Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series



Message

Mad Russian -> Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/13/2013 11:45:33 AM)

With some of 'our' bigger issues taken care of it's time to relook at Sudden Death.

We've waited awhile to redo SD for a couple of reasons. We wanted you guys to have played it enough to give some constructive criticism. Something other than, "It's BROKE....FIX IT!" As well as for us to continue to look at the comments and try to get a better feel for what is broken and what does need fixed.

We want to correct this but we only want to do this one last time. The code that determines SD is quite involved and not something to be tinkered with mildly.

With that in mind, what needs to go into Sudden Death considerations.

Here is what I have so far:

1) There needs to be a continuation option. After SD triggers you may continue to play if you choose to.

2) The scoring needs to be more refined. If the enemy is on the ropes the gamer should get most/all of his unsecured Victory Points (VP).

3) The trigger is currently set at 70%. That trigger number may need looked at. It could be raised to say 80%.


Let us know.

Good Hunting.

MR



Elfastball7 -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/13/2013 12:00:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

With some of 'our' bigger issues taken care of it's time to relook at Sudden Death.

We've waited awhile to redo SD for a couple of reasons. We wanted you guys to have played it enough to give some constructive criticism. Something other than, "It's BROKE....FIX IT!" As well as for us to continue to look at the comments and try to get a better feel for what is broken and what does need fixed.

We want to correct this but we only want to do this one last time. The code that determines SD is quite involved and not something to be tinkered with mildly.

With that in mind, what needs to go into Sudden Death considerations.

Here is what I have so far:

1) There needs to be a continuation option. After SD triggers you may continue to play if you choose to.

2) The scoring needs to be more refined. If the enemy is on the ropes the gamer should get most/all of his unsecured Victory Points (VP).

3) The trigger is currently set at 70%. That trigger number may need looked at. It could be raised to say 80%.


Let us know.

Good Hunting.

MR



A continuation option sounds awesome!



ParaB -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/13/2013 12:16:12 PM)

My suggestion would be that if SD kicks in the respective side loses all objectives within 2km of enemy forces.

This would prevent the silly situation where an attack manages to get a unit on an objective, gets wiped out in the process and still "holds" the objective due to SD kicking in.

Add an option (for the winning side) to continue until the scenario ends and everybody should be happy.




76mm -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/13/2013 12:38:59 PM)

I think the trigger should go to 75%, and that it should only apply if your own forces have not fallen below some threshhold (50-60%). In other words, if the enemy is down to 24.9%. but I'm at 26%, SD should not apply, at least not in the same way).

I also think that if SD applies, all Victory Locations within two hexes of the winning side should go to that side.

The next question of course is to what extent all of the victory conditions in the existing scenarios will have to be revised...



Mad Russian -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/13/2013 12:44:31 PM)

None of the Victory Conditions should have to be revised. I just went through and did a revision on them. That was in preparation to get SD to working correctly.

The work done to the scenarios this update was in preparation for the SD changes to come. They were all revisited and balanced with a better perspective towards the end of game score and how we attain that.

Time I earned my keep around here.

Good Hunting.

MR



Kommissar -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/13/2013 3:11:52 PM)

Not so much a suggestion as a question . . . In the Soviet campaign, I constantly have a situation in which I have decimated the NATO side and reduced their forces to below 30% of their initial force while maintaining my own force above 80%. In this kind of situation in which SD is triggered, shouldn't I get by default all the VPs? My force is pretty much intact with little time or expenditure needed to bring my force back up to 100%. The enemy has been forced to abandon the battle field and all his fallen out units since they can't recover them. He also has abandoned the battlefield and by implication any VPs he occupied. I don't understand why in this kind of circumstance in which SD is triggered I'm not given a total victory type condition.

Also in cases of encirclement, the enemy isn't necessarily going to be all that successful in leaving especially if he's in a pocket and my forces are nipping at his heels. If the game is automatically going to assume a successful general pullout because of SD trigger, shouldn't the game also calculate how much of that 30% actually did manage to get out and survive instead of assuming all of them did?



trebcourie -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/13/2013 7:05:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kommissar

Not so much a suggestion as a question . . . In the Soviet campaign, I constantly have a situation in which I have decimated the NATO side and reduced their forces to below 30% of their initial force while maintaining my own force above 80%. In this kind of situation in which SD is triggered, shouldn't I get by default all the VPs? My force is pretty much intact with little time or expenditure needed to bring my force back up to 100%. The enemy has been forced to abandon the battle field and all his fallen out units since they can't recover them. He also has abandoned the battlefield and by implication any VPs he occupied. I don't understand why in this kind of circumstance in which SD is triggered I'm not given a total victory type condition.


That's the rub. If you're defending, for instance, as the WGs are in the Soviet campaign, just defend all the way forward and get wiped out quickly. You'd lose all of your loss VPs but would still hold all of the VLs.

