Further Refinements In Exp. ModsEdit

  • More Implementation Heurisms are uncovered & defined.

Rman on Troman's ProvisosEdit

  • QUOTE from Troman: ...........
  • I do think that experienced units should build a more compact group and stay together to become more effective, but rookies bumping into objects and maybe getting stuck for some seconds might be too annoying for a human player."
  • Rman: What about if Rookie Pilots were timid drivers and only used 75% of their chassis power plant HP.
  • In others words, they drove slower..... where as as they gained experience they would maximize their engines output.....

DarkRaven's ThoughtsEdit

  • That's what I was thinking - apparent increase in speed and agility not through some kind of magical increase in the actual physical properties, but rather having naturally (relatively) high stats for most properties, but then having green troops unable to utilize 25-50% of the stat, and only using a larger fraction of the maximum amount by gaining EXP.
  • Thus a veteran IS faster and more agile than a green troop simply by utilizing more of what's already there. Same for other properties - a maximum to-hit accuracy% that may seem high, but which greenies have no way of achieving, only vets.

Troman Re-evaluatesEdit

  • I don't know, I still don't like the idea of making units of the same type travel slower or faster depending of their experience.
  • Ok, if we'll let the rookies move slower at the end, what do we do about the 'group' concept? ie: you give a move order to a unit group. Because some units are faster and some are slower, it will end up in a big ant-tail.
  • The player will have to make the faster units stop and wait for the slower ones once in a while to keep the group together, which is kind of ineffective.
  • I don't remember, what does WZ do in this situation, does it just let the group build an ant-tail? If I remember correctly it does. Do we want to keep this?
  • Or do we want to make the experienced units actually act as those, by making them wait for the slower units automatically? Or just make them travel slower, adapting to the slower units?
  • But then in both situations this whole speed concept becomes obsolete. It will only make and difference if units are sent separately and not as a group, which is a nonsense I think.
  • How do we solve this?

Rman Comments on DarkRavenEdit

  • Well put, DarkRaven !
  • This is a KEY concept of this whole topic, IMHO.
  • One thing, in particular, that is pronounced about this scheme is that experience boons & the enemy engagement outcomes are NOT based on dice-rolls like in RPGs. They are purely quantifible RT operants.

Kage Explains MoreEdit

  • QUOTE: "I like this one. If we are to make unit experience to play a more important role in WZ, then this idea is definitely worth considering. Well, maybe not "most of the time", but make them miss the rearm pads more frequently than trained units."
  • ever notice that neat powerslide thing that hover units do - we could do something like have green units forget to powerslide, or even powerslide too far (maybe powerslide past the entrance to the base it was intending to go through), while the experienced ones pull it off better than you see it in the current version of warzone.
  • QUOTE: "Not sure if I'd like to have such units on my side. It could be just too annoying. Make them look/act less experienced, but bumping into objects and slowing down the entire group/creating ant-tail, ... I don't know."
  • i guess i exaggerated my idea a little bit - what i meant was more things like misjudging turns, etc - as in a green tank might start a turn only to stop just short of hitting a rock outcropping, back up, then get themselves in the right direction, while an experienced tank crew would realize that turning a few seconds earlier would have been enough to avoid that rock outcropping.
  • we can even go so far as to make it so inexperienced vehicle crews run into other vehicles when packed tightly - this could easily be made so that annoyance is replaced completely with amusement - not only would it not be serious (you'd just see one tank rear-end another and sparks fly, but they'd get right back up going with little time lost), but we could get chojun to program in some radio chatter like "what in the hell are you doing?!"

QUOTE: "I do think that experienced units should build a more compact group and stay together to become more effective, but rookies bumping into objects and maybe getting stuck for some seconds might be too annoying for a human player."

  • actually, it's really the opposite - when used correctly, manueverability and speed are vastly more important in battles than firepower - your tanks could literally have enough firepower in each of their shells to destroy any opposition with one shot, no matter where placed, but if the enemy tanks can move fast enough that you simply can't aim a shot, then your firepower is completely worthless - they could have bb guns and eventually they'd wear you down.
  • when you get in a compact group, the enemy no longer has to aim at any one tank - they only have to aim in the right direction and your ass is theirs. thus it would be rookies that would stick together, and seasoned units that would try things like flanking individual enemy tanks (currently doesn't have any use in warzone since armor is shared all around the tank), all the while weaving and moving to make themselves harder to hit.

karmazilla Speaking to Troman's ConcernsEdit

  • It is a well known consept in military tactics that a group stay together and keep backward connection to ensure that nobody's lost.
  • Thus the group should never move at greater speed than what the slowest units is capable of.
  • I would like to see a WZ with a greater focus on groups and use of commanders, and this could be one of the methods used for accomplishing that goal.
  • Next, this may be a bit far down the road, but for a rookie soldier working alongside with a far more experienced personel is likely to gain courage, and do what he can, to listen and learn from his experienced comrades.
  • So in that sense, a rookie is likely to not be as slow, as had he been alone or among equally experienced.

Rman on karmazilla's PointsEdit

  • Essential point.
  • Comes down to Rookie Commanders and Ranked Commanders.
  • Like this:
  • Rookie Units led by a Rookie Commander are going to be the most ineffective & vulnerable combat group...
  • A Commander of higher rank would positively influence the effectiveness of his rookie units
  • Then there is this scenario:
  • A Rookie or Lower Ranked Commander leading, let's say, units with greater experience ?
  • HOW, deal with that ?
  • ALSO.....
  • Can units gain experience & rank such that when they attain a certain threshold they gain Commander Abilities" ?
  • Btw: I agree that combat grouping maneuver should be based on the slowest unit(s) in the formation.

