Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 62

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Does Factions need engagement incentives?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Junior Member Esth's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    29

    Does Factions need engagement incentives?

    So, I know this topic will be controversial, I don't even know if I want it. Basically I think it is probably optimal for two skilled players to get in a good formation and pass until the other makes a mistake and moves forward, at least in some situations. This generally is not a problem because turtley players tend to be less skilled and with the advantage of first strike a good player will win anyway, but if 2 tournament players really want to play to win I think it will happen. This is because there is no reason to attack in Factions. There is no mid-map objective to take to incentivize a player into taking the first move. Really, this has been a good thing so far. It is hard to create such a scenario without granting an advantage to the first player, limiting game length, or having an objective that only matters at the end. Still, I think that in the future stalemates may become common, or at least leaves room for griefers to force a concede. Discuss? I really don't know what, if anything, should be done about this.

  2. #2
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    I think it does (need engagement incentives).

    For two reasons, the first related to the math of the game, the second to its widely accepted enjoyment: (1) As you say, when the two opponent skills & builds & formations are even, then the "first hit principle" fundamentally applies; meaning that, whoever gets first hit (be it AB or STR), usually has an advantage. (2) Not engaging, e.g. turtling & waiting, kinda delays the matches and annoys casual players who are more interested in mid- and end-game, i.e. head-banging w bloody axes and the like

    So, there have been some proposals that would help teams engage faster. I'll just name a few, not claiming its my own ideas.
    • Smaller maps, e.g. like the Wall one -- The problem is that the (randomly chosen) player-who-acts-first might get a big advantage.
    • Start match with some bonus WP that disappears after the first round -- That way, you have some free WP to spend, particularly aimed for exerted movement, that you will lose if you advance slowly, not attacking etc -- The problem is how to seamlessly introduce this new mechanic. We could use the existing Horn, starting with it full and having it deplete by one point at each turn you take.
    • Give a bonus to movement-range, when starting off far from enemy units -- The problem is to establish clear rules for this type of exerted movement. On the bright side, clicking on units reveals their movement range, so you'll know it in any case. Some other grid-based games (e.g. Card Hunter) have a similar mechanic, where walking by an enemy-occupied tile "slows down" or "terminates" your movement.
    • Overhaul initial deployment. For example, you could deploy your units one-at-a-time (or in pairs or triplets) taking turns with your opponent, so that both see each-other. You might start with your Varls or your first-to-act, according to the preset initiative. We could also open up the entire map for deployment. -- Obviously, all these are very big changes, that profoundly affect the existing strategies & metagame...
    Last edited by Aleonymous; 11-02-2013 at 04:39 AM.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Wordplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    94
    I don't think that it needs engagement incentives with the current set of units. I'm pretty sure that with perfect play, turtlers should always lose - because they'll concede the first hit advantage.

    The only exception is what you might call 'snapping turtles' where the player forms a turtle, lures the opponent in, then breaks out of the turtle to take the first hit. It's technically not turtling at that point (because the unit will be exposed).

    I'd distinguish both from the highly positional play where each side manoeuvres for an advantageous first hit. The manoeuvring takes a little while, but it usually shortens the mid-game and late-game. If it goes on for a really long time, it probably indicates a problem with each side's build more than anything.

    That said, the proving grounds map can be a bit of pain...not so much because of turtling, but because it can take forever to move units into place to engage each other, even with two players who are keen to fight.

    This will likely change with the new classes - the hunter and landsman classes in particular look like they'll shift the metagame on turtling.

    Anyway, are we so sure that casual players are interested in mid-game and late-game to the exclusion of early-game? Whom do we class as a casual player?

  4. #4
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by Wordplay View Post
    I don't think that it needs engagement incentives with the current set of units. I'm pretty sure that with perfect play, turtlers should always lose - because they'll concede the first hit advantage. The only exception is what you might call 'snapping turtles' where the player forms a turtle, lures the opponent in, then breaks out of the turtle to take the first hit. It's technically not turtling at that point (because the unit will be exposed).
    lol Yeah, the "snapping-turtle" technique is what I had in mind as potentially OP. From my pov, the only way to beat it (and assuming the opp knows what he's doing), is to come up with a relative unit order (and deployment) so that your breakers act (and engage) right after opp's breakers. For instance, you=[2SM 2BM 2RM] -vs- opp=[2RM 2SM 2BM], and you arrange to engage with your RMs. This effectively reduces the life-cycle of opp's breakers by one round (or forces his BMs to waste precious WP on AB, or chance-shots).

