of vehicles for both a random pubbie who is pulling his stock mag just because he wants to drive around making "pew pew pew" noises in his head, while also accounting for dedicated drivers who've spent massive amounts of certs on said vehicles.

The dev's saw a problem with the number of vehicles being pulled, and with the lackluster impact of the resource system in affecting the decisions of drivers. The problem however is that they have to slow down vehicle production by both the randoms who are pulling one-off mags, and dedicated drivers who are pulling mags consistently through their playtime. What the system should aim to do is limit mag production to this latter category, thus limiting their overall number and making it easier to balance resource costs versus the needs of the players using the vehicle. PS1 did this by making you cert vehicles, and limiting the number of certs you could have; PS2 has intentionally been developed missing that component, and the lopsided resource system is a symptom of that IMO.

The naive solution is to add a cert which reduces the resource cost of vehicles, but unless those certs are made mutually exclusive to resource cutting certs for other abilities, you eventually end up right back in the same situation we're in...

_________________
Image


Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:18 pm
Profile
DARKie

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:47 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
MightyMouser wrote:
The naive solution is to add a cert which reduces the resource cost of vehicles, but unless those certs are made mutually exclusive to resource cutting certs for other abilities, you eventually end up right back in the same situation we're in...


There are a lot of design issues they brought upon their self. They decided to do things completely different than PS1 because they were looking to draw more of the mainstream FPS players. We now have to live with that decision. The ship has sailed on a lot of things from PS1.

The problems with the reduced cost cert tree is the same as PS1 had eventually with BR 25+ being able to pretty much cert into everything. Granted there will always be power-creep (Unless you limit people artificially, thus killing the generalists), but for now it will alleviate some of the issue until they actually fix things.

Basically there is a balance between the generalists and the specialists. For the true generalist, PS1's cert system was restrictive and annoying. That's why they needed to put in the recert timer to allow for those generalists to mix it up. The specialists had to deal with vehicle timers and tech benefits... Overall I think PS1's system was a decent compromise between the two. Now they want to add resources to be a "goal" or a "reason" to fight over area.

I'm just not sure what game mechanic or problem restricting resources is meant to solve? Are they to limit the amount of vehicles pulled by a single person? Or are they meant to limit the amount of vehicles pulled by a single faction? Are they meant to promote area capture? Are they meant to help push a losing faction off a continent faster? Are they suppose to favor the attacker, or defender?

As they stand right now:
They limit the number of vehicles a single person can pull (but not how many are on the field at one time, a zerg can still have 20 vehicles together)
They promote the faster and easier capture of a whole continent (by making the faction with more territory, even stronger compared to the losing one)
They promote attacking not defending (same cost pulling from base next to enemy warpgate as there is from your own)
They promote generalization (Forcing players to pull air, then ground, then infantry for awhile and cycle on through while the others recover)
They promote conservative, slower play... (penalized for losing a tank early... before your resources have recovered)
They promote zerging (Safer to stick with others as you lose your vehicles slower)
They promote overpopulation (Better to stick with a faction with higher population, therefore higher territory gain)

_________________
Image

Active (PS2)
Calisai (Tech Test/Alpha/Beta/Release) - Mattherson (Youtube Channel)

Retired (PS1)
Calisai (Emmy VS)
Calisi (Markov TR)
Calisi (Konried TR)


Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:16 pm
Profile WWW
DARKie
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 5:09 am
Posts: 1978
Location: IA
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
A quality of life update...for infantry lol. They want to keep trying to make this work, they need more data. It's an annoying step closer to a working system I guess.

I recall when they changed resources a long time ago. People were pissed they couldn't switch between ESFs and Libs, or MBTs and Lightnings as much as they wanted to. I haven't heard any dev ideas yet on the resource revamp, but they're getting tons of player suggestions now after this change, lol.

I think I'm seeing some overreacting with the nerfed frequency that you can pull vehicles, especially the powerful gunner vehicles, and when you have a decent amount of territory. The system overall I still say toss it or disable it until it's revamped. Liberator is my main gunner vehicle, and it's a challenge to get it to work with lattice and all the AA options. Forget flying near a large TR force. After the GU11 patch I was doing the same thing I had to do before it without much issue. A gunner and I take turns pulling a lib when needed with low downtime, especially if engaging large forces or most Indar battles.

_________________
Find me on Discord: ObsidianOne#2697


Sun Jun 23, 2013 1:56 am
Profile
DARKie

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 3:47 pm
Posts: 968
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post Re: Resource Cost Changes
ObsidianOne wrote:
I think I'm seeing some overreacting with the nerfed frequency that you can pull vehicles, especially the powerful gunner vehicles


It's annoying to me. Yea, I'm probably being a little dramatic in how it actually affects me personally.

However, Put yourself in the shoes of the underpop factions, and look at actual game numbers from a few
minutes ago. With the overpopulation we have going on (And is quite common on ALL servers, regardless of
faction, someone is low pop)

Who would actually want to play TR if you like driving vehicles?

1:15 am Saturday night.

Mattherson TR global population... 26% ( Remember when VS was around that pop regularly? )

Time to pull when at 0 resources. (The BEST time is 25 min...)

Amerish - 17% territory control +30 mech (1hr 15min) (Alpha/Full) +20 mech (1hr 55min) (Free)
Esamir - 17% territory control +68 mech (35min) (Alpha/Full) +48 mech (50 min) (Free)
Indar - 19% territory control +105 mech (25min) (Alpha/Full) +72 mech (35min) (Free)


Waterson VS global Population 23% (BEST time is 35 min for Free player)

Amerish - 23% territory control +55 mech (45min) (Free)
Esamir - 8% territory control +12 mech (3hr 7 min) (Free)
Indar - 25% territory control +67 mech (35min) (Free)


How could they not do the math and figure this out? I was putting forth when I heard about the
issue that increasing resource cost was going to cause population imbalance to get worse. It's
just a matter of time. 35 min minimum for Free... on the BEST continent. If you are newer to the
game and look at 450 resources while getting 20 per 5 mins... what are you going to think?

Granted, this is off-primetime... but it's also a Sat night... and populations are getting very imbalanced...
perception can be worse than reality. Once players start thinking they can't pull the vehicles they want
to pull... they'll perceive that it's best to play on a larger faction.

They are going to need to fix this, and pretty quickly too.

_________________
Image

Active (PS2)
Calisai (Tech Test/Alpha/Beta/Release) - Mattherson (Youtube Channel)

Retired (PS1)
Calisai (Emmy VS)
Calisi (Markov TR)
Calisi (Konried TR)


Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:38 am
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 11 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Copyright © 2014, Multi-Dimensional Visual Echo. All rights reserved.
Powered by hamsters on treadmills drinking coffee © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by ST Software for PTF.