OpenXcom Forum
Modding => Released Mods => XPiratez => Topic started by: Eddie on November 03, 2016, 05:37:32 pm
-
Is the randomness in the research time adding any value to the game? Because so far I can't think of any. And if it adds no value, why keep it?
I would prefer research to be more like manufacturing, where it displays how many scientist days it needs until completion so you can allocate accordingly. Right now I'm looking at my save files to see how many scientist days I need (It gives me more peace of mind, because I WANT TO KNOW!!!). Displaying that outright in game could be exploited because of the RND applied to research cost. You could simply cancel and restart a project to roll the RND again and get a better result. If the RND is gone, no more exploit and no downside to displaying that value.
Changing this would probably mean lower research times because of less wasted research days, but that can be adjusted in research cost.
Your opinion?
-
No. If anything should be random, it's research. I'd gladly increase randomness if research model was more intricate.
Cancelling would do you no good, since you have no way of telling what the random roll was. And you should NOT know, since research is never a linear and predictable process (unlike manufacturing). Also you'll lose the researched item if research requires it, and will have to spend another one to restart. You can naturally savescum to your heart's content, that's your power as a player, but no part of mechanics.
If you're obsessed with losing research days, research everything with 1 scientist. That way you get maximum time efficiency.
-
It's easy to say how much time will be required to produce a rifle, given the amount and quality of personnel and materials. Any factory which produces anything knows exactly how long it takes to complete the production process.
Now tell me exactly how much time would it take to research a rifle (assuming you don't know it yet), given the amount and quality of personnel and materials. :P
"Gentlemen, our country needs a fusion reactor. How long would it take to invent it?"
"Sir, with our current resources, that would be twelve years and three months."
"Excellent, we'll reserve the money needed to build a couple fusion reactors in the budget for 2029."
Sounds rather silly, no?
EDIT: I've been ninja'd, of course. :P
If you're obsessed with losing research days, research everything with 1 scientist. That way you get maximum time efficiency.
This is actually a very good point.
-
Also you'll lose the researched item if research requires it, and will have to spend another one to restart.
That part I've checked. No, you get the item back if you cancel a research project.
-
Indeed, discoveries are the least foreseeable thing since you never know when someone will go "Ah ah!" and get the breakthrough that will enable the project to be completed. Some things, like designing a new craft, could be planned, given existing knowledge of all the modules, since it is more engineering than actual research (in fact, that's what defense departments do: Open up a call for new something proposals when they identify a need, with a deadline for the weapons companies to reply), but all the fundamentals like researching new technologies to try to understand how the hell they function should be highly random.
What would be cool is a system where you can assign interrogation of certain VIPs to help with a research project. Stuck on your flying development? Ask a guild engineer! Can't figure out voodoo? Ask an Esper!
Having some kind of not-normal, not-flat distribution that has a fairly reliable mean but also the possibility of outright getting stuck, coupled with a mechanic for getting unstuck (researching related tech, interrogating VIPs, reading books/data disks) would be a much better system.
But totally predictable research times, especially as we already have totally predictable breakthroughs ("research X and Y and that'll cover the pre-reqs for Z, now you can research it") makes no sense. Research sometimes fails or takes forever, and what if none of your brainer thinks of Z to make the research proposal, uh? Research times should be random and research completion should randomly open access to other research projects instead of 100% of the time.
Something like:
1 - Start research project X. It takes a random number of scientist-days, with a small chance every day that further progress is impossible. If you get stuck (and the lab should report it in the progress, like it does for Excellent and other statuses), go to * without cancelling the stuck project.
2 - Complete research project X. This was your last dependency for both project Y and Z.
3 - You get a chance of getting Y or Z as available projects, a chance of getting both and a chance of neither.
3a - You got Y, when finishing the research of Y, Z has a chance of becoming available. If you fail that, see *.
3b - Same but with Y and Z swapped
3c - You got both, lucky you!
3d - You got neither, see *.
* - Start another project. This can be VIPs, data disks, books, etc. that have no chance to fail and have a chance of "unsticking" research projects, and sparking new ideas (ie making a research project for which all dependencies are done but which wasn't available yet available). Different things can be set to only being able to spark and unblock certain projects (like an engineer won't spark or unblock voodoo, only construction related stuff, similarly, an esper won't spark or unblock construction, but will for voodoo. Old Earth Books can spark/unblock any early-mid game tech, Liber Occultus can spark/unblock voodoo or demon stuff, Data Disks can work for anything, etc.)
All the chances mentioned above would be influenced by the number of scientists working on the project: The more scientists, the more likely you are that one of them has an idea for a following project. The more scientists you have, the less likely you are of getting stuck. This becomes an incentive to put more scientists on a project, even though it will waste a few scientist-days on the last day.