    Quote Originally Posted by Wordplay View Post
    This will likely change with the new classes - the hunter and landsman classes in particular look like they'll shift the metagame on turtling.
    I'm not sure how Hunter will eventually turn out because, from what we've seen, he's definitely too OP for Factions! Walking up through already-engaged high-STR allies, to give them one more attack is... frightening! On the UP side, with his ability relying on allies being in-range, it's practically useless when pillaged -- similarly to FA.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wordplay View Post
    Are we so sure that casual players are interested in mid-game and late-game to the exclusion of early-game? Whom do we class as a casual player?
    Judging from my early experience (note: I started out as 100% casual, and I consider myself still ~50% casual), I really liked mid/late game! I used to dash straight in with 2RMs for one big 6AB, followed up by 2BMs for a puncture/archer-maim/extra break, finishing it with 2WHs. It was usually decided by who made clumsy mistakes. Good matches went to close archer-archer standoffs and matches lasted 12-15mins, max.
    Last edited by Aleonymous; 11-03-2013 at 11:13 AM.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Wordplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    94
    Agreed on countering snapping turtle. It will be much easier to counter if you have support units - strongarm or warleader. Backbiter might be a soft counter under certain scenarios, and raidmaster could also be useful - push him into range with a strongarm.

    Another possible counter might be to try and push the opponent into a corner. All much easier said than done.

    The main strength of the landsman in turtling, as I see it, is that if your opponent wedges you with their positioning, they can still move through your own units.

  6. #6
    Developer raven2134's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Manila, Philippines
    Posts
    1,061
    There's been enough feedback for me to consider that camping is and can be a real problem to the game. I mean the good thing is, majority of the time and thankfully in the higher levels of play players have been good mannered enough to not be wusses to do turtling or snap turtling to the extreme.

    I chalk this up to elements of the game design which creates natural openings/incentives to attack, good player manner, and player experience.

    However, it still does occur to me that there is a potential advantage (which we could verify easily through tests) for players waiting and baiting. There's just so much of a positional advantage when you can form a strong position and wait, compared to having to charge and have your front line sync up with your back-line keeping up.

    Even mechanics which make attacking easier (aggressive RM positioning) also happen to be the same tools at a turtles disposal (who would use less willpower because they can rest/not move).

    The issue with introducing map objectives is that this could tip the scale of the match too early, leading to pre-determined outcomes and play just going through the motions until a decided conclusion.

    To keep things variable, I think allowing an attacking player to gain position more easily would be the way to go. Or well, anything which you do want both players to fight over on an exchange basis (i.e. not a single claim).
    Last edited by raven2134; 11-03-2013 at 11:02 PM.

  7. #7
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by raven2134 View Post
    To keep things variable, I think allowing an attacking player to gain position more easily would be the way to go.
    We now have a character who benefits from not moving (archer and puncture). What if we bring a character whos ability will do the opposite? First thing that comes in mind is cavalier/champion who gets +5% damage per sqare covered before attacking.
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  8. #8
    Superbacker LoliSauce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    166
    Engagement incentives would certainly make things more explosive early, which I'm sure many people will have mixed opinions on. In my opinion, I'd like to have an alternate mode of play that introduces them, but still have the completely straightforward basic battles with only routing the enemy as your objective.

  9. #9
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by raven2134 View Post
    The issue with introducing map objectives is that this could tip the scale of the match too early, leading to pre-determined outcomes and play just going through the motions until a decided conclusion.
    What map objectives did you have in mind? Like tiles that give benefits to whoever occupies them?

    Quote Originally Posted by netnazgul View Post
    We now have a character who benefits from not moving (archer and puncture). What if we bring a character whose ability will do the opposite? First thing that comes in mind is cavalier/champion who gets +5% damage per square covered before attacking.
    Very interesting, thought I'd say more like +1STR per-1tile or per-2tiles.

    Quote Originally Posted by LoliSauce View Post
    Engagement incentives would certainly make things more explosive early, which I'm sure many people will have mixed opinions on.
    I agree. As you say, it might fall better as an optional case. However, these "optional battle modes" segment the playerbase which is an issue on itself.

