Resources for kill (RFK)
PedoKuma
Join Date: 2011-01-10 Member: 76968Members
Join Date: 2011-01-10 Member: 76968Members
Hey guys, as some of you might have seen in the decision log/progression tracker, UWE wants to test a RFK system (as it was in NS1). I was wondering what do YOU think of RFK so let's discuss in this new thread about it (If it was already posted, I apologize but the search system seems broken).
So, if you played NS1, you should know RFK rewards you (as kharaas, so you can buy better lifeforms or chambers/hive) or your team (as marines, allow your comm to buy more gears that will provide even more resources that will allow you comm ...) by giving resources when you perform a kill.
It added more tactical aspect to NS, you could rush a 2/3minute hive or fade and the commander had to give you gears if he wanted more resources instead of stacking them. The counterpart was if newbies (you know there are ALWAYS newbies in games, because you always need to begin before becoming good heh), they could feed the opposite team, giving them a good bigger superiority.
Now, with the new gameplay in NS2, would you like to see marines get better gears when they kill ? (with the pick up weapons ability, we'll quickly have all double minigun team).
Or maybe, something like : when a marine kill an alien, the actual commander get personal resources (for medpaks) and if a kharaa get a kill, he earn plasma so best players will have better lifeforms.
Also, would you like to see a "when you are in a squad who get a kill, you earn too a small amount of resource" system ?
These are my thoughs, now write yours :p Your turn.
So, if you played NS1, you should know RFK rewards you (as kharaas, so you can buy better lifeforms or chambers/hive) or your team (as marines, allow your comm to buy more gears that will provide even more resources that will allow you comm ...) by giving resources when you perform a kill.
It added more tactical aspect to NS, you could rush a 2/3minute hive or fade and the commander had to give you gears if he wanted more resources instead of stacking them. The counterpart was if newbies (you know there are ALWAYS newbies in games, because you always need to begin before becoming good heh), they could feed the opposite team, giving them a good bigger superiority.
Now, with the new gameplay in NS2, would you like to see marines get better gears when they kill ? (with the pick up weapons ability, we'll quickly have all double minigun team).
Or maybe, something like : when a marine kill an alien, the actual commander get personal resources (for medpaks) and if a kharaa get a kill, he earn plasma so best players will have better lifeforms.
Also, would you like to see a "when you are in a squad who get a kill, you earn too a small amount of resource" system ?
These are my thoughs, now write yours :p Your turn.
Comments
While this is good for shortening rounds, it also eliminates a lot of the cinematic moments that early NS1 play was pretty famous for... long, pitched battles where you always had a chance at coming back, if you got it together and fought harder (or smarter, targetting the higher-value weapon carriers and guarding the drops until despawn). Well, at least until the ping of death was added.
I'm still against the RFK system, and personal-buy for Marines. But then, I like feeling that there's a fighting chance; prefer tug-of-war to slap-jack rounds.
Counter Strike used to have the slippery slope because the winners kept piling on cash and buying better and better equipment.
Later on they added mechanisms that prevented this.
But I am unafraid to try it.
I do not assume it is exactly like the original NS1 RFK.
and I think UW is actually aware of the slippery slope potential.
and I feel if there is enough backlash against it...it will get reverted.
In moderation I like the idea of a slippery slope; it keeps games from becomming too <i>epic</i>(also known as tedious, spam fest, stale mate...).
Many of those cinematic moments and epic games were decided by good players getting bored and leaving, server crashes, latejoiners F4ing because they're not emotionally invested in the current round and want to start over, random fluctuations in player count exceeding the autoconcede treshhold and the like.
2 hours games are just as bad as slippery slopes that are decided 5 minutes in and take another 15 minutes before final victory.
[...]