-
This becomes an incentive to put more scientists on a project, even though it will waste a few scientist-days on the last day.
Excuse me, but you really need no extra incentives to throw more people at a project - it gets researched faster, and that's what counts. Truth be told, it's kinda crazy that you finish research faster for each scientist added, 1:1 - in reality, this isn't nearly as simple; to use a simple analogy, if digging a grave takes one man 100 minutes, throwing 100 people at the task won't result in grave being dug in a minute... However this all would require a complex research engine, and I'm not sure if XCOM is the right game for such an engine.
-
Yeah sure progress shouldn't be a 1:1 thing with numbers of researchers. And if it weren't, then the need for further incentives increases.
Also, faster completion is rarely an issue in Piratez or XCom Files, since you're more trudging along in the tech forest than eagerly looking forward to climbing the tech tree like in Vanilla (where getting, say, plasma weapons was a OMG I need this NOW, compared to researching stuff that unlocks stuff, or weapons that you don't intend to use because they, along with 5 other weapons, will lead to your next weapon). In both mods, researching 10 things at once and not wasting research days is often more valuable than researching 1 thing at a time 10 times faster and wasting research. Especially since research is sort of limited compared to vanilla where building another lab and hiring 50 more scientists is a pretty easy thing to do.
Using 100 people gets you 100 graves in 100 minutes, or 50 graves in 50 minutes if they can work in pairs. That kind of "parallel work" is pretty much what I did in Piratez and XCom Files. You only have few scientists, so losing even 1 scientist-day feels like a major loss. This is amplified by the "many short projects" situation in both mods compared to the "few long projects" of vanilla XCom, since you get more opportunity to waste brainpower.
This is especially true when tidying up lose ends and encountering the possibility of over-staffing since you have no idea how long a project is unless you look in the ruleset/your save. For example, using 20 brainers on projects that takes 5-15 brainers-day, twice, versus doing the 2 projects with 10 each: Waste 5-15 twice for a total of 10-30 and be done in two days, versus 0-10 total by doing both in parallel, with the possibility of getting one or both in a single day any ways.
So even in the current situation, there is a good reason to spread your resources on different projects.
-
what about this
1) project takes 100 scientist days to be completed, which is unknown to the player
2) player assigns 10 scientist to project, which is known to the player
3) every day it adds 50% - 150% to the project (5 to 15 points), unknown to the player
4) "Progress" is being displayed
4a) None <25%, no chance
4b) Slow 25%-50%, no chance to have a daily breakthrough
4c) Average 50%-75%, 10% to have a daily breakthrough
4d) Good 75% - 100%, 30% to have a daily breakthrough
4e) Excellent >100%, 60% to have daily breakthrough
-
By breakthrough, do you mean the 150% day or just finishing the thing? Or something I didn't think of?
-
Yeah, that would need to be clarified.
Also, the current random duration with fixed scientist output is functionally the sea as fixed duration with random output. I'd agree that random output is maybe more like research, but if the effect is the same, it doesn't really need to be changed.
-
I think Bladum had in mind something like in Master of Orion 2: as progress on an advance reaches a certain threshold, there is a daily chance of instantly finishing it. The chance steadily grows with % of nominal cost completed, but it takes a lot of research points for it to reach 100% (assuming that breakthrough didn't happen yet).
-
breakthrough is daily chance to have research completed and technology given to player.
which means with good luck you can have it research even at 50% but with bad luck even at 150% of progress.
Idea of this system is that you may have something low risk / high risk to research (optional new parameter for research). Most basic it may be used for low risk = human technology, high risk = alien technology.
So there are two random factors here:
- how good scientist are performing - 50% - 150% of assigned people to project
- how risky is the area of being researched, there may be different threshold levels for different research. high risk = more curvy, low risk = more linear. Above i just gave example.
-
The original game had a system for research efficiency (100 people for one day not as efficient as 1 person for 100 days), I guess OpenXcom already implements it the same way.
-
Bladum, I would actually like a more complicated system, but it would be a huge change. Still, let me expand on it for fun:
Science teams!
A science team is a group of researchers working on a particular project. It is actually a roster with several positions. In order for it to make sense, scientists would need special skills, like in X-Com Apocalypse: Science (research of their own field) and Administration.
A team consists of:
- Project Leader. The most important person. Their Science skill generates research points as normal. They also increase the whole team's research output by a certain percentage, depending on Administration. You can only have one in a project.