DarkRaven Melds ConceptsEdit

  • Hmm.... Actually, an idea (more a brain-fart - I don't know if this could be implemented) is to mix my concept with karmazilla's - namely, with the support of higher-ranking units greenies will display better cohesion and ultimately better speed than the norm.
  • After all, the higher the rank, the more you can boss around the underlings and order them to do something constructive, as opposed to ram each other not to mention the surrounding countryside.
  • By keeping the rookies in line the vets can improve group max speed and mobility. The problem is that
  • a.) we're not decreasing the speed of the group per unit anymore, we have to find the AVERAGE speed between the units, ie. a group with lots of rookies and some greens may still be slower than a group with one Hero/Elite and an almighty swarm of greens.
  • Second - how do we define the radius of the stat-boost?
  • Could we just apply it to grouped units or commander squads? Would this cause problems if for some reason one unit got stuck/wandered off and the rest of the group just sat there waiting for it to catch up?
  • IMHO good/most realistic concept, no clue how we'd ever implement it

Karmazilla's "Boost" ConceptsEdit

  • Proposed Method of Implementation of the Above:
  • First, let's call the 'stat-boost' given to rookies or greenies from the company of veterans "dicipline-boost" - simply because this is what it mainly do (but just a name still;))
  • Now, the decipline-boost is applied groupwise (groups formed by pressing Ctrl+number) and squadwise (a commander and its linked units) to every single unit, provided these condition are present:
  • The unit must have clear, visual sight to at least one unit from its squad/group with more experience than itself.
  • And and a second unit from the squad/group of any level of experience.
  • OR
  • In the situation that a squad composes of just one unit additional to the commander, that unit must have clear sight to its commander which must be more that two experience ranks higher than the said unit.
  • Possible benefits of the decipline-boost:
  • More ordered movement, and faster overland (march) speed (posibly by using the 'average' system mentioned by DarkRaven).
  • Just slightly higher experience gain compared an unassigned group/squad (I'm talking 2-1% here - exclusively considerable in the long term).
  • Improved effectiveness of a "scatter" order (in the case that one gets implemented) in the event that the group/squad encounters artillery fire ("Keep movin' boys! they can only aim at the ground on which you stand!").
  • Improvements on other groupwise orders.
  • More intelligent automatic target selection (by having less confusion - only fire at user designated targets if they are in range, otherwise find something better to shot at - lessen the 'all versus one' behavior on sudden enemy encounters).
  • Explenation of the 'group/squadwise only' restriction:
  • This system is based on the assumption that units who know each other are the most likely to excersise this activety of parsing on knowledge and help each other.
  • And the assumption that an assigned group, or formed squad, executes orders together, and therefore spend more time together, thus getting to know eachother is inevitable.
  • Consequences of this method:
  • The most experienced unit in a group or squad will not get a decipline-boost (that might incresae firepower). Neither will units leaving the group to return to base or repair facility. Mobile arty left behind is unlikely to get any benefit as, at least in my games, the most experienced unit tends to be in the role of MBT or commander.
  • The drawback, I think, outweight the benefits.
  • And speaking of implementation I think that the actual benifits will prove the hardest challenge as the 'in sight' and experience checks are functions that (should) already exist in the code.

Kage Evaluates MeritsEdit

  • QUOTE: "What about if Rookie Pilots were timid drivers and only used 75% of their chassis power plant HP."
  • as it applies directly to warzone, if you had retreat orders and you were an ultra-green tank driver, would you play it safe, going slow around buildings and debris, making sure you don't hit anything, even though the enemy is quickly catching up to you, or would you push your tank to it's limits so you could have a chance of getting out of there alive? i would have no objections to this idea if it didn't limit speed at all times, and would make it more of a "preferred" speed.
  • i believe the above quoted idea is very applicable when that unit is not in battle, and not in a group with less timid drivers (a timid driver in a tank group isn't going to drive slowly when everyone around him is moving fast, soon to leave him behind, nor are they going to slow down for him).
  • i guess what i just said is contradictory, meaning that it is a sign that your idea might need to be looked at in other ways for other implementations. and after thinking it over, the idea of actually having units run into things in the heat of battle a rather effective (and amusing) extension of the veterancy system (not to the extent where green units would run into every obstacle they encounter, but definitely when they're backing up, or turning around corners that they can't see past, etc).
  • i can see how this concept could easily be applied to many aspects of the game, eg. a vtol pilot with higher experience could make higher g-factor turns (up to a maximum number of g's that the vtol could take before breaking apart) than pilots with less experience, resulting in faster turns.
  • i like the experience Discipline-Boost idea, but people would not have increased reaction speed, better eyesight, etc. they would only gain useful knowledge, and would be smarter tactically, but not really any better in battle as far as stats go. that said, wouldn't it be much more accurate to apply it only to unit placement, formations, and other tactical manuevers? otherwise, you could have some hero unit in the middle of a group of greens, and from the hero's experience alone they'd be fighting as if they were several ranks higher, which would considerably offset the game mechanics (making research take a backseat).
  • i think the discipline-boost idea would apply well as a bonus to experience growth. as was said by karma, people would do well to learn from those more experienced soldiers, thus their rate of experience growth would be raised (not to any signifigant extent where players would go out of their way to throw a hero in with the greens so that the greens would learn faster - it would simply be a nice thing to have when it's already available, and the heroes would be much more effective in a group with other high-ranked units).
  • as for a definition of radius... we could calculate a web-pattern - if this unit is close to that unit, and that unit is close to that other unit... meaning it will eliminate radius, and any experienced unit will affect all other units within an appearant group.

Cont. POVsEdit

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.