<!--quoteo(post=1756464:date=Mar 2 2010, 11:20 AM:name=Thief)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thief @ Mar 2 2010, 11:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756464"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So the lerk is returning to his original ranged attack role, yet he does a braveheart melee charge in the reveal video? o_o<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, put teh lork back on teh clorf where he belongs! And I fear we have to deduct some points from the overall score because everybody knows you don't fight lorks with pistols but shirtgons! Noob.
As a tangent point, count me as one of the players who stopped playing NS because it became *too* finely balanced.
I'm no pro, never had interest in becoming one. But NS became so unforgiving to the smallest mistakes that it really became an exercise in masochism for anybody who wasn't willing to devote themselves to the game.
Well, I'm no masochist, and too busy for that kind of devotion to a game, so NS simply left me behind.. or I left it behind. Whatever. End result was the same.. one less player. I worry when I see these pros talking about how the game is getting dumbed down and made so that you don't need sooper-1337 skills to win as if that's a bad thing. I see that and I worry about <a href="http://www.costik.com/weblog/2003/08/grognard-capture.html" target="_blank">grognard capture</a> and what that would mean for NS2.. and more importantly, for UWE.
<!--quoteo(post=1756679:date=Mar 3 2010, 03:39 AM:name=Kwil)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kwil @ Mar 3 2010, 03:39 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756679"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As a tangent point, count me as one of the players who stopped playing NS because it became *too* finely balanced.
I'm no pro, never had interest in becoming one. But NS became so unforgiving to the smallest mistakes that it really became an exercise in masochism for anybody who wasn't willing to devote themselves to the game.
Well, I'm no masochist, and too busy for that kind of devotion to a game, so NS simply left me behind.. or I left it behind. Whatever. End result was the same.. one less player. I worry when I see these pros talking about how the game is getting dumbed down and made so that you don't need sooper-1337 skills to win as if that's a bad thing. I see that and I worry about <a href="http://www.costik.com/weblog/2003/08/grognard-capture.html" target="_blank">grognard capture</a> and what that would mean for NS2.. and more importantly, for UWE.
Just sayin'.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think NS2 will provide some serious skill. It will just take time for all the NS1 pro players to master the game just like everyone else from the start. Of course in every multiplayer game practically, you will have players who exponentially are far greater than other players. It's just a matter as how fast people can gain skill, and master the game.
Hey I've got some ideas for the alternate fire if you haven't heard these yet.
When the lerk uses gas let the primary be the assault gas that does damage while the secondary shoots the protective cloud for the other aliens. that would ease the role for the lerk and he could focus on shooting the gas where it needs to go and flying instead of hitting 2 or 3 to change gas constantly.
Another idea for secondary gas would be a trigger. Ex. When the lerk shoots the gas, secondary fire activates the cloud to spread at that moment. Keep up the good work guys, I loved the first one and spent many a late night playing it!
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1756516:date=Mar 2 2010, 10:36 PM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Mar 2 2010, 10:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756516"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm not sure how much clearer I can be, but I'll try one more time: Voicing our theoretical concerns doesn't mean we can't change our minds in the future after trying it out. I've made a rational argument for why the developers shouldn't (as I see it) waste their time continuing down this path. What they decide to do is obviously up to them.
That's what I was asking, although not as directly. Don't you think this is a bit hypocritical, considering what you're saying boils down to "shut up"?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nobody is asking or telling anyone to shut up. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. It just so happens that my opinion is that people who judge an aspect of the lerk design without having tested it within an appropriate context are jumping to conclusions and doing more harm than good in the medium term.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Try counting and comparing the amount of positive and negative replies in this thread -- or any thread on this forum for that matter. We're not exactly having a balanced debate of pros and cons.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think it is unfair to suggest that expressions of excitement and enthusiasm are a counterbalance to crystal ball predictions of doom. WHat you are doign is the equivalent of a music journalist slating an upcoming album because of such-and-such a collaboration on it BECAUSE that band are popular.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If what I've been doing is "jumping to conclusions", then we can pretty much scrap these forums as there's nothing to post other than oohs and aahs, and perhaps a few spore mine requests.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Look, as I've already stated, I share your concerns about spikes. I accept that people can criticise it without context. But I too am entitled to point out how bogus such claims are at this stage.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In any case I'm quite happy with the way this thread has progressed. Now we actually have a reasonable debate about how we want the Lerk to perform, even if some of our assumptions don't necessarily have any basis in reality. I think it's sad that so many of you would prefer it if this debate never happened just because we don't know for sure how the alpha will play.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, just to be clear, I am not an NS2 dev, and neither is Tankefugl. All that has happened is a few of the old NS devs have popped their heads up to try to frame some criticisms in their correct context - i.e. they are rampant speculation.
I hope you know me well enough to know that if your concerns turn out to be well-founded, that I'll have no hesitation in reversing my point of view and will support your argument. But until then, I think people need to be aware that framing a single NS2 feature against the gameplay and technology of NS1 is disengenious.
I do not know, whether you have defined already secondary mode Gas for Lerk, but I will state the wish about it. I would make possibility to poison continuously, but on a short distance! Thus - we receive poisonous "flame thrower". That is from the big distance he can attack the opponent the thorns harming, from an average distance to start a compact cloud which at collision with object complicates visibility and gradually removes health (it is necessary to notice that the cloud in process of flight should dissipate that it did not use as in NS1 to poison the opponent in other end of a card), and alternative fire of gas - on a close distance (if we fly up more close) - like a flame thrower - we concentrate attack to the several marines standing nearby, both their reservation and a body in few seconds turn in dense jelly. However to fly up more close not so that it is simple, true? But also it is necessary to keep the enemy "in a sight".
