Allow xeno evolution regardless of caste/remove evolution tree

As per title. Allow any T1 to evolve into any T2 and any T2 into any T3. Being forced to play - or afk - as a t1 and/or t2 you dislike just to get the t3 - with a vastly different gameplay than the preceding two - you actually want to play isn’t exactly fun.
I don’t think there’s any solid balance or gameplay reason to keep it, beyond “muh immersion” (broken by 300 other things anyway). I see little point in gatekeeping people from having fun with this old system.

3 Likes

Defender tree

  • Defender: Tankie front combatant with CC abilitys
  • Warrior: Tankie front combatan with CC abilitys
  • Crusher: Tankie front combatant with CC abilitys

Sentinel tree

  • Sentinel: Ranged support thats cant melle well and best figths from behidn teammates
  • Spitter: Ranged DPS that cant melle well and best figths from behind teammates
  • Boiler: Ranged DPS that cant melle well and best figths from behind teammates

Runner tree

  • Runner: Squishy backliner that is good at melle, posses active flank abilitys, and is very mobile.
  • Stalker: Squishy backliner that is good at melle, posses active flank abilitys, and is very mobile thanks to evation abilitys.
  • Ravenger: Frontliner that is good at melle, posseses small flank capabilitys, and has active combat abilitys.

Drone tree is all support, you get it.

Most cast trees are very similar in how they play. They all have a theme.
Except rav, that one could be a tiny bit better, but has enough overlap to be fine.

If you sit around doing nothing and not having fun, thats entirly on you.
You are perfectly able to have great fun with T1, and just as much as with T2. You dont need to play T3 to have fun. Just because it has a higher number, doesnt mean its better.
If standing around doing nothing isnt fun, maybe dont sit around.
Fun fact, Defende has the highest armor value currently. Yes, higher then crusher.

But some people have a hard time going out of their comfort zone and try new things, to have fun in other ways. Maybe find something new with wich they have even more fun.
That is why stuff like the forced evo tree is done.
Its an old game dev trick called “force the player, to have fun”.
If you allow people complet freedome, they will very quickly find the way thats most optimal and get stuck in a set route. Thats not an opion, thats a very common problem in game development.

We dont want that. We want you to play every cast, to learn them and enjoy them. If you cant do that on your own, someone will come and hold your hand.

So. If you dont have fun playing the not T3, maybe try a new aproach to said cast.
Every cast hs something enjoyable about them. Yes, some migth click more with you. But they are still fun. Try and learn how to make those casts work. Worst thing that happens, is you still dont have fun, so no cange. And best, you actually start to have fun with more casts.

2 Likes

Go Queen from start round.
You will notice how fun are all the other castes, regardless of constraints.
Ask a Queen main how much they hate beign Queen. They will tell.

Semi-True jokes aside: I feel the evo tree is good as it is.
My only pet peeve is to a drone go directly to queen. With no in-between.

  • Warrior: Tankie front combatan with CC abilitys
  • Sentinel: Ranged support thats cant melle well and best figths from behidn teammates
  • Spitter: Ranged DPS that cant melle well and best figths from behind teammates

yo are we playing the same game

1 Like

literally bro what is this dude talking about

how tf is boiler DPS

2 Likes

I think your very confused about what DPS classes are.
Otherwise you wouldnt be suprised to hear that boiler is about dealing damage.

yeah on the tanki part i did an upsy. Rest is very much true though.
Fun fact: Defender, Warrior and crusher all share an ability that only they have.

Thats done for sanity reasons. No T1 limit means easy to go drone, and doesnt need queen evo points.
Otherwise you would easily get the designated “princess” thats obligated to stay in hive at all times, because hive cant get her easily if mom died, and she is needed in case mom dies.
Just imagine the pain it would be.
Same if you slap it on pratorian evo. Now you have a person forced to be pratorian, wich isnt allowed to take risks.

Who is the boiler dealing damage to? Boiler is one of the most slow, telegraphed and strategic classes in the game in my opinion. Anybody who is actually taking damage to a non-trapper boiler is either very unfortunate or slow to react.

Boiler is for creating smoke for other xenos to attack through, so that they can’t get focused on while they push. Also, for FOB siege. In no world is Boiler a DPS class.

what ability, warrior cant cc for shit lol

What do you mean warrior can’t CC for shit. He litterary gets a stun, a weak push, and a throw. Thats more then any other xeno gets except oppressor.

Warrior in close combat against more than 1 person is death, stuns are lethal for warriors

Warrior indeed is basically a sidegrade for a lurker and should be put as a runner evo, but then there is nothing inbetween defender and crusher, but then just make defender and runner share the same evo tree.
In the past Crusher already was in the runner tree.


I personally don’t see anything bad comming from this if there is made one exception. Only drone can evolve into support T2s that are currently on his evo branch and queen. Combat castes and support castes should remain separated.

1 Like

CC isa bit of a confusing term, so i get why you think that.
CC does mean crowd control, yes. But it isnt restricted to crowds.
In general what CC means is the ability to controll the enemy in some way.
The most picture perfect example of that, would be an Aoe stun.
But, this also counts for single targets. It is still CC, just that instead of controlling the entire crowd, your controlling part of it. Or rather, one person of the crowd.
Then there can also be the argument made that aoe dmg abilitys are a form of CC, but thats more ehh.

In general CC just means abilitys that impact the enemys ability to do things. aka, muting, slowing, moving.

Warrior has the strongest single target CC in the game actually.
Warrior can realibly pick a target and move them to another part of the map at will. aka, the jump and fling combo.
They can fling a target in a roughly predetermind direction, cardinal directions, in form of fling.
And they have a long range grab combined with a stun, their jump.
Compare that with lurker or runner, wich both have a single hard CC.
The pounce.
Yes lurker has crippeling strike, but 1. thats soft CC and 2. that only works after pounce. Its not even as close to the strength War has.

In what way? War isnt build for backlining at all.
And lurker is kinda shit in terms of frontline combat because its abilitys work best for Guerrilla combat and often leave it exposed.

“Sidegrade” of a lurker, warrior sacrifaces backline capabilities for more of a frontline presence. It is literally just fat (more HP/Slower/Armor) lurker who can’t go invisible and has a lunge instead of a pounce.

The playstyle and goals of both are pretty simillar. Focus on single targets, “ambush” tactics (sitting behind a corner, or a door to lunge, generally outside of view) and such. Warrior doesn’t feel like an evolution of defender at all, or as a previous form of a crusher.
As you said yourself Warrior has the strongest single target “CC” and all of his abilities are against single targets, the same as lurker, while defender and crusher have AoE.

Focus on single targets is a domain of ambush tree, where runner and lurker are.
Any warrior worth their salt won’t be actually frontlining like a defender, crusher, or ravager would.
That is why I think Warrior is a Lurker sidegrade, I could totally see Warrior’s removal and making him a lurker strain (or in reverse). Just think about it.
Basically no other caste could be changed into a strain outside warrior (or in reverse with lurker being warrior strain).


That is why I think that every combat caste should be allowed to evolve into any other combat caste tier higher.

im not rly reading all of this but oppressor and vanguard are both way better at what u described

CC just means stun, silence, root etc.

14176c090c7b2cbdd56c323957779c6c

1 Like

I don’t see aee any reason to keep the t2 supports separate besides the initial weirdness of runners becoming hivelords, but the queen should definitely keep being drone locked.

lmao

Sure, but if I chose to have fun playing a t1 or t2 that I like, then im locked out of having a fun t3 to play and thus unwilling to evolve if needed. Which is obviously an issue.

You seem clueless about actual game development, I suggest reading through starsector dev diaries, there were several dedicated to handling the “player picks the optimal route everytime, how do we work with that without enforcing tedium” issue. League of legends balance changes and development throughout the years are also pretty good to look at.

Besides, just look at marines. Last I checked you’re not forced to use certain guns.

If you have so little arguments for your point that you have to result to akwardly laughing as a respons to a point, i think enough is said about the validty of your points. But i humor you.

Nobody is forcing you to play a T3. If you enjoy playing the T1 or T2 more, do it. Your not the only player. There is very likly someone else that will enjoy it more then you that is willing to play it.

Go look at what issues the research bio printer has currently. Then come back and tell me with a straigth face marines do not have the problem of “optimizing the fun out of thing”.
Fun fact, you can’t do that without lying. Its very sad, so much shit in it gets autrigth ignored.( I dare you to tell me of a time where the sleeper upgrade was printed.)

And to answer you statment that i dont seem to know much about game development.
I was refering to a concept in game design called finding the fun. Something that referse to the fact, that if you put something fun into your game, you need to guide to player towards the fun.
This can be done in literal terms in level design where you place something to catch the players attention (such as collectable, pickups) near the entrance of a secret.
Or by having certain restrictions in the way the player is able to play, guiding them to a playstyle that is the most “fun” ie. engaging, interactive, insert buzzword for frun here.

A good example for this is Doom 2016 and Doom Eternal. Doom 2016 being more free and allowing you to play through the wole game with one weapon without suffering real drawbacks.
This though resulted in many players missing out on a lot of varations of playstyles.
Because if there is one thing players like as much as playing optimally, its not changing their playstyle unless they need to. Wich in combination, spell doom for any other playstyle one carfully crafted for people, that isnt the optimal one.
People wont play another way, even if its not fun for them.

In Doom eternal they tried to target exactly that problem. To force the player to find the fun. Thanks to more previlant enemy weakspots and more limited ammo, one is more encouraged to juggle weapons then in the previous game. Wich is overall a more enjoyable playstyle for most people.
Yes, some people migth enjoy 2016 gameplay over etneral, and i can very much relate to that, but those are not the majority. And one has to focus on the majority when designing any product.

Still, it is very interesting how many people are against the direction eternal went, calling 2016 better and often saying it is the forced weapon juggelings fault. Wich i cant fully agree myself, being that there are more changes then just that to the combat. But the discourse between the two games is still incredibly facinating, with both sides having rather valid points in the subject matter.

