<!--quoteo(post=1938304:date=May 23 2012, 10:15 AM:name=twiliteblue)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (twiliteblue @ May 23 2012, 10:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938304"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't like to see players punished for dying either. It only bogs the game speed down.
Wouldn't it better to have a small amount of Res per Kill instead? Its forms tested so far has been quite dramatic (random 1-3 res). What if it is reduced to a consistent 1 res per kill? Perhaps there could even be a time constraint added (eg RFK is only rewarded once every 8 seconds).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Res per kill would speed the game up, not gaining res while dead would slow the game down slightly and make it a more measured experience. The game does not need to be sped up as it is right now, and there is a problem with things like marines just suiciding into killing RT's etc with no loss on their part and this would address cheesy tactics like that somewhat.
Situations some of you guys are mentioning like a player just sitting in their base until they had enough res for a lifeform are terribly unrealistic and would be quite damaging to their team's map control. Sure it's something they could do, but it comes with quite a cost and that sounds fine.
i've always felt that the skulk is supposed to be somewhat disposable. it wouldn't feel right to me for it's death to have the same negative impact like the other lifeforms.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
<!--quoteo(post=1938340:date=May 22 2012, 07:19 PM:name=Arkanti)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arkanti @ May 22 2012, 07:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938340"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Situations some of you guys are mentioning like a player just sitting in their base until they had enough res for a lifeform are terribly unrealistic and would be quite damaging to their team's map control. Sure it's something they could do, but it comes with quite a cost and that sounds fine.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
^ After playtesting this today i have to agree with this. No one made a conscious decision based on it, it was sort of just in the background, making our pres off by a number or two in relation to one another. Definitely achieved the goal.
However, I think it will have problems with balancing between aliens and marines, given spawn times and class playstyles and what not. A simpler method could be loss of pres on death with a definitive number.
But yea, we didn't have any cowering in base, or even making decisions around it - it was so trivial.
<!--quoteo(post=1938343:date=May 23 2012, 12:29 PM:name=DJPenguin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DJPenguin @ May 23 2012, 12:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938343"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->i've always felt that the skulk is supposed to be somewhat disposable. it wouldn't feel right to me for it's death to have the same negative impact like the other lifeforms.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It wouldn't, you don't have to spend any res to evolve it.
At the least I think that the no pres while dead change should be tested.
<!--quoteo(post=1938344:date=May 23 2012, 12:34 PM:name=ironhorse)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ironhorse @ May 23 2012, 12:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938344"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->However, I think it will have problems with balancing between aliens and marines, given spawn times and class playstyles and what not. A simpler method could be loss of pres on death with a definitive number.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, I'm hoping that spawn times and systems are nowhere near finalised, especially for Aliens(wave based spawning is not having the desired effect with teamwork and is causing widespread frustration). Though losing pres upon death seems like it might be a cleaner way to reach the same goal, I think the psychological effect accompanying the direct loss of resources rather than simply not gaining any is pretty undesirable.
I think the primary issue with getting no res for the duration of your death is that their can be no informed decision because the time lost cannot be known for sure. Might be 9 seconds, might be 15, could be 19, hell might even be 30 seconds. If you don't know what the risk is, the choice will essentially be random.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So... Guess which game is going to DREAMHACK!? <a href="http://t.co/Oh5bubIR" target="_blank">http://t.co/Oh5bubIR</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> wonderful news! can u talk about some of the ideas u have for DH? maybe someone here can give u some good ideas.
I for one have this idea about letting them have a hands on experince, maybe give out a timed trial version of the game maybe without steam just a LAN version ( better,as I dont think our servers might be enough anyway to all of the people there :D ) so after X hours the users can't play anymore and must preorder? ( this will allso give more freedom of not having to setup a booth + getting PCs and such over there ).
Maybe give dreamhack an exclusive sneak peak at the exo?
<!--quoteo(post=1938676:date=May 25 2012, 04:16 AM:name=Jibrail)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jibrail @ May 25 2012, 04:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938676"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->wonderful news! can u talk about some of the ideas u have for DH? maybe someone here can give u some good ideas.
