map sizes vs player count

Wheeee

<div class="IPBDescription">how is this going to work?</div>so i was thinking about this today and i think max or someone mentioned at some point that the design goal is for ns2 to accomodate 16v16 (32) players in a server. but that got me thinking that some maps will really not feel good at all with that many players; for example summit feels alright up to 8v8, but i think at 10v10 it'll start feeling crowded, and at 16v16 the map will be really unwieldy (imagine 12-14 GL marines pushing down a hallway at once, it's a mess and probably uncounterable by aliens). So how would that work? just let it be 16v16 in pubs and let the balance be shot, or force people into spec, or what? would a mapper be able to set a "max # of players on the field" variable so, e.g. once a team has 10 people in the field on summit, the rest go into a spawn queue? I imagine that with the various sizes of the maps it's going to be hard to find a way to balance the game when maps rotate, it's not like the server will suddenly go from a 32 player server down to a 20 and vice versa.

Racer1

Mappers could design maps for 16+ players, but initially (as the round starts) block of certain areas. As more players join, more areas could be revealed. (Once revealed, that area would stay open for the rest of the round).

ScardyBob

I think the ideal situation would be to have a plugin that limits the maps in active rotation to those best suited to the current playercount. For example, if the server currently had 16 players, it would make the next map summit. However, if the playercount jumped to 24, then it would automatically switch the next map it to a new map suited to 24 players. Or, if the server had a map voting system, it would only list maps within a suitable range of the current playercount.

Otherwise, you'll run into the situation of having 32 players trying to play on rockdown.

Wheeee

right, but then you're going to run into a very limited map rotation per server, and if you want to play a different sized map you'll have to switch servers. i find that to be a crappy solution that no one will enjoy.

ScardyBob

<!--quoteo(post=1897794:date=Jan 27 2012, 05:38 PM:name=Wheeee)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wheeee @ Jan 27 2012, 05:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1897794"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->right, but then you're going to run into a very limited map rotation per server, and if you want to play a different sized map you'll have to switch servers. i find that to be a crappy solution that no one will enjoy.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, I was thinking that the server would have all of the maps available, but the next map can only be one that fits the current (not max) playercount. For example, if its a 32 person server, but only 20 people are currently playing, it will only allow maps that are sized for 16-24 players to be the next map.

subshadow

<!--quoteo(post=1897747:date=Jan 27 2012, 07:00 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Jan 27 2012, 07:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1897747"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think the ideal situation would be to have a plugin that limits the maps in active rotation to those best suited to the current playercount. For example, if the server currently had 16 players, it would make the next map summit. However, if the playercount jumped to 24, then it would automatically switch the next map it to a new map suited to 24 players. Or, if the server had a map voting system, it would only list maps within a suitable range of the current playercount.

Otherwise, you'll run into the situation of having 32 players trying to play on rockdown.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I like this idea

BearTaxi

It isn't like this situation is unique to NS2 though?

Pretty much every fps game out at the moment has this issue to some extent. It's mainly just remidied by an increase in the number of maps. Eventually people will find certain maps within those that they prefer to play, and the fact that one map might feel crowded at a certain player count will subconciously effect which maps they prefer.

Public games will tend to play certain maps that competitive won't. That's just how it works. Certain maps are good for certain things.

twiliteblue

What are the main reasons why small maps cannot be balanced for large player counts?

I believe poor game balance scaling on player count is a core game design problem, as well as a map design problem.

If player v player area effect weapon being too powerful is the culprit, then their effectiveness should be reduced.
For example, GL damage radius could be reduced, and narrow doorways could be widened, so grenade bombardment does not instantly kill all aliens who try to break a siege on the Hive.
Whereas Lerk Spore Trail is very different from the GL, as charging into a group of Marines puts the Lerk at significant risk.

I think some rule to balance the game for variable player counts are:
1. Players should not have powerful AOE damage weapons. The power (damage, radius, DPS) of an AOE weapon should be inversely proportional to its sustainability (ammo) and availability (cost).
2. Strategic weapons (that cost T.Res, eg ARC, Sentry, Whip) SHOULD be AOE. This would make them scale well on player count.

What other rules does everyone feel NS2 should adopt?