Subspace Hockey/Football Zone Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: Static Damage  (Read 906 times)

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Static Damage
« on: January 19, 2017, 08:06:15 AM »

First off, the apology, I was wrong and I am sorry.  Now on to the fun!

Now on to the good news, static damage is achievable with the current settings/modules etc, so I am going to try it in go small.  If we figure it out fast enough it can be used in the 5v5 tourney.

There are two core settings:
Base Damage
Upgrade Damage

Total Damage = {Base Damage} + {Bullet Level - 1} x {Upgrade Damage}

So: Level 1 = Base Damage
      Level 2 = Base Damage + Upgrade Damage
      Level 3 = Base Damage + 2 x Upgrade Damage
      Level 4 = Base Damage + 3 x Upgrade Damage

One number I still need is the multiplier applied to damage for users carrying the ball.  I am not totally sure if its a constant or a setting, but we can make it work either way.  Goldeye?

We may(very likely) have to change a ships max energy to make the static damage system work, for now if this occurs the costs/recharge rates will be changed so there is effectively no change to the other ship settings.  This will isolate static damage from other nerfs/buffs to ships.

The way forward:
Step 1) The spreadsheet: Once all the numbers are known a handy dandy spreadsheet will help visualize what is needed and keep everyone on the same page.  I can use Excel but I am no expert, anyone out there live and breathe this stuff?
Step 2) The discussion: Keep it civil.  The stated goal of this first effort is to make the current damage model static.  The model may have to change a bid but lets not get crazy yet.
Step 3) The implementation: This I have to do, maybe alone but possibly with help
Step 4) The iteration: After playing with it enough
Logged

Goldeye

  • Local Moderator
  • My post count proves I'm better than you
  • *****
  • Posts: 5363
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2017, 10:26:25 AM »

Step 1) The spreadsheet: Once all the numbers are known a handy dandy spreadsheet will help visualize what is needed and keep everyone on the same page.  I can use Excel but I am no expert, anyone out there live and breathe this stuff?

Here's the sheet I used to guide conversion from random damage to random level:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NhuLoMJ2lN329gxjdRjJ8Cwcg6e62G1qwruGwkrWZe4/edit?usp=sharing
Logged
Shlazzer> dont you ppl realize once our sun goes supernova, NOTHING anyone or anything has EVER done or said on this planet will EVER matter?

Thrill> also i have a gr8 personality

I made $124.03 for a single season of HZ!
Nubby> U could b 3rd highest payed player
Nubby> Maybe 2nd

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2017, 05:01:24 PM »

So it looks like the Multiplayer used for on ball damage is flaggerdamagepercent, so it is controllable. Cool
Logged

dragonwing0

  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *
  • Posts: 1479
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2017, 05:02:19 PM »

Just adding a detail to keep in the back of your mind while manipulating ship energy levels. We need to keep in mind afterburner energy usage. Is it a percentage of max energy or a fixed energy rate. Don't want to make jav/Levi have turbo for the majority of the map while making them beefy enough to take an L2 for example.
Logged

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2017, 05:47:19 PM »

We may(very likely) have to change a ships max energy to make the static damage system work, for now if this occurs the costs/recharge rates will be changed so there is effectively no change to the other ship settings.  This will isolate static damage from other nerfs/buffs to ships.

As I mentioned above, but correct dw0.  To elaborate, the costs/recharge rates are ship centric so they can be consistent whether the max energy is 1000, recharge rate is 100, and thrust cost is 10, or the numbers are 100/10/1.  Damage and total energy are the only way ships interact with each other.
Logged

zero seven

  • RSFL Captain
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 2500
  • :D
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2017, 06:03:17 PM »

Goldeye, can you define what "old" and "new" are in respect to your spreadsheet? Is "old" classic continuum settings in the 2nd tab? This appears to have the bullet level set as a maximum damage possible with a smooth negative probability curve approaching the maximum. This contradicts what I (any perhaps others) may have expected 'classic' settings to be for static damage.

For anyone else trying to decipher Goldeye's sheet, here's some notes:

Warbird Tab

Top Graph is looking at the probability a Warbird kills an enemy ship with the puck.
The X axis shoes the enemy ship energy.
The blue curve shows 'new' ship settings where Warbird has a 70% chance of delivering L1 damage of 170, showing a 100% probability of killing an enemy with energy from 1-170.
The next portion of the blue curve shows the 30% chance a Warbird has of delivering L2 damage of 335, showing a 30% probability of killing an enemy with energy from 171-335.

I think everyone arguing for static damage agrees that the blue curves are better than the smooth red curves. I am just confused that the red curves existed in classic settings #1, and think the overall preference would be to eliminate different tiers in the blue curves altogether.

We would also first need to standardize on expected bullet damage value based on our current random settings.

For Warbird L1 On Ball has 70% chance of 170, 30% chance of 335, giving a mean expected value of 219.5 (this is assuming the data in the google doc matches current settings which I doubt it does). That would be the target static value.
Logged
it's not as if i am the only person on my team with my brain.

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2017, 08:26:46 PM »

I am a simple guy.  The spreadsheet I envisioned was one where you could enter the bullet setting numbers, energy level, and see how many shots it took to kill ships with each type of bullet.

Like:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rywufA9n89IoqPLDx0KjYmkPP-xqul7rTLrkG6CqbfY/edit?usp=sharing

Simple but a good tool to come up with a target.
Logged

Goldeye

  • Local Moderator
  • My post count proves I'm better than you
  • *****
  • Posts: 5363
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #7 on: January 20, 2017, 08:01:05 AM »

Goldeye, can you define what "old" and "new" are in respect to your spreadsheet? Is "old" classic continuum settings in the 2nd tab? This appears to have the bullet level set as a maximum damage possible with a smooth negative probability curve approaching the maximum. This contradicts what I (any perhaps others) may have expected 'classic' settings to be for static damage.
"old" is classic random damage, wacky as it is.

Quote
I think everyone arguing for static damage agrees that the blue curves are better than the smooth red curves. I am just confused that the red curves existed in classic settings #1, and think the overall preference would be to eliminate different tiers in the blue curves altogether.
What does that mean?

Quote
We would also first need to standardize on expected bullet damage value based on our current random settings.

For Warbird L1 On Ball has 70% chance of 170, 30% chance of 335, giving a mean expected value of 219.5 (this is assuming the data in the google doc matches current settings which I doubt it does). That would be the target static value.
That seems like a reasonable starting point, but you probably won't be able to match that target because of the discrete values of bullet damage.
Logged
Shlazzer> dont you ppl realize once our sun goes supernova, NOTHING anyone or anything has EVER done or said on this planet will EVER matter?

Thrill> also i have a gr8 personality

I made $124.03 for a single season of HZ!
Nubby> U could b 3rd highest payed player
Nubby> Maybe 2nd

zero seven

  • RSFL Captain
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 2500
  • :D
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #8 on: January 20, 2017, 11:02:42 AM »

"and think the overall preference would be to eliminate different tiers in the blue curves altogether."

What does that mean?



I definitely think our current random dmg based settings are the best starting point for any testing to conversion of static damage. Our experience playing over the years naturally would gravitates towards the mean expected value. Even though our current 'random' dmg given by a ship looks relatively discrete now (WB for example is either L1 Ball 170 dmg or L2 Ball 335 dmg - no possible dmg in between), our experience or feeling of how dmg is given is likely more random as we dont have perfect indicators of how much energy an nme ship has or how much dmg we've given.

Second I believe that if we're going to test changes to static dmg it makes sense to use the settings we are familiar with as the baseline to try and mirror, since these are relatively balanced over years of refinement. Trying to backdoor what we think the settings should be based on feel is not quite starting from scratch, but probably more effort than we need to get to an apples to apples baseline for testing in the first place.

Here is what the mean expected dmg values look like for each ship, again assuming the settings in Goldeye's sheet are current:



Velocity based multipliers I think are another topic of conversation. I agree that it had the potential to represent added skill depth to the game (independent of random vs. static dmg) but in practice my personal experience has been that many people experience the velocity multiplier as added randomness, with few players able to really take advantage of it. D.Hasek comes to mind as one of the only players to understand it somewhat and incorporate it into his play style.
Logged
it's not as if i am the only person on my team with my brain.

zero seven

  • RSFL Captain
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 2500
  • :D
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #9 on: January 20, 2017, 11:49:42 AM »

And finally to build off Doobie's spreadsheet, I've made my own copy that will allow anyone to play with the settings in the top left.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yE8bTSStfSomM0FPLDgHu0NgSeCzBLhXoaULqnLlCJY/edit?usp=sharing

The goal is to modify the top left 3 cells in such a way to hit the target off ball and on ball damages that I outlined as expected values based on our current settings. The delta %'s are in the bottom yellow portion to review progress. I don't know if we can use non-integer settings for this, but either way its not reasonable to expect we can get 100% match, but we can get close enough to current settings to perhaps use as a baseline for testing and have a known idea of what got bumped or nerfed.

The important thing about approaching in this manner is no edits would need to be made to topline energy, recharge, speed, etc. (I think?)

WB / WZL would use L1
SPID / TERR would use L3
JAV / LEV would use L4

I've left goalie bullets out for now as we'd reasonably only need to mess w/ one ship to get everything where it needs to be after doing the rest of the ships.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2017, 02:40:29 PM by zero seven »
Logged
it's not as if i am the only person on my team with my brain.

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #10 on: January 20, 2017, 01:25:46 PM »

Did you want to set up the permissions as anyone with link or request access?  It is request access currently
Logged

zero seven

  • RSFL Captain
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 2500
  • :D
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #11 on: January 20, 2017, 07:16:30 PM »

Can't figure out how to give access to anyone with the link on mobile, but will check when I get back from Sundance. Whoever requested access, I assume you doobs, now has access

Edited to now be open to anyone to view / edit: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yE8bTSStfSomM0FPLDgHu0NgSeCzBLhXoaULqnLlCJY/edit?usp=sharing
« Last Edit: January 23, 2017, 02:40:54 PM by zero seven »
Logged
it's not as if i am the only person on my team with my brain.

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #12 on: January 25, 2017, 03:27:12 PM »

Warbird: 200
Javelin: 595
Spider: 400
Levi: 695
Terrier: 400
Weasel: 385

Numbers are close with the values you are someone else keyed in: 47/24/4.6

With some minor(tenths) adjustment of the multiplier the L4 level can be moved above the Levi Energy...

Big question: should the levi be able to tank another levi/jav?

Probably also need to include recharge rate in consideration of multiple hits.

Logged

zero seven

  • RSFL Captain
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 2500
  • :D
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #13 on: January 25, 2017, 06:51:54 PM »

I don't think any ball carrier should be able to survive a lev or goalie bullet. I'm not opposed to a full energy lev ball carrier surviving a jav bullet. But since this is the only edge case (in my opinion) I'd be fine with L4 boosted so that it results in kill on normal ball carriers every time.

The only newly introduced issue of increased L4 bullet dmg above and beyond Levi max energy is shots on goalie ball carriers outside of net. Given our current goalie buff this might be ok but would definitely throw off goalies who like getting out of the net to outlet.
Logged
it's not as if i am the only person on my team with my brain.

Thrill HZ

  • Spaceship Commentator
  • RSHL Captain
  • Out of Control
  • *
  • Posts: 8567
  • All stat requests go through my agent, BlueGoku
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #14 on: January 25, 2017, 09:22:42 PM »

I agree, a ball carrier shouldnt be able to survive a lev bullet. However I do think we need to remove the option where the levi can fire like 4 times in 1-2 seconds when multifire is on. If you have super high checking power that should not also be accompanied by super low checking delay, in fact logic would probably argue in the opposite direction.
Logged
thrill is super awkward and likely rubs it out to himself in the mirror

zero seven

  • RSFL Captain
  • Inspiration to Trolls Everywhere
  • *
  • Posts: 2500
  • :D
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #15 on: January 26, 2017, 04:39:49 PM »

The 47/24/4.9 split looks really good to me.

A WB and WZL will always die to an L1 Ball, L3 Ball, L4 Ball - Check
A SPID and TERR will always die to an L3 Ball - Check, Needs 57.5% energy to survive and L1 Ball - Pretty good (maybe would want 50% energy to be the norm but this is fine)
A JAV needs 97.9% energy to survive an L3 Ball - Pretty good, arguments could be made for less or more, will always die to an L4 Ball - Check
A LEV needs 83.8% energy to survive an L3 Ball - Check, will always die to an L4 Ball - Check

WB and WZL get a roughly 5% on ball buff, SPID and TERR get a roughly 9% buff (really only noticeable when attacking a Jav), JAV / LEVI are effectively no gain due to being above LEV max energy.

Off ball DMG is w/in 3% of expected value across the board, so virtually all energy amounts / recharge can stay the same.

