Customization, randomly generated maps and auto-deploy

Jeffrey Harpen
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 119

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#21 » 15 Sep 2017, 23:12

sollniss wrote:MG does massive damage and wins every 1v1 except against long range snipers.

Yes, I know this, but is easy to kill when starts to panic.

TheKidPunisher
Autonomous Entity
Autonomous Entity
Posts: 563

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#22 » 15 Sep 2017, 23:16

sollniss wrote: MG wins every 1v1 except against long range snipers.


The maps will be 4vs4 so no problem

Jeffrey Harpen wrote:Similar here, but my concerns are mostly about assault. Assaults work very well in teams with other assaults. One assault in 4 bots team is not very useful. Sometimes even team of 4 assaults is not enough to use their potential effectively. I don't want them to extinct, so GFX47 please consider a bit bigger teams and stay with the current system (one of each special bots, many assaults).

i agree i will be sad to not play with only those little guys, but as said sollniss: with a rework it could be considerate as a special class and not as the base class

Jeffrey Harpen wrote:Funny: I find it the weakest because of its' slooownessss. ;)
+1

sollniss
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 178

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#23 » 15 Sep 2017, 23:21

As I understand Auto Deployment, you have a Team of 4 robots and you can decide one class for each slot. Currently we only have 4 classes so we have assault, mg, sg, sniper for our team.

When your team is decided you just press "Play match" and the game automatically generates a random map, puts your 4 bots on it, finds another player, places his bots automatically and starts the simulation.

You can also press "Play 10 matches" and the same happens, just 10 times.

Or you can press "Join tournament" and get the results in 1 second if you are the last person joining.

Preferably you can only set one AI for your team, but that is my opinion.

The maps will be 4vs4 so no problem


Well the MG would be in every team because it is the best. This would mean you'd only have 3 real slots of variation to begin with.

mcompany
Autonomous Entity
Autonomous Entity
Posts: 872

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#24 » 15 Sep 2017, 23:31

sollniss wrote:OK so let's take my SYP on the current system. My AI is super specialized I would argue it plays the map optionally. I can't even remember the last time I lost on this map. This would be the prime example of your pregame setup system. If GFX would change one little thing about this map my AI would break. If I change the setup around, my AI would break. My AI is super dumb because it plays according to one single set of rules. It can't react to enemy bots because it has to play optimally and there is only one optimal thing for each bot to do.

Do you really want this kind of AI? It knows everything about the game beforehand, it doesn't care about the enemy. This sounds more like an IKEA manual on how to build the best AI for map X instead of a game where you want to make a better AI than your opponent.

1. If you have a better AI for every map than your opponent, then idk, you seem like you are better at making AIs than your opponent so... once again, whether it is for one map or 20, what is the difference? Is it just that the AI suited for one map actually knows what is going on and the other has to waste to figure it out (even when figuring it out is guaranteed to be disadvantageous, partially impossible, and something the map specific AI has to do as well)?
2. Do you believe that most of us aren't looking for the "IKEA manual" even generically? Not me or harthag or some guy I never heard of? Not hdeffo who during 5.2 tried to create a super complex subtree to attempt to track the opponents's likely actions and respond accordingly? Making an AI with no regard for the enemy just to be perfect isn't a new concept or one limited to any map. It wouldn't change anything but create AIs guaranteed to be worse because they are forced to fight with a blindfold on

User avatar
LuBeNo
Autonomous Entity
Autonomous Entity
Posts: 532

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#25 » 16 Sep 2017, 09:02

I like the ideas GFX47.

Customizing a bot with a name, with colors, decals and different 3D models parts (bot legs, bot body, bot head and bot weapon) would be really nice. I want a german flag on the back and 2 or 3 colours for the body that I can customize. I think this will also bring a big value as I can see that I play against Miojo, Ritter or Milk.

Perhaps also spending 10 stat points per customized bot would be a good idea: Is it important to have more fire power, movement speed, health, shield or less reload cooldown? Standard configuration is 2 stat points in each slot. But I can use up to 5 in a slot. If I put 5 stat points to health and shield I have 0 stat points in the other slots. Balancing must be really good. No pay to win, no disadvantage for new players.