  10. #10
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    Very interesting, thought I'd say more like +1STR per-1tile or per-2tiles.
    damn, self-editing made the message unreadable
    I've meant Heroes of Might and Magic III unit, Cavalier/Champion (from Castle towns).
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  11. #11
    Junior Member Esth's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    29
    A unit like that would be better implemented with bonus damage for distance between start and end than actual tiles covered. Sill, one unit that won't (and shouldn't) be in every build isn't an answer if you really think this is a problem.

  12. #12
    Superbacker LoliSauce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by Esth View Post
    A unit like that would be better implemented with bonus damage for distance between start and end than actual tiles covered. Sill, one unit that won't (and shouldn't) be in every build isn't an answer if you really think this is a problem.
    It wasn't just a suggestion to counter another unit, but more of a suggestion to put in more units that benefit from offensive moves than setting up defenses and remaining stationary. As it is, there aren't many units that benefit highly from offensive action that can't also benefit defensive turtling, making the safer option gel best with most of the current cast. Balancing that out with some more units that benefit more from offensive action could give more motivation to play in other styles.

  13. #13
    Senior Member roder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    215
    I definitely agree with engagement incentives. Not sure if you can make it inherent in the current gameplay mechanics, or you'd have to introduce other variables.

    I don't agree that turtle-y players are less skilled, playstyle doesn't dictate skill level, and in fact skilled turtle players are the hardest to beat.

    As everyone likes to compare this game to chess, Chess has a lot of engagement incentives, or objectives. The most important thing in chess is to control the center, that is one objective. As for engagement, gaining tempo or initiative, is basically gaining momentum over your opponent. The person on the offensive usually forces the opponent into defensive, or forces them into a counter-offensive in which both players are trying to kill each other as fast as possible instead of trying to block each others offense.

    I wouldn't mind an alternative objective mode, where there are other objectives on map to promote engagement and movement. It also depends on unit types, there are, IMO, more defensive-formation units than offensive units. Archers promote staying back, Shieldmasters promote defensive formation, and raider shieldwall makes units stick together rather than promoting movement. If there were more backbiter-esque units, you'd see a lot different style of games.

  14. #14
    Superbacker StandSure's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    141
    I haven't encountered very many turtle players in my experience. Is this a big problem? Maybe a tournament issue, since I don't play there.

    It seems to me that there are a lot of units that can attack a turtle effectively...SA comes to mind in a big way, especially promoted. WM can do a big damage to huddled units with his ability...WH even worse if he can do a Tempest that double-hits and double-shocks neighboring units. As already mentioned, BB can at least get to the back lines. Any of the archers can sit back and hit. SRM can literally break up a turtle. TS can afford to put himself in harm's way and still be threatening. Heck, I could see a RM using his ability to safely move around a clump of units.

    I would think that the incentive is to get kills, which already translates to the only real valuable asset in the game - Renown. There is no bonus to keeping the most units alive, only getting the most kills. There is no one unit to protect (the chess king), nor does territory matter. Is turtling really an effective way to get kills? If it's not, should we be worried?
    Let the Sleeping Dog Lie!

    See my album of Banner Saga crests here. Many thanks to everyone who displays my work!

  15. #15
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by rodereve View Post
    As everyone likes to compare this game to chess, Chess has a lot of engagement incentives...
    Also, half the units in the chess army can only move in one direction... Forward! And they have a very good motive for that. They can become Knights or Queens!

    Quote Originally Posted by StandSure View Post
    Is turtling really an effective way to get kills? If it's not, should we be worried?
    I see it more as an annoyance. I know that this match is gonna take longer than normal, almost two rounds to actually engage, versus one round if both are moving forth. Also, as rodereve said, skilled turtlers are really difficult to beat.

    Apart from turtling another similar and equally annoying strategy is moving one step forward then one back, or moving sideways. The psychological play is the same -- Waste time and frustrate the opponent into opening up to engage you, while you're sitting comfortably in the back with all your units cross-covered.
    Last edited by Aleonymous; 12-03-2013 at 04:20 AM. Reason: typos
    Together we stand, divided we fall.

  16. #16
    Senior Member roder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    215
    Well, its not always hard turtling (basically just not moving), its more often soft turtling, which is essentially just shuffling around units but around the same vicinity, like Aleo said, moving forward then backwards or sideways. Re-shuffling your formation is always present in every game, but I've played some games where we just shuffled for 5 minutes before any action occurred lol You can understand how some players would find that frustrating, non-engagement is a bit boring too.

