<!--quoteo(post=1790373:date=Aug 1 2010, 04:25 PM:name=tw1st)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tw1st @ Aug 1 2010, 04:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790373"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->UWE have stated that the core gameplay will be there.; which to me is marines vs aliens, one team overwhelmes the other and you win.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If core gameplay is as simple to define as "one team vs another" they could basicly make this game an TBS without any RTS elements :P I think most people expect more from "core gameplay" than 2 teams fighting each other, quite a few people consider "beeing able to build things" one of the core gameplay features from NS1. Personaly i consider it one as only few other FPS games give you something like this.
<!--quoteo(post=1790369:date=Aug 1 2010, 04:18 PM:name=rebirth)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rebirth @ Aug 1 2010, 04:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790369"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Just because somebody has now a shotgun doesn't mean he will now automaticly kill stuff, still requires aiming. And yes give the guy who has a hard time aiming an AoE ranged weapon in a game where friendly fire is enabled by default, that sure sounds like fun :D
And those are not alternatives, they are also just "combat" that's like saying "you don't like just beeing able to shoot stuff? You want to do more? Pull out your knife and stab them!"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Er, NS has FF enabled?
I really don't remember that at all.
Also you have to be pretty damn terrible to miss with a shotgun or a flamethrower. I am pretty bad with the LMG but even I can hit with a shotgun, and it's kinda impossible to miss with a flamethrower.
You could also take the grenade launcher attachment and do fire support, or like I said, take a welder because I'm pretty certain they're still in. In late game there are the minigun armed exoskeletons for use by the precision-impaired members of the team.
In fact the majority of the weapons and marine functions in the game seem to be geared around something other than precise aiming.
Let UWE at least show us what they have come up with. Without us being able to see everything that will be in NS2 it is rather pointless to discuss this feature. Perhaps it will make sense once everything is available for us to test it. Perhaps it will not. But you have at least give UWE the benefit of the doupt.
Ane one more thing. Most arguments say "It was like that in NS1." , "I dont want it to change because i liked it in NS1". This game is not NS1 it is NS2 and it is not supposed to be the same as NS1.
If you liked NS1 so much i would suggest play it and wait and see how it will work out in NS2. At the end you might even say that the new system is far stronger than the old one.
Give the new system time to show us why it is good.
This system reminds me of company of heroes where we send our engineers on strategic points to build with an escort of soldiers. that the same, if you don't escort them they will died.
I think it adds a real role to the commander and a team spirit to obey him if they want to move. In ns1, each player go on his side and build ... (don't speak of war just ffa) and the commander must obey or else nobody's listening him.
<!--quoteo(post=1790344:date=Aug 1 2010, 03:14 PM:name=pSyk0mAn)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pSyk0mAn @ Aug 1 2010, 03:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790344"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's what people don't seem to realize in this thread. While the builder unit has AI-pathfinding, the commander still controls it. The commander has to be smart and present, retreating when necessary and communicating for support on the field. So the builder IS a human player, just not using the keyboard but point&click to move. That's also the point people made about feeling more like an RTS to the commander (crazy micromanagement of units).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well from what I've seen, the bots are reliant on path nodes, since they're clearly going through a series of predetermined points in a hallway if you order them to go somewhere past that corridor, and don't handle so well without these nodes. Plus they're plain slow (notably, no jumping ability) compared to players, you're not going to be dodging many skulk bites no matter how awesome your APM is...
That and the comm can't be everywhere at once, but now that he doesn't drop meds and ammo so much I guess that'll be less of an issue?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For example DI-tunnels and the squad spawning system might be handled similar to building a phasegate in enemy territory. The squadleader has to use something or is not able to shoot/move while phasing in former marines of his squad that died. Sounds quite similar to the mood in ns1 you described.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Let's hope it comes to that, then.
<!--quoteo(post=1790388:date=Aug 1 2010, 12:57 PM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ Aug 1 2010, 12:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790388"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well from what I've seen, the bots are reliant on path nodes, since they're clearly going through a series of predetermined points in a hallway if you order them to go somewhere past that corridor, and don't handle so well without these nodes. Plus they're plain slow (notably, no jumping ability) compared to players, you're not going to be dodging many skulk bites no matter how awesome your APM is...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've already been on a few MAC escort missions. I definitely found it more fun to protect the MAC on its way to a node, protect it while it builds and then deal with the skulks hurtling themselves in for a quick bite. I even took a bullet - well, a lerk sniper spike - for one right as it finished making a forward base armory for my other squadmates. It was great fun, and involved less standing around with my back to the enemy like in NS1. It's pretty much a necessity on Tram, as there are some pretty long hikes to the resnodes for lil ol' Maxey. If not into it, you can play more Rockdown. :)
<!--quoteo(post=1790358:date=Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790358"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yes but if the comm tells me to do something I am not a very good marine if I say 'no I don't want to go away and leave me alone'. If the commander has sent me there to build something and I then say 'I don't feel like it' he is likely to be very annoyed and quite possibly the entire game could collapse because of it. So I really don't have the option, do I?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Your personal feelings of guilt shouldn't deny the rest of us from having the option. Again the commander could send out a bot instead if you're ignoring him.
<!--quoteo(post=1790358:date=Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790358"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also I find it extremely hard to imagine that you enjoyed staring at a building holding the E button.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The appeal is in the ability to build myself instead of relying solely on bots, not the button I use or what I'm staring at.
<!--quoteo(post=1790358:date=Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790358"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The e building is a poor mechanic, what it achieves can be achieved better in other ways, with fewer/no ill effects, therefore it should be changed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Leaving building completely up to bots is a poor mechanic IMO.
<!--quoteo(post=1790360:date=Aug 2 2010, 01:04 AM:name=NurEinMensch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NurEinMensch @ Aug 2 2010, 01:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790360"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In a hybrid system the commander can choose whichever is more convenient at any given moment. <b>That requires less communication and teamwork.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> How so?
As it stands the commander just uses bots to build, whether they need player escort depends on the situation.
In a hybrid system the commander maintains the bot option but can also get a player to build something for them where appropriate.
If anything that gives the commander even more reasons and opportunities to communicate and coordinate with players. As they can do more given tasks than simply defend the bots or destroy the enemy.
<!--quoteo(post=1790355:date=Aug 1 2010, 07:48 AM:name=pSyk0mAn)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pSyk0mAn @ Aug 1 2010, 07:48 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790355"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The problem is, if you have the option to build, the game will be balanced around it and thus it might be the commander's strategy to have the whole team build the expansion cc to get it up a lot faster. When marines build a lot slower, it's boring, when they build slightly slower, they can power up buildings in no time causing imbalance. This also scales with amount of players which causes further problems with balanced build times.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1790360:date=Aug 1 2010, 08:04 AM:name=NurEinMensch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NurEinMensch @ Aug 1 2010, 08:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790360"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Contrary to popular belief making things easier or more convenient will not necessarily result in a better game. Having more options can lead to worse results. This is counter-intuitive, I know, but that's what game theory has shown to be correct.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Having the option to do something does NOT necessarily change how the gameplay is done. Vestigial, unnecessary, overly complicated layers that have no use will be seen as such and summarily discarded by the knowledgeable and only serve to confuse the uninitiated.
