Page 1 of 3

Repair Node

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 8:58 am
by Bronze Fox
We're plugging away at the Engineer update. He's an interesting class to work on, because he creates a larger footprint in the game than any other class. This means we have a lot of options to work with, and the resulting set of ideas is truly daunting. Since we've already built and playtested some things that haven't worked out (with no false modesty, I think we've mastered the art of rapidly making things that aren't fun), we thought it might be interesting to give you some of our failed experiments.

The first was a new building internally known as the Repair Node. We gave Engineers the ability to replace any current building (teleporter entrances and exits were considered one building for this) with the Repair Node instead.

While deployed, the Repair Node would draw from a pool of energy to fix damage to nearby buildings. When the node ran out of energy, it would stop repairing and regenerate up to full, creating a window of opportunity for the attackers. When sapped, the Repair Node's repair function was disabled for the duration of the sap.

The goal of the Repair Node was to solve a perceived problem in the Engineer's play experience: always having to be tied to your base. The Engineer often has little to do after his base is built and fully upgraded except wait for the inevitable Spy sapper attempt, or for the battlefront to reach the base. The Repair Node was meant to buy the Engineer time if he wanted to range out to gather metal or harass the enemy with his shotgun.

This is usually how we approach our game design: Identify a problem, then discuss the ways it could be solved. Our experience told us that even when the Engineer didn't feel immediate pressure, he still couldn't range out away from his base. If a Spy, Soldier, or Demoman found the base unguarded, it didn't take long to blow up. The further away an Engineer was, the fewer buildings he would be able to save from sapping. We also felt that the Engineer invested a lot of up-front work to establish bases that were very easily destroyed. Thus the repair node was born.

Play-testing the Repair Node showed us one expected, and two (somewhat) unexpected, outcomes. The expected outcome was that bases were far harder to destroy, and turtling became a super effective strategy. Fortunately, this is the kind of problem that can be attacked by turning the correct game design knob, and the Repair Node had a lot of available knobs. We could lower the rate of repair, lower the amount of repair energy, lengthen the vulnerable period, and so forth. We tried several options. One change we made was to add diminishing returns so that two Repair Nodes working together were less than perfectly efficient, and adding a third didn't really help at all.

Despite the design choices we had available, we were never really able to get the Repair Node to feel balanced for the attacking team. TF2 maps tend to be designed with very specific predicted Sentry placement locations and length of Sentry survivability. The Repair Node distorted both old favorite maps and made testing new ones more difficult by exaggerating intentional choke points and creating new choke points where they didn't previously exist.

The first unexpected outcome of the Repair Node was the team realizing just how valuable the Dispenser and Teleporter were to so many aspects of game pacing. If the Engineer isn't able to build a Dispenser, his team loses the support power that the Dispenser provides. In most games Dispensers are ubiquitous. You don't really realize what you've lost until you've lost it. Fewer Dispensers had the effect of slowing attacking teams down in a variety of ways: Teams were more fragile, metal was harder to get to the front lines, and team rally points were harder to define.

An Engineer who took a Repair Node instead of a Teleporter put his team in an even less viable position. The pacing of many maps became completely broken without Teleporters in play. Teams weren't able to push as effectively and the lines of battle moved closer to the spawn points. This lack of flexibility meant that attackers weren't able to hold gains and matches took longer to complete.

The second unexpected outcome was downstream from the first. Teams perceived Engineers with Repair Nodes as less "friendly", specifically because they weren't building Dispensers or Teleporters. In retrospect, older data at our disposal should have known this would happen. Prior to TF2's release, the Medic had weaponry that was significantly more powerful, leading to highly skilled players playing Medic as a purely combat class. Aside from the balance issues this created, it also resulted in a Medic that wasn't interested in healing anyone, which didn't typically sit well with his teammates. Their perception was that healing is the Medic's job. Medics who didn't do that weren't perceived to be team players -- an identical reaction to Engineers refusing to build Dispensers and/or Teleporters. Like many design exercises we didn't learn what to do next so much as what NOT to do.
  • Lesson 1: The problem of the Engineer being tied to his base still exists, but the Repair Node was too heavy-handed a solution. If we solve this problem in the future, it will have to be in a way that doesn't distort the existing balance between attackers and defensive choke points.
  • Lesson 2: The Dispenser and Teleporter are really good. We already knew this, but we didn't know that they were really, really good. Encouraging Engineers to either avoid build them entirely, or to build them in weird ways, broke the game's pacing immediately. New buildings in the Engineer update will probably take the form of upgrades, or entirely new choices alongside the old buildings, instead of replacements.
These may seem like obvious lessons, but knowing for certain why a particular idea doesn't work can often be as valuable as an idea that does. This process highlighted specifically where and why the Engineer is valuable, and how even slightly altering this value can have game-shattering implications.
Ultimately, the Repair Node was cut because it made the game more of a grind. While it definitely made it less stressful to manage a base as an Engineer, it wasn't fun. The Engineer gained a little bit of fun, but nearly everyone else in the match suffered as a result.