The offer on a sniper thorn - instead of dispute to give a paralysis. Each got sniper thorn puts few damages, but "increases" (expands) a sight of the marine and lowers speed of its moving. If it is weak - it is possible to add effect of turbidity of the screen.
And what will be with Umbra? I, as well as many here, watch changes, and I have noticed that you gradually cut out all command making of game! At first this purchase of the weapon, as in Counter Strike (it means - that soldiers do not need to obey the commander, they to themselves will buy a rifle), now - switching-off Umbra (which was mainly protective ability for a command)... I understand that it would be desirable to make all classes independent, but I do not wish to see in legendary game Team Fortress 3 where everyone plays for itself(himself) because nothing agitates him to play to a command.
To all other - dangling paws at lerk look bad, can is better, that it drew in them under himself at flight?
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1756704:date=Mar 3 2010, 12:29 PM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Mar 3 2010, 12:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756704"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Nobody is asking or telling anyone to shut up. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. It just so happens that my opinion is that people who judge an aspect of the lerk design without having tested it within an appropriate context are jumping to conclusions and doing more harm than good in the medium term.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> When you define a rational argument based on general gameplay and balance constraints, and not as you claim exclusively NS1 comparisons, as "crystall balling", that is basically what you're saying. Instead of attacking my argument, you're defining it away. Unlike what you claim, I'm not predicting doom and destruction -- I'm simply stating that if my understanding of the new Lerk concept is correct, we might have some problems in the future.
<!--quoteo(post=1756704:date=Mar 3 2010, 12:29 PM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Mar 3 2010, 12:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756704"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, just to be clear, I am not an NS2 dev, and neither is Tankefugl. All that has happened is a few of the old NS devs have popped their heads up to try to frame some criticisms in their correct context - i.e. they are rampant speculation.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This was actually directed generally to all the "but you can't say anything, the alpha hasn't been released yet!" posts that pop up whenever anybody voices concerns. I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would oppose a debate about what we ideally want the Lerk to be -- if anything, that's what we should be using this forum for. I don't understand how this could cause any harm to anyone.
I'm sure the game will hardly be recognizable after alpha and beta testing, but there's a limit to how much can be changed, especially when the information that's released now will more or less cement the general public's opinion of what the Lerk "should" be like. By having this debate now, at least the devs will know that not everyone wants a ranged Lerk. Regardless of whether or not that was their explicit intent, they might keep that in mind while working on it.
Once I'd pieced together Zmey Gornynych's post, I have to say I agree entirely with his 3rd paragraph.
People seem to be getting all hung up and side tracked by things. Absolutely regardless of player class abilities NS2 should (and from my point of view, needs) to not lose any teamplay requirements that NS has.
I had previously mentioned that there were things from the indie awards video that really put me off the game. One of those was when the marine went close to the armoury a tool tip popup stated "Use this to get ammo and buy guns".
From information I've gained from various places about the game there are many things wrong with its development direction other than a lerk sitting in a vent for a game.
This is one of the reasons I hate reading/seeing information on any game release.
As for the comment about how the alpha will play, I would have assumed that the alpha wouldn't be about gameplay. For instance there is no point complaining about a certain aspect of the gameplay if the engine is so broken that it affects the gameplay :p
There was a similar debate in economics. They debated whether empircal data (positivism) or verbal deduction based on axioms (apriorism) are good ways to produce valid data. Clearly puzl is a strong positivist. Anyway. The point is that verbal logic is enough to provide valid data. If premises are true, also the conclusion is true.
When I command and make up tactics, I always use logical deduction to assess whether the thought tactic has any chances. It has its limits, but its better than wasting everyone's time for a tactic that never had any chance to work.
Puzl, are you also saying that people had absolutely no right to condemn taser and strongly prefer pistol over it even though they had not tested it? Are you also saying that NS2 devs have unlimited resources and this "rampant speculation" (gotta shoot those speculators before they get across the border) would have no use to for development decisions?
I don't get it. If people prefer pistol over taser, or close-combat lerk over ranged one (which it sounded by the first mention about hiding in vents), I think they are entitled to their opinion and there should be no harm done stating it.
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
Pistol vs Taser was really a debate over Form vs Function. I could care less what the weapon looks like. I'm interested in its game mechanics. Many people made up their mind that the Taser was a bad idea without having judged it within the context of the wider NS2 game design. This to me is disingeneous. I'm much more interested in its rof, damage, recoil, weapon switch time, reload time and all the other facets that will determine whether it is effective as a secondary backup weapon or whether it performs a primary role as a long rage sniping weapon.
People have a right to prefer pistol over taser but I would think they are jumping to conclusions they know little or nothing about.
People might prefer close combat lerk, but honestly, do you want one of the major pieces of the alien lineup to be effective only because its hitbox is still on the other side of the room? In my mind, the first thing that *I* would do to the lerk is slow it down and make it larger. After that I would design the combat role based on how it feels. Because the absolute bare minimum for NS2, IMO, is that it should be designed within the constraints of the network it runs on.