Gameplay almost never has a singular stable balance point as long as meaningful choices are involved. Just like Rock-Paper-Scissors doesn't have a "safe" thing to choose. It is all dependent on the surrounding situation.
So, if you force players to build, they will build and yes it will create the "imbalance" pSyk0mAn brings up. However, if it remains an option with downsides, just like power building in NS1 since it took time to bring your weapon back up, then it is still a CHOICE. It will then influence gameplay and not forcibly shove all players into necessitating to help build.
PS. I don't think anyone here is advocating the removal of the MAC, contrary to what some people seem to think. The MAC is a great addition and allows the Commander to not be completely reliant on rambo idiot Marines who don't help with his grand scheme. However, I think people want to be involved in the RTS side while playing the FPS side. We don't want individual games that are tied only via "strategy" or "resources", we want direct interactions with the buildings. It is a tangible way to help in the RTS side. You could argue that defending a MAC is the same joint operation, but some people want a more hands-on play to this.
<!--quoteo(post=1790423:date=Aug 1 2010, 05:11 PM:name=spellman23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (spellman23 @ Aug 1 2010, 05:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790423"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You could argue that defending a MAC is the same joint operation, but some people want a more hands-on play to this.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So holding off waves of aliens is less hands on than holding down "E" while sipping a pepsi?
If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!
<!--quoteo(post=1790431:date=Aug 1 2010, 05:47 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 1 2010, 05:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790431"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So holding off waves of aliens is less hands on than holding down "E" while sipping a pepsi?
If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yes. yes it does. now run along and go rambo a hive.
<!--quoteo(post=1790431:date=Aug 1 2010, 05:47 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 1 2010, 05:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790431"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So holding off waves of aliens is less hands on than holding down "E" while sipping a pepsi?
If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're not a very bright player if you sip a pepsi while building (unless it is base which MACs could take care of). The whole point is that this is a vulnerable time where you need to be on alert for skulks rushing in instead of just sitting there waiting for them with your gun drawn. If you don't get this point then you shouldn't even be part of the debate. People like this tension, something that if marines can't build will be unavailable to us now. Maybe you don't care for it but clearly many if not most people do.
What's great about NS is that the FPS side and RTS side both supercharge each other. Strategy elements add gravity to the outcome of each fight, and each strategic decision affects the action. BUT it's the way in which this occurs that is important.
Each player has an individual stake in each side of the fight, RTS and FPS, and therefore must be able to affect each directly with BOTH types of actions.
Commanders affect the RTS game directly through their actions, but also play directly into the action with "spells". And both types of actions indirectly affect the other type.
Similarly, FPS players affect the action game directly through their fights, but also must be able to play into the strategic elements directly. By removing the dependence on marines to build, this is the missing link in NS2 with the introduction of AI builders!
Therefore, the most straightforward solution is that marines must be able to function as a MAC, perhaps with the purchase of a building tool(someone mentioned "MAC-pack", or just use welder), which they could pay for in anticipation of a need to build a structure without the presence of a MAC.
You can't just have somebody playing the rts game, and others playing the action game. This format is why all other attempts at RTS/FPS hybrids have sucked. (Savage, anyone?) What's great is that as ANY player, you're playing BOTH ASPECTS AT ONCE, although with different emphasis.
It's not about hitting "e", it's about the ability to directly affect strategic elements in the FPS, forcing the action player to see the whole picture.
NS2 is actually improving the commander's ability to directly affect the action side by adding more spells. But NS2 is taking away players' ability to directly affect the strategic side, which is a mistake.
<!--quoteo(post=1790437:date=Aug 1 2010, 06:04 PM:name=Lazer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lazer @ Aug 1 2010, 06:04 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790437"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're not a very bright player if you sip a pepsi while building (unless it is base which MACs could take care of). The whole point is that this is a vulnerable time where you need to be on alert for skulks rushing in instead of just sitting there waiting for them with your gun drawn. If you don't get this point then you shouldn't even be part of the debate. People like this tension, something that if marines can't build will be unavailable to us now. Maybe you don't care for it but clearly many if not most people do.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm still confused by this whole tension argument. I said it before - if you can only have tension from being helpless, you must have hated movies like Aliens, Predator, and the multitude of other science fiction movies where the humans have a clear military presence and still freak out because "why would they? They have guns." It doesn't make sense that the only way the game can be tense is if you're helpless, and if you were solo building the whole time, you weren't really a team player to begin with and so are making a poor point that "since I can't enjoy being by myself, no one can."
I also think we need to break this argument into "new players and the benefits of welders" and "competitive play and the benefits of welders" because they are two very different arguments that have been blended into something that is almost an argument but not quite. You can't say "new players will be put off and I'm a veteran and I'll be put off" because new players play style will be much different from someone who's been with the game for some time. 9/10 of the time you can assume a new player is not going to communicate and so you have to base what they'll do as new players with this growing "it will turn new players off if they can't build" mentality.
Also, the players are not being removed from strategy, which again, I've said before. If the comm sends wave after wave of MAC to build something without any player support, he's going to be bleeding and SOL in the long run, both on the research side and on the map growth side. Likewise, ground units on both sides are going to be the key source of what weapons should be brought out to fight the current unit types. If players don't inform of the stampede of onos, the comm is going to be winging it on research and no amount of skill will save you from that. Not only that, but grunts on both sides will be the only source of flow control for where bases and structures are set up. No amount of comming can overcome good information control.
I would also like to point out that, right now there really isn't a need to talk about alien side of build assistance. Yes, I know gorges have changed what their old duty was, but that's not really a bad thing. However, the reason I think it's not as much of an issue is their build unit is sacrificed in the process, guaranteeing that the structure gets built, even if it's taken damage. The same cannot be said about the MAC and this does change up the strategy for both sides, again separating them into two unique play groups. Since I've seen starcraft thrown around so flippantly, it's like saying zerg are the same as terrans. You'd be wrong if you said it about that game, so don't say it about a game that hasn't even reached full features.
<!--quoteo(post=1789527:date=Jul 30 2010, 06:10 PM:name=Revi.uk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Revi.uk @ Jul 30 2010, 06:10 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1789527"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is no need to have both, you can't please both crowds. I've said it plenty of times this is not about giving or taking away from the marine on the ground it's about making the commanders game more interesting.
In NS1 everyone hated being the commander, at the start of every game there would be "who wants to comm..." then someone would almost have to forfeit their game in order to do something they disliked. The point of the MACs is to make being a commander more rewarding and exciting.
I highly doubt it's going to change, UWE is obviously set on this path.
Deal with it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't think you can give an accurate opinion on what other people like/don't like. Especially since that's such a broad generalization that's filled with so many variables that I think you probably shouldn't even be in this discussion if you are going to use that thinking process.
It was said best earlier in the that (imo) that giving players options is always the best way to go as long as it makes sense to the game.
An important thing I loved in NS was the fact the games, even on the same maps, were always dynamic. Not only did this add to the gameplay for me but it also added to the overall longevity that I wanted to play NS.
And part of what NS made dynamic was the fact that if someone can ninja in buildings such as PGs and TFs or ninja resource nodes. To me it sounds like (I'm not in alpha) that if you get all the way over to an important or good building spot, you have to wait for a MAC to come all the way there to build anything?
That sounds silly to me and I think it takes away from the overall gameplay and how dynamic each game can be.
Anyways, how does losing the ability to build structures even make sense as far as a natural selection, did the marines become dumber and forget how to build things? lol..
<!--quoteo(post=1790431:date=Aug 2 2010, 07:47 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 2 2010, 07:47 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790431"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So holding off waves of aliens is less hands on than holding down "E" while sipping a pepsi?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The general gameplay as a Marine is 'holding off aliens' we don't need to give up our build ability to experience that. Building didn't take THAT long in NS1 either and you could pause to check the area and fend off attackers before finishing it.
<!--quoteo(post=1790431:date=Aug 2 2010, 07:47 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 2 2010, 07:47 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790431"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> What would help is properly reading our posts and finally figuring out that what we want is not just about holding down the E button.
<!--quoteo(post=1790439:date=Aug 1 2010, 06:18 PM:name=Walfisch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Walfisch @ Aug 1 2010, 06:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790439"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It doesn't make sense that the only way the game can be tense is if you're helpless, and if you were solo building the whole time, you weren't really a team player to begin with and so are making a poor point that "since I can't enjoy being by myself, no one can."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So if I'm solo capping RTs while the rest of my team is pressuring the aliens, I'm not a team player?
<!--quoteo(post=1790445:date=Aug 1 2010, 06:26 PM:name=Lumberjack_Wannabe)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lumberjack_Wannabe @ Aug 1 2010, 06:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790445"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So if I'm solo capping RTs while the rest of my team is pressuring the aliens, I'm not a team player?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not what I said. Also, you can't really "solo cap" in NS2, and you had to have your comm drop in the first one. It's directed more at those who "DROP HERE COMM I'M HERE" players.
<!--quoteo(post=1790042:date=Jul 31 2010, 03:14 PM:name=Revi.uk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Revi.uk @ Jul 31 2010, 03:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790042"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I wake up and again I find my name being mentioned. Yet again being called a 'troll' for disagreeing with the ideas of people with knee jerk reactions to game mechanics that have yet to be fully tested. If you'd actually read through the thread you'd see that I'm not the only person who shares the same opinion as me.
Troll : To disagree with some ones point of view. In that case I guess you're right, I am troll - in the sense that I refuse acknowledge any of your ideas as good ones.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, a troll is someone who's posting to get a reaction out of someone, usually an upset reaction.
I've been on the internets far too long to even bother to care about what people like you say as I find it more humorous.
Also, the best way to share your opinion is to give it in an appropriate manner. If the developers were reading this thread, they are going to see a whole lot of people with good explanations and reasoning for their ideas and you who's acting like a 13 year old. Who do you think is going to persuade them more?
Anyways, capping RTs with yourself and another person is extremely important and is one of, if not the most important, things for a team. So saying people doing it aren't "helping" the team or aren't "team players" is incorrect as far as I'm concerned. Those guys are the ones that are feeding the Comm res who in return is feeding the team jetpacks, heavies, and hmgs :)
As for everyone saying how 3 guys, 2 guarding 1 capping a structure, is more teamwork than 2 guys defending a robot, well, chances are if a fade comes, that guy capping the rt isn't just going to sit there, he's going to help coordinate to take down a fade.
I'm surprised so many people are getting upset over adding another option to the game which is only beneficiary to everyone.
You can help MACs build faster, you can build solo and save the COM res from needing a MAC to get all the way to where you are, and it retains part of NS1 that made NS... NS.
<!--quoteo(post=1790431:date=Aug 1 2010, 10:47 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 1 2010, 10:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790431"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So holding off waves of aliens is less hands on than holding down "E" while sipping a pepsi?
If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're giving your own side a bad name. In case repeating it again will get the point through, it's not holding E, it's being vulnerable and relying on teammates.
<!--quoteo(post=1790439:date=Aug 1 2010, 05:18 PM:name=Walfisch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Walfisch @ Aug 1 2010, 05:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790439"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm still confused by this whole tension argument. I said it before - if you can only have tension from being helpless, you must have hated movies like Aliens, Predator, and the multitude of other science fiction movies where the humans have a clear military presence and still freak out because "why would they? They have guns." It doesn't make sense that the only way the game can be tense is if you're helpless, and if you were solo building the whole time, you weren't really a team player to begin with and so are making a poor point that "since I can't enjoy being by myself, no one can."
I also think we need to break this argument into "new players and the benefits of welders" and "competitive play and the benefits of welders" because they are two very different arguments that have been blended into something that is almost an argument but not quite. You can't say "new players will be put off and I'm a veteran and I'll be put off" because new players play style will be much different from someone who's been with the game for some time. 9/10 of the time you can assume a new player is not going to communicate and so you have to base what they'll do as new players with this growing "it will turn new players off if they can't build" mentality.
Also, the players are not being removed from strategy, which again, I've said before. If the comm sends wave after wave of MAC to build something without any player support, he's going to be bleeding and SOL in the long run, both on the research side and on the map growth side. Likewise, ground units on both sides are going to be the key source of what weapons should be brought out to fight the current unit types. If players don't inform of the stampede of onos, the comm is going to be winging it on research and no amount of skill will save you from that. Not only that, but grunts on both sides will be the only source of flow control for where bases and structures are set up. No amount of comming can overcome good information control.
I would also like to point out that, right now there really isn't a need to talk about alien side of build assistance. Yes, I know gorges have changed what their old duty was, but that's not really a bad thing. However, the reason I think it's not as much of an issue is their build unit is sacrificed in the process, guaranteeing that the structure gets built, even if it's taken damage. The same cannot be said about the MAC and this does change up the strategy for both sides, again separating them into two unique play groups. Since I've seen starcraft thrown around so flippantly, it's like saying zerg are the same as terrans. You'd be wrong if you said it about that game, so don't say it about a game that hasn't even reached full features.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sort of like why RE1 and 2 is far more scary then RE5 where you can literally punch the heads of zombies off since your main character is a freakin mammoth. Tell me, what would scare you more, or create more tension, being stuck in a room with aliens, having heavy armor and some mini-guns, or having nothing but a knife? Yeah.. the helpless one creates a bit more tension now doesn't it?
<!--quoteo(post=1790439:date=Aug 1 2010, 11:18 PM:name=Walfisch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Walfisch @ Aug 1 2010, 11:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790439"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm still confused by this whole tension argument. I said it before - if you can only have tension from being helpless, you must have hated movies like Aliens, Predator, etc<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's not the only thing, it's an additional thing. That is, it's MORE tense to be vulnerable. Though I would hardly call the marine helpless even while building, since he can stop and whip a gun out at any time. However, since this takes a second or two, you have a short moment where you can't do anything, and since you can <i>die</i> in a short moment in NS...
But right now the tension is "Do not let the MAC get destroyed". If the MAC is destroyed then the Marine attempt to capture a certain position might have failed. It is not the same tesnion but it is a different tension.