I really like random maps and deploying always a team of 4. We need to improve the Assault then to make him competitive. It is a good step towards generic AIs what I think is a really good idea for gladiabots. IMO the current maps should be moved to private / tournaments and ranked should be only the random maps.

Perhaps there could be small maps with a team of 3, normal games with a team of 4 and big games with a team of 6 where I can take my whole team (Sniper, Assault, Shotgun, Machinegun, Healer, Comander).
Image
My algorithm of life: if(self.tired) sleep(); else if(self.hungry) eat(); else follow(Jesus);

mcompany
Autonomous Entity
Autonomous Entity
Posts: 872

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#26 » 16 Sep 2017, 19:17

Idk, I'm fine with random maps being in and its focus on generic AIs, but I just think that any sort of team composition between bots is going to be lost (especially without knowing the maps beforehand), and think that the current limitations for the bots (generically) will also hurt the game a bit more than keep the current system or having both (with different leaderboards for each).

Also yeah, considering that assault's only current balance is "there is multiple of them and it is still underpowered, this idea definitely makes assault guaranteed to be a worse bot just there because "why not".

User avatar
Athelinde
Algorithm
Algorithm
Posts: 64
Contact:

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#27 » 17 Sep 2017, 14:11

I like the idea of random maps a lot. Even with possible random tank placement (thinking rectangular field, with partially overlapping squares in which the opponents are randomly placed (so part where only one party can be placed, part where either can be randomly placed), with obstacles that obstruct firing line and line of vision, and enemy tanks can only "see" tanks where at least one ally bot has a line of sight on. It may seem completely arbitrary, but actually adds another element of strategy, hook up with allies as soon as possible while avoiding enemies, when hooked up start hunting down the enemy and especially stragglers that haven't hooked up with an ally yet.

But there is another problem there, the game would need commands to deal with obstacles and sensing the edge of the field, otherwise it will be very difficult to setup anything systematic to do search and destroy missions.

I also had another idea how to combine the resource and elimination type of games (inspired by other games), set a "fuel" amount for the tanks, tank becomes immobile idle if out of fuel.. And resources replenish fuel.. See who has the most Bots left by the time everyone has run out of fuel or one side is eliminated.. Just an idea..

I know I am rambling on, and it would be a LOT of work, but maybe there are some usable ideas there.. ;)

User avatar
neoliminal
Algorithm
Algorithm
Posts: 78

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#28 » 17 Sep 2017, 18:38

• I think you can make money with customization. I don't think it will sustain if you don't market the game. The game is very niche in appeal so customization might not be enough.

• Random maps are probably going to be required. I'm getting bored of the same map coming up over and over again, so a random map would be nice. Implementation, I think, should be considered carefully. Allow random maps to get rated, named, and have them shuffled in on a weighted basis. This will keep really bad random map configuration from reappearing often and will allow people to keep really good random maps around for other's to enjoy.

Also, don't limit to four slots. 4-8 seems like more fun.

• Please don't force me into a configuration or choose my bot set. I like the meta of picking where the sniper is and where the MG is. I like NOT having a shotgun in certain situations. I suppose Autodeploy works for tournaments, however.
[Target closest post where post is type Sniper.]

User avatar
Revenge
Neural Network
Neural Network
Posts: 398
Contact:

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#29 » 08 Oct 2017, 22:40

GFX47 wrote:Customization
I'm currently working on the bot customization system.
It will only affect the visuals of the bots, no impact on the game resolution, no pay to win.

It will be central in the business model of the game.--- Customization will cost in-game currency and/or real money depending on the content.The in-game currency will be earned--- by winning career matches, you win more in ranked matches, nothing in private matches, etc.

Sounds great, I think that would be a fantastic feature.

GFX47 wrote:Each bot will have its own customization options.
The goal here is to get the player attached to her bots, like you do with your squad in XCOM.

Naming them, giving them a unique looks, etc.
It means that player will have to compose her team apart from the match deployment process (more on that in the Auto deploy chapter).

I love this idea, I think this would be a fun way to make each bot feel personal.

GFX47 wrote:The team will have 4 slots and each slot will have to use a different bot class.
Right now it means you will have 1 of each existing classes.

