IeptBarakatThe most difficult name to speak ingame.Join Date: 2009-07-10Member: 68107Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Diamond, Reinforced - Shadow
<!--quoteo(post=1792261:date=Aug 5 2010, 11:19 PM:name=SatanLovesYOu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SatanLovesYOu @ Aug 5 2010, 11:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792261"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->wow no twitter or FB updates....this topic killed the devs...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If they had more people it would probably end up like. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clwhm1dRu6c" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clwhm1dRu6c</a>
<!--quoteo(post=1792166:date=Aug 5 2010, 09:41 PM:name=TrC)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrC @ Aug 5 2010, 09:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792166"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I recommend you check up threads regarding matter, if you still dont change your mind or choose ignorance theres nothing we can do.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thankyou for proving my point so well.
"Pro" players are elitist arseholes who's views should be counted as the minority, if they're listened to at all. They're exclusionist, hate new people playing "their" game, have no tolerance for newer or less skilled players, and are exactly the people who would, for example, deliberately cause the marine team to loose by voting out the only willing commander just because he didnt build what they said he should build.
Balancing a game around Pro players means balancing around a rigid set of tactics based on a small number of players (5v5 on average) and thats not the direction any FPS should start off.
<!--quoteo(post=1792064:date=Aug 5 2010, 04:21 PM:name=Cerebral)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cerebral @ Aug 5 2010, 04:21 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792064"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It doesn't make it more valid, but often times it makes it more knowledgeable and well reasoned.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I might grant you this, tho I could argue it. Someone who played, say, 12 months of NS1 in only public will have had an entirely different game experience to someone who played 12 months of NS1 in only competitive. Since public players will always be a larger group than dedicated competitive players I could argue it the other way just as well.
<!--quoteo(post=1792327:date=Aug 6 2010, 08:34 PM:name=zex)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (zex @ Aug 6 2010, 08:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792327"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->no thanks, UWE please follow your vision and ignore backseat drivers Amen<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Compelling contribution to the debate. Especially the "please do what I want you to and ignore everyone else" part. I wonder what you'd be saying if their 'vision' actually differed from yours.
UWE have stated that they are grateful for our support and want to make NS2 as popular as possible, so they're going to continue to give consideration to our feedback. Which doesn't mean obeying every suggestion/complaint either.
<!--quoteo(post=1792202:date=Aug 5 2010, 06:24 PM:name=Nicksaerian)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nicksaerian @ Aug 5 2010, 06:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792202"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I haven't rifled through the 23 pages of text, so I apologize if my opinion is redundant. I would just like to add it to the pile.
I originally thought the MAC was going to be an assist tool for the commander to relieve the commander from yelling "HEY, COME BACK AND BUILD BASE". I thought marines would maintain the ability to build, but MACs would fill the void when marines simply ran off without building something (essentially getting rid of the base monkey role). Now it seems that NS2 will be one giant VIP mode where marines have to escort the VIP (the MAC in this case) to its destination. I can't say I like the thought of that. I, too, was one of those who enjoyed building... not for the sake of building but because it was a deeper involvement in teamwork to achieve the primary goal of defeating the aliens. Now all it feels like is that I can only kill. Putting forth escorting the MACs doesn't quite fill the void of teamwork that actually building a structure held. I'm not entirely sure how the gorge and alien commander will play out, but I'd like to see the gorge remain a participating builder of various structures as well. I know it was frustrating in NS1 trying to get people to spend their res at the get go for RTs and chambers, so I hope there will be a symbiosis between the gorge and alien commander to rectify that.
I'd like to keep the ability to build as a marine and have the MACs as a failsafe builder when the marines fail to build at all. But just as many posts in this thread, it's just my opinion and feelings.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ah wise words indeed, and might I mention that for the most part, the gaming community as a whole despises escort missions, I mean just think back to most all the FPS games with escort missions, how many times did you actually play it, or enjoy it?? I also bet if you checked the server list of game types it would be the least play mode. I honestly don't want my fun, gaming time to feel like a chore, and that is exactly what that type of experience brings. One more thing.. as if it wasn't bad enough escorting actual players who could react and fight back, now it's AI controlled robots, who literally make or break your entire teams survival.. how is this fun for anyone???? I don't know maybe I am a old school gamer but I care about protecting and keeping my human players alive, and that should always be the #1 focus of the game.. not robots.
