Aimed for 16v16?

Koruyo

NS2HD said UWE aims for 16v16 gamebalance, true?

I dont know but this could be a problem if you look into the esports scene... 16players squad - oh boy...

Maybe make 2 vanilla Modes, Tournament max 8v8, and public 16v16.

Dont think this should rely only on community modding - to balance and get a special version for this.

Ofc i know you(uwe) dont got the time for this atm, and aim for the more casual playerbase first - since usually this the bigger part of the cake... but still.

Any plans?

Avalon

Maybe perhaps they are just trying to balance the game so that any size game may be played without imbalance. I remember back in NS1, a 6v6-8v8 was ideal. Anything less and the aliens had the advantage, anything more and the marines started getting the advantage due to the asymmetrical resource model.

Asraniel

i wouldn't worry that much.

The team size is probably mostly depending on the map size, so you just need smaller maps. That beeing said, ns1 maps where quite big and there was no problem with 8v8 or so.

The only thing that needs to be balanced is probably stuff like building HP, for example as NS2HD said, taking down a hive with 16 marines is fast, with 4, not so. But that again might not be a problem with stuff like the siege tank, so that we would simply have different strategies depending on the team size.

Koruyo

Dynamic adjustment of gamebalance on player count would be cool... (or at least 3 steps with a specific player range, so the game adjust itself?)

Copyright by Koruyo :P

derWalter

the balancing system is DYNAMIC, so it would fit EVERY team size :)

Runteh

They are talking about public play, not pro.

5 has always been the perfect team size... 6 at the most.

Any more than that, and organising games becomes a real pain.

Dank McShwagger

with the option for 3 commanders per team im assuming uwe is aiming for games with more players then ns1. 16v16 with 3 comms per team seems on scale with ns1's 6v6 with only 1 comm.

Runteh

You'll never have 3 comms per team, there is just no need for it. The reason for 3/4 comms (depending on hive count) is so that new players can jump in and learn without the stress of having NS1 veterans barking that them.

Played on Tram a few times, it can be a good or bad thing having multiple commanders. Mostly because right now you immediately (more or less) go for advanced armoury, and GL and Flamethrower. But sometimes newer players jump into the 2nd CC after is built, and will waste res by dropping the observatory, for example. It has actually lost games for me, because you can get hampered by bad comms spending res poorly before you take over.

There needs to be some way of sharing commander resources that prevents this sort of thing from happening.

2 Would be a good count for any game, any more and you are taking soldiers away from the front lines.

peregrinus

Tram would be amazing with 2 squads of 7 marines + 1 comm

<!--quoteo(post=1817833:date=Dec 21 2010, 07:12 PM:name=Runteh)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Runteh @ Dec 21 2010, 07:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1817833"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There needs to be some way of sharing commander resources that prevents this sort of thing from happening.

2 Would be a good count for any game, any more and you are taking soldiers away from the front lines.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This deserves its own topic.

ASnogarD

I am happy if they can get good performances on 16 v 16 matches , and I dont really care about 'pro' matches... in my opinion its easier to take 8 v 8 pro teams and make a 32 player map work, than try build up a great community on 8 v 8 player limited servers.

More players in a server the less stress if a noob messes up, means less hostile reception for new players, means more players online playing than swearing at full servers... all good.

ScardyBob

As long as they allow modders to make 128 megaservers (64v64), then I don't care what size they shoot for balance.

Crispy

The economy of both teams would need to be designed to scale up and down (for instance, NS1 does not). And bigger maps were played but were not in as much favour as smaller well-balanced maps. If you go higher than the game is aiming to support, then you start to see issues with server and client performance.

FocusedWolf

<!--quoteo(post=1817833:date=Dec 21 2010, 01:12 PM:name=Runteh)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Runteh @ Dec 21 2010, 01:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1817833"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You'll never have 3 comms per team, ... 2 Would be a good count for any game, any more and you are taking soldiers away from the front lines.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Your missing the point though. The marines will need 1 full time commander, but lets say the com just dropped west... at that point another player can get that place established (armory, rt, possibly an emergency ip because marine start is dead). The same applies for the third cc (maybe the armory is destroyed, the power dead, need turrets).

The whole point is the additional cc's allow the marines to adapt rapidly, to secure their corner of the map, without having to bother the com all the time.

Also, sometimes the first com is a total noob and it helps if you can get into west cc to do things like click the first cc and research L2. So in general this allows for more experienced comms to hop in and improve the situation (maybe their's not enough ips in marine start etc etc).

Runteh

Did I ever say in my post it was a bad thing? I don't think I was missing any point, I was just making a response to the post before me - which seemed to state that the reason for multiple comms was for the intended 16 v 16 max player limit.

Cymen

/rant
ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?!
The game isn't even out yet and we already have comp-elitism?
Why can't these people play the game the way it was intended to be played?
Go ahead and make plugins, change the stats and ban features but know this: You will split the community and it will be like it is with TF2, L4D(2), Counterstrike etc.
/rant


I know this post must sound like a raging rant but I don't want this to happen to NS2. I've seen it too many times and believe me: It does not only destroy the community (which is excellent ATM) but destroy the game as a result.

Deadzone

<!--quoteo(post=1817946:date=Dec 21 2010, 04:59 PM:name=Cymen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cymen @ Dec 21 2010, 04:59 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1817946"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->/rant
ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?!
The game isn't even out yet and we already have comp-elitism?
Why can't these people play the game the way it was intended to be played?
Go ahead and make plugins, change the stats and ban features but know this: You will split the community and it will be like it is with TF2, L4D(2), Counterstrike etc.
/rant


I know this post must sound like a raging rant but I don't want this to happen to NS2. I've seen it too many times and believe me: It does not only destroy the community (which is excellent ATM) but destroy the game as a result.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


Let people play the game how they want to play it. THAT is how the game is meant to be played. The only elitism in this thread so far is your own, sir.

spellman23

The reason NS1 was balanced at 6v6 was because of how the resource model worked. More players meant each Alien got less from the capped nodes, which meant harder for single players to get enough cash to do big things like Fade, drop Hives, chambers, etc. Contrast to the shared pool of Marines where you could save up and dump the res into a variety of big ticket items.

Also, there's the inherent Melee vs Fanged problem. More ranged dudes in a corridor means more bullets means more death. You can only fill a region with so many melee units.

However, this is countered by the mobility. Hit-and-runs of Aliens all over the map at all time forcing Marines to respond. Sure if they are all together they never lose a fight, but they lose the map unless they split up, making them more prone to getting mobbed.


Since we have a more unified resource model on both sides, I know at least economically it should scale very nicely. I am hopefully for the other aspects as well.

Harimau

<!--quoteo(post=1817853:date=Dec 22 2010, 02:42 AM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Dec 22 2010, 02:42 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1817853"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As long as they allow modders to make 128 megaservers (64v64), then I don't care what size they shoot for balance.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
hahaha ###### yeah. that would be hectic.