With this in mind, I think *NOBODY* should jump to conclusions. This is both the general point that you should try something out before jumping to conclusions and the very specific point about the lerk.
As for your point about positivism vs apriorism, I'm an engineer, not a mathemitician. To me, iteration and experimentation to produce an evolution of the system towards a satisfactory goal are always the most cost effective way to reach your targets. A very good historical example would be how academcis laughed at Linux for not adhering to the academic theory of the day, yet those guys just ploughed on and fairly rapidly eclipsed their competitiors ( i'm speaking of the other Unix flavours coming out of various research initiatives at the time ).
Well when NS came out it put everything from servers to clients to their limits. If NS features would have been cut to make it as smooth as CS, would you think NS would have been equal success? Nowadays most comps can run NS very smoothly, while servers have high FPS (1000) and connections are rather fast aswell.
While handling hitboxes both codewise and hardware-wise was hard in the ealy days, now its more than good. I think Max is the correct person to respond about this for NS2, but I wouldn't want to skill dimensions (yes I count aerial acrobatics as one) to be lost just because current computers are not juicy enough for 100% accurate hitboxes. I'm obviously not expert on the subject, but since server is not rendering graphics, it can stick to objects' positional calculation and collision clipping which I doubt is very different from NS1 even though the graphic rendering is years ahead. Is there something very heavy and necessary calculation that NS2 servers have to do but HLDS doesn't?
And lerk is not effective because of some weird hitboxes but because of fast acrobatics to avoid lmg fire. This is especially useful when you have skulks to back you up.
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited March 2010
<!--quoteo(post=1756785:date=Mar 3 2010, 07:04 PM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Mar 3 2010, 07:04 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756785"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->do you want one of the major pieces of the alien lineup to be effective only because its hitbox is still on the other side of the room?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's a stretch, to put it mildly. While it has an impact, it's miniscule compared to player input.
<!--quoteo(post=1756785:date=Mar 3 2010, 07:04 PM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Mar 3 2010, 07:04 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756785"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In my mind, the first thing that *I* would do to the lerk is slow it down and make it larger. After that I would design the combat role based on how it feels. Because the absolute bare minimum for NS2, IMO, is that it should be designed within the constraints of the network it runs on.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yet your approach would inevitably lead to a Lerk that is unable to dodge bullets, but instead either has to hide or soak damage. Both of which lead to duller gameplay, at least it would for me. And don't bring your "crystal ball" argument -- while gameplay mechanics might change, aim won't.
While I agree with you that it's important to not discount something without trying it (tasting new foods for instance), there are certain things you can know without trying (I used the example of bacon flavoured ice cream earlier). Completely ignoring all theoretical knowledge is ridiculous -- even impossible in reality.
This will be my last post on this matter. I think it's a shame that the productive debate we had about the Lerk has turned into an entirely useless debate about whether or not we should be allowed to state our opinion on the development of NS2 without being labeled as fortune tellers.
Marines buying their own guns is a compromise that I think is very very important to the pub scene without having much impact on competitive games. If you want your commander to tell everybody what to buy, go right on ahead. But in pub games often the commander is subpar and doesn't drop weapons often enough, or pub players get frustrated with comms that won't drop them guns because they suck. This is how the majority of people by far are playing the game and it's irresponsible to ignore all of it in favor of the supposed trickle-down balance. NS2's success depends on pub impressions of the game, especially now that it's retail.
At least that's an issue that is pretty clear-cut though and easy to debate. This whole Lerk spikes debate, on the other hand, is built on baseless assumptions of the specifics of their implementation, which I think is really silly. We've known for a long time that UWE is building the game to save all the details like that for last, and I'm sure they're ready and willing to rework a bunch of this stuff based on alpha feedback. That's the time that it will be productive to complain about things that aren't working. Jumping to conclusions about how a weapon will work based primarily on a similar weapon from NS1, despite the stated differences in design, isn't helping anybody.
<!--quoteo(post=1756808:date=Mar 3 2010, 08:54 PM:name=Zek)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zek @ Mar 3 2010, 08:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756808"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Marines buying their own guns is a compromise that I think is very very important to the pub scene without having much impact on competitive games. If you want your commander to tell everybody what to buy, go right on ahead. But in pub games often the commander is subpar and doesn't drop weapons often enough, or pub players get frustrated with comms that won't drop them guns because they suck. This is how the majority of people by far are playing the game and it's irresponsible to ignore all of it in favor of the supposed trickle-down balance. NS2's success depends on pub impressions of the game, especially now that it's retail.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It still pains me to see things like this. I know it's important for the public games and I agree that at least some, propably most of it is necessary. Still, the original NS had such horrendous flaws in introducing the players to the game that I'd really like to see NS2 trying to find some solutions on proper tutorials, feedback and guidance rather than lowering the bar right away.
A lot of things in NS weren't that inhumanly complex once you figured out how to get started on understanding and learning them. For example the whole alien movement system got far easier to learn once someone told people to bind +movement to mouse2 and yet it was never there by default. Big share of lower tier players are still unaware of its effective use, making for example fading completely inaccessible for them.
As for the res model itself I've got a few worries, but I'm quite hopeful the issues can be sorted out or at least minimized by decent design. Still, I don't think there's any way to completely replace the strategical possibilities that one big commander res pool is going to give you. Of course playing around with a limited system can be interesting too, just as it was on aliens in NS1 to some extend.