-Brandon Reinhart
Image

TF2 Blog

Re: Repair Node

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:15 am
by Supreveio
At least they realized that the Repair Node would've ruined the game.

Unlike all the other unlockables they released that have ruined the game. :P

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:28 am
by Plinko
Steveio ruins the game.

Neat post. Engie is going to be super hard to mess with, so glad they're trying really hard to do it right.

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:38 am
by Boss Llama
Indeed, the Engy is a massively integral part of the team as is, and every one of his buildings plays a part. The only things they could mess with would be non-building related weapons, or wrench tweaks, but then it wouldn't really feel like an Engy update. Glad to hear they're looking at adding a fifth building, because losing any of the current ones is definitely unacceptable. I suppose they could also make modifications to the existing buildings, without modifying what they do (just how they do it), but that might be a bit like the last change they did, and could potentially be boring.

Re: Repair Node

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 11:44 am
by Stevo
Interesting :)

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:02 pm
by bullet4o1
They should have a Tier 4 that doesn't allow the Spy to sap. Should take 250 metal to upgrade to from 3.


I posted my idea here: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/s ... ?t=1172862

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:31 pm
by Plinko
I strongly dislike that idea, a class should never have a role completely taken away by something, a big part of why they had to remove the Sandman stunning ubercharged players. If a Tier 4 makes sapping less viable - I could see that, but removing it disables one of your three basic methods of clearing a sentry.

I hope some kind of gear mobility is still on their radar.

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:39 pm
by Clay Pigeon
They just need tier 4 sg that takes longer to successfully sap
(more hp), acquires and engages targets more quickly, has longer range, AND ISN'T KILLED BY 2 DH SHOTS.

Its damage doesn't even need to be raised.

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:30 pm
by Bronze Fox
[quote="Clay Pigeon";p="228699"]AND ISN'T KILLED BY 2 DH SHOTS.[/quote]

It's one hit on Scouts. :cry:
(If I remember correctly)

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:11 pm
by Plinko
I thought a level 3 needs 3 DH shots?

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:13 pm
by Guardian
Nope it's 2 Pinko.

Re: Repair Node

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:26 pm
by TheCarpe
Yep, the DH is a prime weapon for taking out sentries at range. It hits so fast the Engi might not even have time to respond.

And I am also against the idea of Sapper-proof buildings. Anyone who thought of that idea has got to play more Engineer than Spy, and just want to shortchange the handsome rogues. It would be terrible for game balance.

Re: Repair Node

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:38 pm
by metacide
[quote="TheCarpe";p="228728"]And I am also against the idea of Sapper-proof buildings. Anyone who thought of that idea has got to play more Engineer than Spy, and just want to shortchange the handsome rogues. It would be terrible for game balance.[/quote]

Sapper proof buildings would make the Spy far less valuable, regardless of how much it costs to build it. Maybe if there were some small percentage (10-20%) that the building could shake off the effects of the Sapper on its own. That might be a neat idea yeah? Or maybe while unsapped the Dispenser has a small chance to unsap other items near it.
That would need diminishing returns so you couldnt just put a bunch of dispensers next to each other to guarantee something couldn't be sapped.

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:42 pm
by Guardian
I wonder if why ever thought of disabling the repair node if the engy is nearby?

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:11 pm
by Cpt. Winky
i want buildings that you can choose to detonate like stick bombs so that if they are sapped, you can asplode them and kill the spy

My second idea was to have a turret that has a higher damage output and range than a lvl3, but it has to be manned by someone and is not autonomous. that way a simple backstab would disable it if you werent careful, but it could do awesome amounts of damage. Actually, if they could import the IFV defense from RA3, that would be awesome.... have the sentry change to fit whoever is manning it, i.e.

Keep the same lvl 1 - 2 sentries, but when upgrading to lvl3, no rockets, just a chariot like seat to man it from

Medic - Sentry heals as a lvl 2 dispensor

Heavy - bigger miniguns which do more damage and a little more knockback

Soldier - essentiall a manned lvl3 sentry, but inverted. 1 minigun and 2 smaller rocket pods.

Demo - Sentry has slightly more health - can detonate stickies from inside turret

Spy - turret can look like a lvl 1 turret

Sniper - turret has slightly increased accuracy

Engineer - nothing (i think this is key because it makes it more fair. someone ELSE has to use it to make it more powerful, so it is a tradeoff. 1 less offensive person for a more powerful sentry.

Scout - Pitching machine addon. Rate of fire should be about 1 ball every 4 seconds or so, arcing only slightly shallower than the normal ball

Pyro - on this one, i have no idea. Maybe a splash damage fireball instead of missiles, but i feel that will either do too much damage, or with a single jarate\enemy pyro, do near to no damage...