One last thing I want to mention is this, let's say 5 marines go together to an RT, now with marines building they have the option of, all building to get it up fast, have 3 build and 2 defend, have 2 defend and 3 build, and etc. I mean you have OPTIONS and VARIETY, now let's take it the way it is now.. you have 5 marines and 1 MAC, now what happens is the 5 marines stand around doing nothing and watch at the robot builds for them.. exciting huh? I mean yeah your standing their defending but if nothing comes, you've contributed nothing during that time of standing still and waiting for the building to be built... man holding e and actually seeing building progress while actually contributing to the cause sounds pretty good at this point.
<!--quoteo(post=1792359:date=Aug 6 2010, 12:06 PM:name=TheGivingTree)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheGivingTree @ Aug 6 2010, 12:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792359"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->One last thing I want to mention is this, let's say 5 marines go together to an RT, now with marines building they have the option of, all building to get it up fast, have 3 build and 2 defend, have 2 defend and 3 build, and etc. I mean you have OPTIONS and VARIETY, now let's take it the way it is now.. you have 5 marines and 1 MAC, now what happens is the 5 marines stand around doing nothing and watch at the robot builds for them.. exciting huh? I mean yeah your standing their defending but if nothing comes, you've contributed nothing during that time of standing still and waiting for the building to be built... man holding e and actually seeing building progress while actually contributing to the cause sounds pretty good at this point.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which is my worry too. Are players who come from an FPS background going to quickly get bored of standing guarding something for no immediate benefit to them, and so not bother?
<!--quoteo(post=1789658:date=Jul 30 2010, 03:59 PM:name=Revi.uk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Revi.uk @ Jul 30 2010, 03:59 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1789658"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How does this expand on game play though, in what way does this somehow make the game any more exciting or appealing. There is no reason for it to be in the game it just makes the build robots redundant in their soul role which is what YOU just don't get.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I still think it expands gameplay nicely.
In the field, marines can build structures placed by the commander directly. Perhaps one marine needs to be equipped with whatever tech allows the MAC to place buildings.
Back at base, the Comm can use MACs to build up defenses and tech without having to get in and out of the chair constantly. I remember this being really annoying and dangerous for marines pushing on aliens.
Don't try to claim it's nonsensical to have MACs and marine-building. The two can co-exist.
<!--quoteo(post=1792347:date=Aug 6 2010, 11:14 AM:name=Snazz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Snazz @ Aug 6 2010, 11:14 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792347"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Compelling contribution to the debate. Especially the "please do what I want you to and ignore everyone else" part.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm assuming you can read English, so I'm assuming by "do what I want" you actually meant "do what you were originally planning to do before the forums became a screaming ######fest demanding you bring back minutia from NS1 regardless of the current design."
<!--quoteo(post=1792524:date=Aug 6 2010, 10:09 PM:name=tk-421)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tk-421 @ Aug 6 2010, 10:09 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792524"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The development page has "Allow marines to build" with a star and the words "Accepted". Guessing we will see this in the next update then?
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/progress" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/progress</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> yay
Too bad. NS2's improvements over the RTS aspect is what I was looking forward to the most. Shame to see such a critical element to the RTS gameplay diminished before actual testing.
<!--quoteo(post=1792540:date=Aug 6 2010, 05:31 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 6 2010, 05:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792540"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Too bad. NS2's improvements over the RTS aspect is what I was looking forward to the most. Shame to see such a critical element to the RTS gameplay diminished before actual testing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Care to explain how this diminished the RTS game play? Whats the difference if you drop a building and have AI robots build it or actual people. how does this change anything for you as a commander? Your doing the same damn thing, dropping a building and having it get built.
<!--quoteo(post=1792540:date=Aug 6 2010, 10:31 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 6 2010, 10:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792540"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Too bad. NS2's improvements over the RTS aspect is what I was looking forward to the most. Shame to see such a critical element to the RTS gameplay diminished before actual testing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
this,
this was pretty much exactly what my impression was
Gosh you folks are just so black and white about all of this. "Oh man they're going to let marines build END OF WORLD I AM DEPRESSED WHAT A SHAME" without remembering we are in an alpha. How else are they going to test whether this is a good or bad idea without, I dunno, having us test it?! NS2 is still in such a flexible state that marine building might be taken out completely, again, and for the better (for all we know) so please, stop jumping to conclusions and stop mucking up this thread with back-and-forth "My opinion is more important" BS and let's get some more constructive criticism about how we can evolve the gameplay to be more fun for <b>everyone</b>.
And please, don't reply with the usual "you can't please everyone" phrase. NS2 is in alpha. This thread is for brainstorming, and only by setting up an impossible goal will we get more creative ideas flowing. :)
Just because they are allowing marines to build doesnt mean they are changing the gameplay drastically. Theres many variations on the ideas of how to let marines build.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Care to explain how this diminished the RTS game play? Whats the difference if you drop a building and have AI robots build it or actual people. how does this change anything for you as a commander? Your doing the same damn thing, dropping a building and having it get built.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's the idea that you have to plan, mentally track, and control the unit (micro) as opposed to dropping a building once a marine is standing next to it. There's a huge difference. Plus there are far more impacts on gameplay than just the diminished RTS aspect. There's also the deeper level of general strategy being diminished as well, for example, feigning an expansion with MAC's while pushing the opposite hive. Kwil explains why people liked the idea of MAC only construction very well with his post here; <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=110803&st=20&p=1792478&#entry1792478" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...p;#entry1792478</a>
His point is even more relevant when you consider UWE is unsure if the powergrid and/or DI system will make it in the version 1.0 release. Ironically most people who didn't want MAC only construction said wanted more than just an FPS/Team deathmatch experience, and MAC only construction would somehow down gameplay down to this level, but without MAC/Drifters that TDM experience may be all that's delivered on 1.0.
<!--quoteo(post=1792565:date=Aug 6 2010, 07:26 PM:name=LlamaFarmer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LlamaFarmer @ Aug 6 2010, 07:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792565"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Theres many variations on the ideas of how to let marines build.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And they all suck. I look forward to exploiting them at retail to rage as many people as possible. I get my fun out of 1) winning and 2) making people angry so this should be a natural outlet for that.
<!--quoteo(post=1792576:date=Aug 6 2010, 03:49 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 6 2010, 03:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792576"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And they all suck.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Man you must have hated NS1, huh?
C'mon guys, the game isn't even playable from a "it's a game" point of view yet. Let's hold off on all the inane speculation until we get our hands on something that we can actually balance and test. In the meantime, think of some good variations on the theme of allowing marines to build.
<!--quoteo(post=1792576:date=Aug 6 2010, 07:49 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 6 2010, 07:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792576"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's the idea that you have to plan, mentally track, and control the unit (micro) as opposed to dropping a building once a marine is standing next to it. There's a huge difference.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, you don't have to because MACs will still be able to build so you can build on opportunity OR by planning.
These arguments against marines building almost all imply that this will become the only way to build and this is clearly not the case. MACs will be a godsend in small games and at the least still very useful in larger games.
<!--quoteo(post=1792578:date=Aug 6 2010, 07:56 PM:name=DaveKap)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DaveKap @ Aug 6 2010, 07:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792578"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Man you must have hated NS1, huh?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why do people constantly think of NS2 gameplay in NS1 terms? They're going to be two completely different games. <i>Big</i> changes have already been made to NS2 that makes most of what we know from NS1 obsolete.
What I hated about NS1 was how lackluster commanding was. NS2 has a chance to improve upon it with things found in actual RTS games like controlling MACs. MACs are an important part of strategy when they're the sole builders and a redundant afterthought when they're not. Since almost everything has already been said about this, I"ll quote Kwil again as he explains why: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=110696&view=findpost&p=1790533" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1790533</a> If it's a tldr for you then just skip to the 4th paragraph.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, you don't have to because MACs will still be able to build so you can build on opportunity OR by planning.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, you have to plan ahead. With MAC only construction if you see a small window of opportunity to set up an aggressive turret base you to have plan ahead for that by having a MAC there at the right time. With MAC/Marine construction you're probably going to have marines everywhere. No planning necessary. Drop whatever, wherever (game permitting), at a moment's thought. That's not what an RTS is about.
