Feature: Commander shields

[Monsterovich]

The motivation behind this PR is to make commanders not useless in multiplayer. This PR adds shields to all droids in the commander's squad. Shields absorb damage instead of reducing health. This concept is present in other games as well.

The initial value of shield points is 10% of the droid's base health + 5% of base health with each level up. Shields regenerate constantly, shield regeneration can be interrupted if the shields points value is 0, then shields will need to not take damage for a while to start regenerating, i.e. shields are unable to regenerate under continuous fire in an interrupted state. Interruption time and regeneration time also improves with each level (see the values in the code). I put those values intuitively, all this should be tested in real multiplayer, and I'm honestly not sure what values would be better. Perhaps the current values are overall good.

Here's a video demonstration of the idea (well basically I've already implemented everything :P):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6auvDe2Vkw

update: EMP weapons are used to disable shields completely.

[vaut]

The video is not available to unregistered users.

[Monsterovich]

The video is not available to unregistered users.

Um, for some reason the availability checkbox didn't click. Try it again.

[Monsterovich]

I'm not sure about low oil maps (I rarely play them), but on NTW maps the commander unit limit of 6 is ridiculous, I would multiply it by 2 at least and may be increase step (which is 2 units per lvl) too, considering the cost of commanders, etc.

[vaut]

Cool mechanics.
But let me remind you, commanders are not used for indirect control. This does not allow you to place units in the right place.

Other places where you can put your hands:
"Broken" jammers.
Controversial mechanics of the satellite.
Transport carrying capacity that cannot be modded

[Monsterovich]

@vaut

Controversial mechanics of the satellite.

What's wrong about satellites btw?

[vaut]

@vaut

Controversial mechanics of the satellite.

What's wrong about satellites btw?

There are several problems with the satellite:

1. Completely disabling the fog of war prevents you from understanding where your sensors can see.
2. A completely open map deprives you of the opportunity to prepare a surprise for the enemy (gather a fist on one flank, prepare aviation).
3. A window in air defense is definitely used.

[Monsterovich]

1. Completely disabling the fog of war prevents you from understanding where your sensors can see.

I had an idea to make a range display effect for selected units, we can do that for sensors as well.

[dunk2k]

@Monsterovich
Does shield apply to assigned artillery droids and assigned VTOLs? both of which do not increment to a Commander's unit assignment limit.

[Monsterovich]

@Monsterovich Does shield apply to assigned artillery droids and assigned VTOLs? both of which do not increment to a Commander's unit assignment limit.

First thing, it's not true about artillery, and about VTOL: no, shields don't apply because the air units de facto don't have a commander (hasCommander(psDroid) is false).

[Raptor959]

I really like this but I think it would be better served as a researchable technology armor (Power Armor) technology for units and structures like auto-repair instead of being used to bluntly buff Commanders into usefulness, I think there is a far more graceful way to make Commanders relevant without even changing them.

[Monsterovich]

@Raptor959

I really like this but I think it would be better served as a researchable technology armor (Power Armor) technology for units and structures like auto-repair

No, that's not what was intended. This ability can't be given to all units as an enhancement: it would be either too OP or useless, and I intended progressive mechanics. What you quoted has nothing to do with this PR.

bluntly buff Commanders into usefulness

That's exactly what I want to do. :)

[Raptor959]

No, that's not what was intended. This ability can't be given to all units as an enhancement: it would be either too OP or useless, and I intended progressive mechanics.

Why would it be either too overpowered or useless with no possible middle ground if all units gained this but not if it's tied to only commanders? As I would make it a new armor tech line I wouldn't tie the shield's points to unit experience but shield tech level, In fact I think having this tied to unit experience is where the balance problems will originate from. Commanders or not.

What you quoted has nothing to do with this PR.

Did you even read it? How does it not have anything to do with:

The motivation behind this PR is to make commanders not useless in multiplayer.

As commanders are not revealed by radar detectors, Allowing players to assign artillery and vtol to radar detectors so they can pre-strike enemy sensors and counter-battery radars would give commanders a distinct and vital niche. Being spotters for artillery and vtol in the vision dead ground created by radar detectors seems way more inherently balanced than commander shields which by your implication is potentially overpowered or useless in principle.

on a side note that might matter to others more it would be more "realistic" to limit shields to just commanders and not assigned units, That was basically the reason why teleporting Nexus turret buff was turned down. I guess in that vein maybe replace the shields on assigned units with an increase to auto repair speed of assigned units just like how you have shields implemented? idk just exploring the idea and its possibilities pls don't shoot me.