Thrill's comments could be addressed later, but I will re-iterate that our 1st goal should be to make static vs. dynamic DMG as close as possible first to see if the 'static' is preferred. Then can modify individual ships.
Logged
it's not as if i am the only person on my team with my brain.

Goldeye

  • Local Moderator
  • My post count proves I'm better than you
  • *****
  • Posts: 5363
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #16 on: January 27, 2017, 04:26:43 AM »

Big question: should the levi be able to tank another levi/jav?

No. Let them BK instead :)

While you're at all this, think about getting rid of the whole energy / level correlation.  Along the lines of giving spid higher energy and a worse check than terr, and giving lev somewhat lower energy.    Also, if spid gets L2 and terr gets L3, we can boost spider so it can be a reasonable offensive contributor while remaining balanced.

I still think VRBL is really cool and adding a chance of higher level bullets at high speeds would be beneficial.  Plays built on tanks are fine but there should be a reasonable risk of it backfiring... none of the "I KNOW YOU WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY NOT KILL ME" that is very possible at today's levels. (Bias: I often play weasel, so I see that a lot.  I think it's a lame thing of it's own right, just because it is so dependable -- it really discourages lunging, which we don't want the settings to discourage...
Logged
Shlazzer> dont you ppl realize once our sun goes supernova, NOTHING anyone or anything has EVER done or said on this planet will EVER matter?

Thrill> also i have a gr8 personality

I made $124.03 for a single season of HZ!
Nubby> U could b 3rd highest payed player
Nubby> Maybe 2nd

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #17 on: January 27, 2017, 01:28:45 PM »

I am still wrapping my head around the velocity based damage part of hz_bullets.

A velocity based damage that at close to full forward velocity overcomes the gap and at full backward velocity just sneaks under it would be fantastic.

Wouldn't be too crazy a swing for the jav/levi L3 tank. 

The WB/Weasel check at full velocity taking down a terrier/spider?  Hmm

I also see the isNearBall calculation and now understand the situations where someone gets a double-kill when players on on top of each other.   
Logged

Goldeye

  • Local Moderator
  • My post count proves I'm better than you
  • *****
  • Posts: 5363
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #18 on: January 27, 2017, 01:48:16 PM »

A velocity based damage that at close to full forward velocity overcomes the gap and at full backward velocity just sneaks under it would be fantastic.
It's relative velocity independent of position and ship orientation.  If the checker and ball carrier are moving the same direction & speed, it's the same as not moving.  if they're moving opposite directions, the bonus is maximized regardless of the actual orientation and timing of the bullet.  That's a bit awkward physically, but I think it works out fine for gameplay since it's probably a hard-to-land bullet whenever those physics are awkward.

Quote
The WB/Weasel check at full velocity taking down a terrier/spider?  Hmm
I believe this is (/ would be, because I'm pretty sure the chances right now are too low) a good thing.  It gives the offensive ships a reason to lunge rather than collapse and use their prox.  That means more space, and more opportunities for quick transitions.

Quote
I also see the isNearBall calculation and now understand the situations where someone gets a double-kill when players on on top of each other.
Remind me what that is?
Logged
Shlazzer> dont you ppl realize once our sun goes supernova, NOTHING anyone or anything has EVER done or said on this planet will EVER matter?

Thrill> also i have a gr8 personality

I made $124.03 for a single season of HZ!
Nubby> U could b 3rd highest payed player
Nubby> Maybe 2nd

Doobie

  • Local Moderator
  • Registered Posting Whore
  • *****
  • Posts: 2011
Re: Static Damage
« Reply #19 on: January 27, 2017, 02:35:17 PM »

for (i = 0; i < MAXBALLS; ++i)
   {
      int squareDistance = abs(hitPlayerX - pdat->ballX) + abs(hitPlayerY - pdat->ballY);
      if (squareDistance <= ad->nearBallRadius)
      {
         isNearBall = TRUE;
      }
      if (squareDistance < distFromBall)
         distFromBall = squareDistance;

      if (pdat->carriers == hit)
      {
         isCarrier = TRUE;
      }
   }

   if (isCarrier || isNearBall)
   {
      totalBonus = pdat->onballVelocityBonus;
      wpn->level = pdat->onballLevelBase;
   }
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
 

Page created in 0.08 seconds with 19 queries.