I should add that the only reason I care so much is because MAC only construction adds something great to the RTS aspect. Hopefully, with it's removal, there are still new things we have yet to hear of that will further the RTS side of NS2.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
You do realize that "they all suck" is an opinion. And I guess in this case that opinion sucks, because it will result in a game that has less options.
Giving players more options on how they can do things (in this case the building aspect) just adds to the game's value, so please go away with your narrow mindedness! Some of the ideas on how to implement do not force marines to build, that is if they keep the MAC's and Drifers as the building dropping units and have the option there to build it alongside the mac for players who want that.
I mean guys that only like to shoot stuff can still point their gun in the direction of the aliens and pull the trigger, or is that too boring as well.
There is nothing wrong with building on opportunity. It isn't like a good player/team can't be told a plan and micromanaged the same way either. If anything the current system is making marines want to run around separate from the MACs. It isn't how its intended but this is what happens when the marines don't feel like playing an escort mission every round and the general opinion on escort missions has been made clear...
Players have a tendency to be impatient. A lot of time they want to run ahead and cap RTs. Maybe if the game was played entirely from the commander's perspective MAC only building would be fun, but the majority of players are on the ground. By making marines build too, they feel like the MAC is also their slave and there to support THEM, not the other way around.
<!--quoteo(post=1792594:date=Aug 6 2010, 08:40 PM:name=Lazer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lazer @ Aug 6 2010, 08:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792594"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1) If anything the current system is making marines want to run around separate from the MACs. 2) It isn't how its intended but this is what happens when the marines don't feel like playing an escort mission every round and the general opinion on escort missions has been made clear...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1) Doesn't even make sense and you're thinking about 2) in context of NS1. If this was NS1 I would agree with you but NS2 has much more streamlined maps and standing next to a MAC may be not this horrible "great now I have to escort this thing to some random hallway for no reason" mission that everyone is making it out to be. When there are 8 players on a team and only two or three paths to go down you're going to have to go out of your way to not be a team player.
<!--quoteo(post=1792583:date=Aug 6 2010, 04:02 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 6 2010, 04:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792583"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, you have to plan ahead. With MAC only construction if you see a small window of opportunity to set up an aggressive turret base you to have plan ahead for that by having a MAC there at the right time. With MAC/Marine construction you're probably going to have marines everywhere. No planning necessary. Drop whatever, wherever (game permitting), at a moment's thought. That's not what an RTS is about.
I should add that the only reason I care so much is because MAC only construction adds something great to the RTS aspect. Hopefully, with it's removal, there are still new things we have yet to hear of that will further the RTS side of NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> OK so what's wrong with this suggestion: Make it so MACs have to <i>start</i> the construction process, can continue the construction process, but marines can help it along. Is the problem that you'd think, because the marines are everywhere, they'd just insta-build nearby buildings to life? Or am I missing something else?
<!--quoteo(post=1792597:date=Aug 6 2010, 08:45 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 6 2010, 08:45 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792597"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->NS2 has much more streamlined maps and standing next to a MAC may be not this horrible "great now I have to escort this thing to some random hallway for no reason" mission that everyone is making it out to be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> But that's exactly how 'everyone' is seeing it. Allowing real people to build does not take away from the RTS side of this game at all, it just allows you to be more directly a part of it. Again, I much rather the MAC to be my little helper than me be its little helper but that's just me.
<!--quoteo(post=1792598:date=Aug 6 2010, 04:48 PM:name=DaveKap)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DaveKap @ Aug 6 2010, 04:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792598"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->OK so what's wrong with this suggestion: Make it so MACs have to <i>start</i> the construction process, can continue the construction process, but marines can help it along. Is the problem that you'd think, because the marines are everywhere, they'd just insta-build nearby buildings to life? Or am I missing something else?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The more and more I think about this suggestion, the more and more it makes sense.