Is there some underlying problem with using all assault? I thought that made bots weaker, so I do not see the purpose in stopping it.
Also, as some people have suggested already, I think it should be okay to have 5v5 and 6v6. I don't see the point in getting rid of them, and feel it would be a huge loss of strategy for the game. If the worry is consistency, you could set generic 4bot 5bot and 6bot teams, then generate random maps based off that.

GFX47 wrote:Later, when more classes will be implemented, you will have to make a strategic choice: do you want a healer or a sniper in your team, etc.

Sure! This sounds fun so long as you can choose assaults also.

GFX47 wrote:Randomly generated maps

We already talked about it here so I won't detail it further but I really want to try it.
I don't believe in static maps, and map specialized AIs, especially on the long run if we frequently add more of them.

I think overall this would be a healthy change for the game. The point is to make the most versatile, effective ai possible, and this would be taking a step towards that. One ai to rule them all. ;)

GFX47 wrote:All maps would have to be 4 VS 4 though: 4 slots for each team would be randomly placed on the map and bots would be automatically assigned according to the team composition order.

Once again, not a fan of the 4v4 and locking 1 of each type; but I am fine with automatically assigning spots based on their type.

GFX47 wrote:The map generation system could also be used to generate offline missions.
The problem remains to find interesting enemy team composition and AIs.
It could be picked from online matches and anonymized (you don't know who's team it is).
Although it would need some internet connection at some point and a not negligible amount of storage space for AIs (making me reconsider the AI size limit option...).

Offline missions would be a lot of fun. As some people have pointed out, simply generating a mission randomly can get stale after a while depending on the variables used. Take No Man's Sky for example, where literally unlimited variety is made, but there are not enough initial variables to make it fun to play(at least for most people). To me Map Customization > Randomization for private/unranked games. But throwing in random maps could work for competitive so long as they are the minority of maps. :)

GFX47 wrote:Auto deploy

The currently existing deployment phase, where you select your bot classes and AIs, wouldn't be necessary anymore.
Player could then deploy X matches at once, automatically redeploy if she wins, etc. (pro features?)
We could also have full auto tournaments: you commit your team once and all the tournament matches can be played without further interaction.

Wow, that sounds fantastic! Both deploying matches automatically and being able to simulate tournaments like that.(as long as we can pause it to watch a current tournament match too.[semifinals for example]) :D

GFX47 wrote:So, what's your thoughts on it all?

I love almost all of it. There are a lot of fantastic ideas in there. I disagree with locking it to 4v4, as i feel that would limit the fun and variety the game has. The same goes for forcing bot classes. Other than that, customization, random maps, faster matches... I love it all! It's your game, and i can't wait to see what you do with it. Regardless of how i feel now, I'm excited to at least see where this goes. :)

MrChris
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 170

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#30 » 18 Oct 2017, 16:22

I don't like the idea of only having 4 bots per team
------------------------------------------------
My in-game name is MrChris

Creator of the unofficial Gladiabots stats page: https://gladiabots-stats.info.tm/mrchris
And the Gladiabots retreatment simulator: https://cmrichards.github.io/glad_simulation

MrChris
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 170

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#31 » 18 Oct 2017, 16:46

I'm not so sure that the bot customisation thing will appeal much to the kind of players who play this game. If your research says otherwise then fine, but I just can't see it being something people will care about.

It also has the potential to scare people away who would enjoy playing this kind of game. I know I'm easily put off games that do too much of this kinda thing and try to charge for it.

Some other ideas for making money:

1) Yearly subscription recurring charge
2) Charge after every X thousand games

I would happily pay for any of those options.
------------------------------------------------
My in-game name is MrChris

Creator of the unofficial Gladiabots stats page: https://gladiabots-stats.info.tm/mrchris
And the Gladiabots retreatment simulator: https://cmrichards.github.io/glad_simulation

User avatar
Kanishka
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 1420
Contact:

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#32 » 18 Oct 2017, 16:58

MrChris wrote:I'm not so sure that the bot customisation thing will appeal much to the kind of players who play this game. If your research says otherwise then fine, but I just can't see it being something people will care about.

It also has the potential to scare people away who would enjoy playing this kind of game. I know I'm easily put off games that do too much of this kinda thing and try to charge for it.

Some other ideas for making money:

1) Yearly subscription recurring charge
2) Charge after every X thousand games

I would happily pay for any of those options.


Both "options" are not met by 97% of all players.
Fixes break an AI more than bugs do. :ugeek:

Gladiabots Off-Topic Chat


My Stats: Kanishka_RN3;Kanishka_MiPad

User avatar
Revenge
Neural Network
Neural Network
Posts: 398
Contact:

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#33 » 18 Oct 2017, 19:37

Kanishka wrote:
MrChris wrote:I'm not so sure that the bot customisation thing will appeal much to the kind of players who play this game. If your research says otherwise then fine, but I just can't see it being something people will care about.

It also has the potential to scare people away who would enjoy playing this kind of game. I know I'm easily put off games that do too much of this kinda thing and try to charge for it.

Some other ideas for making money:

1) Yearly subscription recurring charge
2) Charge after every X thousand games

I would happily pay for any of those options.


Both "options" are not met by 97% of all players.


I have a good idea for making money for gfx. Just waiting till this patch is done to suggest it.

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3353

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#34 » 19 Oct 2017, 09:09

MrChris wrote:
1) Yearly subscription recurring charge
2) Charge after every X thousand games



I do agree with both (but I would keep the fremium model nevertheless otherwise no players coming ) although the number of people staying for a year or for thousands of matches are not much.

Given the data of people playing I would say:

Like 0.50 cents for 1000 games (of all types) or 0.50 cents for a month subscription. So people can decide their pace. Otherwise watching ads.

The point is to have very low prices that guarantee some activity ads free.

If someone is hooked will choose to pay 6 euro per year with a lot of games. If someone else plays a little will choose to pay for thousands of games.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

sollniss
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 178

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#35 » 19 Oct 2017, 17:52

You guys seem to know know how other games make money. You don't make money of the normal user, you make money of the whales. In order to get whales you need a money sink. A monthly or yearly subscription is not a money sink, skins are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhz9OXy86a0

User avatar
LuBeNo
Autonomous Entity
Autonomous Entity
Posts: 532

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#36 » 19 Oct 2017, 21:35

sollniss wrote:You guys seem to know know how other games make money. You don't make money of the normal user, you make money of the whales. In order to get whales you need a money sink. A monthly or yearly subscription is not a money sink, skins are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhz9OXy86a0

Good video.

Would buy:
  • new skins
  • the "I supported the developer badge" visible in my player profile ;)
  • colors and decals to customize my bots to be distinctable if other players play against me
  • being able to use custom messages like "Ouch", "I'll get you.", "My precious treasure." popping up above my bot in my AI. (shown if the message node is evaluated green, it still searches for a action to take.)
  • victory dances
Image
My algorithm of life: if(self.tired) sleep(); else if(self.hungry) eat(); else follow(Jesus);

sollniss
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 178

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#37 » 20 Oct 2017, 01:00

Yea, emotes would be a nice idea and very simple to implement.

You could make them a node that is usable only once and doesn't interrupt the AI, similar to instant tags. You could also have game starting / game ending emotes.

User avatar
GFX47
Dev
Dev
Posts: 2873

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#38 » 20 Oct 2017, 09:09

sollniss wrote:Yea, emotes would be a nice idea and very simple to implement.


Image

sollniss
Automaton
Automaton
Posts: 178

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#39 » 20 Oct 2017, 09:42

Just a popup with a picture and/or some text doesn't seem too complicated to me.

User avatar
Kanishka
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 1420
Contact:

Re: Future updates (need feedback)

Post#40 » 20 Oct 2017, 18:13

LuBeNo wrote:
  • being able to use custom messages like "Ouch", "I'll get you.", "My precious treasure." popping up above my bot in my AI. (shown if the message node is evaluated green, it still searches for a action to take.)
  • victory dances


1> My idea. I won't pay for it. If it is paid, I leave the game. (Actually I'll leave the game if anything is unattainable by just playing.)

2> what? :?
Fixes break an AI more than bugs do. :ugeek:

Gladiabots Off-Topic Chat


My Stats: Kanishka_RN3;Kanishka_MiPad

Return to “Devlog”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest