Non-deterministic Research

[TH300]

Non-deterministic research

Related ideas:

- Technology Create By Usage Over Time Of Stuff
- Infinite Technology(weapons Part)


Description:

In outpost2 (and most other rts games) research is deterministic, i.e. you start a research and you know, that after a certain time you will have a certain new technology that gives you certain advantages. This is one aspect which allows to use the same research order every game.

Now what if research wasn't deterministic? the player couldn't be sure to have certain advantages after a certain research. The player would have to adept to what comes out of research.

Of course there would still be some limits for the outcome, i.e. if you research a new weapon, you won't get a technology that improves the productiveness of your agridomes. Instead the properties of the weapon could vary, so it could have a higher firerate / less firepower than the default.

Maybe the time for a research could not only depend on scientists assigned and morale. It could end earlier than normal, but the outcome wouldn't be as good as normal.
The results could be better if specialists were assigned to research.


What do you think?

[dm-horus]

ive heard of no game (and if there is one out there, theres a reason i havent heard of it)  using this type of research method. it sounds annoying. it pretty much removes the element of balance and makes the game more like a series dice throws - the person who has the best luck with research gets to win. It sounds interesting and innovative, but i dont like it. Maybe it could be used in another area of the/a game? (but definately not op2).

[TH300]

It can still be balanced. I don't want to make it completely random, just so that it becomes more realistic. In real life you don't know how much faster your tanks will be, before the actual speed upgrade research is done. Maybe the scientists don't see some possibilities etc.

It would still be fair, because when the research takes longer, you will get a better result and vice versa. Its just so you don't know before, how long it will take. If it finishes earlier, you have a slightly worse tech than other players, but you can start earlier with another topic, and maybe later your scientists find out that they can still improve the tech and then you get a second chance.

[dm-horus]

nobody wants an rts game to be real life. if it were, setting up a building should take months. this type of research is interesting but putting it in op2 is just crazy. nothing would be predictable, nothing would be certain. that is fine in certain places or in small amounts but with something as important as main research, it would just piss people off.

people expect things to behave a certain way and when they dont, they really dont like it. im not saying this isnt a cool idea but im pretty sure players would be irate or simply not play it.

[Freeza-CII]

Even if you did that there would be patterns that would make weapons for rushes and long stand offs.  Plus If you did do your research this way the description alone would be enough to tell people what its going to do.  Now if its going to be research with no description and the name of the research doesnt sync up with that is outputted then i think that would be a major problem.  I think you would be better off with adding to the exsisting research tree or moddifiying it for any new weapons or buildings or chassis.

[omagaalpha]

Actual think the idea is good idea for cyou an't have very plan out statergy as much well. Make player think more in game when you are doing it.
 It throw lot more uncerteity into the loops. Instead of for insteait  I reaserch microwave I get all potential immenfiately.
Is more of research and get half of what could of then has research other technolgy and make do until scietistic say hey figure out way make it better. Also make so can always improve stuff as time goes by.
Wreakage vechicle put in give vaule to try wreack fall enemy vehivle scan by scout scan it give way to stuff your scientist check make they did not have better.

For those love say compare idea to technology. Here one if don't do something like this then it make more like red alert, warcraft 1,2,3, and more that don't know about. Get rid feel when step 1 complete go step 2 type stuff.

[TH300]

I don't see why players would want the exact same techtree over and over again.
Real good players must be able to adept to different situations, and its not like I want to disadvantage players randomly.

[BlackBox]

I think if you add something like this, it should definitely not be part of the default set of rules. (make it something you can turn on and off).

Personally I think it creates a lot of 'chance' thus strategy might be less of a factor.

[omagaalpha]

Only reasoin see why is op2 reseach tree set time research thing is so can think head what research plan stragegy out before game. Yes cool more stategy that has plan for instead if don't good of weapon or maybe get better weapon then expected.

Point out also people out there want keep game almost exact like outpost 2 instead of try find way make game challege and also might make more fun even quote been done another game.

 

[croxis]

There was a game with this kind of research - Alpha Centauri (the best 4X game me thinks) and its quite fun to have on imho.

I think this kind of option would be most effective if the specialization thing I talked about was used.  A player could allocate what % of research points will be used for what areas (heavy weapons, light weapons, spaceship, mining, etc etc etc whatever).  Perhaps this could be done on a per lab basis?

Doing that will still give players some control over the direction of the research but there is still the blind factor that the player must prepare for.  

Maybe if there is a research tech path then one of the techs on that branch would make deterministic research available?

[Freeza-CII]

points for research that sounds bad.  The way you research things now it good because it takes time and requires scis.  and with enough time you can get every thing.  Making the research so you dont know what your getting sounds a bit off i mean if your researching some thing you have to expect what your going to get out of it based on a hypothesis or Theroy.  its not like Hey lets just start pushing these 2 peices of equipment together with a fusion generator and add a parabol.  Think we will call this weapon the falingendingen.

[croxis]

Sadly the transformation of science into reality doesn't work like that, in real life anyways =P.  Science is driven by failures in experiments more than success.

There ARE points used in op2 research.  Each scientist contributes so many points to the research per mark, so the more scientists there are, the more points that are added to the research (thats what those numbers mean above the research bar.  Higher end research needs more points, hence it takes longer).