This time you are not helpless yourself. But the MAC is easily destroyed and is helpless.
And there is still the posibility of ninja capping res nodes and build stuff behinde enemy lines. Only this time the Marines will have to create a diversion so the Commander can navigate a MAC into position. Again not the same but still possible.
You have to let go of NS1 gameplay for now and embrace NS2 gameplay. Or do you want NS2 to be just like NS1 with a few minor changes here and there. It is a different game.
Again lets wait and see how it plays out firs before we cry murder.
IMO the state of affairs regarding building was a lot better when marines could contribute to the build. IN NS1 it opened up a risk vs reward dynamic when multiple rines were in a situation e.g. three rines attempting to set up an offensive position turret factory and siege: do you have 1 builder and 2 guards, 2 builders and 1 guard or go breakneck build speed and risk no protection? It was a nice little tactical consideration the com didnt necessarily have to micro-manage. The problem is we won't get that system back now. The drifter/alien com controls the additional hive placement for the time being, and until gorgies are given more build freedom, letting rines build without macs would give ninja freedom to the rines and choke the aliens.
<!--quoteo(post=1790452:date=Aug 1 2010, 06:53 PM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ Aug 1 2010, 06:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790452"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're giving your own side a bad name. In case repeating it again will get the point through, it's not holding E, it's being vulnerable and relying on teammates.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That vulnerability has been given to the commander who will rely on his teammates which will promote the RTS / FPS interactions that everyone wants. Granted, the commander is not exposed but a piece of equipment that cost resources is. 'Your side' loves to say how they want/need teamwork and commander only building somehow limits that. If teamwork and relying on the guy next to you is so important why are these same people unwilling to stay near a builder bot? Yeah, teamwork sounds real important to them...
Also, don't lose track of the other changes in NS2. There will be no ninja phase gates and no hidden siege outposts because they don't exist in NS2 and, more importantly, the power grid system prevents that. FPS players are going to spawn in and want to get to the front line not sit back in already taken territory building random buildings. Instead, that "ninja" rush you're all looking for is going to be replaced with mobile siege cannons. I hope people don't say "escort missions? Screw that, I hate those!" when it comes time to set up sieges. Somehow, between all of the intensity and combat I doubt they'll care.
If UWE can remove mundane aspects from NS1 while making the RTS side actually feel like an RTS then they should do it.
<!--quoteo(post=1790122:date=Jul 31 2010, 03:36 PM:name=Kwil)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kwil @ Jul 31 2010, 03:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790122"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Gorges can currently build Hydras. Only. That's it. We see from descriptions about the game that marines may well be able to build sentries in future. So there, problem solved, eh?
How on earth do you come to that conclusion? I see it enforcing the team to talk to the commander and vice versa, so that they know where the builder is going in order to get ahead of it and properly defend it. Before, commander said "Go to this res point and build the RT!" and marine said, "Yeah, no, I like this res point better.. once I'm there I'll call for an RT, and what are you gonna do, follow your strategy or follow mine?" The system now enforces teamwork. You want to build somewhere the commander doesn't? Tough nuts. Follow the strategy of the guy called the commander. That's why he's called the "Commander", btw. That you think it disconnects you suggests to me that you're used to getting where you want and having the commander react to you, rather than you having to react to the commander.
Or, the commander is working directly with the marines by keeping an eye on the MAC, making sure it moves with the group, falls back when it needs to, etc.. that you haven't had a commander that does that doesn't mean the system needs to change so much as the old habits of the commander from NS1. Perhaps you've heard of this game called Starcraft? It's an RTS game, apparantly, one in which a good commander is one that can control not only various upgrades and the like, but actually handle complex movements of their troops, advancing, flanking, retreating, etc. It turns out that there's apparantly some RTS stuff going on in NS2, and that NS2 commanders are going to be expected to be similarly skilled. I don't necessarily see that as a failure in the system at all.
So your argument here is essentially noob players act like noobs? Yeah, I can see how the MAC has suddenly made that come to the fore.. oh wait.. If marines just follow the bot around, marines are going to lose, as the aliens will jump on said bot and eat it. Marines need to lead the bot to make sure where it's going is clear. This requires, once again, <i>more</i> interaction with the Commander, not less.
And again we see the reality. Your problem isn't that the Commander is separated from the marine so much, (because we've shown it isn't) it's that the Commander has been put in the Commanding role and the marine has to act as.. well.. a marine under command, rather than a rambo.
I'd suggest your problem is that you need better commanders. If you really want the tension of building, you could always go face a wall for a while and see if you can manage to count to 30 before turning around. That seems to require the same level of alertness and skill.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1790122:date=Jul 31 2010, 04:36 PM:name=Kwil)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kwil @ Jul 31 2010, 04:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790122"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'd suggest your problem is that you need better commanders. If you really want the tension of building, you could always go face a wall for a while and see if you can manage to count to 30 before turning around. That seems to require the same level of alertness and skill.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How are you going to get good commanders in pub games? It's pretty rare. Suffice to say I think UWE wants their game to be a big hit and sell a lot of copies. That means a huge influx of new players, many of whom will not have any commanding experience, or little-to-no RTS experience. NS2 should not automatically assume that people will know how to play the game; in fact one of their mission statements for NS2 was to make the learning curve easier to grasp for new players. It is very overwhelming to have the entirety of the RTS load being borne by the commanders' shoulders. Why not allow marines to help alleviate that?
If any of you followed the starcraft 2 scene you would know that they changed the high ground advantage from starcraft1/broodwar to starcraft 2, this caused an outrage among the community. There were tons of threads about changing it back, and keeping it "you just want broodwar with new graphics" and flaming etc... In the end they kept the change, everyone got over it and the game turned out fine. Starcraft 2 is different from broodwar in a lot of way, but still over all the same thing.
This is the exact same thing, a minor change in game play mechanics that people judge to soon/get to worked up about. If history repeats itself, bots will build and threads will be about new things. I think natural selection 2 is still gunna feel the same as natural selection over all. These minor things don't affect game play as much as some of you appear to think, the largest difference would be; marines needing to secure the area before/during setup, rather then just having a marine do it when they manage to get there.
<!--quoteo(post=1790460:date=Aug 2 2010, 12:20 AM:name=5EuroSchein)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (5EuroSchein @ Aug 2 2010, 12:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790460"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->But right now the tension is "Do not let the MAC get destroyed". If the MAC is destroyed then the Marine attempt to capture a certain position might have failed. It is not the same tension but it is a different tension.
This time you are not helpless yourself. But the MAC is easily destroyed and is helpless.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> If the MAC is destroyed, you and your squad can still defend yourselves just as well as before, you just can't do anything productive other than go back to the nearest MAC and start over. If the build-able marine dies, you're going to have that much harder a time surviving, even if you avenge him and finish the building.
Maybe it's an unfair bias caused by me not liking AI allies much, but the former sounds frustrating, while the latter sounds tense.