It seems really silly that, in NS1, people just built stuff by going to a place marked by the commander and building it. It seems to make more sense that a MAC, which would obviously carry the supplies needed to build a structure, would be necessary to begin the construction of a building. It also makes sense that a marine, with a welder, would be able to help with the building as marines typically should be able to do anything necessary on the field in order to push forth their effort to destroy the alien threat.
I know taking a realistic view shouldn't be the end-all reason to do something, but it actually makes a lot of sense in this scenario!
<!--quoteo(post=1792518:date=Aug 7 2010, 06:59 AM:name=zex)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (zex @ Aug 7 2010, 06:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792518"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm assuming by "do what I want" you actually meant "do what you were originally planning to do before the forums became a screaming ######fest demanding you bring back minutia from NS1 regardless of the current design."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No because I think that you would be complaining if their original plans conflicted with your own view on the matter. The way you've insulted your opposition and dismissed their objective feedback as simply winging doesn't give the impression that you have a fair, unbiased or measured standpoint.
Sticking to your initial vision without reflection and ignoring your target audience's evaluations is not good practice, nor is the only alternative blindly obeying suggestions.
<!--quoteo(post=1792576:date=Aug 7 2010, 09:49 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 7 2010, 09:49 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792576"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They all suck. I look forward to exploiting them at retail to rage as many people as possible. I get my fun out of 1) winning and 2) making people angry so this should be a natural outlet for that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't take selfish griefers seriously. However your argument of losing everything good about MACs just because they're not the only build option wasn't convincing me in the first place.
At first I was suspicious about MACs and Marines, who <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->sould not be able to build anymore<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->. An extremely important part for the gameplay in NS1. But I have to say I got used to it after just a couple of hours.
I love MACs. <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Especially the sound :D<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> " Right away Sir, or Mam, or whatever you are" This humor reminds me of Portal :D
And they are great for the gameplay: - You dont need a <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Base ######<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> anymore. - <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->MACs have to be protected by other Marines<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->, otherwise they will be destroyed easily. As a result <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Marines are involved in the process of building,<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> because you cant just let your MAC (or drifter) unprotected. - <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->The most anoying thing in NS1 for me was the actual building<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->. It was boring to run to a building, push your use key all the time and circle around the building. Hoping all the time that the model didnt blind an attacking alien.
<!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->I think the gameplay in NS2 has advanced drastically<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->. MACs and Drifters are bulding, but each team has to protect it like another member. This fact integrates the players into the building process as well!
<!--quoteo(post=1792598:date=Aug 6 2010, 06:48 PM:name=DaveKap)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DaveKap @ Aug 6 2010, 06:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792598"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->OK so what's wrong with this suggestion: Make it so MACs have to <i>start</i> the construction process, can continue the construction process, but marines can help it along. Is the problem that you'd think, because the marines are everywhere, they'd just insta-build nearby buildings to life? Or am I missing something else?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not as bad of a problem then, because at least they have to get the MAC up to the front lines. But once there, a savvy commander would have it start building every building there before using it to complete any of them, thus nearly eliminating the need to protect it. If marines could only speed up the process on the structure that the MAC was currently building, that'd be even better. And in fact, that might nicely handle the one lack that no marine building had -- making the tactical decision as to how many would stop defending in order to rush a structure to completion. As Steve has pointed out, it makes balancing the teams more of a bear, especially because there's always an element of map dependency.. but we're talking about the team that managed to put a ranged team vs a melee team on a razor's edge balance, so I'm fairly confident that could be handled.
Unfortunately, it seems most who have been arguing for marine building weren't arguing for a better system that can keep the advantages to gameplay of the MAC, but rather just arguing for the old system they were familiar with -- except with an extra building ###### besides the commander to help them along.
Comments
If they had more people it would probably end up like.
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clwhm1dRu6c" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Clwhm1dRu6c</a>
Thankyou for proving my point so well.
"Pro" players are elitist arseholes who's views should be counted as the minority, if they're listened to at all. They're exclusionist, hate new people playing "their" game, have no tolerance for newer or less skilled players, and are exactly the people who would, for example, deliberately cause the marine team to loose by voting out the only willing commander just because he didnt build what they said he should build.
Balancing a game around Pro players means balancing around a rigid set of tactics based on a small number of players (5v5 on average) and thats not the direction any FPS should start off.