I for one have this idea about letting them have a hands on experince, maybe give out a timed trial version of the game maybe without steam just a LAN version ( better,as I dont think our servers might be enough anyway to all of the people there :D ) so after X hours the users can't play anymore and must preorder? ( this will allso give more freedom of not having to setup a booth + getting PCs and such over there ).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unfortunately we don't have the resources for a booth, nor to create a specialised Dreamhack build. We also don't think that such a hardcore PC crowd would take kindly the game in its current state of not-there-yet performance and balance.
This will be a stage show, do draw attention to the game for summer release :)
ok gotcha, yeah ur right these guys are as hardcore as they come and they wont be easy on ya. anyway GL with that and I hope to catch u guys on one of the live streams.
swalkSay hello to my little friend.Join Date: 2011-01-20Member: 78384Members, Squad Five Blue
edited May 2012
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thinking long and hard about the role of structure energy in NS2. Some players find it confusing. I find it critical. Hmm.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I find it obsolete with the two other res pools. Having more res pools, while different stuff is purchased from the different individual pools, means less trade-offs. Nothing costs two types of resources. Playing as a commander, there is no trying to balance the usage of each res pool, you can mostly just maximize the usage from each pool, without much thought put into it. The strategic depth would benefit greatly from the removal of one the 3 pools. I would prefer to see PRes and TRes staying, since energy is "hidden" on each selected stucture, which is overly complicated for no benefit towards gameplay or strategic depth. Also, energy will always have the "spam syndrome". Get one more for twice as much action on the energy abilities. Promotes turtling, and spamming of specific stuctures. If it would cost actual resources, you would need map control(resource towers) to keep the action going on your abilities. Punishes turtling, and promotes placement of specific structures instead of promoting numbers of them.
Personally I prefer the energy to be linked to the structures, like to the obs. Going two obs build seems like a valid strategy. Frankly if people find hard or confusing to hotkey some buildings and to micro them they probably shouldn't be commanding. So the confusion argument is not very good immo.
Strategic depth as exposed by swalk and hive/cc being no-harassable resource extractors are more serious problems. Don't forget that introduction of pres/tres already hurts strategic depth is a big way, so one has to be cautious with additional similar problems.
Consistency is another problem, having one structure costing energy instead of tres (and one being free...), or one NPC's unit.
I think there is a subtle shift in energy being an interesting cooldown for abilities to being a full-blown resource.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=May 24 2012:name=@NS2 (twitter))--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (@NS2 (twitter) @ May 24 2012)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thinking long and hard about the role of structure energy in NS2. Some players find it confusing. I find it critical. Hmm.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Remove PR as a kham resource as I suggest here: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118315" target="_blank">idea on: gorges building + kham, co-existing!</a>
2. Make all hive abilities/functions cost TR! As I suggested here: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118603" target="_blank">cysts cost energy again?</a>
And here's my direct response to the energy tweet quoted on top, in that thread: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118603&view=findpost&p=1938734" target="_blank">cysts cost energy again? (post #28)</a>
Energy should be gathered from tech points. This one energy pool should be shared for energy abilities instead of separate pools, promoting trade-offs. All energy abilities should have a nominal T-res cost as well (~1-2 T-res). This prevents energy ability usage in turtle/stalemate situations. The energy cost acts as a cool-down to prevent spamming. Taking more tech points with a hive or comm station would provide a larger energy pool and increased recharge rate.
P-res should only be able to buy lifeforms/weapons/items just like an FPS player. If a comm wants players to lay mines or weld, they can spend their P-res on that. A shotgun rush or gorge push also can be supported/promoted by comm/khamm P-res.
Scenarios:
Turtled team has res income from 1 res node and energy income from 1 tech point. Energy abilities are very limited due to low T-res, slow energy income and smallest energy pool size.
Majority map control with 6 res nodes and 3 tech points allows for longer and more frequent use of energy abilities. Large energy pool allows more 'burst' usage.
Control of 4-5 res nodes with only one tech point limits energy income and pool size. This only allows for occasional use of energy abilities (acting as long cooldowns).
Control of 2-3 tech points and 3-4 res nodes makes for constant trade-offs between energy usage and tech/expansion. Res starved team will need to limit spending T-res to activate energy abilities.
This would create more value in balanced expansion. Taking lots of res nodes and no tech points will leave the commander with limited support options but good tech and economy. Taking multiple tech points but having limited res income will make the trade-off of spending small T-res to activate energy abilities much greater versus tech. A balanced expansion of 3-4 res nodes and 2 tech points allows for more responsive commander play, spending T-res on energy abilities and tech.
This simplifies the implementation of energy while increasing the value of holding multiple tech points. It also retains the anti-spamming and anti-turtling features of an energy system. PNs and cysts could cost energy or T-res. Drifter should likely be a T-res cost.
EDIT/PS: The tech point and energy conection to commander activated abilities encourages commanders to focus on expansion and taking tech points to be able to use those abilities most freely (faster recharge and larger pool). This connects the marco-strategy of the commander to their access to micro-abilities. Without successful macro-strategy, a comm will have less access to the cool/fun stuff, activated energy abilities.
For me the scoreboard should provide as much information as possible. For example in NS1 the scoreboard often tells me how much nodes we are biting, how our team's fragging capabilities are spread, sometimes I can check whether we got a building down before it was recycled and so on.
While removing any information has good intentions, it also prevents more experienced player from reading the game further. It kind of emphasizes the dependency on having equally experienced teammates feeding you information needed for an enjoyable game.
Surely you can also spread the information around minimap, HUD and other communication channels, but it's quite likely that some details are lost unless you've got a good and information filled scoreboard.
The issue is, that maybe UWE think a score on the scoreboard effects the way players play on a server. When I was playing CS all those years ago, this was a factor. In some games, winning is ALL about hunting players down. Yes, CS was a team based game with similar skills required. But on publics, it was all about solo skill (more or less).
But when playing NS2, it is only something I sort of check at the end. But essentially you lose and win as a team, and it is extremely obvious in a game like this. I have to think about attacking their extractors, building our own, thinking about where I should be on the map to 'hold the line' and about one hundred other things that I am sure any NS veteran can relate to.
If UWE think that having 'kill/death on a scoreboard dictates whether players play as a team or go solo, then they are SERIOUSLY barking up the wrong tree.
I agree with Bac and would add one small gripe that most people will probably never feel:
As a clan-leader, I found that monitoring people's scores were very useful in determining who I wanted to keep and who I wanted to acquire for my clan. It is really handy to be able to gauge somebody's fragging ability against their willingness to eat extractors, for example. If a player is consistently dying less, I might be able to infer that the player is someone who knows his limits or something like that. Basically, detailed scoring would be a good tool for <i>me</i> (I can't speak for other leaders and how they do things).
<!--quoteo(post=1938806:date=May 25 2012, 07:06 AM:name=culprit)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (culprit @ May 25 2012, 07:06 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938806"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Some thoughts on energy:
Energy should be gathered from tech points. This one energy pool should be shared for energy abilities instead of separate pools, promoting trade-offs. All energy abilities should have a nominal T-res cost as well (~1-2 T-res). This prevents energy ability usage in turtle/stalemate situations. The energy cost acts as a cool-down to prevent spamming. Taking more tech points with a hive or comm station would provide a larger energy pool and increased recharge rate.
P-res should only be able to buy lifeforms/weapons/items just like an FPS player. If a comm wants players to lay mines or weld, they can spend their P-res on that. A shotgun rush or gorge push also can be supported/promoted by comm/khamm P-res.
Scenarios:
Turtled team has res income from 1 res node and energy income from 1 tech point. Energy abilities are very limited due to low T-res, slow energy income and smallest energy pool size.
Majority map control with 6 res nodes and 3 tech points allows for longer and more frequent use of energy abilities. Large energy pool allows more 'burst' usage.
Control of 4-5 res nodes with only one tech point limits energy income and pool size. This only allows for occasional use of energy abilities (acting as long cooldowns).
Control of 2-3 tech points and 3-4 res nodes makes for constant trade-offs between energy usage and tech/expansion. Res starved team will need to limit spending T-res to activate energy abilities.
This would create more value in balanced expansion. Taking lots of res nodes and no tech points will leave the commander with limited support options but good tech and economy. Taking multiple tech points but having limited res income will make the trade-off of spending small T-res to activate energy abilities much greater versus tech. A balanced expansion of 3-4 res nodes and 2 tech points allows for more responsive commander play, spending T-res on energy abilities and tech.
This simplifies the implementation of energy while increasing the value of holding multiple tech points. It also retains the anti-spamming and anti-turtling features of an energy system. PNs and cysts could cost energy or T-res. Drifter should likely be a T-res cost.
EDIT/PS: The tech point and energy conection to commander activated abilities encourages commanders to focus on expansion and taking tech points to be able to use those abilities most freely (faster recharge and larger pool). This connects the marco-strategy of the commander to their access to micro-abilities. Without successful macro-strategy, a comm will have less access to the cool/fun stuff, activated energy abilities.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> +1 commander support abilities should draw from 1 energy pool, that should be displayed in the comm interface
<!--quoteo(post=1938344:date=May 23 2012, 01:34 PM:name=ironhorse)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ironhorse @ May 23 2012, 01:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938344"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->However, I think it will have problems with balancing between aliens and marines, given spawn times and class playstyles and what not. A simpler method could be loss of pres on death with a definitive number.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> What your suggestings already the case if you stop and think about it with the higher alien lifeforms, it hurts you by 30 res for a lerk, 50 for a fade and 75 for an Onos or as marines 10 for JP, 20 for shotgun etc (though marines can re-use their purchases so not punished the same as aliens). Being penalised for dying is wrong, part of being a good skulk is to die the good death, take out the power node/extractor and die seconds later. Leave you with a bad K:D ratio but great teamwork.
You should not be penalised because your the one on your side who draws the marine/aliens into an ambush or is first to start the attack on an outpost.
<!--quoteo(post=1939044:date=May 26 2012, 06:15 AM:name=Venatos)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Venatos @ May 26 2012, 06:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1939044"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->+1 commander support abilities should draw from 1 energy pool, that should be displayed in the comm interface<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks for the input Venatos. I made a thread for this idea over <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118665" target="_blank">HERE</a>.
I believe streamlining the energy system with a single energy pool would make it more intuitive as well as creating more trade-offs and the opportunity for various 'builds' based on different energy priorities.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->@victury ¡Encantado de conocerla Victur!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Do not try to speak spanish again. There's vomit all over my keyboard.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Build 210 is now off to Valve! Look for it shortly. Hope you have fun with it this weekend.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It begins... in Valve Time!
Also, obligatory <a href="http://steamcommunity.com/groups/NS2-Official" target="_blank">NS2 Official Steam Group Chatroom</a>, join the hype train!
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1941924:date=Jun 6 2012, 11:25 PM:name=Mendasp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mendasp @ Jun 6 2012, 11:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1941924"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Do not try to speak spanish again. There's vomit all over my keyboard.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ai Ai Ai! Que está repulsivo señor! <img src="http://members.home.nl/m.borgman/ns-forum/smileys/youreallwrong.gif" border="0" class="linked-image" />
swalkSay hello to my little friend.Join Date: 2011-01-20Member: 78384Members, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1938304:date=May 23 2012, 02:15 AM:name=twiliteblue)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (twiliteblue @ May 23 2012, 02:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938304"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What if it is reduced to a consistent 1 res per kill?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This would be much better than not gaining res when dead.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Twitter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Twitter)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Wow, the balance in NS2 210 is awesome! ns2_tram is now at 51% aliens, 49% marines. Aggregate across all maps? 54% aliens 46%!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Troll-tweet?
Comments
Wouldn't it better to have a small amount of Res per Kill instead? Its forms tested so far has been quite dramatic (random 1-3 res).
What if it is reduced to a consistent 1 res per kill? Perhaps there could even be a time constraint added (eg RFK is only rewarded once every 8 seconds).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Res per kill would speed the game up, not gaining res while dead would slow the game down slightly and make it a more measured experience. The game does not need to be sped up as it is right now, and there is a problem with things like marines just suiciding into killing RT's etc with no loss on their part and this would address cheesy tactics like that somewhat.
Situations some of you guys are mentioning like a player just sitting in their base until they had enough res for a lifeform are terribly unrealistic and would be quite damaging to their team's map control. Sure it's something they could do, but it comes with quite a cost and that sounds fine.
^ After playtesting this today i have to agree with this.
No one made a conscious decision based on it, it was sort of just in the background, making our pres off by a number or two in relation to one another. Definitely achieved the goal.
However, I think it will have problems with balancing between aliens and marines, given spawn times and class playstyles and what not. A simpler method could be loss of pres on death with a definitive number.
But yea, we didn't have any cowering in base, or even making decisions around it - it was so trivial.
It wouldn't, you don't have to spend any res to evolve it.
At the least I think that the no pres while dead change should be tested.
<!--quoteo(post=1938344:date=May 23 2012, 12:34 PM:name=ironhorse)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ironhorse @ May 23 2012, 12:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1938344"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->However, I think it will have problems with balancing between aliens and marines, given spawn times and class playstyles and what not. A simpler method could be loss of pres on death with a definitive number.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, I'm hoping that spawn times and systems are nowhere near finalised, especially for Aliens(wave based spawning is not having the desired effect with teamwork and is causing widespread frustration). Though losing pres upon death seems like it might be a cleaner way to reach the same goal, I think the psychological effect accompanying the direct loss of resources rather than simply not gaining any is pretty undesirable.
wonderful news! can u talk about some of the ideas u have for DH? maybe someone here can give u some good ideas.
I for one have this idea about letting them have a hands on experince, maybe give out a timed trial version of the game maybe without steam just a LAN version ( better,as I dont think our servers might be enough anyway to all of the people there :D ) so after X hours the users can't play anymore and must preorder? ( this will allso give more freedom of not having to setup a booth + getting PCs and such over there ).
Maybe give dreamhack an exclusive sneak peak at the exo?
I for one have this idea about letting them have a hands on experince, maybe give out a timed trial version of the game maybe without steam just a LAN version ( better,as I dont think our servers might be enough anyway to all of the people there :D ) so after X hours the users can't play anymore and must preorder? ( this will allso give more freedom of not having to setup a booth + getting PCs and such over there ).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Unfortunately we don't have the resources for a booth, nor to create a specialised Dreamhack build. We also don't think that such a hardcore PC crowd would take kindly the game in its current state of not-there-yet performance and balance.
This will be a stage show, do draw attention to the game for summer release :)
I find it obsolete with the two other res pools.
Having more res pools, while different stuff is purchased from the different individual pools, means less trade-offs. Nothing costs two types of resources.
Playing as a commander, there is no trying to balance the usage of each res pool, you can mostly just maximize the usage from each pool, without much thought put into it.
The strategic depth would benefit greatly from the removal of one the 3 pools.
I would prefer to see PRes and TRes staying, since energy is "hidden" on each selected stucture, which is overly complicated for no benefit towards gameplay or strategic depth.
Also, energy will always have the "spam syndrome". Get one more for twice as much action on the energy abilities. Promotes turtling, and spamming of specific stuctures.
If it would cost actual resources, you would need map control(resource towers) to keep the action going on your abilities. Punishes turtling, and promotes placement of specific structures instead of promoting numbers of them.
Strategic depth as exposed by swalk and hive/cc being no-harassable resource extractors are more serious problems. Don't forget that introduction of pres/tres already hurts strategic depth is a big way, so one has to be cautious with additional similar problems.
Consistency is another problem, having one structure costing energy instead of tres (and one being free...), or one NPC's unit.
I think there is a subtle shift in energy being an interesting cooldown for abilities to being a full-blown resource.
1. Remove PR as a kham resource as I suggest here:
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118315" target="_blank">idea on: gorges building + kham, co-existing!</a>
2. Make all hive abilities/functions cost TR! As I suggested here:
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118603" target="_blank">cysts cost energy again?</a>
And here's my direct response to the energy tweet quoted on top, in that thread:
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118603&view=findpost&p=1938734" target="_blank">cysts cost energy again? (post #28)</a>
Energy should be gathered from tech points. This one energy pool should be shared for energy abilities instead of separate pools, promoting trade-offs. All energy abilities should have a nominal T-res cost as well (~1-2 T-res). This prevents energy ability usage in turtle/stalemate situations. The energy cost acts as a cool-down to prevent spamming. Taking more tech points with a hive or comm station would provide a larger energy pool and increased recharge rate.
P-res should only be able to buy lifeforms/weapons/items just like an FPS player. If a comm wants players to lay mines or weld, they can spend their P-res on that. A shotgun rush or gorge push also can be supported/promoted by comm/khamm P-res.
Scenarios:
Turtled team has res income from 1 res node and energy income from 1 tech point. Energy abilities are very limited due to low T-res, slow energy income and smallest energy pool size.
Majority map control with 6 res nodes and 3 tech points allows for longer and more frequent use of energy abilities. Large energy pool allows more 'burst' usage.
Control of 4-5 res nodes with only one tech point limits energy income and pool size. This only allows for occasional use of energy abilities (acting as long cooldowns).
Control of 2-3 tech points and 3-4 res nodes makes for constant trade-offs between energy usage and tech/expansion. Res starved team will need to limit spending T-res to activate energy abilities.
This would create more value in balanced expansion. Taking lots of res nodes and no tech points will leave the commander with limited support options but good tech and economy. Taking multiple tech points but having limited res income will make the trade-off of spending small T-res to activate energy abilities much greater versus tech. A balanced expansion of 3-4 res nodes and 2 tech points allows for more responsive commander play, spending T-res on energy abilities and tech.
This simplifies the implementation of energy while increasing the value of holding multiple tech points. It also retains the anti-spamming and anti-turtling features of an energy system. PNs and cysts could cost energy or T-res. Drifter should likely be a T-res cost.
EDIT/PS:
The tech point and energy conection to commander activated abilities encourages commanders to focus on expansion and taking tech points to be able to use those abilities most freely (faster recharge and larger pool). This connects the marco-strategy of the commander to their access to micro-abilities. Without successful macro-strategy, a comm will have less access to the cool/fun stuff, activated energy abilities.
While removing any information has good intentions, it also prevents more experienced player from reading the game further. It kind of emphasizes the dependency on having equally experienced teammates feeding you information needed for an enjoyable game.
Surely you can also spread the information around minimap, HUD and other communication channels, but it's quite likely that some details are lost unless you've got a good and information filled scoreboard.
But when playing NS2, it is only something I sort of check at the end. But essentially you lose and win as a team, and it is extremely obvious in a game like this. I have to think about attacking their extractors, building our own, thinking about where I should be on the map to 'hold the line' and about one hundred other things that I am sure any NS veteran can relate to.
If UWE think that having 'kill/death on a scoreboard dictates whether players play as a team or go solo, then they are SERIOUSLY barking up the wrong tree.
As a clan-leader, I found that monitoring people's scores were very useful in determining who I wanted to keep and who I wanted to acquire for my clan. It is really handy to be able to gauge somebody's fragging ability against their willingness to eat extractors, for example. If a player is consistently dying less, I might be able to infer that the player is someone who knows his limits or something like that. Basically, detailed scoring would be a good tool for <i>me</i> (I can't speak for other leaders and how they do things).
Energy should be gathered from tech points. This one energy pool should be shared for energy abilities instead of separate pools, promoting trade-offs. All energy abilities should have a nominal T-res cost as well (~1-2 T-res). This prevents energy ability usage in turtle/stalemate situations. The energy cost acts as a cool-down to prevent spamming. Taking more tech points with a hive or comm station would provide a larger energy pool and increased recharge rate.
P-res should only be able to buy lifeforms/weapons/items just like an FPS player. If a comm wants players to lay mines or weld, they can spend their P-res on that. A shotgun rush or gorge push also can be supported/promoted by comm/khamm P-res.
Scenarios:
Turtled team has res income from 1 res node and energy income from 1 tech point. Energy abilities are very limited due to low T-res, slow energy income and smallest energy pool size.
Majority map control with 6 res nodes and 3 tech points allows for longer and more frequent use of energy abilities. Large energy pool allows more 'burst' usage.
Control of 4-5 res nodes with only one tech point limits energy income and pool size. This only allows for occasional use of energy abilities (acting as long cooldowns).
Control of 2-3 tech points and 3-4 res nodes makes for constant trade-offs between energy usage and tech/expansion. Res starved team will need to limit spending T-res to activate energy abilities.
This would create more value in balanced expansion. Taking lots of res nodes and no tech points will leave the commander with limited support options but good tech and economy. Taking multiple tech points but having limited res income will make the trade-off of spending small T-res to activate energy abilities much greater versus tech. A balanced expansion of 3-4 res nodes and 2 tech points allows for more responsive commander play, spending T-res on energy abilities and tech.
This simplifies the implementation of energy while increasing the value of holding multiple tech points. It also retains the anti-spamming and anti-turtling features of an energy system. PNs and cysts could cost energy or T-res. Drifter should likely be a T-res cost.
EDIT/PS:
The tech point and energy conection to commander activated abilities encourages commanders to focus on expansion and taking tech points to be able to use those abilities most freely (faster recharge and larger pool). This connects the marco-strategy of the commander to their access to micro-abilities. Without successful macro-strategy, a comm will have less access to the cool/fun stuff, activated energy abilities.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
+1 commander support abilities should draw from 1 energy pool, that should be displayed in the comm interface
What your suggestings already the case if you stop and think about it with the higher alien lifeforms, it hurts you by 30 res for a lerk, 50 for a fade and 75 for an Onos or as marines 10 for JP, 20 for shotgun etc (though marines can re-use their purchases so not punished the same as aliens).
Being penalised for dying is wrong, part of being a good skulk is to die the good death, take out the power node/extractor and die seconds later.
Leave you with a bad K:D ratio but great teamwork.
You should not be penalised because your the one on your side who draws the marine/aliens into an ambush or is first to start the attack on an outpost.
Thanks for the input Venatos. I made a thread for this idea over <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118665" target="_blank">HERE</a>.
I believe streamlining the energy system with a single energy pool would make it more intuitive as well as creating more trade-offs and the opportunity for various 'builds' based on different energy priorities.
:)
i hope there is a way to bind the gorge build
Do not try to speak spanish again. There's vomit all over my keyboard.
It begins... in Valve Time!
Also, obligatory <a href="http://steamcommunity.com/groups/NS2-Official" target="_blank">NS2 Official Steam Group Chatroom</a>, join the hype train!
Ai Ai Ai! Que está repulsivo señor! <img src="http://members.home.nl/m.borgman/ns-forum/smileys/youreallwrong.gif" border="0" class="linked-image" />
This would be much better than not gaining res when dead.
Developer: Unknown Worlds
Publisher: Perfect World
Release: Late Summer 2012
This is from the Destructoid preview article...what does it mean that Perfect World is the publisher I thought NS2 would only be on steam?
Edit: Nvm updating.
Troll-tweet?
I hope so..
<!--coloro:#9932CC--><span style="color:#9932CC"><!--/coloro--><!--sizeo:7--><span style="font-size:36pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><!--fonto:Arial Black--><span style="font-family:Arial Black"><!--/fonto-->:D<!--fontc--></span><!--/fontc--><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--><!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->