Unit cap/limit
schkorpio
I can mspaint Join Date: 2003-05-23 Member: 16635Members
I can mspaint Join Date: 2003-05-23 Member: 16635Members
<div class="IPBDescription">to help balancing</div>Taking a page from many RTS games such as warcraft or dawn of war (farms, barracks, reinforment upgrades):-
These games have limits as to how many units of each type you can produce.
In dawn of war, you have a unit cap of 20, then each unit you produce takes up 1-5 of those resources. So you can mass out 20 weak soldiers, or only 4 mega units. Or a medium number of meduim units. Or a mixture of each.
Its up to the player.
It helps maintain a tactical element, rather than just relying on getting resources and massing out many mega units.
I think it would really help balance NS2 to have these artificial limits.
So in NS, if there was a unit cap of 20
Onos could be say 6, so you could only produce 3 onos at any one time.
H.A. could be a cap of 3 - you could only produce 6 HA at any one time.
That way if both teams are at the peak of their tech levels, it is never unbalanced (because atm 12 onos will always beat 12 H.A)
Where as with the cap system, there would always be 2 HA per onos which is roughly balanced.
Of course this system would need to be tweaked, but i think it could solve a lot of issues.
Actually Dawn of War goes even further but having a seperate infantry and vehicle cap. Which is probably what would need to happen.
e.g. 20 cap for normal life forms, and 20 cap for advanced life forms.
and a similar thing for marines.
These games have limits as to how many units of each type you can produce.
In dawn of war, you have a unit cap of 20, then each unit you produce takes up 1-5 of those resources. So you can mass out 20 weak soldiers, or only 4 mega units. Or a medium number of meduim units. Or a mixture of each.
Its up to the player.
It helps maintain a tactical element, rather than just relying on getting resources and massing out many mega units.
I think it would really help balance NS2 to have these artificial limits.
So in NS, if there was a unit cap of 20
Onos could be say 6, so you could only produce 3 onos at any one time.
H.A. could be a cap of 3 - you could only produce 6 HA at any one time.
That way if both teams are at the peak of their tech levels, it is never unbalanced (because atm 12 onos will always beat 12 H.A)
Where as with the cap system, there would always be 2 HA per onos which is roughly balanced.
Of course this system would need to be tweaked, but i think it could solve a lot of issues.
Actually Dawn of War goes even further but having a seperate infantry and vehicle cap. Which is probably what would need to happen.
e.g. 20 cap for normal life forms, and 20 cap for advanced life forms.
and a similar thing for marines.
Comments
well if it gets to the stage where the alien team has 12 onos, the game is already over.... and the marines deserve to lose for letting it happen.
personally i'm against any unit cap/limit, there's nothing wrong with the current system. the less restrictions there are, the better the gameplay will be.
Although i can see the virtue in unit capping ive never encountered a situation in ns where both teams have had a resource overload
I have. It was pretty dumb, but an exciting 2 hour game slug fest with Oni running rampant with Lerk attachments and HAs and JPs flying everywhere. In reality if our higher lifeforms were more competent, it should have ended long ago.
There already is a sentry turret limit in the current version of NS, and I see no reason why the development team for NS2 would regress on that.
Besides there's two major con's here:<ul><li>players are going to fight over the slots for the "better" lifeform, just like they do in other games with such limits. Which ever one is in demand, people fight over it, leaving feelings of not having a choice or irritation. Those that would take an in-demand slot and aren't awesome with it will also get harassed for sucking, much more than a player resource hoarding to go fade early and then dying moments later in the current NS.</li><li>Limiting the freedom to choose and tactical versatility. What if you need more of a certain class to counter something the other team is doing? Well too bad, your team is at the limit already. Things out of the locus of control of the player, especially things seen as arbitrary barriers, frequently get the blame for a loss. Right or wrong.</li></ul>Maybe you can change my mind, but right now I believe I'm pretty close to a no on this one. Sorry.
I completely agree that thats probably the only downside to something like this. So if 3 noobs are onos, then then everyone else has to go fade or something else. But chances are those onos won't last long anyways.
RTS games have proven that this could work if done correctly - it even takes a couple of patches for those RTS games to get it right! but i still think its great aid to balance things out.
<!--quoteo(post=1682820:date=Jul 9 2008, 08:57 AM:name=the_x5)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(the_x5 @ Jul 9 2008, 08:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1682820"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What if you need more of a certain class to counter something the other team is doing?.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well that is exactly why this system would work <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />, done correctly,the above would never happen, cause the other team would be limited in what they are doing to balance on the amount of counter aliens you have <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" /> there would be a ratio for this vs that.
eg. like a 2:1 H.A. to Onos ratio (if you assume 2 h.a. = the power of 1 onos)
where as now, the alien team can spawn 12 onos, and marines can't do anything significant to stop them.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If we all reacted the same way, we'd be predictable, and there's always more than one way to view a situation. What's true for the group is also true for the individual. It's simple: Overspecialize, and you breed in weakness. It's slow death.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You do not see entire teams of oni today, partly because the res to build them is needed elsewhere, but also because a couple of skilled jetpackers would cause havoc to say the least. Gorgerushes are fun, but they tend to end quite abruptly when a shotgun or two is in play. HA trains can be slowed down considerably by a good onos, and jetpackers have trouble with focus.
There is no need to include a hard limit on anything, as the inherent weaknesses of each particular unit or ability would make a lopsided team inherently vulnerable as a whole. IMHO, you achieve no balance benefits from imposing atificial limits, and a lot of tactical diversity is lost by forcing teams to be of a certain makeup.
You do not see entire teams of oni today, partly because the res to build them is needed elsewhere, but also because a couple of skilled jetpackers would cause havoc to say the least. Gorgerushes are fun, but they tend to end quite abruptly when a shotgun or two is in play. HA trains can be slowed down considerably by a good onos, and jetpackers have trouble with focus.
There is no need to include a hard limit on anything, as the inherent weaknesses of each particular unit or ability would make a lopsided team inherently vulnerable as a whole. IMHO, you achieve no balance benefits from imposing atificial limits, and a lot of tactical diversity is lost by forcing teams to be of a certain makeup.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I kinda agree. To me setting unit limits seems like covering up the bad basic gameplay structure. Sometimes the limits are necessary (the amount of heroes in wc3 for example), but other than that it should be more about surviving long enough to have a number of powerful units and taking advantage untl the enemy gets the counter.
Co has the limits plugin because neither team is going to lose any resoucres at any point while the game still keeps going for unnecessarily long.
<!--quoteo(post=1682843:date=Jul 8 2008, 11:19 PM:name=schkorpio)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(schkorpio @ Jul 8 2008, 11:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1682843"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->RTS games have proven that this could work if done correctly - it even takes a couple of patches for those RTS games to get it right! but i still think its great aid to balance things out.
Well that is exactly why this system would work <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />, done correctly,the above would never happen, cause the other team would be limited in what they are doing to balance on the amount of counter aliens you have <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" /> there would be a ratio for this vs that.
eg. like a 2:1 H.A. to Onos ratio (if you assume 2 h.a. = the power of 1 onos)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you are referring to a class limit, like having one commander instead of four, then yes there are some class limits in NS, and there will be some class limits in NS2. But that's not the change you proposed here. You were talking about limits on classes, particularly alien team lifeforms.
If there were hero's (and get extra abilities a "normal" unit/player doesn't have like extra damage) in NS2 then, yes I could see the point in creating limits on the number of hero's. The marines will have limits on the number of squads and, if prefered, squad leaders. But that doesn't correlate to restricting players who want to go fade from going fade simply because somebody used up the available slot first.
It's a bit more complex than that. Consider if you were trying make an algorithm to estimate the outcome of a battle/conflict for an AI:
RTS game battles can be estimated, somewhat. You can consider HP, damage per second, other spells & feats. It's not the kind of thing you can do in your head, but it's the kind of thing a computer AI could evaluate the threat/vulnerabilities on. For example, you suggested that 2 HA may be equivocal to one onos in the original NS. That's not necessarily true. The onos could be a highly experienced competitive player and the HA's could be newbies whom might as well miss half of their shots. Or what if the onos is the newbie and the HA's are almost aimbot-accurate players equiped with level 3 HMG's. You have the RTS <i>and</i> you have the FPS, combined. You can still make estimations of course, but the latitude of variance depends on so many factors not present in an RTS.
That may not seem a significant difference at first, but it's exponentially harder to balance what those limits should be. So how in the world would you playtest what's a fair lifeform class restriction when you are talking about an FPS and and RTS, not to mention two teams that are fundamentally different in their ranged vs. melee combat styles? (sry about the run-on question)
<!--quoteo(post=1682863:date=Jul 9 2008, 10:29 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bacillus @ Jul 9 2008, 10:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1682863"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I kinda agree. To me setting unit limits seems like covering up the bad basic gameplay structure.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, it is covering up for poor gameplay design in a way... Good point.