<!--quoteo(post=1792064:date=Aug 5 2010, 04:21 PM:name=Cerebral)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cerebral @ Aug 5 2010, 04:21 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792064"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It doesn't make it more valid, but often times it makes it more knowledgeable and well reasoned.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I might grant you this, tho I could argue it. Someone who played, say, 12 months of NS1 in only public will have had an entirely different game experience to someone who played 12 months of NS1 in only competitive. Since public players will always be a larger group than dedicated competitive players I could argue it the other way just as well.
For someone who complains about trolling zex you have an uncanny grasp of it.
Charlie, of UWE, admitted he feels like he misses the building from NS1. It's been quoted several times in this thread and elsewhere.
It's not as clear cut as you want to make out.
Compelling contribution to the debate. Especially the "please do what I want you to and ignore everyone else" part. I wonder what you'd be saying if their 'vision' actually differed from yours.
UWE have stated that they are grateful for our support and want to make NS2 as popular as possible, so they're going to continue to give consideration to our feedback. Which doesn't mean obeying every suggestion/complaint either.
I originally thought the MAC was going to be an assist tool for the commander to relieve the commander from yelling "HEY, COME BACK AND BUILD BASE". I thought marines would maintain the ability to build, but MACs would fill the void when marines simply ran off without building something (essentially getting rid of the base monkey role). Now it seems that NS2 will be one giant VIP mode where marines have to escort the VIP (the MAC in this case) to its destination. I can't say I like the thought of that. I, too, was one of those who enjoyed building... not for the sake of building but because it was a deeper involvement in teamwork to achieve the primary goal of defeating the aliens. Now all it feels like is that I can only kill. Putting forth escorting the MACs doesn't quite fill the void of teamwork that actually building a structure held. I'm not entirely sure how the gorge and alien commander will play out, but I'd like to see the gorge remain a participating builder of various structures as well. I know it was frustrating in NS1 trying to get people to spend their res at the get go for RTs and chambers, so I hope there will be a symbiosis between the gorge and alien commander to rectify that.
I'd like to keep the ability to build as a marine and have the MACs as a failsafe builder when the marines fail to build at all. But just as many posts in this thread, it's just my opinion and feelings.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ah wise words indeed, and might I mention that for the most part, the gaming community as a whole despises escort missions, I mean just think back to most all the FPS games with escort missions, how many times did you actually play it, or enjoy it?? I also bet if you checked the server list of game types it would be the least play mode. I honestly don't want my fun, gaming time to feel like a chore, and that is exactly what that type of experience brings. One more thing.. as if it wasn't bad enough escorting actual players who could react and fight back, now it's AI controlled robots, who literally make or break your entire teams survival.. how is this fun for anyone???? I don't know maybe I am a old school gamer but I care about protecting and keeping my human players alive, and that should always be the #1 focus of the game.. not robots.
One last thing I want to mention is this, let's say 5 marines go together to an RT, now with marines building they have the option of, all building to get it up fast, have 3 build and 2 defend, have 2 defend and 3 build, and etc. I mean you have OPTIONS and VARIETY, now let's take it the way it is now.. you have 5 marines and 1 MAC, now what happens is the 5 marines stand around doing nothing and watch at the robot builds for them.. exciting huh? I mean yeah your standing their defending but if nothing comes, you've contributed nothing during that time of standing still and waiting for the building to be built... man holding e and actually seeing building progress while actually contributing to the cause sounds pretty good at this point.
Which is my worry too. Are players who come from an FPS background going to quickly get bored of standing guarding something for no immediate benefit to them, and so not bother?
I still think it expands gameplay nicely.
In the field, marines can build structures placed by the commander directly. Perhaps one marine needs to be equipped with whatever tech allows the MAC to place buildings.
Back at base, the Comm can use MACs to build up defenses and tech without having to get in and out of the chair constantly. I remember this being really annoying and dangerous for marines pushing on aliens.
Don't try to claim it's nonsensical to have MACs and marine-building. The two can co-exist.
I'm assuming you can read English, so I'm assuming by "do what I want" you actually meant "do what you were originally planning to do before the forums became a screaming ######fest demanding you bring back minutia from NS1 regardless of the current design."