I'm still against the RFK system, and personal-buy for Marines. But then, I like feeling that there's a fighting chance; prefer tug-of-war to slap-jack rounds.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've the same opinion, RFK in NS often lead the fed team to an easy victory. Or, in some rare cases, could let marines siege when they are out numbered/teched, they just have to beacon/cap deads' weapons for several annoying minutes (those several minutes I'm usually awaiting in the rr because you can only F4 when you have 3onos and 8fades with 3hives on the map). That's seriously annoying for a strategic (not tactical) game as NS, and even more in a game like NS2, but I still think you need to be rewarded for kills (at least a bit).
Imagine a non-RFK system :
-On marine side, commander will have to buy medpaks with his own money. In ns1, in early game, if you kill a skulk when he hurted you but before he put 3 bites on your ass, your commander win 1 to 3 resources, so he can buy you a medpak (rewarding you because you killed someone and allowing you to survive, that means AREA CONTROL). Now if no RFK, commander have to choose wisely which marines he wants to heal/keep on the front.
-On alien side, now that gorges can't build chambers (only hydras ... I hope they'll be able to build small chambers/more buildings than those weak hydras), you DO NOT want to keep your res in order to build hive/RTs. Then, after 5minutes or so, everyone will be able to buy fades (except the ones who bought gorges and hydras or lerks, that means 25% of the team) because, they'll have 50 at the same time. Don't you think 8-10 will be overpowered versus some poor rines ?
I just feel that we still need to brainstorm about RFK because a RFK Ã la NS wouldn't suit well in NS2.
-On marine side, commander will have to buy medpaks with his own money. In ns1, in early game, if you kill a skulk when he hurted you but before he put 3 bites on your ass, your commander win 1 to 3 resources, so he can buy you a medpak (rewarding you because you killed someone and allowing you to survive, that means AREA CONTROL). Now if no RFK, commander have to choose wisely which marines he wants to heal/keep on the front.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
RFK makes healing your marines more attractive because they can go on and earn further RFK and it denies aliens RFK, but it is not free and it is not a no-brainer. There is still an opportunity cost associated with dropping meds and ammo; the comm can decide to keep the RFK and put it toward any other purpose, such as upgrades, weapons or resource towers, all of which generate a resource flow(weapons and upgrades improve RFK, but not necessarily enough to repay themselves).
For the Marines i would say killing a Skulk With GL should give less Res than killing a Onos whit a MAC.
And maybe giving Pres for a kill when you aren't in a Squad, and giving PRes and TRes if you are linked to a Squad.
So that are just ideas and I didn't really thought much about then.
So RFK can be a really good feature and forcing team play if its well balanced and tested.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My 2 Cents. Quoted from the Log Thread.
Yeah, he can keep RFK for more upgrades. But if you keep your good marines alive, at least when they are pushing a hive or RT/defending isolated RT, it's better than giving to the team new upgrades. You always need zone control. If you don't heal your rines, they'll have to feed someone and wait till they respawn (and take a slot in the respawn queue) or going back to the base or the nearest armory because they won't hold an area strongly. Also, yes you can buy upgrades, but in NS2, you'll do it with team resources. The only way to spend plasma as commander is to buy med/ammo packs (and future catalysts) and, if I understood well, weapons for your good marines (you could also buy sentries, but now they are as expensive as a CS).
EDIT :
<!--quoteo(post=1849930:date=Jun 5 2011, 12:04 AM:name=Floodinator)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Floodinator @ Jun 5 2011, 12:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1849930"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My 2 Cents. Quoted from the Log Thread.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought it could be better to create a proper thread to speak about RFK to give ideas to UWE. Everyone does not read the Log thread, furthermore everyone does not read ALL the log decision/twitter/progress threads so having a single topic to think about RFK (which is a BIG gameplay mechanic who need to brainstorming to be well implemented).
While this is good for shortening rounds, it also eliminates a lot of the cinematic moments that early NS1 play was pretty famous for... long, pitched battles where you always had a chance at coming back, if you got it together and fought harder (or smarter, targetting the higher-value weapon carriers and guarding the drops until despawn). Well, at least until the ping of death was added.