<!--quoteo(post=1756818:date=Mar 3 2010, 03:47 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Mar 3 2010, 03:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756818"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It still pains me to see things like this. I know it's important for the public games and I agree that at least some, propably most of it is necessary. Still, the original NS had such horrendous flaws in introducing the players to the game that I'd really like to see NS2 trying to find some solutions on proper tutorials, feedback and guidance rather than lowering the bar right away.
A lot of things in NS weren't that inhumanly complex once you figured out how to get started on understanding and learning them. For example the whole alien movement system got far easier to learn once someone told people to bind +movement to mouse2 and yet it was never there by default. Big share of lower tier players are still unaware of its effective use, making for example fading completely inaccessible for them.
As for the res model itself I've got a few worries, but I'm quite hopeful the issues can be sorted out or at least minimized by decent design. Still, I don't think there's any way to completely replace the strategical possibilities that one big commander res pool is going to give you. Of course playing around with a limited system can be interesting too, just as it was on aliens in NS1 to some extend.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I think this particular issue has very little to do with education - everybody knows how to drop guns from the comm chair, that doesn't make them good at it. Very often a marine team is formed without a good commander and they just have to make due. And to make the game as fun as possible in that situation it's a good idea to mitigate the damage of a bad commander as much as possible without crippling higher levels of play. Equipment is the #1 most important factor for the fun of the individual marines, leaving it completely in the hands of the commander is way too risky. If I've got a pub comm that is just going to sit in the chair and run upgrades while we do everything ourselves, I'd at least like to be able to grab a shotgun for myself without begging.
The way I see the roost ability that it is an alternative for sitting in a vent or even on the ground if you might be low on energy so you are not exposed that much, but I don't see it as anything usefull maybe it will be overused by new players which keep hanging in the Hive Room as Offense Chambers ...
And the way I understand Spikes (or atleast that's how I feel they should work) is that it is no longer dive by biting but dive by short ranged shooting, ofcourse the secondary sniper like attack is a little disturbing and I hope the secondary Spore attack is not going to be something similiar, because this would encourage players to sit in vents all day long and shoot at marines, which is something that really bores people (if you don't have to fly out from time to time to KILL those low hp marines) if you feel too save in your vent you get bored eventually.
Picking Weapons for yourself is fine for me, most of the time I never expected to be handed any weapons in public so I just played along with my LMG until the very end of a game, the marines come a little closer to the aliens in that point of the game and with a commander the aliens come closer to the marine style of playing, I hope they both don't feel to equally because of that.
(Another example of "poor" execution of this balancing would be Blizzard's WoW Paladin / Shaman and adding them in Burning Crusade to each Faction (with little special skills) and then even adding those special skills in Wrath of the Lich King to each side ... fail Blizzard is what I would call this, BUT this won't be the case with UWE I do hope so :) )
<!--quoteo(post=1756818:date=Mar 3 2010, 11:47 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Mar 3 2010, 11:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756818"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...rather than lowering the bar right away.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> How does that lower the bar? You can still coordinate your loadouts on higher level, it's just that now you're no longer completely screwed on lower one.
An awesome idea for an ability for the lerk would maybe be some kind of swoop claw attack that he does from out of a perch. So you have to hang on and then swoop down and bite/claw the marine and then flap off. It could deal damage like charge does, you dive out of roosting on the ceiling and the first marine you run into takes 70 damage or whatever. Then you flap away.
This way he can primarily be a long ranged alien keeping him different, but give him a reason to occasionally be near the marines while they frantically fire away above their heads. Seems very lerky to me.
<!--quoteo(post=1756845:date=Mar 4 2010, 12:38 AM:name=Draco_2k)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Draco_2k @ Mar 4 2010, 12:38 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756845"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How does that lower the bar? You can still coordinate your loadouts on higher level, it's just that now you're no longer completely screwed on lower one.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, for example you can't coordinate that one bit on lower levels. I'm fine with it on competetive play, at least for the most of it, but for the public game we are probably going to see some more combat style joyride gaming. You're going to see a lot of unorganised spamming, mines and whatever.
I guess it's good for the fun factor of your average player, but I can't see the team executing one strategy even to the extend where it was on NS public games.
You're right about this particular one not lowering the bar all around though.
Edit: Well yeh, I guess that's me with my chrystal ball again. Still, I'm not very optimistic on the level of possible organisation on public games.
<!--quoteo(post=1756935:date=Mar 4 2010, 09:33 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Mar 4 2010, 09:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756935"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, for example you can't coordinate that one bit on lower levels. I'm fine with it on competetive play, at least for the most of it, but for the public game we are probably going to see some more combat style joyride gaming. You're going to see a lot of unorganised spamming, mines and whatever.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's kind of the point, isn't it? So that your experience and performance isn't completely ruined by a reluctant commander. Both cases will have lack of teamwork, it's just that individual players are no longer screwed now.
I'm sure we'll see other things that encourage teamwork, an NS game should have them of all things... Commander is a pretty huge one, really.
<!--quoteo(post=1756935:date=Mar 4 2010, 01:33 AM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Mar 4 2010, 01:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756935"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, for example you can't coordinate that one bit on lower levels. I'm fine with it on competetive play, at least for the most of it, but for the public game we are probably going to see some more combat style joyride gaming. You're going to see a lot of unorganised spamming, mines and whatever.