Unfortunately, I don't have a good answer for MR's exact question. Perhaps we should be granted VPs for the remaining victory locations, maybe based on time remaining?

Yeah, maybe that's my suggestion. If more than half of the time is remaining, we get XX% of the VPs for the VLs we don't currently have. Then the scale can slide so that, if you hit SD 1 minute before the scheduled end, you don't get any more VPs.

Of course, maybe this should just apply to the side on the offensive unless it's a meeting engagement. Or maybe it can be further scaled based on the percentage of your force remaining since an attacking force that has already culminated, but squeaks out a SD victory, can't exploit and seize the remaining VP locations. Maybe it should slide from 75% to 25%, assuming 25% is the new SD trigger.

So...
Unconquered [by the victorious side] VP locations * (2 * (percentage of time remaining or 1, whichever is less)) * (2 * ((remaining force VPs -25% of starting VPs) / (75% of starting force VPs) = VPs awarded to winner

Pardon my math. I think it says what I want it to say.



budd -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 12:00:10 AM)

what i know is that all but 2 of the scenarios i played ended with the AI hitting SD of 70% with as much as 4 hours left in a medium sized scenario's. All were played as NATO and most were a contested result when i didn't get to the VP's although most of the time i was clearly winning.

I like to see the SD trigger at 75% and if there is a 15% or less difference in the remaining force size for both sides that SD doesn't trigger. So if the AI hits 25% and i'm at 40% the SD trigger doesn't kick in we play until time is up. I'm not sure i want credit if the AI is sitting on some VP's and my forces aren't close to them when they hit the SD, maybe all unoccupied VP's or contested VP's should go to the winner and there should be a choice to continue although i probably wouldn't if it was really one sided and i was just trying to grab some VP's to get a better score so maybe there should be something to get all the VP's awarded if the difference in force size is greater than.....hmmm I don't know......maybe twice as much. If i have 80% and the AI has 40% or less i get all the VP's no matter what.



CptHowdy -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 12:36:02 AM)

I like budd's idea and would go in that direction. kinda like volleyball or ping pong. yeah you win if get to a certain point total but you have to be winning by at least 2 to win the game. can I say I really won if the enemy is at 30% and im at 35%?? I would also suggest that you need to keep a unit in a VP to be able to claim its points. just passing through it should revert it back to neutral.



budd -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 1:13:11 AM)

my numbers are messed up above, what i meant was when the SD triggers if i have twice the percentage of force or more of the AI i get all the VP's no matter what. don't know where i got 80% 40% from. So 25% to 50% in above example, it might need to be higher though, maybe 2 1/2 times to get all the VP's awarded if not 2 1/2 times then some system to award unoccupied VP's and contested VP's to the winner.If the AI occupies a VP and its not contested the player shouldn't get the points.



76mm -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 1:26:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CptHowdy
I would also suggest that you need to keep a unit in a VP to be able to claim its points. just passing through it should revert it back to neutral.


Not sure that I agree with this, or do you mean only if S/D is triggered?



Mad Russian -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 1:27:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CptHowdy

I would also suggest that you need to keep a unit in a VP to be able to claim its points. just passing through it should revert it back to neutral.


That would depend on where the VL was in my opinion. If it's 10km behind your front lines why would you lose it just because you didn't garrison it?

Good Hunting.

MR



budd -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 1:35:21 AM)

im not sure about this either. Wouldn't want to worry about occupying a wayback VP and wouldn't want the AI to have to do it either.



MikeAP -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 1:59:33 AM)

My immediate reaction is that destroying a majority of the enemy forces should result in a decisive victory. This is probably off of the board for the devs though, and we know that victory conditions are set within the scenario.

Alternatively, I would say that SD would be a toggle similar to Limited Staff Rule. If victory conditions are tied to a scenario then 70% destruction of the enemy would have no bearing on the scenarios outcome. it should be strictly tied to whether I met the scenario conditions.

That's my suggestion. SD is a toggle, and players can play until they've met the scenario win/lose conditions, regardless of how much they've killed.




Fieval -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 6:13:21 AM)

How about a calculation of relative strengths around the VP in question?

If the opponent has the shattered remnants of a unit sitting on a VP, and you have several units bearing down and within a given range (say 4 hexes?), Then you are awarded the VP.

This means you wont be given victory hexes that are an unreasonable distance away, but in areas you are likely to seize anyway the points are yours.

Basically the enemy has withdrawn to form a better defensive line.

Of course, this also would apply to your own troops... so could get tricky if the opponent is strong in one area of the field and being smashed elsewhere!!





deadsunwheel -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 11:31:26 AM)

It would seem that the over all assessment is that option 2 should be the fix looked into. In principle the SD trigger is fine. The problem is that it can feel like a win is being stolen from you when the other side collapses before you can exploit their weakness. I really like the idea of a VP shift based on the relative difference in remaining forces. Unfortunately that sounds like it will be the hardest fix to code.