I'm still against the RFK system, and personal-buy for Marines. But then, I like feeling that there's a fighting chance; prefer tug-of-war to slap-jack rounds.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I disagree on this idea of a lucky victory.... How can a victory ever even be considered as lucky?
I do not perfer the tug of war. Its dumb and annoying. If your kicking the other teams ass then you should beable to finish them off. Games that last longer then 30 mins are not fun.
Now with ns2 using ires and tres i would suggest that the aliens get tres for there kills and the humans get ires. Because i find that the humans rely on there guns more then there buildings and the aliens rely on there buildings more then becoming new types of aliens.
RFK is like and would be happy if it was in the game.
2 hours games are just as bad as slippery slopes that are decided 5 minutes in and take another 15 minutes before final victory.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As you mentioned, too much forced epicness should be avoided. The longer and more even the rounds are by average, the less special it gets when the two teams actually are equally matched and playing well.
The best long games I've had in organised NS and Starcraft are memorable exactly because you can look back and know you've just performed a crazy tighrope walk in tornado weather.
Never welded an Onos to death?
To the topic. Lets have a try on RFK, and have a look how they implemented it.
To the topic. Lets have a try on RFK, and have a look how they implemented it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Never played ns1 :<
You seriously miss something. I bought HL1 3months ago to play NS (cause I was bored by NS2's performances issues and didn't get HL on my actual steam account) and NS is still as good as it was what when I was younger. NS is probably the best (or at least the 2nd best) HL mod and is still one of the best mod ever made. If you have Half life on your steam account (If you don't, you can buy it for <10€) you only have to download the 150mb client (<a href="http://www.moddb.com/mods/natural-selection/downloads/natural-selection-v32-installer" target="_blank">Click me!</a>). There's always enough people to play good rounds.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Never welded an Onos to death?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The welder did something like 3hp/sec, right ? With the 950hp/950ap of the onos ...
By the way, If you kill an Onos with a welder, this time, it's the alien who say "oh nos" I think :p.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->To the topic. Lets have a try on RFK, and have a look how they implemented it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think they are also thinking on how implement RFK (or another mechanic) to the game, if we can bring good ideas to them, it's a good thing. NS2 is in open development and its player base is big and mature enough (I leave out the trolls heh) to debate about the gameplay mechanics.
Should be treated as another asymmetrical mechanic imo.
Might as well since we can't kill it <a href="http://www.existence-unknown.com/marbl_media/articles/1shot-comics/ns2-tsa-vs-dundee.jpg" target="_blank">with knives</a> anymore :P
in the NS2 Progress-thread, Squidget wrote a real good statement, which is exactly what I think.
<!--quoteo(post=1849142:date=May 30 2011, 12:07 AM:name=Squidget)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squidget @ May 30 2011, 12:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1849142"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I gotta admit I don't get the RFK for kills argument. It seems like a solution looking for a problem. Looking at the pros and cons, I don't see that the pros are actually fixes:
* harvester recycle problem : negated by later decision that RFK is personal res only.
* marine relocate trick : ditto.
* early fade or hive : ditto, because these are now more team-res limited.
* turn around a losing battle : debatable. After all, we can't forget that the winning team was getting RFKs while building that lead! So this isn't actually a fix, it's at most neutral. And since early game effects are typically more important than late-game effects (RTS theory 101), I'd actually say that RFK REDUCES the chance of a comeback, since it puts the losing team in a bigger hole early.
* turn around a losing battle part 2 : In addition to the above, I think the whole premise is flawed. You mount a comeback by playing better, and improving your position on the board, not by an artificial point system. That is, if you are outplaying your opponent, you will be gaining an advantage in lifeforms, tech, or terrain. If this ISN'T happening, if superior play alone isn't enough, then the game design is broken on a deeper level and needs to be fixed. RFKs just paper over the deeper problem.
* what's wrong with suicide rushes? meat-grinder attrition is a valid tactic, just ask the Russians. Why penalize for it?
* "rewarding" or "encouraging" good play? Is this a problem? Are there players who would otherwise want to suck? No. And commanders will gift the best weapons to the best players, RFK or not. Again, if you have to "bribe" players to play well, the game design is broken on a much deeper level, and RFK won't fix it.
* Recouping your investment with static D? Is this a problem? No. There's already a reason for investment in static D, and that's to WIN THE GAME. This ain't "SIM NS." Again, if you have to "bribe" players to play well, the game design is broken. And does this game need MORE static D? Is that what we want?
* Encouraging players to ambush and not die? Again, bribery is broken.
* This is NOT a strategic bonus. It's a tactical bonus. Kill the other guy, don't die yourself. That's as tactical as you can get. And how much sense does it make thematically, if something called PERSONAL res was strategically-based? Thats a by-definition contradiction.
* There is already WAY too many personal res in the game, we already know that this is going to be nerfed. So why even think about P-res boosters at this point? Maybe later, but not now.
-----
The CONS, however, are quite real:
* Coding and testing RFK won't be free, time spent on it is time not spent on a different game feature.
* It can cause the runaway effect in the midgame. Fade, kill, kill, kill, die, spend the RFKs to Fade again. Repeat.
* Marginalizes the Skulk even more, because RFK reduces the effective cost of higher, more RFK-efficient lifeforms.
* If you thought NS2 was newbie-hostile before, wait until poor play can have a NEGATIVE effect on a team. We will be able to see the "GTFO NOOB" flames from space.
------
tldr:
IMO, this is a feature that will consume development time and not bring any real benefit. I'm totally against features unless they solve a problem. Feature-creep is the number one killer in software development.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To really boil it down:
Unless you can show me a problem that is best fixed by an RFK mechanic, AS OPPOSED To other mechanics, it shouldn't be in the game. Pure and simple.
You can't even START tallking about what RFK should look like unless you know what problem you are trying to solve. Saying "it can work this way" is pointless without the WHY.
I said before, and will say again, that all current problems seem to be fixable by better means, rather than RFK.
So discuss this: what's the point? WHY make the effort for a feature that causes pacing problems, balance problems, and let's face it, is unrealistic even by NS standards?
Give me a good WHY, and I'll reconsider. But as of now, I think working on RFK is a total waste of time.
And testing it right now to see if it fixes a temporary problem will just make it so we have to test it again when we do get T3 tech to figure out whether or not it still needs to stay in the game and isn't contributing to slippery slope game play too much
I agree that I need a solid argument for why it should be in the game. Just because NS1 had it doesn't mean it is good. There are a number of game mechanics in NS1 which aren't going to be carried over for good reasons.
I'm tend to favour NS1 features that I know to be interesting, but I'm not sure about RFK. On NS1 resoucre model it was wonderful at best, but I don't understand how NS2 resoucre model blends with it.
In my opinion there are some decisions that have to be made before they decide how RFK works. In a way I see RFK as a more of a fine tuning method rather than a direct solution to an issue.
The RFK implementation in NS1 wasn't a terrible feature for sure, but it does have some severe downsides and I won't even begin to get into the little stuff like randomly giving 1-3 res when it should have been a fixed amount.
The good points about RFK from NS1 in my mind were:
<ul><li>Gave the aliens a means to distribute resources how they wanted (as in letting one specific player get the kill so they can lerk faster) - <b>defunct</b> due to new resource model.
</li><li>Rewarding good play - Yeah I'm biased I was good at NS1 and I loved RFK. The little happy kick you get from hearing the res trickle noise is nice. On marines you got to contribute more to your teams medpack fund, on aliens you got to lifeform more. Inevitably the game was balanced around the level of resource income <i>including</i> RFK.
I'd prefer to see "instant rewards" for good play in the form of in-combat bonuses. Maybe. I'm undecided to be honest. A potential example (which is purely illustrative and I'm not suggesting it be implemented) would be as you hit consecutive bites/shotgun shots or kills in a row you gain more and more damage while the multiplier is lost when you miss. I could easily see this as a "bloodlust" type ability for aliens. This type of thing also happens to give great spectator value, like watching an SC2 pro marine stutter step/split away from a baneling attack. The trick would be finding the sweet spot of rewarding and fun but difficult enough to gain that it's rarely seen and to not over-do it on the overpowered-ness. I readily admit this kind of thing can very easily feel forced, though.