I guess it's good for the fun factor of your average player, but I can't see the team executing one strategy even to the extend where it was on NS public games.
You're right about this particular one not lowering the bar all around though.
Edit: Well yeh, I guess that's me with my chrystal ball again. Still, I'm not very optimistic on the level of possible organisation on public games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I think it will be fine as long as the comm has a way to herd the sheep, like a distress beacon or squad spawning or something. This is just about being able to get the weapon you want independent of the comm.
<!--quoteo(post=1756979:date=Mar 4 2010, 02:27 PM:name=Zek)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zek @ Mar 4 2010, 02:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756979"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think it will be fine as long as the comm has a way to herd the sheep, like a distress beacon or squad spawning or something. This is just about being able to get the weapon you want independent of the comm.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, probably. I just feel when comming I won't have the shotgun push or GL ready when I really need it. Coordination like that take quite a bit of practise and planning even in organised play sometimes. On public you can't go through the plan before the game, so everything needs to be clearly explainable during the game. At that point it would be just easier to drop, 2 HMGs, GL, maybe a welder and tell them to push the location instead of starting to figure out your team's gun composition, welder spread and trying to get the right people grouped up and pushing.
It's not like you can do that much organised pushing now on public, but I'd really like to try it without being limited by terrible waypoint system and horrible HLVoice.
Here's a crazy idea... when the developers ask you to write in this forum feedback about their lerk ideas, you post your ideas and maybe include some supporting reasoning... NOT turn the thread into a 300+ post personal pissing match about how your preferred playstyle is so awesome and every other opinion is dumb. Less than HALF of the posts here contain suggestions for lerk gameplay. IF you want to go OT, take it to another thread!
You wonder why the development takes so long when they have to sift through 300 posts to get 6 ideas...
Write "I would like to see (blank) because..." and nothing else. ONCE. Then the devs can tally up how many people like what and use their best judgement on what fits best into the gameplay mechanics.
"Your idea is dumb." "No it isn't." "Yes it is." "No it isn't" AIN'T HELPING. I think the dev's are smart enough to figure out which ideas are good/dumb without the juvenile bickering. But if you insist... go make a new thread. Crazy idea, I know.
schkorpioI can mspaintJoin Date: 2003-05-23Member: 16635Members
<!--quoteo(post=1757091:date=Mar 5 2010, 07:33 AM:name=Khyris)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Khyris @ Mar 5 2010, 07:33 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1757091"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Here's a crazy idea... when the developers ask you to write in this forum feedback about their lerk ideas, you post your ideas and maybe include some supporting reasoning... NOT turn the thread into a 300+ post personal pissing match about how your preferred playstyle is so awesome and every other opinion is dumb. Less than HALF of the posts here contain suggestions for lerk gameplay. IF you want to go OT, take it to another thread!
You wonder why the development takes so long when they have to sift through 300 posts to get 6 ideas...
Write "I would like to see (blank) because..." and nothing else. ONCE. Then the devs can tally up how many people like what and use their best judgement on what fits best into the gameplay mechanics.
"Your idea is dumb." "No it isn't." "Yes it is." "No it isn't" AIN'T HELPING. I think the dev's are smart enough to figure out which ideas are good/dumb without the juvenile bickering. But if you insist... go make a new thread. Crazy idea, I know.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> YES IT IS!
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
<!--quoteo(post=1757091:date=Mar 4 2010, 04:33 PM:name=Khyris)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Khyris @ Mar 4 2010, 04:33 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1757091"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Write "I would like to see (blank) because..." and nothing else. ONCE. Then the devs can tally up how many people like what and use their best judgement on what fits best into the gameplay mechanics.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> They aren't developing the game by popular vote. A discussion is useful; a poll is not.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1757270:date=Mar 5 2010, 03:31 PM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 5 2010, 03:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1757270"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No it isn't.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Don't make me send my minions to your house! It's snowing and they hate the cold...
<!--quoteo(post=1757272:date=Mar 5 2010, 03:39 PM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Mar 5 2010, 03:39 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1757272"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Don't make me send my minions to your house! It's snowing and they hate the cold...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OT: What kind of Overlord are you supposed to be? My minions loved the cold and plundering trough the dwarfs houses.
Comments
Well, there'll always be <i>newb</i> lorks... ;)
Looking great UWE!
And I fear we have to deduct some points from the overall score because everybody knows you don't fight lorks with pistols but shirtgons! Noob.
I'm no pro, never had interest in becoming one. But NS became so unforgiving to the smallest mistakes that it really became an exercise in masochism for anybody who wasn't willing to devote themselves to the game.
Well, I'm no masochist, and too busy for that kind of devotion to a game, so NS simply left me behind.. or I left it behind. Whatever. End result was the same.. one less player. I worry when I see these pros talking about how the game is getting dumbed down and made so that you don't need sooper-1337 skills to win as if that's a bad thing. I see that and I worry about <a href="http://www.costik.com/weblog/2003/08/grognard-capture.html" target="_blank">grognard capture</a> and what that would mean for NS2.. and more importantly, for UWE.
Just sayin'.
I'm no pro, never had interest in becoming one. But NS became so unforgiving to the smallest mistakes that it really became an exercise in masochism for anybody who wasn't willing to devote themselves to the game.