<!--quoteo(post=1790473:date=Aug 2 2010, 12:58 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 2 2010, 12:58 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790473"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That vulnerability has been given to the commander who will rely on his teammates which will promote the RTS / FPS interactions that everyone wants. Granted, the commander is not exposed but a piece of equipment that cost resources is. 'Your side' loves to say how they want/need teamwork and commander only building somehow limits that. If teamwork and relying on the guy next to you is so important why are these same people unwilling to stay near a builder bot? Yeah, teamwork sounds real important to them...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's a dumb defenceless machine rather than a human player, equal to yourself. Noone ever said the MAC wasn't vital, but it's not part of the team.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, don't lose track of the other changes in NS2. There will be no ninja phase gates and no hidden siege outposts because they don't exist in NS2 and, more importantly, the power grid system prevents that. FPS players are going to spawn in and want to get to the front line not sit back in already taken territory building random buildings. Instead, that "ninja" rush you're all looking for is going to be replaced with mobile siege cannons. I hope people don't say "escort missions? Screw that, I hate those!" when it comes time to set up sieges. Somehow, between all of the intensity and combat I doubt they'll care.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I never meant to emphasize ninjaing, but you're right when you say it'll be gone. I will admit though, that escorting the siege tanks sounds a lot more like fun and less like a chore. Maybe because they're liable to be a lot less fragile, and you'll have more than one just to be safe anyway.
<!--quoteo(post=1790488:date=Aug 1 2010, 08:50 PM:name=Wheeee)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wheeee @ Aug 1 2010, 08:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790488"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->How are you going to get good commanders in pub games? It's pretty rare. Suffice to say I think UWE wants their game to be a big hit and sell a lot of copies. That means a huge influx of new players, many of whom will not have any commanding experience, or little-to-no RTS experience. NS2 should not automatically assume that people will know how to play the game; in fact one of their mission statements for NS2 was to make the learning curve easier to grasp for new players. It is very overwhelming to have the entirety of the RTS load being borne by the commanders' shoulders. Why not allow marines to help alleviate that?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's kind of a contradiction to most of the arguments so far. Yes, new players should have a step in and enjoy kind of gameplay, and in my opinion the commander who can perform research and building provides that. The core experience, despite what everyone wants to say, is to battle marines vs. aliens. Building isn't part of the core experience, but enhances the options available for players to enjoy the battle more. If anything, people who are saying without building the game is ruined are thinking as veterans, whereas from the MAC-commander building standpoint, the core gameplay is open early and it's up to the commander to do the research necessary to enhance that for them. If anything, I'd say the current system supports that learning curve more than "that guy got a shotgun and I didn't" or "that guy went off to do something and I don't know what" and quitting the game because of it. And again, I like the idea of welders if only to support front line troopers in heavy armor from having to run back to the armory.
Again, I think we need to split this issue into the two separate arguments being made: New Player experience vs. veteran experience (which is the basic welder argument) MAC construction vs. player being able to drop/build (which is bizzaro since this was only in combat mode, of which UWE says "LOL NO" in more eloquent terms)
<!--quoteo(post=1790473:date=Aug 1 2010, 06:58 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 1 2010, 06:58 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790473"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That vulnerability has been given to the commander who will rely on his teammates which will promote the RTS / FPS interactions that everyone wants. Granted, the commander is not exposed but a piece of equipment that cost resources is. 'Your side' loves to say how they want/need teamwork and commander only building somehow limits that. If teamwork and relying on the guy next to you is so important why are these same people unwilling to stay near a builder bot? Yeah, teamwork sounds real important to them...
Also, don't lose track of the other changes in NS2. There will be no ninja phase gates and no hidden siege outposts because they don't exist in NS2 and, more importantly, the power grid system prevents that. FPS players are going to spawn in and want to get to the front line not sit back in already taken territory building random buildings. Instead, that "ninja" rush you're all looking for is going to be replaced with mobile siege cannons. I hope people don't say "escort missions? Screw that, I hate those!" when it comes time to set up sieges. Somehow, between all of the intensity and combat I doubt they'll care.
If UWE can remove mundane aspects from NS1 while making the RTS side actually feel like an RTS then they should do it.
I'm glad they are.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do ya not understand that if BOTH CAN build, you can STILL allow the MAC's to build while every marine there guards them???? That option doesn't become obsolete, but having ONLY MAC's build makes marine building obsolete.
Comments
If core gameplay is as simple to define as "one team vs another" they could basicly make this game an TBS without any RTS elements :P
I think most people expect more from "core gameplay" than 2 teams fighting each other, quite a few people consider "beeing able to build things" one of the core gameplay features from NS1. Personaly i consider it one as only few other FPS games give you something like this.
And those are not alternatives, they are also just "combat" that's like saying "you don't like just beeing able to shoot stuff? You want to do more? Pull out your knife and stab them!"<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Er, NS has FF enabled?
I really don't remember that at all.
Also you have to be pretty damn terrible to miss with a shotgun or a flamethrower. I am pretty bad with the LMG but even I can hit with a shotgun, and it's kinda impossible to miss with a flamethrower.
You could also take the grenade launcher attachment and do fire support, or like I said, take a welder because I'm pretty certain they're still in. In late game there are the minigun armed exoskeletons for use by the precision-impaired members of the team.
In fact the majority of the weapons and marine functions in the game seem to be geared around something other than precise aiming.
Let UWE at least show us what they have come up with. Without us being able to see everything that will be in NS2 it is rather pointless to discuss this feature.
Perhaps it will make sense once everything is available for us to test it. Perhaps it will not.
But you have at least give UWE the benefit of the doupt.
Ane one more thing. Most arguments say "It was like that in NS1." , "I dont want it to change because i liked it in NS1".
This game is not NS1 it is NS2 and it is not supposed to be the same as NS1.
If you liked NS1 so much i would suggest play it and wait and see how it will work out in NS2.
At the end you might even say that the new system is far stronger than the old one.
Give the new system time to show us why it is good.
This system reminds me of company of heroes where we send our engineers on strategic points to build with an escort of soldiers. that the same, if you don't escort them they will died.
I think it adds a real role to the commander and a team spirit to obey him if they want to move.
In ns1, each player go on his side and build ... (don't speak of war just ffa) and the commander must obey or else nobody's listening him.
this is my opinion and it binds only me :p
good day :)
That's also the point people made about feeling more like an RTS to the commander (crazy micromanagement of units).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well from what I've seen, the bots are reliant on path nodes, since they're clearly going through a series of predetermined points in a hallway if you order them to go somewhere past that corridor, and don't handle so well without these nodes. Plus they're plain slow (notably, no jumping ability) compared to players, you're not going to be dodging many skulk bites no matter how awesome your APM is...
That and the comm can't be everywhere at once, but now that he doesn't drop meds and ammo so much I guess that'll be less of an issue?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->For example DI-tunnels and the squad spawning system might be handled similar to building a phasegate in enemy territory. The squadleader has to use something or is not able to shoot/move while phasing in former marines of his squad that died.
Sounds quite similar to the mood in ns1 you described.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Let's hope it comes to that, then.
