How to prevent (dretch) feeding?

Post anything else

Moderator: Nod_Nod_Nod

How to prevent dretch feeding?

Give 0 credits for killing them.
0
No votes
Give some credits for killing them, but significantly less than now.
1
8%
Prevent too frequent spawning.
1
8%
GIve more credits/evos for killing good players, give less for bad players (based on kill/death ratio).
6
46%
Receive credits/evos only after returning to the base.
0
No votes
Receive gained credits/evos gradually over time.
2
15%
Some combination of the preceding two.
0
No votes
No need to do anything, dretches and credits/evos are fine the way they are.
3
23%
 
Total votes: 13

Message
Author
User avatar
nalf
Granger
Granger
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 3:16 pm
Location: CZ

How to prevent (dretch) feeding?

#1 Post by nalf » Sun May 27, 2012 8:53 am

A far too common scenario: The alien team is low on evos, half of the players going dretch, feeding, dying and spawning every a few seconds. As humans get better weapons, aliens lose even more evos and 75% of them go dretch. Soon, most humans get bsuit+luci and a few remaining rants/goons are not able to defend the alien base for long.

So the alien team loses not because its good players are not good enough, but because its bad players are bad enough. Edit: I think that the cause is a combination of lack of skills and knowledge of the game dynamics, and a certain kind of selfishness: players try to get evos at the cost of sacrificing their team's position in the game.

How to solve it? Possibilities I came upon so far, which try to punish feeders personally in different ways:
  1. Reducing the reward for killing a dretch, or even setting it to 0. Problems: Unbalance - aliens would be able to swarm humans with dretches, gaining evos eventually, without losing anything. Humans would not have such an option.
  2. Preventing spawning too fast. I made an antifeed mod that prevents too frequent spawning. If a player spawns too fequently several times, the server will start to make him wait for some time before allowing him to spawn again.
    Problems:
    1. If aliens are low on evos and humans camp really hard, the only possibility is to attack human base with dretches to make a few frags. This mod eventually starts to delay spawning. A possible solution would be not to count spawns, but deaths, and differentiate deaths that give credits/evos the other team and deaths that don't (i.e. dying just by rets).
    2. [{USATREM}] !Gunther! pointed out that an alien team defending agains rushing humans will not be able to defend after some time, due to the spawn restriction. But I think if an alien team just feeds dretches against rushing humans, it's doomed anyway. Even if the dretches manage to stop the rush, humans will have more than enough credits to rush again and finish them off.
  3. Store kill/death ratio for players and give a higher reward for killing a player with a high kill/death ratio and vice versa. This would result in giving (almost?) no reward for killing players that just feed.
    Problems:
    1. I think the most fundamental problem with this idea is that it would greatly handicap the better team (and better players in general). Suppose there is a good team fighting against a weak team. The good team has a high kill/death ratio, so when the weak team manages to kill a player from the good team, it gains a lot of credits/evos. The result would be that the weak team would have similar number of evos as the good team.
  4. Do not reward credits when the player's victim dies, but store them in some buffer and give the reward to the player only after he returns to his base. For example, require him to get near an egg for aliens (get into the creep area) and to get to an armory for humans. If the player dies before returning back, the credits will be lost. So dying frequently would cause to lose most of the credits gained by killing victims.
    Problems:
    1. Rushes would get more difficult, so this would very likely encourage camping.
    2. There are still players stupid enough to just feed, no matter the consequences (like those just feeding with grangers during SD). These players won't care if they don't get credits. But I hope that most players would recognize the necessity to stay alive to get evos/credits with this mod.
    3. (And, most importantly, Lancer would have to abandon his practise of letting himself killed by an acid tube when he's to lazy to walk back to the base :P.)
  5. Again, store rewards into a buffer and give the credits from the buffer to the player over time. For example, if I kill a goon and I'm supposed to get 300 credits for it, I'd get 10 credits every second for the next 30s. Problems very similar to the preceding idea. IMHO this variant would be slightly better for aliens than the preceding one, since one of the aliens' advantages is that they don't have to return to base so frequently.
    Edit: This is currently my favorite. It's simple, and not only it discourages feeding, it also makes people play better. Not dying is a good strategy (in real life too, really!), since it deprives the other team of credits/evos. IMHO people playing with this mod would become better players and would play better in vanilla Trem too. .
  6. Some combination of the preceding ideas: When killing a victim, the player could get part of the credits immediately (like it is now), part of the credits could be released over time, and the remaining part could be awarded when making it back to the base.
  7. Edit: Deduct let's say 0.5 evo (for humans 100 credits or so) for every spawn, if possible. Of course, spawning would be allowed with 0 credits/evos too. So, an alien who feeds 2 dretches to get 1 kill will remain on 0 evos. The same for a human who feeds 2 rifles to get 200 credits. This would motivate people to die less, since they would have to maintain the given minimum kill/death ratio in order to get credits/evos.
Opinions, suggestions and constructive criticism welcome.
Last edited by nalf on Tue May 29, 2012 9:54 am, edited 3 times in total.

grmg.pl
Marauder
Marauder
Posts: 514
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:00 am

Re: How to prevent (dretch) feeding?

#2 Post by grmg.pl » Sun May 27, 2012 2:30 pm

3 and/or 4.

I like your ideas more and more nalf :D

This might turn into something more than tremz (i like the rts/fpp combination) but also something waaaaay more interesting than vanilla+ubp

IOW: go nalf!

User avatar
[{USATREM}] !Gunther!
Dragon
Dragon
Posts: 755
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:00 am
Location: United States of America
Contact:

#3 Post by [{USATREM}] !Gunther! » Sun May 27, 2012 3:20 pm

And what about human feed?
All this seems to be focused on is about a dretch feed, but after many games, I don't see much difference between a luci-dretch feed and a rant-human feed. Lest we forget that a reasonably good Tyrant can kill a battlesuit in one charge, or a goon can headshot one-hit-kill a human with no helmet.
Well anyway. 

1. Unbalance
2. In all respects, this doesn't help. Waiting around for a re-spawn makes rushes and countering-rushes nearly impossible, because most the team, especially at the start of the game, will be stuck in a 15 sec spawn delay. Waiting 15 more seconds to respawn doesn't suddenly make a feeder a better player, all it does is prolong the game, and make for a crippled team and an empty base. 
3. This has been implemented in several games, and it seems to work fine. That way, if a team is stacked, then it doesn't help them. 
4. This would prolong camping, or running back to base every kill. No one would really rush, and games would be much longer because you would have to run back to a base to get full credits/evos. 
5. Time variants is the problem. Say I throw nade in base, kill basi+granger, then fire a shot in and kill dretch, then die by 3 hives, and only get about 100 credits for it because I didn't wait...however long I would wait.
6. Just the problems of 4-5 wrapped into one. 
tremulous |ˈtremyələs|
Adjective
Definition:
1. shaking
2. quivering slightly

User avatar
nalf
Granger
Granger
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 3:16 pm
Location: CZ

#4 Post by nalf » Sun May 27, 2012 3:34 pm

[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote:And what about human feed?
All this seems to be focused on is about a dretch feed, but after many games, I don't see much difference between a luci-dretch feed and a rant-human feed. Lest we forget that a reasonably good Tyrant can kill a battlesuit in one charge, or a goon can headshot one-hit-kill a human with no helmet.
Well anyway. 
Not really, only 1. is focused on dretches. Everything else applies to both teams equally.
[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote: 1. Unbalance
True.
[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote: 2. In all respects, this doesn't help. Waiting around for a re-spawn makes rushes and countering-rushes nearly impossible, because most the team, especially at the start of the game, will be stuck in a 15 sec spawn delay. Waiting 15 more seconds to respawn doesn't suddenly make a feeder a better player, all it does is prolong the game, and make for a crippled team and an empty base. 
Yes, it's not perfect. But for that, the mod allows you to spawn without any delay for several times, before the delay kicks in. The number of "free" spawns and the delay are both configurable. The "free" spawns then regenerate over time by staying alive. Perhaps setting them high enough would suffice to make it work?
[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote: 3. This has been implemented in several games, and it seems to work fine. That way, if a team is stacked, then it doesn't help them. 
Noted, I'll think about it. The question is - how much the rewards should be altered? Give 0 evos/credits for total feeders that with 0 kills? And how much to raise the rewards for top players with no deaths?
[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote: 4. This would prolong camping, or running back to base every kill. No one would really rush, and games would be much longer because you would have to run back to a base to get full credits/evos. 
True, but it can be solved by building a forward base, especially on UBP.
[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote: 5. Time variants is the problem. Say I throw nade in base, kill basi+granger, then fire a shot in and kill dretch, then die by 3 hives, and only get about 100 credits for it because I didn't wait...however long I would wait.
Yes, it would require a change in strategy. Suicide rushes would be much less profitable. But it doesn't mean it won't work, it would be just different.

User avatar
[{USATREM}] !Gunther!
Dragon
Dragon
Posts: 755
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:00 am
Location: United States of America
Contact:

#5 Post by [{USATREM}] !Gunther! » Sun May 27, 2012 3:57 pm

IMHO, I think #3 might be a good place to start, as it would be helpful to not only your server, but others like US1 and RCZ as a standard for the way kills are handled. That way, if you have noob team, you won't be helpless against a stacked one.
tremulous |ˈtremyələs|
Adjective
Definition:
1. shaking
2. quivering slightly

User avatar
PPNL
Server supporter
Server supporter
Posts: 625
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 10:38 am
Location: The Netherlands

#6 Post by PPNL » Mon May 28, 2012 9:22 pm

Also make teh dretches not solid... or atleast that dretches dont block goons
I Maul Ya
McDretch
McRauder
*PPNL MAULED **
*PPNL ZaPP ZaPP
Sky Mauler
O_o

User avatar
Nod_Nod_Nod
Tyrant
Tyrant
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:58 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

#7 Post by Nod_Nod_Nod » Tue May 29, 2012 1:25 am

Nalf from expierance I know that If I would get 3 evos for one kill it would be more than enough... Or even too much. 2 evos for kill would be very good. I smash dozen noobs so like 4 noobs more or less one (maybe 3) for one evo would be good.

Just little opinion :)


KEEP THE GOOD WORK. YOU ROCK TREM CURRENTLY
The nodding of the head once to symbolize a greeting, cuz we white folk to damn lazy to open our mouths and speak up. Nods are also easier to shake off than a flase "hello".
"Person nods at you", or your direction, "you nod back"

grmg.pl
Marauder
Marauder
Posts: 514
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:00 am

#8 Post by grmg.pl » Tue May 29, 2012 7:42 am

Nod_Nod_Nod wrote:KEEP THE GOOD WORK. YOU ROCK TREM CURRENTLY

F1 :D


Btw:the goal is to prevent feeding or is it to negate the negative effects of feed?

The "no.3" idea has also anti-stacking as a side effect :D

User avatar
nalf
Granger
Granger
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 3:16 pm
Location: CZ

#9 Post by nalf » Tue May 29, 2012 9:48 am

grmg.pl wrote: Btw:the goal is to prevent feeding or is it to negate the negative effects of feed?
Good point! That is an important question to be answered before considering one of those variants. I'd like further comments on that.
grmg.pl wrote:The "no.3" idea has also anti-stacking as a side effect :D
True, negating the effects of feeding and anti-stacking goes hand-in-hand.

I'd rather motivate people not to feed and to play better. Negating the effects of feeding would help too, but I'm afraid it'd actually motivate people to feed more.
  • Variants that negate the effects of feeding (but very likely actually promote feeding): 1, 3 (anti-stacking too).
  • Variants that motivate players not to feed: 4, 5, 6.
  • Variants I'm not sure about: 2, 7.

User avatar
nalf
Granger
Granger
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 3:16 pm
Location: CZ

#10 Post by nalf » Tue May 29, 2012 9:56 am

Just note that I added a 7th option to the list in the original post.
Image

grmg.pl
Marauder
Marauder
Posts: 514
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:00 am

#11 Post by grmg.pl » Tue May 29, 2012 10:57 am

nalf wrote:Just note that I added a 7th option to the list in the original post.
I don't get it :D

User avatar
nalf
Granger
Granger
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 3:16 pm
Location: CZ

#12 Post by nalf » Tue May 29, 2012 11:18 am

grmg.pl wrote:
nalf wrote:Just note that I added a 7th option to the list in the original post.
I don't get it :D
I added the following variant to my original post:

7. Deduct let's say 0.5 evo (for humans 100 credits or so) for every spawn, if possible. Of course, spawning would be allowed with 0 credits/evos too. So, an alien who feeds 2 dretches to get 1 kill will remain on 0 evos. The same for a human who feeds 2 rifles to get 200 credits. This would motivate people to die less, since they would have to maintain the given minimum kill/death ratio in order to get credits/evos.

User avatar
Iltavuo
Server supporter
Server supporter
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 11:10 pm
Location: Finland
Contact:

#13 Post by Iltavuo » Tue May 29, 2012 2:30 pm

I see tremulous as a game where you should die quite a lot, the game usualy becomes quite boring when both teams are turtling so much that no one dies. I'd rather see credits gained from killing reduced and a small credit bonus from every building that has been killed ( maybe the amount of credits you get per building should be depend on how many there are in the map currently? ).

User avatar
[{USATREM}] !Gunther!
Dragon
Dragon
Posts: 755
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:00 am
Location: United States of America
Contact:

#14 Post by [{USATREM}] !Gunther! » Wed May 30, 2012 5:31 am

#7=Bad idea.
Iltavou wrote:I see tremulous as a game where you should die quite a lot, the game usualy becomes quite boring when both teams are turtling so much that no one dies.
And that's usually what happens. I really do not think that we need to punish people in the spawning process, as it is a very very important part of the game. (Or any game)
Plus, spawn-punishment just ruins fast build. >.< There's almost no point to it at all, and it's won quite a few games already.
This is where #3 fixes most of that. If a player gets a lot of kills off of a lot of feed, his "bounty" goes up, and the people that kill him get a mega reward instead of just a little reward. If people keep feeding, their "bounty upon thar heds" goes way down, and when they are killed the credit-return is very low.

There, all problems solved. :D (MHO)
tremulous |&#712;tremy&#601;l&#601;s|
Adjective
Definition:
1. shaking
2. quivering slightly

User avatar
nalf
Granger
Granger
Posts: 114
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 3:16 pm
Location: CZ

#15 Post by nalf » Wed May 30, 2012 7:53 am

[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote:#7=Bad idea.
Iltavou wrote:I see tremulous as a game where you should die quite a lot, the game usualy becomes quite boring when both teams are turtling so much that no one dies.
And that's usually what happens. I really do not think that we need to punish people in the spawning process, as it is a very very important part of the game. (Or any game)
I did some testing and I agree that punishing spawning isn't such a good idea.
[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote: Plus, spawn-punishment just ruins fast build. >.< There's almost no point to it at all, and it's won quite a few games already.
I view fast-building mostly as a sort of an unfixed bug, not as a game feature. So personally I wouldn't mind getting rid of it. If fast building is really wanted and it is important for the game, it should be implemented in some other manner.
[{USATREM}] !Gunther! wrote: This is where #3 fixes most of that. If a player gets a lot of kills off of a lot of feed, his "bounty" goes up, and the people that kill him get a mega reward instead of just a little reward. If people keep feeding, their "bounty upon thar heds" goes way down, and when they are killed the credit-return is very low.

There, all problems solved. :D (MHO)
I see two major problems with #3:
  1. Technical: How to compute the bonus? Just a kill/death ratio isn't enough. If Gunther kills a rant and dies as a rifle, it's certainly different then if I die as a bluci and kill a dretch :P.
  2. Conceptual: I don't like #3, since it actually punishes good players for being good, and rewards bad players for being bad. While it balances the game to some extent, it motivates people to be and remain bad players. This is my strongest reason against #3.
    Also, I'm afraid that either
    1. the reward/penalty will be only small and then it doesn't solve anything, or
    2. the reward/penalty will be significant, and the mod will became "a game of equal opportunities" where skill doesn't help people to win.
    Can you convince me that neither of this will happen?
_____________________
There are only 10 kinds of people in this world: those who know binary and those who don’t.

Post Reply