Well, I'm no masochist, and too busy for that kind of devotion to a game, so NS simply left me behind.. or I left it behind. Whatever. End result was the same.. one less player. I worry when I see these pros talking about how the game is getting dumbed down and made so that you don't need sooper-1337 skills to win as if that's a bad thing. I see that and I worry about <a href="http://www.costik.com/weblog/2003/08/grognard-capture.html" target="_blank">grognard capture</a> and what that would mean for NS2.. and more importantly, for UWE.
Just sayin'.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think NS2 will provide some serious skill. It will just take time for all the NS1 pro players to master the game just like everyone else from the start. Of course in every multiplayer game practically, you will have players who exponentially are far greater than other players. It's just a matter as how fast people can gain skill, and master the game.
When the lerk uses gas let the primary be the assault gas that does damage while the secondary shoots the protective cloud for the other aliens. that would ease the role for the lerk and he could focus on shooting the gas where it needs to go and flying instead of hitting 2 or 3 to change gas constantly.
Another idea for secondary gas would be a trigger. Ex. When the lerk shoots the gas, secondary fire activates the cloud to spread at that moment. Keep up the good work guys, I loved the first one and spent many a late night playing it!
That's what I was asking, although not as directly. Don't you think this is a bit hypocritical, considering what you're saying boils down to "shut up"?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nobody is asking or telling anyone to shut up. You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine. It just so happens that my opinion is that people who judge an aspect of the lerk design without having tested it within an appropriate context are jumping to conclusions and doing more harm than good in the medium term.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Try counting and comparing the amount of positive and negative replies in this thread -- or any thread on this forum for that matter. We're not exactly having a balanced debate of pros and cons.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think it is unfair to suggest that expressions of excitement and enthusiasm are a counterbalance to crystal ball predictions of doom. WHat you are doign is the equivalent of a music journalist slating an upcoming album because of such-and-such a collaboration on it BECAUSE that band are popular.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If what I've been doing is "jumping to conclusions", then we can pretty much scrap these forums as there's nothing to post other than oohs and aahs, and perhaps a few spore mine requests.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Look, as I've already stated, I share your concerns about spikes. I accept that people can criticise it without context. But I too am entitled to point out how bogus such claims are at this stage.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In any case I'm quite happy with the way this thread has progressed. Now we actually have a reasonable debate about how we want the Lerk to perform, even if some of our assumptions don't necessarily have any basis in reality. I think it's sad that so many of you would prefer it if this debate never happened just because we don't know for sure how the alpha will play.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, just to be clear, I am not an NS2 dev, and neither is Tankefugl. All that has happened is a few of the old NS devs have popped their heads up to try to frame some criticisms in their correct context - i.e. they are rampant speculation.
I hope you know me well enough to know that if your concerns turn out to be well-founded, that I'll have no hesitation in reversing my point of view and will support your argument. But until then, I think people need to be aware that framing a single NS2 feature against the gameplay and technology of NS1 is disengenious.
The offer on a sniper thorn - instead of dispute to give a paralysis. Each got sniper thorn puts few damages, but "increases" (expands) a sight of the marine and lowers speed of its moving. If it is weak - it is possible to add effect of turbidity of the screen.
And what will be with Umbra? I, as well as many here, watch changes, and I have noticed that you gradually cut out all command making of game! At first this purchase of the weapon, as in Counter Strike (it means - that soldiers do not need to obey the commander, they to themselves will buy a rifle), now - switching-off Umbra (which was mainly protective ability for a command)... I understand that it would be desirable to make all classes independent, but I do not wish to see in legendary game Team Fortress 3 where everyone plays for itself(himself) because nothing agitates him to play to a command.
To all other - dangling paws at lerk look bad, can is better, that it drew in them under himself at flight?
Thanks for attention.
When you define a rational argument based on general gameplay and balance constraints, and not as you claim exclusively NS1 comparisons, as "crystall balling", that is basically what you're saying. Instead of attacking my argument, you're defining it away. Unlike what you claim, I'm not predicting doom and destruction -- I'm simply stating that if my understanding of the new Lerk concept is correct, we might have some problems in the future.
<!--quoteo(post=1756704:date=Mar 3 2010, 12:29 PM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Mar 3 2010, 12:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756704"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, just to be clear, I am not an NS2 dev, and neither is Tankefugl. All that has happened is a few of the old NS devs have popped their heads up to try to frame some criticisms in their correct context - i.e. they are rampant speculation.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This was actually directed generally to all the "but you can't say anything, the alpha hasn't been released yet!" posts that pop up whenever anybody voices concerns. I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would oppose a debate about what we ideally want the Lerk to be -- if anything, that's what we should be using this forum for. I don't understand how this could cause any harm to anyone.
I'm sure the game will hardly be recognizable after alpha and beta testing, but there's a limit to how much can be changed, especially when the information that's released now will more or less cement the general public's opinion of what the Lerk "should" be like. By having this debate now, at least the devs will know that not everyone wants a ranged Lerk. Regardless of whether or not that was their explicit intent, they might keep that in mind while working on it.
People seem to be getting all hung up and side tracked by things. Absolutely regardless of player class abilities NS2 should (and from my point of view, needs) to not lose any teamplay requirements that NS has.
I had previously mentioned that there were things from the indie awards video that really put me off the game. One of those was when the marine went close to the armoury a tool tip popup stated "Use this to get ammo and buy guns".
From information I've gained from various places about the game there are many things wrong with its development direction other than a lerk sitting in a vent for a game.