<!--quoteo(post=1682863:date=Jul 9 2008, 10:29 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bacillus @ Jul 9 2008, 10:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1682863"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sometimes the limits are necessary (the amount of heroes in wc3 for example), but other than that it should be more about surviving long enough to have a number of powerful units and taking advantage untl the enemy gets the counter.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Normally, I'm for increasing the RTS aspects for Natural-Selection and NS2, but here is something where the FPS aspect, combined with the limited # of players, and the class specialization can unite to nullify the need for such limitations.
>> The FPS aspect is that -- unlike in a RTS -- your "units" are individual players with different skill levels in different areas. Aiming, isn't really a part of your RTS gameplay; whereas in an FPS, aim is critical to success in combat. (Why else would aimbots be so advantageous for a cheater?) So it isn't as simple as just summing up the hit points of all the units and putting against their damage per second.
>> The limited number of units aspect is simple to understand. You don't have 100+ unit vs 100+ unit games in NS because the server won't support it, I'd imagine in NS2 the player limit couldn't be anything greater than 64 players in the same server at the same time (32 max per team). Not to mention the more player in a server, the more we are all likely to see server-side lag. (just like an over-crowded area in a MMORPG; a combination of upstream bandwidth limitations and CPU processing-time limitations) Not as many "units" in NS as in an RTS, almost guaranteed in NS2 because games will be held on individual private servers instead of large private company-owned servers.
>> And the last aspect, specialization of classes, means that as long as there are well-designed, solid advantages for having diversity (not everybody is one class), then it will prove unnecessary for everybody to want to be the "biggest" or "best" class. Thus NS2 needs to play attention to make each class valuable in it's own way throughout the game and distinctly different from each other. This is where Private was right on with quoting Major from Ghost in the Shell, if everybody is the same, then a well-designed game would mean that you have an Achilles' heel somehow. For example:
<!--quoteo(post=1682843:date=Jul 8 2008, 11:19 PM:name=schkorpio)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(schkorpio @ Jul 8 2008, 11:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1682843"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->where as now, the alien team can spawn 12 onos, and marines can't do anything significant to stop them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Um, pardon but that's incorrect. Since you are referencing the original NS here, I would advise your team to equip jetpacks and heavy machine guns and go hunting. Oni can't fly, can't even stun jetpackers if memory serves. I suppose they can eat you or gore you when you land, but that's getting off-topic into talk about skill in aiming, maneuvering, and teamworking. If you don't have the resources for that, then your team has lost control of the map and the the game long, long ago. If anything at that point you should be asking the alien team to quit wasting time and charge already. In any case, you get my point: an entire team of just one class should have a counter in the gameplay's design that make the need for lifeform limitations unnecessary.
So in conclusion, you are quite correct Bacillus: unless UWE does a poor job of make each alien lifeform class unique, this idea is unnecessary. Unnecessary but sometimes helpful doesn't rule out this idea of being a good idea, except that it has some major cons which I don't think could be bypassed (because they are resulting behavioral effects). This isn't a bad idea schkorpio, but from my perspective, the cons are outweighing the pros on this one.
<u>And one more con</u>:
Borrowing from older NS I&S discussion format, this idea is presented as a limit on the number of players becoming one lifeform for the alien team only. If this is a limitation on the alien team, then what is the equivocal limit for the marines? Can't choose certain weapons? Can't use your favorite jetpack or heavy armor because somebody else is using it? Whoops, somebody beat you to it first. Tough luck schmuck, sucks to be you. Guess you're going to have to leave the server then. You know, that seems to remind me of an annoying combat plugin to limit the use of certain weapons like GLs. (which is actually band-aid to cover up the symptom of grenade spam resulting from more people in the server than what Combat was playtested for, combined with the Extra Levels 3 plugin's Uranium Ammunition and more ammunition, combined with small-corridor combat map design) You know what? People do fight over the GL on those servers. Surprise, surprise... Yet if that's the not the way, then this causes some serious limits for the alien team. What if you want to do a gorge rush? Oops. Can't. Lifeform/class limit on this server. There really isn't a good equivocal balancing factor for the marines unless you limit their weapons.
As long as UWE keeps counters in mind, and perhaps puts that Ghost in the Shell quote on their wall, I don't feel that lifeform limits will be necessary. Especially considering I can see some pretty clear cons to lifeform limits which would be difficult if not impossible to mitigate. I trust UWE to get the job done correctly and I trust the community to try to fix it if it's not (with many lamentations!)