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/progress" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/progress</a>
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/progress" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/progress</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yay
Care to explain how this diminished the RTS game play? Whats the difference if you drop a building and have AI robots build it or actual people. how does this change anything for you as a commander? Your doing the same damn thing, dropping a building and having it get built.
this,
this was pretty much exactly what my impression was
And please, don't reply with the usual "you can't please everyone" phrase. NS2 is in alpha. This thread is for brainstorming, and only by setting up an impossible goal will we get more creative ideas flowing. :)
Theres many variations on the ideas of how to let marines build.
It's the idea that you have to plan, mentally track, and control the unit (micro) as opposed to dropping a building once a marine is standing next to it. There's a huge difference. Plus there are far more impacts on gameplay than just the diminished RTS aspect. There's also the deeper level of general strategy being diminished as well, for example, feigning an expansion with MAC's while pushing the opposite hive. Kwil explains why people liked the idea of MAC only construction very well with his post here; <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=110803&st=20&p=1792478&#entry1792478" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...p;#entry1792478</a>
His point is even more relevant when you consider UWE is unsure if the powergrid and/or DI system will make it in the version 1.0 release. Ironically most people who didn't want MAC only construction said wanted more than just an FPS/Team deathmatch experience, and MAC only construction would somehow down gameplay down to this level, but without MAC/Drifters that TDM experience may be all that's delivered on 1.0.
<!--quoteo(post=1792565:date=Aug 6 2010, 07:26 PM:name=LlamaFarmer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LlamaFarmer @ Aug 6 2010, 07:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792565"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Theres many variations on the ideas of how to let marines build.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And they all suck. I look forward to exploiting them at retail to rage as many people as possible. I get my fun out of 1) winning and 2) making people angry so this should be a natural outlet for that.
Man you must have hated NS1, huh?
C'mon guys, the game isn't even playable from a "it's a game" point of view yet. Let's hold off on all the inane speculation until we get our hands on something that we can actually balance and test. In the meantime, think of some good variations on the theme of allowing marines to build.
No, you don't have to because MACs will still be able to build so you can build on opportunity OR by planning.
These arguments against marines building almost all imply that this will become the only way to build and this is clearly not the case. MACs will be a godsend in small games and at the least still very useful in larger games.
Glad most people seem to understand this...
Why do people constantly think of NS2 gameplay in NS1 terms? They're going to be two completely different games. <i>Big</i> changes have already been made to NS2 that makes most of what we know from NS1 obsolete.
What I hated about NS1 was how lackluster commanding was. NS2 has a chance to improve upon it with things found in actual RTS games like controlling MACs. MACs are an important part of strategy when they're the sole builders and a redundant afterthought when they're not. Since almost everything has already been said about this, I"ll quote Kwil again as he explains why: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=110696&view=findpost&p=1790533" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1790533</a> If it's a tldr for you then just skip to the 4th paragraph.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, you don't have to because MACs will still be able to build so you can build on opportunity OR by planning.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, you have to plan ahead. With MAC only construction if you see a small window of opportunity to set up an aggressive turret base you to have plan ahead for that by having a MAC there at the right time. With MAC/Marine construction you're probably going to have marines everywhere. No planning necessary. Drop whatever, wherever (game permitting), at a moment's thought. That's not what an RTS is about.
I should add that the only reason I care so much is because MAC only construction adds something great to the RTS aspect. Hopefully, with it's removal, there are still new things we have yet to hear of that will further the RTS side of NS2.
Giving players more options on how they can do things (in this case the building aspect) just adds to the game's value, so please go away with your narrow mindedness! Some of the ideas on how to implement do not force marines to build, that is if they keep the MAC's and Drifers as the building dropping units and have the option there to build it alongside the mac for players who want that.
I mean guys that only like to shoot stuff can still point their gun in the direction of the aliens and pull the trigger, or is that too boring as well.
Players have a tendency to be impatient. A lot of time they want to run ahead and cap RTs. Maybe if the game was played entirely from the commander's perspective MAC only building would be fun, but the majority of players are on the ground. By making marines build too, they feel like the MAC is also their slave and there to support THEM, not the other way around.
2) It isn't how its intended but this is what happens when the marines don't feel like playing an escort mission every round and the general opinion on escort missions has been made clear...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1) Doesn't even make sense and you're thinking about 2) in context of NS1. If this was NS1 I would agree with you but NS2 has much more streamlined maps and standing next to a MAC may be not this horrible "great now I have to escort this thing to some random hallway for no reason" mission that everyone is making it out to be. When there are 8 players on a team and only two or three paths to go down you're going to have to go out of your way to not be a team player.
I should add that the only reason I care so much is because MAC only construction adds something great to the RTS aspect. Hopefully, with it's removal, there are still new things we have yet to hear of that will further the RTS side of NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OK so what's wrong with this suggestion: Make it so MACs have to <i>start</i> the construction process, can continue the construction process, but marines can help it along. Is the problem that you'd think, because the marines are everywhere, they'd just insta-build nearby buildings to life? Or am I missing something else?
But that's exactly how 'everyone' is seeing it. Allowing real people to build does not take away from the RTS side of this game at all, it just allows you to be more directly a part of it. Again, I much rather the MAC to be my little helper than me be its little helper but that's just me.
The more and more I think about this suggestion, the more and more it makes sense.
It seems really silly that, in NS1, people just built stuff by going to a place marked by the commander and building it. It seems to make more sense that a MAC, which would obviously carry the supplies needed to build a structure, would be necessary to begin the construction of a building. It also makes sense that a marine, with a welder, would be able to help with the building as marines typically should be able to do anything necessary on the field in order to push forth their effort to destroy the alien threat.
I know taking a realistic view shouldn't be the end-all reason to do something, but it actually makes a lot of sense in this scenario!
No because I think that you would be complaining if their original plans conflicted with your own view on the matter. The way you've insulted your opposition and dismissed their objective feedback as simply winging doesn't give the impression that you have a fair, unbiased or measured standpoint.
Sticking to your initial vision without reflection and ignoring your target audience's evaluations is not good practice, nor is the only alternative blindly obeying suggestions.
<!--quoteo(post=1792576:date=Aug 7 2010, 09:49 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 7 2010, 09:49 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1792576"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->They all suck. I look forward to exploiting them at retail to rage as many people as possible. I get my fun out of 1) winning and 2) making people angry so this should be a natural outlet for that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't take selfish griefers seriously. However your argument of losing everything good about MACs just because they're not the only build option wasn't convincing me in the first place.
But I have to say I got used to it after just a couple of hours.
I love MACs. <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Especially the sound :D<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> " Right away Sir, or Mam, or whatever you are" This humor reminds me of Portal :D
And they are great for the gameplay:
- You dont need a <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Base ######<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> anymore.
- <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->MACs have to be protected by other Marines<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->, otherwise they will be destroyed easily. As a result <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->Marines are involved in the process of building,<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--> because you cant just let your MAC (or drifter) unprotected.
- <!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->The most anoying thing in NS1 for me was the actual building<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->. It was boring to run to a building, push your use key all the time and circle around the building. Hoping all the time that the model didnt blind an attacking alien.
<!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo-->I think the gameplay in NS2 has advanced drastically<!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->. MACs and Drifters are bulding, but each team has to protect it like another member. This fact integrates the players into the building process as well!
It's not as bad of a problem then, because at least they have to get the MAC up to the front lines. But once there, a savvy commander would have it start building every building there before using it to complete any of them, thus nearly eliminating the need to protect it. If marines could only speed up the process on the structure that the MAC was currently building, that'd be even better. And in fact, that might nicely handle the one lack that no marine building had -- making the tactical decision as to how many would stop defending in order to rush a structure to completion. As Steve has pointed out, it makes balancing the teams more of a bear, especially because there's always an element of map dependency.. but we're talking about the team that managed to put a ranged team vs a melee team on a razor's edge balance, so I'm fairly confident that could be handled.
Unfortunately, it seems most who have been arguing for marine building weren't arguing for a better system that can keep the advantages to gameplay of the MAC, but rather just arguing for the old system they were familiar with -- except with an extra building ###### besides the commander to help them along.