Blind research has always been a very touchy subject with players for obvious reasons.  I'm personally a fan of it because I enjoy the challenge.  SMAC, when blind research was on, allowed the player to select which areas to focus on, and I am more or less saying the same by allocation research points (or whole scientists) to the various branches of the tech tree.

[Sirbomber]

A) This is the future. There is no failure.
B) This is a game.
C) Most OP2 research starts with something they've already done, then they try and enhance it or give it a new use/make it more practical to use.

Examples:
Adv/Reinforced Residences
Lasers
Microwaves
Starflare
Supernova
EMP
Acid Cloud
ESG
StickyFoam
RPG
Rail Gun
Thor's Hammer (Wait, that's all the weapons)
Lynx/Panthers
Spiders/Scorpions
EMP Missile/RLV
The list goes on...

[Tramis]

What if instead, each technology is given a bunch of names and descriptions that changes randomly from game to game, and it doesnt tell you what it does?

IE

I play a game as Eden, and I see a research called "Vehicle Engineering Designs."  I think, "WTF is that?" and click the description.  It says something to the effect of "Our colonies current vehicle designs are obselescent, they need to be upgraded" or something.  I think, hmm, sure, why not.  I research it, not knowing what the hell i'll get out of it.  And when its done, it says "While we haven't come up with an upgraded vehicle, we have increased our abilities at the Vehicle Factory, increasing its production" or whatever.

The next game I play, I see a research called "Updated Factory Production Techniques."  I think, hmm, interesting, and click  the description.  It says "We may have a way to increase our Structure and Vehicel Factory effectiveness." or something.  Then I research it, and it says "We have perfected a technique that allows the Vehicle Factory to be more efficient." or something.

It's the same research, it just has a different name and description, and I dont know what it does.  After all, if you research something in real life, you don't know for certain what you'll get in the end, do you?

[Sirbomber]

This isn't REAL LIFE for a reason.
What's with this sudden "More realistic games" thing?
Realistic games suck, and that's why OP1 failed so miserably.
I have to deal with physics EVERYDAY. That's what games are for.
In games, you can replay failed missions or reload and erase your mistakes.
And while real science might be about taking risks and failed experiments...
I don't give a crap.
This is a computer game.
The more you know about what you're doing, the better off you are.
This "random research" crap will drive people away.
People think the techtree is hard enough to figure out as it is. Now you want to go in and make the names and outcomes random?

Besides, I think the majority has already decided we don't want this.

[Tramis]

If you want a game thats fun but isnt realistic, play Mario.  OP1 failed miserably because of the myriad errors people got because they were too lazy to DL the patch.  

If you know from the very beginning exactly what each research gives you, then the game gets insanely predictable, and its replay value drops like a rock.

If you insist on not randomizing the research, it could get more predictable at lower difficulty levels.  Easy = no randomness, the research tree is the same boring, predictable thing each time.  Normal = some randomness, you arent entirely certain what you'll get.  Hard = Completely random, you have no idea what each research may come out with.

[CK9]

I think bomber's just in the mood to argue today.  Personally, I love realistic games.  I hate it when you're playing a game, and you can do something that is just insanely impossible (in example, jumping off a 300 foot cliff and landing without any injury).  It's okay to have some fiction in a game, that's the backbone of its structure, but can we at least get the insanely impossible things out?

[TH300]

Lets keep the randomness limited. My original idea wasn't to make it entirely random and unpredictable. I rather thought of the following:
Eden scientists want to develop a weapon and know that a laser could serve as such. They propose the "Large scale optical resonators" research, but don't know the exact details of the weapon, yet (otherwise they wouldn't need to research it). After research is completed, they will definitely have the laser weapon, but it could be relatively strong or weak, depending on how good the scientist were.
Later they might find out that they missed some potential, and propose an improvement.

[croxis]

Ahh I see where you were going with this.  So the exact damage, turrent speed, weapon range, redisance capacity, etc etc etc will have some variation.

Hmm, interesting.  THis can tie into the special/super worker scientist (or the variation that scientists/workers becoming more effective with the more experiance they have).  This would enourage more military players to be a bit more attentive to how well the colony is doing.

I think I like this more than blind research.

[Sirbomber]

I hate it when you're playing a game, and you can do something that is just insanely impossible (in example, jumping off a 300 foot cliff and landing without any injury).

That's the best part!!!

[CK9]

*kidnaps bomber and pushes him in a rift*

[Sirbomber]

*lands and has his minor headache cured*
Thanks!

[Tramis]

Ahh I see where you were going with this.  So the exact damage, turrent speed, weapon range, redisance capacity, etc etc etc will have some variation.

Hmm, interesting.  THis can tie into the special/super worker scientist (or the variation that scientists/workers becoming more effective with the more experiance they have).  This would enourage more military players to be a bit more attentive to how well the colony is doing.

I think I like this more than blind research.

Yeah thats a good one.  Thats my primary gripe about online play, is its always fight fight fight, kill kill kill and nobody halfway cares about what happens in their colony unless its getting blown up.

[omagaalpha]

yea problely games lot time seem more evolve around kill then actual maganement of resources.  

[Freeza-CII]

This is starting to sounds more like it would cause a major inbalance in the game between colonies even if there the same.