CapnDarwin -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 12:32:42 PM)

We had hit this pretty hard in the original topic and a similar result is forming here. The current plan when we get to 2.04 is in 3 parts.

1. Add a Pre-Game option for Multiplayer games to have SD off. Both sides fight to time limit or until one side surrenders.
2. In the Single player games, we will add an option to the SD popup dialog which will give the player the option to continue on until the time limit or they end the mission. Your final score will be based on everything you kill and claim up to the time limit.
3. We will be revising the current SD model to include a better surrender/withdrawal resolution and also look at relative force strength, time and locations when awarding remaining VPs. The better off your force and the more time on the clock at SD the more remaining VPs you will be awarded. This will stop the one jeep hold a VP with a company of tanks 1km away syndrome.

This should solve the SD issues. If you like the mechanic you can use the new and improved model and if you don't you can click a button a play on. About the best of both worlds we can get. [:D]



Emx77 -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 12:39:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin

We had hit this pretty hard in the original topic and a similar result is forming here. The current plan when we get to 2.04 is in 3 parts.

1. Add a Pre-Game option for Multiplayer games to have SD off. Both sides fight to time limit or until one side surrenders.
2. In the Single player games, we will add an option to the SD popup dialog which will give the player the option to continue on until the time limit or they end the mission. Your final score will be based on everything you kill and claim up to the time limit.
3. We will be revising the current SD model to include a better surrender/withdrawal resolution and also look at relative force strength, time and locations when awarding remaining VPs. The better off your force and the more time on the clock at SD the more remaining VPs you will be awarded. This will stop the one jeep hold a VP with a company of tanks 1km away syndrome.

This should solve the SD issues. If you like the mechanic you can use the new and improved model and if you don't you can click a button a play on. About the best of both worlds we can get. [:D]


Excellent. That is it.



76mm -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 12:48:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin
we will add an option to the SD popup dialog which will give the player the option to continue on until the time limit or they end the mission. Your final score will be based on everything you kill and claim up to the time limit.


Just to clarify, which player will get the option--presumably the winning player?



MikeAP -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 1:17:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin

2. In the Single player games, we will add an option to the SD popup dialog which will give the player the option to continue on until the time limit or they end the mission. Your final score will be based on everything you kill and claim up to the time limit.



This is good.



CapnDarwin -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 2:29:56 PM)

@76mm, it is a single player game, so you can decide if you want to play past the SD point.



CptHowdy -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 5:10:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

quote:

ORIGINAL: CptHowdy

I would also suggest that you need to keep a unit in a VP to be able to claim its points. just passing through it should revert it back to neutral.


That would depend on where the VL was in my opinion. If it's 10km behind your front lines why would you lose it just because you didn't garrison it?

Good Hunting.

MR


then why have one 10km behind the lines? what purpose does it serve besides free points? is it something meant to be fought over? a goal for the enemy to reach? if we just kill em all then we get the VP anyway(at least that is what some are suggesting) lets make the VL mean something.



76mm -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 5:39:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin
@76mm, it is a single player game, so you can decide if you want to play past the SD point.


I haven't played any PBEM+ game yet, doesn't S/D apply against human opponents?



CapnDarwin -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 6:12:43 PM)

Right now SD applies to both players in a multi player game and will end the game when triggered.



76mm -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 6:19:01 PM)

sorry, then I don't understand what you mean about it being a single-player game?



CapnDarwin -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 6:44:52 PM)

When you play versus the AI, that is single player and the option to override SD will be presented at that time. In multiplayer (PBEM) the option to use SD is set in the pre-game options so both players know.



76mm -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 7:17:55 PM)

ah, so in multiplayer you can turn S/D on/off before the game, but cannot override it during the game? sorry if I'm being a bit dense...



JiminyJickers -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 7:36:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Capn Darwin

We had hit this pretty hard in the original topic and a similar result is forming here. The current plan when we get to 2.04 is in 3 parts.

1. Add a Pre-Game option for Multiplayer games to have SD off. Both sides fight to time limit or until one side surrenders.
2. In the Single player games, we will add an option to the SD popup dialog which will give the player the option to continue on until the time limit or they end the mission. Your final score will be based on everything you kill and claim up to the time limit.
3. We will be revising the current SD model to include a better surrender/withdrawal resolution and also look at relative force strength, time and locations when awarding remaining VPs. The better off your force and the more time on the clock at SD the more remaining VPs you will be awarded. This will stop the one jeep hold a VP with a company of tanks 1km away syndrome.

This should solve the SD issues. If you like the mechanic you can use the new and improved model and if you don't you can click a button a play on. About the best of both worlds we can get. [:D]


That sounds perfect, thanks.



CapnDarwin -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 8:05:12 PM)

@76mm, I think you got it now. [:)]



Mad Russian -> RE: Sudden Death Ending Suggestions (11/14/2013 8:10:02 PM)

I believe that both sides would have to agree on the override as well.

Good Hunting.

MR



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.609375