I've already been on a few MAC escort missions. I definitely found it more fun to protect the MAC on its way to a node, protect it while it builds and then deal with the skulks hurtling themselves in for a quick bite. I even took a bullet - well, a lerk sniper spike - for one right as it finished making a forward base armory for my other squadmates. It was great fun, and involved less standing around with my back to the enemy like in NS1. It's pretty much a necessity on Tram, as there are some pretty long hikes to the resnodes for lil ol' Maxey. If not into it, you can play more Rockdown. :)
Your personal feelings of guilt shouldn't deny the rest of us from having the option. Again the commander could send out a bot instead if you're ignoring him.
<!--quoteo(post=1790358:date=Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790358"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also I find it extremely hard to imagine that you enjoyed staring at a building holding the E button.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The appeal is in the ability to build myself instead of relying solely on bots, not the button I use or what I'm staring at.
<!--quoteo(post=1790358:date=Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 2 2010, 12:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790358"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The e building is a poor mechanic, what it achieves can be achieved better in other ways, with fewer/no ill effects, therefore it should be changed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Leaving building completely up to bots is a poor mechanic IMO.
<!--quoteo(post=1790360:date=Aug 2 2010, 01:04 AM:name=NurEinMensch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NurEinMensch @ Aug 2 2010, 01:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790360"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In a hybrid system the commander can choose whichever is more convenient at any given moment. <b>That requires less communication and teamwork.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How so?
As it stands the commander just uses bots to build, whether they need player escort depends on the situation.
In a hybrid system the commander maintains the bot option but can also get a player to build something for them where appropriate.
If anything that gives the commander even more reasons and opportunities to communicate and coordinate with players. As they can do more given tasks than simply defend the bots or destroy the enemy.
When marines build a lot slower, it's boring, when they build slightly slower, they can power up buildings in no time causing imbalance.
This also scales with amount of players which causes further problems with balanced build times.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1790360:date=Aug 1 2010, 08:04 AM:name=NurEinMensch)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NurEinMensch @ Aug 1 2010, 08:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790360"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Contrary to popular belief making things easier or more convenient will not necessarily result in a better game. Having more options can lead to worse results. This is counter-intuitive, I know, but that's what game theory has shown to be correct.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Having the option to do something does NOT necessarily change how the gameplay is done. Vestigial, unnecessary, overly complicated layers that have no use will be seen as such and summarily discarded by the knowledgeable and only serve to confuse the uninitiated.
Gameplay almost never has a singular stable balance point as long as meaningful choices are involved. Just like Rock-Paper-Scissors doesn't have a "safe" thing to choose. It is all dependent on the surrounding situation.
So, if you force players to build, they will build and yes it will create the "imbalance" pSyk0mAn brings up. However, if it remains an option with downsides, just like power building in NS1 since it took time to bring your weapon back up, then it is still a CHOICE. It will then influence gameplay and not forcibly shove all players into necessitating to help build.
PS. I don't think anyone here is advocating the removal of the MAC, contrary to what some people seem to think. The MAC is a great addition and allows the Commander to not be completely reliant on rambo idiot Marines who don't help with his grand scheme. However, I think people want to be involved in the RTS side while playing the FPS side. We don't want individual games that are tied only via "strategy" or "resources", we want direct interactions with the buildings. It is a tangible way to help in the RTS side. You could argue that defending a MAC is the same joint operation, but some people want a more hands-on play to this.
So holding off waves of aliens is less hands on than holding down "E" while sipping a pepsi?
If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!
If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yes. yes it does. now run along and go rambo a hive.
If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're not a very bright player if you sip a pepsi while building (unless it is base which MACs could take care of). The whole point is that this is a vulnerable time where you need to be on alert for skulks rushing in instead of just sitting there waiting for them with your gun drawn. If you don't get this point then you shouldn't even be part of the debate. People like this tension, something that if marines can't build will be unavailable to us now. Maybe you don't care for it but clearly many if not most people do.
Each player has an individual stake in each side of the fight, RTS and FPS, and therefore must be able to affect each directly with BOTH types of actions.
Commanders affect the RTS game directly through their actions, but also play directly into the action with "spells". And both types of actions indirectly affect the other type.
Similarly, FPS players affect the action game directly through their fights, but also must be able to play into the strategic elements directly. By removing the dependence on marines to build, this is the missing link in NS2 with the introduction of AI builders!
Therefore, the most straightforward solution is that marines must be able to function as a MAC, perhaps with the purchase of a building tool(someone mentioned "MAC-pack", or just use welder), which they could pay for in anticipation of a need to build a structure without the presence of a MAC.
You can't just have somebody playing the rts game, and others playing the action game. This format is why all other attempts at RTS/FPS hybrids have sucked. (Savage, anyone?) What's great is that as ANY player, you're playing BOTH ASPECTS AT ONCE, although with different emphasis.
It's not about hitting "e", it's about the ability to directly affect strategic elements in the FPS, forcing the action player to see the whole picture.
NS2 is actually improving the commander's ability to directly affect the action side by adding more spells. But NS2 is taking away players' ability to directly affect the strategic side, which is a mistake.
<a href="http://img815.imageshack.us/i/diagram.png/" target="_blank"><img src="http://img815.imageshack.us/img815/3959/diagram.th.png" border="0" class="linked-image" /></a>
I'm still confused by this whole tension argument. I said it before - if you can only have tension from being helpless, you must have hated movies like Aliens, Predator, and the multitude of other science fiction movies where the humans have a clear military presence and still freak out because "why would they? They have guns." It doesn't make sense that the only way the game can be tense is if you're helpless, and if you were solo building the whole time, you weren't really a team player to begin with and so are making a poor point that "since I can't enjoy being by myself, no one can."
I also think we need to break this argument into "new players and the benefits of welders" and "competitive play and the benefits of welders" because they are two very different arguments that have been blended into something that is almost an argument but not quite. You can't say "new players will be put off and I'm a veteran and I'll be put off" because new players play style will be much different from someone who's been with the game for some time. 9/10 of the time you can assume a new player is not going to communicate and so you have to base what they'll do as new players with this growing "it will turn new players off if they can't build" mentality.
Also, the players are not being removed from strategy, which again, I've said before. If the comm sends wave after wave of MAC to build something without any player support, he's going to be bleeding and SOL in the long run, both on the research side and on the map growth side. Likewise, ground units on both sides are going to be the key source of what weapons should be brought out to fight the current unit types. If players don't inform of the stampede of onos, the comm is going to be winging it on research and no amount of skill will save you from that. Not only that, but grunts on both sides will be the only source of flow control for where bases and structures are set up. No amount of comming can overcome good information control.
I would also like to point out that, right now there really isn't a need to talk about alien side of build assistance. Yes, I know gorges have changed what their old duty was, but that's not really a bad thing. However, the reason I think it's not as much of an issue is their build unit is sacrificed in the process, guaranteeing that the structure gets built, even if it's taken damage. The same cannot be said about the MAC and this does change up the strategy for both sides, again separating them into two unique play groups. Since I've seen starcraft thrown around so flippantly, it's like saying zerg are the same as terrans. You'd be wrong if you said it about that game, so don't say it about a game that hasn't even reached full features.