This is one of the reasons I hate reading/seeing information on any game release.
As for the comment about how the alpha will play, I would have assumed that the alpha wouldn't be about gameplay. For instance there is no point complaining about a certain aspect of the gameplay if the engine is so broken that it affects the gameplay :p
When I command and make up tactics, I always use logical deduction to assess whether the thought tactic has any chances. It has its limits, but its better than wasting everyone's time for a tactic that never had any chance to work.
Puzl, are you also saying that people had absolutely no right to condemn taser and strongly prefer pistol over it even though they had not tested it? Are you also saying that NS2 devs have unlimited resources and this "rampant speculation" (gotta shoot those speculators before they get across the border) would have no use to for development decisions?
I don't get it. If people prefer pistol over taser, or close-combat lerk over ranged one (which it sounded by the first mention about hiding in vents), I think they are entitled to their opinion and there should be no harm done stating it.
People have a right to prefer pistol over taser but I would think they are jumping to conclusions they know little or nothing about.
People might prefer close combat lerk, but honestly, do you want one of the major pieces of the alien lineup to be effective only because its hitbox is still on the other side of the room? In my mind, the first thing that *I* would do to the lerk is slow it down and make it larger. After that I would design the combat role based on how it feels. Because the absolute bare minimum for NS2, IMO, is that it should be designed within the constraints of the network it runs on.
With this in mind, I think *NOBODY* should jump to conclusions. This is both the general point that you should try something out before jumping to conclusions and the very specific point about the lerk.
As for your point about positivism vs apriorism, I'm an engineer, not a mathemitician. To me, iteration and experimentation to produce an evolution of the system towards a satisfactory goal are always the most cost effective way to reach your targets. A very good historical example would be how academcis laughed at Linux for not adhering to the academic theory of the day, yet those guys just ploughed on and fairly rapidly eclipsed their competitiors ( i'm speaking of the other Unix flavours coming out of various research initiatives at the time ).
While handling hitboxes both codewise and hardware-wise was hard in the ealy days, now its more than good. I think Max is the correct person to respond about this for NS2, but I wouldn't want to skill dimensions (yes I count aerial acrobatics as one) to be lost just because current computers are not juicy enough for 100% accurate hitboxes. I'm obviously not expert on the subject, but since server is not rendering graphics, it can stick to objects' positional calculation and collision clipping which I doubt is very different from NS1 even though the graphic rendering is years ahead. Is there something very heavy and necessary calculation that NS2 servers have to do but HLDS doesn't?
And lerk is not effective because of some weird hitboxes but because of fast acrobatics to avoid lmg fire. This is especially useful when you have skulks to back you up.
That's a stretch, to put it mildly. While it has an impact, it's miniscule compared to player input.
<!--quoteo(post=1756785:date=Mar 3 2010, 07:04 PM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Mar 3 2010, 07:04 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1756785"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In my mind, the first thing that *I* would do to the lerk is slow it down and make it larger. After that I would design the combat role based on how it feels. Because the absolute bare minimum for NS2, IMO, is that it should be designed within the constraints of the network it runs on.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yet your approach would inevitably lead to a Lerk that is unable to dodge bullets, but instead either has to hide or soak damage. Both of which lead to duller gameplay, at least it would for me. And don't bring your "crystal ball" argument -- while gameplay mechanics might change, aim won't.
While I agree with you that it's important to not discount something without trying it (tasting new foods for instance), there are certain things you can know without trying (I used the example of bacon flavoured ice cream earlier). Completely ignoring all theoretical knowledge is ridiculous -- even impossible in reality.
This will be my last post on this matter. I think it's a shame that the productive debate we had about the Lerk has turned into an entirely useless debate about whether or not we should be allowed to state our opinion on the development of NS2 without being labeled as fortune tellers.
At least that's an issue that is pretty clear-cut though and easy to debate. This whole Lerk spikes debate, on the other hand, is built on baseless assumptions of the specifics of their implementation, which I think is really silly. We've known for a long time that UWE is building the game to save all the details like that for last, and I'm sure they're ready and willing to rework a bunch of this stuff based on alpha feedback. That's the time that it will be productive to complain about things that aren't working. Jumping to conclusions about how a weapon will work based primarily on a similar weapon from NS1, despite the stated differences in design, isn't helping anybody.
It still pains me to see things like this. I know it's important for the public games and I agree that at least some, propably most of it is necessary. Still, the original NS had such horrendous flaws in introducing the players to the game that I'd really like to see NS2 trying to find some solutions on proper tutorials, feedback and guidance rather than lowering the bar right away.
A lot of things in NS weren't that inhumanly complex once you figured out how to get started on understanding and learning them. For example the whole alien movement system got far easier to learn once someone told people to bind +movement to mouse2 and yet it was never there by default. Big share of lower tier players are still unaware of its effective use, making for example fading completely inaccessible for them.
As for the res model itself I've got a few worries, but I'm quite hopeful the issues can be sorted out or at least minimized by decent design. Still, I don't think there's any way to completely replace the strategical possibilities that one big commander res pool is going to give you. Of course playing around with a limited system can be interesting too, just as it was on aliens in NS1 to some extend.
A lot of things in NS weren't that inhumanly complex once you figured out how to get started on understanding and learning them. For example the whole alien movement system got far easier to learn once someone told people to bind +movement to mouse2 and yet it was never there by default. Big share of lower tier players are still unaware of its effective use, making for example fading completely inaccessible for them.