- Project Coordinator. Only generates half the research points they would as a leader or Researcher, but slightly increases Researchers' efficiency with their Administration skill. The more Researchers, the lesser the bonus. You can have as many Project Coordinators as you like.
- Researcher. Simply generates research points with their Science. Doesn't use Administration. You can have as many Researchers as you like.
- Lab Technician. Doesn't actually generate research points, but uses their Science skill to prevent research setbacks (the lower the skill, the greater the chance of something going wrong). Doesn't use Administration. You can have as many Lab Technicians as you like.
I suppose it's rather poorly designed at this point, math-wise, but it's just for fun, right?
-
Hehe but then you'd end up putting scientists with good administration skills as project leaders and that'd be unrealistic;P
Project leaders should boost other scientists by their science score and coordinators by their admin score. That'd be more realistic. Project leaders come up with grand ideas and are inspiring others, the coordinators actually are the pivotal support people. I like what you did with techs (or research assistants?). Having good people there does make the research much more dependable.
-
What if from time to time the research team asked for money to buy a specific piece of equipment, or maybe items to disassemble and examine during research. You could then grant or deny the scientists request. Granting money / item requests gives the project a randomized boost.
For example:
Researching Plasma Granade, 20% scientist-hours through.
Lab request window pops up asking 1x plasma pistol clip and 1x plasma rifle clip to disassemble in order to gain some insight on plasma containment.
You partially grant the request (have no plasma rifle clip).
Get a +5% chance of immedately completing the project for 2 days. (instead of the 10% you would get for a complete grant)
Or, alternatively, you get a flat (randomized)% advancement on the project.
Every project would have a list of possible requests, let's say plasma granade research can request:
- $25k "Modified lab equipment", 5% to 20% boost
- 15x HE Granade "We need parts to use as detonators and primers in experiments", 5% to 30% boost
- 2x Plasma Pistol Clip "We need to compare with parts using similar technology", 10% to 45% boost
- etc...
Maybe have the frequency of requests increase with the number of scientists assigned, representing the will to solve the problem by throwing money at it.
-
Yes Arthanor, thanks for the comment. I was hoping you'd show up :)
Stepbystep, right, why not... But then again, research is so fast that I'm not sure there's enough space for such sub-projects. Or it would require an even more revolutionary system, where... everything works differently :)
-
Stepbystep, right, why not... But then again, research is so fast that I'm not sure there's enough space for such sub-projects. Or it would require an even more revolutionary system, where... everything works differently :)
...and we would end up creating mods for crying out loud! ;D
(sorry I couldn't resist ::) )
-
Yes Arthanor, thanks for the comment. I was hoping you'd show up :)
I love research,it plays a pivotal role in pacing the game and that's also where I'd fit in XCOM if it actually happened. Although I'd like to think I'd grab a laser rifle to help with base defenses, honestly I don't know what I'd do ;P But talking about research is fun :)
@stepbystep:
I think this kind of small purchases is included in the cost of the maintenance for both labs and scientists. Scientists don't make 40k/month (Man! I wish though..! Why don't people care more about science? Then I could do my field work in Hawaii! 8) ).
Using items is sort of what I was going for when suggesting the getting stuck/unstuck idea, but it could also be that having completed certain non-necessary projects could give bonus to others. Like if you have researched alien power sources (which are famously explosive), you get less chance of getting stuck while researching the alien grenades. More interplay than just dependencies would indeed be nice in the research, but that's not something done in any game I know of.. it's almost always tech trees. But xcom is very research centric, so it might be a good place to start.
For all these things, we have to ask: what does it add to the game? I like the possibility of getting stuck and of not getting new projects because you're not always guaranteed to get the grand idea and sometimes you have to make do with the side idea, which may well turn out to be grand once it grows. This creates a more erratic progress (bouts of discoveries and dry times) rather than the deterministic research we have (and I'd call at worst being 50% late on actual useable deliverables a really efficient science team). This makes the game more replayable in that maybe the first time you were lucky and got far with what you wanted but the next you have to make do with something else. A bit like how the factions you encounter shape your progress in Piratez (something I love): the development you get and where you get stuck would shape your game too.
Also, getting stuck and not getting projects would add a new value to some items/VIP even after you exhaust their freebies: you hunt them so they can explain something to you when you get stuck. And it adds motivation: you're looking for those things for a reason, not just for progress for progress' sake. It's the one thing I liked with Piratez endgame: I was shaping alien missions by trying to cause retaliations to get VIPs and armor parts instead of just responding to whatever missions were thrown at me. The more the player interacts with the world instead of reacting, the more satisfying the game is. And that's one thing I liked with XCOM Files: you continuously shape the world since what you encounter depends on your missions.
All that to say: research could do awesome things to XCom I think. And it's hard to think of a game where it is more applicable, except maybe civ types.
-
What I would like is to come up with something that makes reasearch time a little more predictable. Vanilla has such a system, but it doesn't work for research projects that can be finished in a day.
And for all those saying "you can't predict research!": Yes, you can predict research, to a degree. You know that finding a flammable material to put on your arrows to produce flame arrows won't take as long as designing a new interceptor.
-
...and we would end up creating mods for crying out loud! ;D
(sorry I couldn't resist ::) )
I'm afraid a mod wouldn't cut it, it would be a completely new part of the game! :)
@Arthanor: So if I understand your ideas, we could make something like introducing research fields. Stuff like for example medicine, energy weapons, craft propulsion, voodoo: destruction and so on. Every research in the game is assigned one (or more) field. And some enemies give you info on specific fields... But I haven't thought of an actual mechanics for this.
@Eddie: Then maybe you would like an additional indicator of research cost? For researches which cost up to 5 it says "Trivial", 6-20 is "Easy", 21-50 is "Average" and so on.
-
And for all those saying "you can't predict research!": Yes, you can predict research, to a degree. You know that finding a flammable material to put on your arrows to produce flame arrows won't take as long as designing a new interceptor.
Unless you've never even heard about flame arrows, and designing a new interceptor is just a matter of reshuffling known components in an interceptor designer software, then pushing the 'wizard' button to calculate all the stuff. Outraugeous? Maybe, but think Star Trek :) Also while you could say, in relative terms, that the former will take less time than the latter, due to sheer complexity difference, this would be a pure guesswork to ascertain how much time, in absolute terms.
It also bears reminding that your examples concern engineering (planning and protoryping), not research (theory & experimentation). XCOM doesn't differentiate between these two (and lumps data analysis and intelligence into the same model, too), true, but none the less we cannot reductio to engineering.
-
I'd like to see the capacity to upgrade our sciencey girls, from brainers to scientists, with however many steps in between as we're willing to add. Brainers are smart, but not actually trained, while scientists are well trained and smart and expensive as well. Getting new girls through the black market would always get you brainers, training them would be your job, for lack of a better location, the workshop would be a good place for it, though how runts would be involved boggles the mind.
On the subject of the runts, they could be upgraded too, a runt is supposed to be basically cheap labor, inexpensive, but in serious need of oversight and very clear instructions, with a little bit of schooling, they could be trained labor, and with more they could be true engineers.
I figure having an upgraded worker, science or workshop, would provide a bonus, even if the others in the project are the most basic type, one scientist/engineer could provide enough authority and direction to be noticeable, at least.
-
@Eddie: Then maybe you would like an additional indicator of research cost? For researches which cost up to 5 it says "Trivial", 6-20 is "Easy", 21-50 is "Average" and so on.
I would find something like that helpful. Example where I would have needed that: damaged grav unit. Early research topics take more or less the same amount of time, except for the damaged grav unit, which takes a lot longer. On my second playthough I know how long it takes, and haven't researched it so far because I know how many other useful research I can get done in that time.
-
I have voiced a similar idea too. However, there is GUI problem; perhaps this should be displayed when you open up a research to start or cancel it? The available research list won't feasibly fit any extra indicators IMO.
Extra points for color: white (0), blue (trivial), green (easy), yellow (normal), orange (challenging), red (hard), purple (extreme). Naturally the ranges would have to be set as globals, as the cost would wildly range from mod to mod (Piratez have very low research costs compared to vanilla).
As a guideline, in Piratez I'd set:
Trivial: 5 or less
Easy: 6-10
Normal: 11-20
Challenging: 21-35
Hard: 36-60
Extreme: 61+
-
+1 from me on that. Definately an improvement.
-
How about this?
-
Some indication of rxpected effort would be cool, yes. That doesn't make research predictable. Like you know that the expected result of rolling two dice is 7, but that doesn't make you able to guess your next dice roll.
The sorting is a great idea, Meridian and it is something your research team should be able to give you. Pushing it, we could add a display in the window where we assign scientists that gives some feedback dependent on "cost / # assigned", sort of like the profit indicator for manufacturing.
-
I don't like the idea of sorting, I'd rather check the topic that interests me and only then maybe change my decision based on difficulty; can't imagine a situation where I'd go and think, "now I'm going to research something easy", except maybe on a 1-brainer base. I know it's a matter of perspective, and it's surealy a solid improvement, but not the thing I had in mind...
EDIT:
I'd add one extra line on research difficulty (small font) where the red line is in the attached picture.
-
The filtering is handy for "low-hanging fruits" that you might not realize are quick (either they popped up a while ago and you forget what "tier" they were in, or they are quick for their "tier") as well as tidying up the "tech forest" occasionally. I could see myself using it and trying to go through projects in order of how quick they are to complete (exhaust the trivial ones, move to easy, etc.) if I don't really know where I'm headed (ie when not using the tech tree viewer to beeline for something specific, which I tend to avoid).
That said, as a general use tool, getting the info in the project starting window as you suggested would be great as well. (Was going to say better, but no, I think they're complementary. One is a warning of the project length when you want a specific project, the other gives you projects when you want a given length)
-
It's filtering, not sorting.
-
I also agree that filtering is a good idea, but shouldn't be the only way to access this information. I think Dioxine's idea with adding a line in the project window should be enough, if feasible. My initial idea was an additional text column on the list, buy it'd never fit...
-
It's filtering, not sorting.
Right, I edited my post. They are functionally the same though, you can filter for trivial first, then easy, once you don't have any trivial ones etc. The only differences are that sorting would display everything at once and order things within categories, neither of which are really needed.
So in short: I think this is a useful feature when you don't know a tech tree and don't want to spoil it.
-
If everyone but me finds it useful, I guess it is useful ;) But I'd like that extra line in the topic window too - I think it's ellegant.
-
So in short: I think this is a useful feature when you don't know a tech tree and don't want to spoil it.
This.
While the tech tree viewer is great for debugging, I really don't like the fact a player can access it. Hey, maybe make it a debug mode function?
-
Agreed - I'm really trying to prevent myself from using the viewer outside of how many prisoners I need to keep of each type - and even that irks me a little bit.
-
Turning on debug mode is a matter of pressing one hotkey... who can't resist now, won't be able to resist anyway.
In my opinion, it's a useful functionality and only very remotely a cheat... modders even provide the tech trees with their mods (e.g. FMP or Hardmode). Many games come with techtreeviewer built in (e.g. Civilization).
-
Turning on debug mode is a matter of pressing one hotkey... who can't resist now, won't be able to resist anyway.
I don't think it's true at all. That's like saying that seeing all map is just a shortcut away, so who wouldn't do it, right? And I think the temptation is much greater in battle.
Also remember that most players don't even know bug mode exists.
In my opinion, it's a useful functionality and only very remotely a cheat... modders even provide the tech trees with their mods (e.g. FMP or Hardmode). Many games come with techtreeviewer built in (e.g. Civilization).
Yes, but Civ is a different type of game; it doesn't have the adventuring component that Piratez has. Civ wasn't designed to block the info from the player, while X-com kinda was, even if at this year we all know the tree by heart.
I think it should at least be enabled by an option and adequately described.
EDIT: If the viewer was limited to only show the next level of researches (directly descending from a tech you have), I'd be perfectly okay with it.
-
I think it should at least be enabled by an option and adequately described.
That's planned, after oxce+ grows up from its "proto" stage, all visible/tangible non-vanilla stuff will be behind an option or ruleset.
Maybe as early as Q1 2017.
-
That's planned, after oxce+ grows up from its "proto" stage, all visible/tangible non-vanilla stuff will be behind an option or ruleset.
Maybe as early as Q1 2017.
Thanks, that sounds very reasonable.
-
I have a suggestion for the research tree, to make it a bit more "fool proof". Items that need a special facility to be produced (for example workshop) should need this facility as a requirement for their research. This would mean that for example Guerilla outfit now needs workshop researched before it is unlocked for research.
-
Been there, done that, but it's not always as simple as it sounds; for example, to do it for Guerilla, it would be neccessary to make a workaround, since it's dependant on Kevlar Weaving OR Spartan Booty, and OR cannot be used in conjuction with AND. So <(Weaving OR Spartan) AND Workshop> is too complex a clause for this engine to implement easily. Also, not having the facility spurns players interest for having it. I'll look for items that fit the bill. Or better yet, you could prepare a list of suggestions :)
-
With a bit more back end clutter, you can have:
- Kevlar Clothing (free, hidden tech) depend on Kevlar Weaving OR Spartan Body
- Guerilla outfit depend on Kevlar Clothing AND Workshop
The player won't know that it's not "(A or B) and C", and it'll prevent odd occurrences. That being said, it's totally understandable that the brainers can come up with a prototype armor while the runts are just like: "Nope, no way right now we can produce this on any usable scale" since they're lacking the tools. You don't need to be able to mass produce something to come up with the idea of it.
-
I just don't like the back end clutter, you know. Takes time and energy.
-
Fully understand that, especially with Piratez's "tech forest". That's why I gave an example of why it could make sense to work the way it currently does :)