In NS1 everyone hated being the commander, at the start of every game there would be "who wants to comm..." then someone would almost have to forfeit their game in order to do something they disliked. The point of the MACs is to make being a commander more rewarding and exciting.
I highly doubt it's going to change, UWE is obviously set on this path.
Deal with it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think you can give an accurate opinion on what other people like/don't like. Especially since that's such a broad generalization that's filled with so many variables that I think you probably shouldn't even be in this discussion if you are going to use that thinking process.
It was said best earlier in the that (imo) that giving players options is always the best way to go as long as it makes sense to the game.
An important thing I loved in NS was the fact the games, even on the same maps, were always dynamic. Not only did this add to the gameplay for me but it also added to the overall longevity that I wanted to play NS.
And part of what NS made dynamic was the fact that if someone can ninja in buildings such as PGs and TFs or ninja resource nodes. To me it sounds like (I'm not in alpha) that if you get all the way over to an important or good building spot, you have to wait for a MAC to come all the way there to build anything?
That sounds silly to me and I think it takes away from the overall gameplay and how dynamic each game can be.
Anyways, how does losing the ability to build structures even make sense as far as a natural selection, did the marines become dumber and forget how to build things? lol..
The general gameplay as a Marine is 'holding off aliens' we don't need to give up our build ability to experience that. Building didn't take THAT long in NS1 either and you could pause to check the area and fend off attackers before finishing it.
<!--quoteo(post=1790431:date=Aug 2 2010, 07:47 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 2 2010, 07:47 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790431"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What would help is properly reading our posts and finally figuring out that what we want is not just about holding down the E button.
So if I'm solo capping RTs while the rest of my team is pressuring the aliens, I'm not a team player?
Not what I said. Also, you can't really "solo cap" in NS2, and you had to have your comm drop in the first one. It's directed more at those who "DROP HERE COMM I'M HERE" players.
Troll : To disagree with some ones point of view. In that case I guess you're right, I am troll - in the sense that I refuse acknowledge any of your ideas as good ones.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, a troll is someone who's posting to get a reaction out of someone, usually an upset reaction.
I've been on the internets far too long to even bother to care about what people like you say as I find it more humorous.
Also, the best way to share your opinion is to give it in an appropriate manner. If the developers were reading this thread, they are going to see a whole lot of people with good explanations and reasoning for their ideas and you who's acting like a 13 year old. Who do you think is going to persuade them more?
Anyways, capping RTs with yourself and another person is extremely important and is one of, if not the most important, things for a team. So saying people doing it aren't "helping" the team or aren't "team players" is incorrect as far as I'm concerned. Those guys are the ones that are feeding the Comm res who in return is feeding the team jetpacks, heavies, and hmgs :)
As for everyone saying how 3 guys, 2 guarding 1 capping a structure, is more teamwork than 2 guys defending a robot, well, chances are if a fade comes, that guy capping the rt isn't just going to sit there, he's going to help coordinate to take down a fade.
I'm surprised so many people are getting upset over adding another option to the game which is only beneficiary to everyone.
You can help MACs build faster, you can build solo and save the COM res from needing a MAC to get all the way to where you are, and it retains part of NS1 that made NS... NS.
If it helps you guys feel better why not just stand next to the MAC/Drifter, look down, and hold E? You can pretend you're building it and you'll get that same hands on feeling!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're giving your own side a bad name.
In case repeating it again will get the point through, it's not holding E, it's being vulnerable and relying on teammates.
I also think we need to break this argument into "new players and the benefits of welders" and "competitive play and the benefits of welders" because they are two very different arguments that have been blended into something that is almost an argument but not quite. You can't say "new players will be put off and I'm a veteran and I'll be put off" because new players play style will be much different from someone who's been with the game for some time. 9/10 of the time you can assume a new player is not going to communicate and so you have to base what they'll do as new players with this growing "it will turn new players off if they can't build" mentality.
Also, the players are not being removed from strategy, which again, I've said before. If the comm sends wave after wave of MAC to build something without any player support, he's going to be bleeding and SOL in the long run, both on the research side and on the map growth side. Likewise, ground units on both sides are going to be the key source of what weapons should be brought out to fight the current unit types. If players don't inform of the stampede of onos, the comm is going to be winging it on research and no amount of skill will save you from that. Not only that, but grunts on both sides will be the only source of flow control for where bases and structures are set up. No amount of comming can overcome good information control.
I would also like to point out that, right now there really isn't a need to talk about alien side of build assistance. Yes, I know gorges have changed what their old duty was, but that's not really a bad thing. However, the reason I think it's not as much of an issue is their build unit is sacrificed in the process, guaranteeing that the structure gets built, even if it's taken damage. The same cannot be said about the MAC and this does change up the strategy for both sides, again separating them into two unique play groups. Since I've seen starcraft thrown around so flippantly, it's like saying zerg are the same as terrans. You'd be wrong if you said it about that game, so don't say it about a game that hasn't even reached full features.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sort of like why RE1 and 2 is far more scary then RE5 where you can literally punch the heads of zombies off since your main character is a freakin mammoth. Tell me, what would scare you more, or create more tension, being stuck in a room with aliens, having heavy armor and some mini-guns, or having nothing but a knife? Yeah.. the helpless one creates a bit more tension now doesn't it?
It's not the only thing, it's an additional thing. That is, it's MORE tense to be vulnerable. Though I would hardly call the marine helpless even while building, since he can stop and whip a gun out at any time. However, since this takes a second or two, you have a short moment where you can't do anything, and since you can <i>die</i> in a short moment in NS...
It is not the same tesnion but it is a different tension.
This time you are not helpless yourself. But the MAC is easily destroyed and is helpless.
And there is still the posibility of ninja capping res nodes and build stuff behinde enemy lines. Only this time the Marines will have to create a diversion so the Commander can navigate a MAC into position. Again not the same but still possible.
You have to let go of NS1 gameplay for now and embrace NS2 gameplay. Or do you want NS2 to be just like NS1 with a few minor changes here and there.
It is a different game.
Again lets wait and see how it plays out firs before we cry murder.
IN NS1 it opened up a risk vs reward dynamic when multiple rines were in a situation e.g. three rines attempting to set up an offensive position turret factory and siege: do you have 1 builder and 2 guards, 2 builders and 1 guard or go breakneck build speed and risk no protection? It was a nice little tactical consideration the com didnt necessarily have to micro-manage.
The problem is we won't get that system back now.
The drifter/alien com controls the additional hive placement for the time being, and until gorgies are given more build freedom, letting rines build without macs would give ninja freedom to the rines and choke the aliens.
In case repeating it again will get the point through, it's not holding E, it's being vulnerable and relying on teammates.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That vulnerability has been given to the commander who will rely on his teammates which will promote the RTS / FPS interactions that everyone wants. Granted, the commander is not exposed but a piece of equipment that cost resources is. 'Your side' loves to say how they want/need teamwork and commander only building somehow limits that. If teamwork and relying on the guy next to you is so important why are these same people unwilling to stay near a builder bot? Yeah, teamwork sounds real important to them...
Also, don't lose track of the other changes in NS2. There will be no ninja phase gates and no hidden siege outposts because they don't exist in NS2 and, more importantly, the power grid system prevents that. FPS players are going to spawn in and want to get to the front line not sit back in already taken territory building random buildings. Instead, that "ninja" rush you're all looking for is going to be replaced with mobile siege cannons. I hope people don't say "escort missions? Screw that, I hate those!" when it comes time to set up sieges. Somehow, between all of the intensity and combat I doubt they'll care.
If UWE can remove mundane aspects from NS1 while making the RTS side actually feel like an RTS then they should do it.
I'm glad they are.
How on earth do you come to that conclusion? I see it enforcing the team to talk to the commander and vice versa, so that they know where the builder is going in order to get ahead of it and properly defend it. Before, commander said "Go to this res point and build the RT!" and marine said, "Yeah, no, I like this res point better.. once I'm there I'll call for an RT, and what are you gonna do, follow your strategy or follow mine?" The system now enforces teamwork. You want to build somewhere the commander doesn't? Tough nuts. Follow the strategy of the guy called the commander. That's why he's called the "Commander", btw. That you think it disconnects you suggests to me that you're used to getting where you want and having the commander react to you, rather than you having to react to the commander.
Or, the commander is working directly with the marines by keeping an eye on the MAC, making sure it moves with the group, falls back when it needs to, etc.. that you haven't had a commander that does that doesn't mean the system needs to change so much as the old habits of the commander from NS1. Perhaps you've heard of this game called Starcraft? It's an RTS game, apparantly, one in which a good commander is one that can control not only various upgrades and the like, but actually handle complex movements of their troops, advancing, flanking, retreating, etc. It turns out that there's apparantly some RTS stuff going on in NS2, and that NS2 commanders are going to be expected to be similarly skilled. I don't necessarily see that as a failure in the system at all.
So your argument here is essentially noob players act like noobs? Yeah, I can see how the MAC has suddenly made that come to the fore.. oh wait.. If marines just follow the bot around, marines are going to lose, as the aliens will jump on said bot and eat it. Marines need to lead the bot to make sure where it's going is clear. This requires, once again, <i>more</i> interaction with the Commander, not less.
And again we see the reality. Your problem isn't that the Commander is separated from the marine so much, (because we've shown it isn't) it's that the Commander has been put in the Commanding role and the marine has to act as.. well.. a marine under command, rather than a rambo.
I'd suggest your problem is that you need better commanders. If you really want the tension of building, you could always go face a wall for a while and see if you can manage to count to 30 before turning around. That seems to require the same level of alertness and skill.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Best, post, ever!
I wish you were my dad
How are you going to get good commanders in pub games? It's pretty rare. Suffice to say I think UWE wants their game to be a big hit and sell a lot of copies. That means a huge influx of new players, many of whom will not have any commanding experience, or little-to-no RTS experience. NS2 should not automatically assume that people will know how to play the game; in fact one of their mission statements for NS2 was to make the learning curve easier to grasp for new players. It is very overwhelming to have the entirety of the RTS load being borne by the commanders' shoulders. Why not allow marines to help alleviate that?
This is the exact same thing, a minor change in game play mechanics that people judge to soon/get to worked up about. If history repeats itself, bots will build and threads will be about new things. I think natural selection 2 is still gunna feel the same as natural selection over all. These minor things don't affect game play as much as some of you appear to think, the largest difference would be; marines needing to secure the area before/during setup, rather then just having a marine do it when they manage to get there.
[all imo of course]
It is not the same tension but it is a different tension.
This time you are not helpless yourself. But the MAC is easily destroyed and is helpless.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If the MAC is destroyed, you and your squad can still defend yourselves just as well as before, you just can't do anything productive other than go back to the nearest MAC and start over. If the build-able marine dies, you're going to have that much harder a time surviving, even if you avenge him and finish the building.
Maybe it's an unfair bias caused by me not liking AI allies much, but the former sounds frustrating, while the latter sounds tense.
<!--quoteo(post=1790473:date=Aug 2 2010, 12:58 AM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 2 2010, 12:58 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1790473"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That vulnerability has been given to the commander who will rely on his teammates which will promote the RTS / FPS interactions that everyone wants. Granted, the commander is not exposed but a piece of equipment that cost resources is. 'Your side' loves to say how they want/need teamwork and commander only building somehow limits that. If teamwork and relying on the guy next to you is so important why are these same people unwilling to stay near a builder bot? Yeah, teamwork sounds real important to them...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's a dumb defenceless machine rather than a human player, equal to yourself. Noone ever said the MAC wasn't vital, but it's not part of the team.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, don't lose track of the other changes in NS2. There will be no ninja phase gates and no hidden siege outposts because they don't exist in NS2 and, more importantly, the power grid system prevents that. FPS players are going to spawn in and want to get to the front line not sit back in already taken territory building random buildings. Instead, that "ninja" rush you're all looking for is going to be replaced with mobile siege cannons. I hope people don't say "escort missions? Screw that, I hate those!" when it comes time to set up sieges. Somehow, between all of the intensity and combat I doubt they'll care.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I never meant to emphasize ninjaing, but you're right when you say it'll be gone.
I will admit though, that escorting the siege tanks sounds a lot more like fun and less like a chore. Maybe because they're liable to be a lot less fragile, and you'll have more than one just to be safe anyway.
That's kind of a contradiction to most of the arguments so far. Yes, new players should have a step in and enjoy kind of gameplay, and in my opinion the commander who can perform research and building provides that. The core experience, despite what everyone wants to say, is to battle marines vs. aliens. Building isn't part of the core experience, but enhances the options available for players to enjoy the battle more. If anything, people who are saying without building the game is ruined are thinking as veterans, whereas from the MAC-commander building standpoint, the core gameplay is open early and it's up to the commander to do the research necessary to enhance that for them. If anything, I'd say the current system supports that learning curve more than "that guy got a shotgun and I didn't" or "that guy went off to do something and I don't know what" and quitting the game because of it. And again, I like the idea of welders if only to support front line troopers in heavy armor from having to run back to the armory.
Again, I think we need to split this issue into the two separate arguments being made:
New Player experience vs. veteran experience (which is the basic welder argument)
MAC construction vs. player being able to drop/build (which is bizzaro since this was only in combat mode, of which UWE says "LOL NO" in more eloquent terms)
Also, don't lose track of the other changes in NS2. There will be no ninja phase gates and no hidden siege outposts because they don't exist in NS2 and, more importantly, the power grid system prevents that. FPS players are going to spawn in and want to get to the front line not sit back in already taken territory building random buildings. Instead, that "ninja" rush you're all looking for is going to be replaced with mobile siege cannons. I hope people don't say "escort missions? Screw that, I hate those!" when it comes time to set up sieges. Somehow, between all of the intensity and combat I doubt they'll care.
If UWE can remove mundane aspects from NS1 while making the RTS side actually feel like an RTS then they should do it.
I'm glad they are.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do ya not understand that if BOTH CAN build, you can STILL allow the MAC's to build while every marine there guards them???? That option doesn't become obsolete, but having ONLY MAC's build makes marine building obsolete.