[Monsterovich]

@Raptor959 You are trying to jump in with your suggestions that are irrelevant to this PR. Once again, my motivation is for commanders to be used in multiplayer, because in intense NTW games (and in general) they are useless. The only way to do this is to give the commander's squad an improvement that will be worth the cost of dealing with micro-controlling commanders (if even that isn't enough, then either increase shield stats or unit limit in the squad). Shield mechanics were intended to gain experience and increase shield stats. I had a thought to make a separate unit for shields, which will cover only a certain area, but it is worse, because such a buff is easy to lose, so it is better to give it to commanders (which are generally durable and have plenty of HP).

I don't see the point in discussing this with you any further.

[Raptor959]

The only way to do this is to give the commander's squad an improvement that will be worth the cost of dealing with micro-controlling commanders (if even that isn't enough, then either increase shield stats or unit limit in the squad).

I totally disagree and my point of reference is that people use sensors and counter-battery radar in all games because they have vital strategic functions, If radar detectors and commanders filled the same kind of vital strategic function they would be seen as necessary as sensors/radars are. The only reason they don't is because players can't assign artillery and vtol to radar detectors leaving their enemies with only commanders and radar detectors to spot.

Even if it's overpowered these shields for commanders is just a tactical level ability, It doesn't principally provide commanders a strategically vital role which is why using it to balance commanders is probably doomed to fail.

I don't see the point in discussing this with you any further.

Suppose your shields were added to commanders and their balance was made perfect, Would commanders suddenly become overpowered if they remained invisible to my suggestion of radar detectors with assigned artillery and vtol?

[Monsterovich]

@Raptor959

Suppose your shields were added to commanders and their balance was made perfect, Would commanders suddenly become overpowered if they remained invisible to my suggestion of radar detectors with assigned artillery and vtol?

If you had watched the demonstration video, you wouldn't be asking this silly question.

[Raptor959]

If you had watched the demonstration video, you wouldn't be asking this silly question.

That video doesn't show the full depth of consequences this change would or would not have in a given form, You said it yourself that the values need to be tested in real multiplayer.

Furthermore how are you deciding whether commander shields are overpowered or underpowered? Seems like a much harder line to walk than making it a universal tech and making commanders as relevant as sensors by making radar detectors as relevant as counter-battery radars.

[Monsterovich]

That video doesn't show the full depth of consequences this change would or would not have in a given form, You said it yourself that the values need to be tested in real multiplayer.

@Raptor959 It does and also shows that commanders are not OP with this feature and overwhelmed by artillery just like other units. :P Whether the shield buff will be sufficient is the question.

[Raptor959]

@Raptor959 It does and also shows that commanders are not OP with this feature and overwhelmed by artillery just like other units. :P Whether the shield buff will be sufficient is the question.

Have you considered the balance impact scavengers have with commanders due to the easy unit experience they offer?
It's said that a commander needs to get a rank of regular before it becomes worth the cost to build, An otherwise difficult task.

[Monsterovich]

@Raptor959 It does and also shows that commanders are not OP with this feature and overwhelmed by artillery just like other units. :P Whether the shield buff will be sufficient is the question.

Have you considered the balance impact scavengers have with commanders due to the easy unit experience they offer? It's said that a commander needs to get a rank of regular before it becomes worth the cost to build, An otherwise difficult task.

I would say more that people avoid messing with scavengers altogether because it's a risk of wasting of units in combat. I myself have seen situations where I or my opponent lost units early in the game to scavengers and then lost the game entirely because of it, so this is a double-edged sword.

[dunk2k]

@Monsterovich @Raptor959
Gents, whilst both your points of view are valid and you both seem very grounded in them, could I ask that you find a middle ground (i.e. the overlapping section of a 2 circle Venn diagram) as I would like to see Commanders be a viable option in multiplayer (Monsterovich's view) without putting a stake through the current balancing/meta (Raptor959's view).

[Monsterovich]

@dunk2k There is no middle ground here, this guy just jumps in with some nonsense ideas that have nothing to do with this PR.

Just ignore him, his experience of understanding the game doesn't go beyond, “let's just raise the cost of factory modules for the sake of strategic depth™”.

[Raptor959]

@dunk2k Find a middle ground? What is saying that it should be added to the game for more than just commanders?
Am I really so off base for bringing up another means of buffing commanders on the point that it's more fundamental, simpler, and inherently balanced?