    I have to admit that was one quality I hated when I first started, but I don't mind it as much anymore, its sort of like shuffling back and forth until your opponent moves up too far or makes a weak point in formation, similar to how football (soccer) is where they just pass the football around until someone slips up or passes through. But other players will mind, especially newbies. The tactic is particularly effective against new players actually, because many just move a unit too far ahead of their team, and it becomes a target. Just turtle and wait for them to advance their units.

  17. #17
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by roder View Post
    Well, its not always hard turtling (basically just not moving), its more often soft turtling, which is essentially just shuffling around units but around the same vicinity, like Aleo said, moving forward then backwards or sideways. Re-shuffling your formation is always present in every game, but I've played some games where we just shuffled for 5 minutes before any action occurred lol You can understand how some players would find that frustrating, non-engagement is a bit boring too.
    In my general strategy I have units that act (active breakers, SMs that benefit from activating their ability etc) and units that react (raider vs warrior, warrior vs RoA, etc). The same counts for my enemy. So sometimes the starting position is suboptimal when units that act a closest to enemy reacting units, so I start repositioning then, sometimes this includes approach and sometimes not (depends on how much space my opponent allows me to have).

    There are probably 3 stages of approach skill development - first you just all attack and lose to better positions, then you start turtling to win against all attacks but lose to good players, in the end you figure out to control your approach speed depending on situation.

    Quote Originally Posted by roder View Post
    Scroll of Wills, Shield of Strand, Pilgrim's Horn
    No random incentives please, that will only make it all worse than it is.
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  18. #18
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by netnazgul View Post
    No random incentives please, that will only make it all worse than it is.
    Always fearful of RNG That one has been bloody-flailed too many times! Well, it doesn't have to be random, it could be very well fixed for each map, tailored to the particularities of the terrain. For instance, open maps could have a couple of "outpost tiles" in the middle that give ARM bonus etc.

    Another nasty idea to promote engaging is making all tiles in the original deployment zones "WP-draining". So, if you rest while standing on those (or just move within that zone), you lose 1WP at the end of your turn.
    Together we stand, divided we fall.

  19. #19
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by Aleonymous View Post
    Another nasty idea to promote engaging is making all tiles in the original deployment zones "WP-draining". So, if you rest while standing on those (or just move within that zone), you lose 1WP at the end of your turn.
    Yeah, you approach you opponent and lock him in his deployment zone, so he is either forced to stay in it losing WP or forced to attack you exposing his units. You stay turtling both ways. Well done


    To sum up - most of the aforementioned decisions result from not being able to beat the game usual way. But this doesn't mean the game isn't beatable, most of the times it means you hadn't enough vigor to beat it. Still you try to fix the thing you don't fully understand, introducing questionable kludges that will most likely make it even worse for yourself cause they don't actually fix the problem (the actual problem being your own approach to the game, not the mechanics).
    Last edited by netnazgul; 12-05-2013 at 06:07 AM. Reason: additional thoughts and bragging
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  20. #20
    Skald Aleonymous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,444
    Quote Originally Posted by netnazgul View Post
    Why the hell would giving ARM bonus negate turtling? It will only amplify it for a person who got the bonus
    ARM bonus will be given to units standing in the bonus tiles that can be found in the middle of map, not in/near the deployment zones. Turtling --if I am not mistaken-- is defined as waiting in the back on your zone, or in a corner...

    Quote Originally Posted by netnazgul View Post
    Yeah, you approach you opponent and lock him in his deployment zone, so he is either forced to stay in it losing WP or forced to attack you exposing his units. You stay turtling both ways.
    You're getting this all wrong. Firstly, attacking or using a special ability should not count as "waiting"; so, you wont be WP-drained if you start crunching that offending enemy unit that comes up to lock you in. Secondly, even without that "rule", it'd gladly concede 1-2WP to draining to kill a silly warrior that comes hit my shieldbangers. Thirdly, how exactly could you lock an opponent in his zone? Units are carefully deployed and move one at a time, so every unit can "escape" their zone. It's just that the deployment meta will need to be revisited; now it's just "keep a 7 tile gap" and/or "pick a corner if you wanna frustrate opponent and play a longer match".

    If that is no enough, well... I wish you gl hf the next time you meet a skilled player with a Yth/Butters-type build
    Together we stand, divided we fall.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •