Simple mod penalising campers

[nalf]

Hi all,
just for fun I started a very simple mod to discourage camping (as all the time people are complaining about that ). The idea is simple: Since it is harder to kill someone near a defensive structure, it should be rewarded more (just like killing a higher alien class / more equipped human rewards more).

Currently, it works like this: There are three  new parameters: range, mod and bonus. When someone dies, it counts all the defensive structures (, ,  ) of the corresponding team within range. Let's call that number n. If n > 0 then the reward is multiplied by 1 + bonus * (n / (n + mod)). The reward can be newer higher than (1 + bonus) [assuming positive bonus], and the lower mod the higher is the reward for just a single defensive building.

The parameters can be given separately for humans and for aliens.

Anyone interested, or willing to give (preferably constructive) criticism?

    Best regards,
    nalf

[/dev/humancontroller]

Hi all,
just for fun I started a very simple mod to discourage camping (as all the time people are complaining about that ). The idea is simple: Since it is harder to kill someone near a defensive structure, it should be rewarded more (just like killing a higher alien class / more equipped human rewards more).

Currently, it works like this: There are three  new parameters: range, mod and bonus. When someone dies, it counts all the defensive structures (, ,  ) of the corresponding team within range. Let's call that number n. If n > 0 then the reward is multiplied by 1 + bonus * (n / (n + mod)). The reward can be newer higher than (1 + bonus) [assuming positive bonus], and the lower mod the higher is the reward for just a single defensive building.

The parameters can be given separately for humans and for aliens.

Anyone interested, or willing to give (preferably constructive) criticism?

    Best regards,
    nalf

combating camping directly with such arcade-style game logic rules has 0 immersive properties.

[Chomps123]

uh you lost me

[1337-Kynes]

I think this is an interesting idea, though I'd be more inclined to give the killer a bonus for kills that occur far away from their buildables.

[CreatureofHell]

I think this is an interesting idea, though I'd be more inclined to give the killer a bonus for kills that occur far away from their buildables.

That's what I thought it said the first time I read it.

[nalf]

I think this is an interesting idea, though I'd be more inclined to give the killer a bonus for kills that occur far away from their buildables.

I didn't think of that. My original idea was that it's harder to kill someone camping near defences so it should be awarded more (in this way, it is actually more pro- base attacking than anti-camping). Your idea could be justified as well since it's harder to kill someone further from own base (well, at least for humans). But killing someone far from own base doesn't necessarily mean that the victim is camping. Maybe it could be reversed so that killing near own defences awards less, so that actually the camping party is punished.

Any opinions what's better? I could implement the other option as well.

Anyhow, I'm posting the current patch, if anyone is interested. I can provide the compiled VM as well.

[/dev/humancontroller]

http://pastebin.com/Uha12fu5

do not use pastebin.com ! use an ad-free, google-analytics-free pastebin, such as Slexy. you should move the existing paste and update the link.

[RAKninja-Decepticon]

I think this is an interesting idea, though I'd be more inclined to give the killer a bonus for kills that occur far away from their buildables.

I didn't think of that. My original idea was that it's harder to kill someone camping near defences so it should be awarded more (in this way, it is actually more pro- base attacking than anti-camping). Your idea could be justified as well since it's harder to kill someone further from own base (well, at least for humans). But killing someone far from own base doesn't necessarily mean that the victim is camping. Maybe it could be reversed so that killing near own defences awards less, so that actually the camping party is punished.

Any opinions what's better? I could implement the other option as well.

Anyhow, I'm posting the current patch, if anyone is interested. I can provide the compiled VM as well.

how about penalizing kills made near friendly structures, and giving bonuses for kills made near enemy structures? 

[nalf]

These two approaches have slightly different effects:

• Penalizing defenders results in less overall credits/evos.
• Awarding attackers more results in more overall credits/evos.

I don't know, what's more appropriate and better for the game. A solution would be to allow a server admin to choose, but this would introduce even more new game parameters.

Another thing to consider is construction of forward bases. This mechanism would consider defending forward bases as camping, which may not be correct. But I suppose a forward base rarely has more than one defense (unless on an unlimited server), so the penalty wouldn't be high anyway.

And yet another idea: Instead of modifying awards for kills, we could just exclude defensive kills from the stage counters. So camping team would not advance to a next stage, which would give the other team quite an advantage. (This would not affect camping at stage 3, but I suppose this is not an issue anymore, I'd say a camping team at stage 3 looses anyway.) As I think about it, I like this idea even more. It doesn't alter game balance as much as credits/evos awards/penalty, yet effectively penalizes a camping team as a whole.

[RAKninja-Decepticon]

still, only discourages basecamping.  does nothing to discourage hallcamping.

[nalf]

The problem I suppose is how to define hallcamping. Any ideas? If we could define it in the terms of the game, then there is no problem adding some code that penalizes it.

[RAKninja-Decepticon]

it's a tough one, as there are several ways to do it.  most times it is by humans sitting at the end of a hall..  though sometimes they like to keep opening the door to the alien base on maps where the alien base has a hall right outside.  like the "front" door on karath, "front" door on nivius, and "front" door on tremor.  basically, anywhere a human or two can dish out enough damage to kill anything less than mara before they can be reached.

this is more than likely quite inefficient, but how about this - have the game track the coordinates of where the player was when he made his last three kills.  to give credit for stage ups, a player must be x mu (map units) away from his position of his last three kills, provided he has not moved significantly (say, repeater range)

i am quite tired, so i prolly didnt word that well. 

[nalf]

The model you describe would penalize non-camping behavior. For example, when attacking an opponent base, the kills would stop to be counted, because it would all happen at the same place. I think it's quite hard to find a good and general solution in this case.

And I'd say that the situation you describe is actually a (wanted) game feature and IMHO it should not be penalized. Humans' main advantage are ranged weapons and so they use such a tactic to their advantage. Aliens have their advantages, which annoy humans a lot . Aliens can try to build bases more resistant to that, or move them to a better place. Or it can be a problem of the specific map that it allows hallcamping and doesn't give enough opportunities to attack the campers from another side etc.

[RAKninja-Decepticon]

good point.  add a check then.  if the last three kills were in range to not count toward stage up, check the epicenter of those kills (where the repeater would be, assuming the range for the camp-counter is repeater range) and see if an enemy structure is in range.  if so, creds/evos are applied to stage up as normal.  if not, they are not.


and you also just said that humans were "designed" to camp.  perhaps that should be addressed, instead of tinkering with kill rewards.

[ULTRA Random ViruS]

How bout base damage takes up 2x as much credits instead but a minimum of 1/10th credit gain.
e.i.
* dretch gives 180 creds, if shot once by a turret, only 36 creds are gained because 72 credits = 1 shot (8dmg) and times by 2 is 144 and 180-144 is 36.

Basically the credits the turret 'earns/steals' from you when it does damage is multiplied by 2.

O.k., that idea isnt very strong for bigger aliens. But if i made it x4, the turrets would take 288 creds and minimum is also 1/10th so human gains 18 credits, but that's a load of bullcrap.

[nalf]

good point.  add a check then.  if the last three kills were in range to not count toward stage up, check the epicenter of those kills (where the repeater would be, assuming the range for the camp-counter is repeater range) and see if an enemy structure is in range.  if so, creds/evos are applied to stage up as normal.  if not, they are not.

Interesting idea. But for me it's too complicated. First, it's much more difficult to implement (certainly not within my time capabilities), and second somehow it feels too artificial. I'd prefer something simple, uniform, if possible.

and you also just said that humans were "designed" to camp.  perhaps that should be addressed, instead of tinkering with kill rewards.

Well, they are, sort of. But changing this would would probably result in a completely different game .

[nalf]

Basically the credits the turret 'earns/steals' from you when it does damage is multiplied by 2.

Do I understand it correctly that if I kill a , dealing 100HP damage and another 100HP is dealt by turrets, I get nothing? And if I deal 120HP and turrets 80HP, I get credits only for 200-2*80=40HP?

I was thinking in that direction too. Damage dealt by enemy defences ( s, s, etc.) is not included in the stage counter. So camping is actually already penalised this way. If the reward taken by defences would be multiplied, as you suggest, the penalty would be even higher. I think this would reasonable. Another question is whether to also take away the killer's creds/evos reward, or just take away the reward added to the stage counter.

I think it would work well for bigger aliens too. Usually they take a lot of turret damage too, so the defenders would get just little credits for killing them. And if they are good and they don't take turret damage, well, the humans are doomed anyway .

[ULTRA Random ViruS]

Actually i got a better, and hilarious idea: If you stay in the base without moving from a 500 radius in your base within 2 minutes, the reactor zaps you with massive knockback, possible hurling you into the aliens XD

[/dev/humancontroller]

Actually i got a better, and hilarious idea: If you stay in the base without moving from a 500 radius in your base within 2 minutes, the reactor zaps you with massive knockback, possible hurling you into the aliens XD

to avoid the above scenario, move outside the base (only as far as 500 qunits, a repeater's range) every 2 minutes, or don't stand in a location where the reactor's zap would hurn you in danger; both of these are easy as pie.

[nalf]

A funny and interesting idea. Maybe it would be better to simply teleport the camper to some known location (or locations). Probably the other team would be already waiting there to feed on him/her .

BTW, I think that Risujin has a good anti-camping idea in his domination mod, although it's much more complex and I'd say that it changes the game significantly.