</li><li>Provides an "off-grid" source of income. While this is a strategy game, it's easy to forget that what would pass in a pure RTS can be terrible in RTS/FPS. When every one of your players gets to be a unit you don't want to be the proverbial overlord blocking enemy expos with creep-poo. Obviously every player is in the game to have fun and if your commander is terrible, ###### with you or your team get slapchopped really quick you should still be able to do <i>something</i>. The worst thing in NS1 was the frustrating feeling of not being able to do anything on a big public server.</li></ul>
I do not particularly mind the entrenching effect RFK can have as long as the game offers a way of dealing with it, spore for example, and I view it as just another aspect of play.
Obviously the slippery slope problem is a massive drawback to RFK and in a team game with so many participants you will rarely get to the quit & restart stage that you commonly see in RTS games where the slippery slope is less of a problem because you can just play another game right after.
I do agree with Bacillus on not being sure about this particular aspect of NS1 being able to be carried over. If implemented well it can probably be put to good use, however.
I'm definitely a big fan of the idea of <something> for kills, though.
Right now I don't particularly like the idea of how alien res usage is directed even more into lifeforms. In NS1 the skulk and gorge roles had a lot more economical value while in NS2 the alien comm steals the value from the lower lifeforms and most often skulks and gorges are reduced to stepping stones towards bigger lifeforms.
So, what if the gorge and skulk frags gave RFK to the alien team resoucres (if they still exist in the final res model)? That way sticking to lower lifeforms still grants aliens better economical strength and allows aliens to balance and adjust between tech, economy and brute army strength instead of simply trying to field a team of lerk/fade/onos combo ASAP.
For example,
Marine A lobs grenade at Harvester, Skulk B kills Marine A in x seconds after the explosion, thus Skulk B gains y PRes for defending Harvester.
Marines on the other hand, when they work as a team , can defend or attack while minimisng losses as long as they advance with caution and cover each other... usually Aliens break through a Marine force by forcing a judgement error on the Marines part, breaking up the formation or exploiting a gap in the Marine defence.
In short , I am concerned it will penalise Alien players that play the Skulk as a its meant to be played in <b>defence</b>, as a throw away unit thats meant to distract or whittle down a enemies position.
Ahah, nice :D.
"AHAHAH, Is that a knife ? Now THAT's a <strike>knife</strike> hax !"
No more onos dundee huh :(.
Right now I don't particularly like the idea of how alien res usage is directed even more into lifeforms. In NS1 the skulk and gorge roles had a lot more economical value while in NS2 the alien comm steals the value from the lower lifeforms and most often skulks and gorges are reduced to stepping stones towards bigger lifeforms.
So, what if the gorge and skulk frags gave RFK to the alien team resoucres (if they still exist in the final res model)? That way sticking to lower lifeforms still grants aliens better economical strength and allows aliens to balance and adjust between tech, economy and brute army strength instead of simply trying to field a team of lerk/fade/onos combo ASAP.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I suppose it comes down to how an alien team is supposed to break sieges. Fades could potentially be terrible at any type of head-on attack meaning you need your skulk bombardment.
It's a good idea. Perhaps as a Tier2 upgrade for skulks?
I like this but I think it should only be for the gorge so the gorge still keeps a little bit of economical value. Gorge's contributed to the team but placing structures with their own res, now they should be able to contribute to the team but getting resources for the commander to place.
Maybe allow the gorge to have a few ways of getting team resources like RFK, placing hydras, healing structures, and so on. Just to make the gorge much more useful in the game.
Skulks are also getting a bit of a fix in the next build so maybe the RFK won't be so bad if you can manage to kill the marines easier instead of dying yourself.