And to give you homework for learning game design as well, i recomend you to look at diablo immortal. That game is a master class in game design. All of that craftmenship went into the cash shop, but still. If your are actually into game design yourself, that is something i highly recomend to look into. Joshstrivehays actually has a nice video explaining in detail how deep the cash shop really goes in effecting the game, best to start there to get an overview of the scale they worked on.

1 Like

Lack of reading comprehension, strawman, off topic and probably something else I’m missing the word for. If you’re confused as to what I mean I’m sure chat GPT can explain it if you paste the chain. As for me it’ll just be LMAO, thread worth it for the laugh alone. Didn’t read the doom wall btw

As for the actual topic optimizing the fun out of the game is a balance issue not a mechanical one. In this case nothing stops xenos from playing the “optimal” caste, you just sacrifice fun with the current system. Unless you’re referring to playing the best t1 into the best t2 into the best t3 but this isn’t realistic given how many people play suboptimal caste or can’t even agree on which one is best.
Besides, people also arent always going to optimize, especially in multiplayer games fun takes precedence (unless we’re talking competitive top of the ladder). Should be evident if you look at people’s loadouts and playstyles. Idk, think before typing or actually look at the game you’re discussing.
In the case of research, OT etc optimization is directly tied to fun so of course it’ll happen. The opposite spectrum is also lack of fun options that will lead to optimization too because you have no reason not to. Still, a balance issue.

bullet points
  • It is good to have castes be limited in access as it helps against caste stacks. You do not want everyone to be playing the same t3s, t2, or t1s.
    • It makes it more of a commitment to go for specific t3 slots, and heightens the feeling of value attributed to them.
    • It improves diversity of caste choice
    • It makes playing builder castes more of an investment. (Builder castes have no risk // it would be an easy path to a more effective t2 or t3)
  • It provides incentive to try and learn different castes then the ones that you are used to.
  • It makes sense to link similar castes together.
extra thoughts into post

I think the biggest point is that it makes it more of a commitment to go for certain castes over others. I don’t really think it’s that restrictive though regardless. It just means you can’t go Crusher from Spitter, lurker, or a drone t2; Boiler from a Warrior/lurker/drone t2; praetorian from a drone/lurker t2; or rav from a non-lurker t2.

All of these t3 options are very non-issues and make sense imo. Rav, Crusher, Boiler are the big ones ofc, where limiting access prevents annoying caste-stacks and improves the value attributed to them. It prevents meta-strategies, such as going Warrior into Ravager, or Warrior into Boiler, and never doing things like praetorian or crusher.
//
It balances out ravager/lurker (slightly) by having generally “harder/less consistent castes” preceding it. This makes gaining ravager an achievement.

It balances out boiler by having generally “less fun” castes preceding it. This makes it more of a commitment to go for boiler.

It balances out warrior by giving it less options of t3 choices, which prevents meta-strategies such as warrior into ravager, or warrior into boiler

It balances out lurker by giving it a hard t1 which evolves into it.

It also encourages the player to try and learn the castes leading up to their “chosen caste”, even if the caste is not so effective. It’s either that, or you don’t play at all and just wait for evo! Intentional design.

A massive flaw with “free evolution” is drone castes to any t2 or t3 castes. I think Drone should be a commitment, and cost evo points/time to evo into or out of. The problem with drone line to t3, for example, is you have ZERO danger, and have MASSIVE impact. It makes t2 or t3 a non-achievement or non-time investment entirely.



Tldr:

Realistically, I think all caste choices should be a commitment, I think the design is good and effective, and the negatives are simply not enough to remove it.

It prevents certain meta strategies, and improves diversity of castes.

  • It is well-designed that castes like Ravager have more “inconsistent” caste lines into it. This adds value to the caste
  • It is well-designed that Boiler has a very specific path into it, and is thus an achievement to gain. This makes its “path” less appealing, and less likely for caste stacks to form. The existence of boiler and praetorian also adds value to the Spitter line.
  • It is well-designed that the most popular t2, Warrior, cannot go Ravager or Boiler without heavy investment
  • Reducing mobility in evolution increases the chance you stick through the intentionally “less optimal” solution and try more things out.
    • It is well-designed, that you cannot go from the “easiest” set of castes (drone-line) to the “best” or “most meta” t3s or t2s.

And as for t1s into t2… those are all fine. Its 200 evo points, not even close to an issue. The biggest point of free evolution is the implications of t2 to t3. And I believe, the biggest issue resulting from that would be encouraging caste-stacking or going for “easier” or more comfortable castes instead of encouraging challenge/diversity of castes.

The power you gain by giving free-evolution to warriors for example, is a genuine design
and balance consideration as well, and should not be undersold.

Overall the current design removes freedom in order to add challenge, gamefeel, and/or weight/impact to your choice, which I believe is great design. The idea of evolution “lines” is also just cool too. I do not agree that it needs to be reworked at this time, unless a better option exists.


also it improves immersion did u know that :troll:

3 Likes