As for the res model itself I've got a few worries, but I'm quite hopeful the issues can be sorted out or at least minimized by decent design. Still, I don't think there's any way to completely replace the strategical possibilities that one big commander res pool is going to give you. Of course playing around with a limited system can be interesting too, just as it was on aliens in NS1 to some extend.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think this particular issue has very little to do with education - everybody knows how to drop guns from the comm chair, that doesn't make them good at it. Very often a marine team is formed without a good commander and they just have to make due. And to make the game as fun as possible in that situation it's a good idea to mitigate the damage of a bad commander as much as possible without crippling higher levels of play. Equipment is the #1 most important factor for the fun of the individual marines, leaving it completely in the hands of the commander is way too risky. If I've got a pub comm that is just going to sit in the chair and run upgrades while we do everything ourselves, I'd at least like to be able to grab a shotgun for myself without begging.
And the way I understand Spikes (or atleast that's how I feel they should work) is that it is no longer dive by biting but dive by short ranged shooting, ofcourse the secondary sniper like attack is a little disturbing and I hope the secondary Spore attack is not going to be something similiar, because this would encourage players to sit in vents all day long and shoot at marines, which is something that really bores people (if you don't have to fly out from time to time to KILL those low hp marines) if you feel too save in your vent you get bored eventually.
Picking Weapons for yourself is fine for me, most of the time I never expected to be handed any weapons in public so I just played along with my LMG until the very end of a game, the marines come a little closer to the aliens in that point of the game and with a commander the aliens come closer to the marine style of playing, I hope they both don't feel to equally because of that.
(Another example of "poor" execution of this balancing would be Blizzard's WoW Paladin / Shaman and adding them in Burning Crusade to each Faction (with little special skills) and then even adding those special skills in Wrath of the Lich King to each side ... fail Blizzard is what I would call this, BUT this won't be the case with UWE I do hope so :) )
How does that lower the bar? You can still coordinate your loadouts on higher level, it's just that now you're no longer completely screwed on lower one.
This way he can primarily be a long ranged alien keeping him different, but give him a reason to occasionally be near the marines while they frantically fire away above their heads. Seems very lerky to me.
Well, for example you can't coordinate that one bit on lower levels. I'm fine with it on competetive play, at least for the most of it, but for the public game we are probably going to see some more combat style joyride gaming. You're going to see a lot of unorganised spamming, mines and whatever.
I guess it's good for the fun factor of your average player, but I can't see the team executing one strategy even to the extend where it was on NS public games.
You're right about this particular one not lowering the bar all around though.
Edit: Well yeh, I guess that's me with my chrystal ball again. Still, I'm not very optimistic on the level of possible organisation on public games.
That's kind of the point, isn't it? So that your experience and performance isn't completely ruined by a reluctant commander. Both cases will have lack of teamwork, it's just that individual players are no longer screwed now.
I'm sure we'll see other things that encourage teamwork, an NS game should have them of all things... Commander is a pretty huge one, really.
I guess it's good for the fun factor of your average player, but I can't see the team executing one strategy even to the extend where it was on NS public games.
You're right about this particular one not lowering the bar all around though.
Edit: Well yeh, I guess that's me with my chrystal ball again. Still, I'm not very optimistic on the level of possible organisation on public games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think it will be fine as long as the comm has a way to herd the sheep, like a distress beacon or squad spawning or something. This is just about being able to get the weapon you want independent of the comm.
Yeah, probably. I just feel when comming I won't have the shotgun push or GL ready when I really need it. Coordination like that take quite a bit of practise and planning even in organised play sometimes. On public you can't go through the plan before the game, so everything needs to be clearly explainable during the game. At that point it would be just easier to drop, 2 HMGs, GL, maybe a welder and tell them to push the location instead of starting to figure out your team's gun composition, welder spread and trying to get the right people grouped up and pushing.
It's not like you can do that much organised pushing now on public, but I'd really like to try it without being limited by terrible waypoint system and horrible HLVoice.
You wonder why the development takes so long when they have to sift through 300 posts to get 6 ideas...
Write "I would like to see (blank) because..." and nothing else. ONCE. Then the devs can tally up how many people like what and use their best judgement on what fits best into the gameplay mechanics.
"Your idea is dumb." "No it isn't." "Yes it is." "No it isn't" AIN'T HELPING. I think the dev's are smart enough to figure out which ideas are good/dumb without the juvenile bickering. But if you insist... go make a new thread. Crazy idea, I know.
You wonder why the development takes so long when they have to sift through 300 posts to get 6 ideas...
Write "I would like to see (blank) because..." and nothing else. ONCE. Then the devs can tally up how many people like what and use their best judgement on what fits best into the gameplay mechanics.
"Your idea is dumb." "No it isn't." "Yes it is." "No it isn't" AIN'T HELPING. I think the dev's are smart enough to figure out which ideas are good/dumb without the juvenile bickering. But if you insist... go make a new thread. Crazy idea, I know.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
YES IT IS!
They aren't developing the game by popular vote. A discussion is useful; a poll is not.
No it isn't.
Don't make me send my minions to your house! It's snowing and they hate the cold...
OT: What kind of Overlord are you supposed to be? My minions loved the cold and plundering trough the dwarfs houses.