Command Chair
Angry Hillbilly 2
Join Date: 2012-03-31 Member: 149741Members
Join Date: 2012-03-31 Member: 149741Members
I have been pondering on this for a long time and have been thinking is there ever any incentive for the marrines to get a second command chair? Because as it stands apart from more base to kill. I dont know of any other positives it gives the marrines to expand in that respect.
I think it would be perhaps interesting if the marrines had some sort of incentive (although not vital) to get a second cc giving some sort of minor bonus (not sure what).
I think it would be perhaps interesting if the marrines had some sort of incentive (although not vital) to get a second cc giving some sort of minor bonus (not sure what).
Comments
<ul><li>Deny hives</li><li>Have backup chairs in case yours dies, so that you don't lose</li><li>More energy for more nano shields</li></ul>
This game already has depth. It comes into the game through the interaction of different mechanics, and we don't need more things added to create additional depth if players aren't even recognizing what's already there.
<ul><li>Deny hives</li><li>Have backup chairs in case yours dies, so that you don't lose</li><li>More energy for more nano shields</li></ul>
This game already has depth. It comes into the game through the interaction of different mechanics, and we don't need more things added to create additional depth if players aren't even recognizing what's already there.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree. These are the only reasons that marines should have to build a second command chair. A commonly cited design principle is asymmetry for a reason, but internetexplorer's reason (<a href='index.php?showtopic=118104'>http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=118104</a>) is incredibly pertinent, especially at this stage in development.
See, there are more reasons than the ones I was able to list. Like I said, this game is really deep mechanically at the moment.
You know, I've never actually had a commander do this, and it would be really great to see it in action. People are getting stuck in the same strategies over and over.
This is my biggest reason for ever even considering dropping a second chair. I love nanoshields and I hope marines enjoy getting them. 50% damage reduction is pretty damn nice.
Nope. Respectfully disagree good sir.
See below:
<!--quoteo(post=1929531:date=Apr 24 2012, 08:50 PM:name=ironhorse)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ironhorse @ Apr 24 2012, 08:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1929531"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also dont forget that as you lose map control (map control being the requirement for obtaining winning tech)<u> you do not lose tech. </u>
Thus, you end up with Tier 3 tech all held up in one location.
IF say, some tech was tied to a techpoint, you wouldn't end up with this situation , as you were slowly declining in effectiveness as a team as you lost your map control. This method would be far more intuitive than the current model. (gain map control to gain tech, but dont lose tech as you lose map control?)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh and to rebuttal your rebuttal i know you are considering: Creating more powerful siege weapons/methods to crack these high tech turtles will only throw the midgame out of wack when you are able to get them. Then you will suggest that the siege abilities be scaled, to which i ask "To what?" It cant be hives, because having a singular hive is supposed to be a viable strat with tradeoffs. I've thought on this subject a lot in the past year since they removed "Tech" from being tied to "Techpoints"..
EDIT: oh heres another post i made regarding this
<!--quoteo(post=1927394:date=Apr 19 2012, 02:13 PM:name=ironhorse)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ironhorse @ Apr 19 2012, 02:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1927394"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I might sound like a broken record here considering my posts in general discussion in the past, but:
Both teams must lose tech of some form when losing map control - and not just the ability to have enough res to purchase tech - but actually LOSE tech as you lose map control.
Else, you will end up exaggerating stalemates with Tier 3 tech in a heavily fortified base that can only be taken down with OP siege weapons that would upset the balance during any other part of the game. (like say, mid game, for instance)
So there needs to be<b> economically viable</b> reasons to put something down on that techpoint, that when you lose it, <i>you've lost some form of tech.</i> So that when you have taken down 2 hives and you are on the last one with teammates, you wont spend 20 minutes trying to crack their last base/drag on the end game/have people RR or recycle in frustration/impatience.
ofc "economically viable" refers to the cost of that 2nd hive vs the returns (that scardybob listed) and this can be adjusted in price, but then you still have the issue of not losing tech when losing map control because people drop their new chambers/tech in the original heavily fortified hive.
IF you made it mandatory that any new upgrades/tech from 2nd hive had to be placed AT the 2nd hive - then this issue goes away.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That thing was so cozy and comfortable. Instead now we get a giant box.
Back on topic -- forward bases are always nice to have.
Nanoshield is like a staticky hug from commander.
I even managed to save the game once by beaconing a forward base and jumping out the commander chair in time (as last marine alive). Was pretty damn epic.
I've been working on this strategy that revolves around that. Build an obs in marine start. Relocate to Crossroads. Lock down every available techpoint with an obs (hidden as best as possible) and command chair. Lock them down further with phase gates once researched and have the res for them. Beacon places if they get into trouble.
Problem is, although it can help gain map control, it's a lot of res wasted, and upgrades are generally put on the back-burner. By the time you have everything locked down, there's fades + lerks + onos + augmentation with very little to counter it with. Apart from lots of nanoshields (due to more CCs). It works better with more people (7+ players per team) as beacons dont revive people anymore (thus beaconing your team to a tech point under attack by an onos when there's only 2 people alive doesn't do much). It helps to have lots of IPs though. Also helps if you can hide your obs, to have a powerpack, so that even if the power goes down you can still beacon and take it back (command chair doesn't need power for a powered obs to beacon to that tech point).
I've had this countered by aliens attacking me at every techpoint at once though (I didn't have phase gates at that stage, and only just researched it). I was frantically beaconing all over the place, while the place my marines weren't was getting smashed. I think I managed to save it, though barely, by getting phases up just in time.
I like the fact that the obs doesn't have to be in the same room to beacon to that techpoint, and instead can be hidden in an adjacent room. Currently there's not a lot of spots to hide an obs+powerpack though. For example, you can stick an obs in the vents in crevice in order to beacon to crossroads (weird it's not atrium) - however, there's no way it wont get spotted eventually. There's also not a lot of things you can put them behind, as even if they're sticking out behind something only the smallest amount, anyone with alien vision on will be able to spot it.
If there are any mappers out there reading this post - please include more places to hide my obs :P. Currently, in summit at least, there's only a couple of places in atrium, and one place in flight control, that make okay hiding spots.
Thus, you end up with Tier 3 tech all held up in one location.
IF say, some tech was tied to a techpoint, you wouldn't end up with this situation , as you were slowly declining in effectiveness as a team as you lost your map control. This method would be far more intuitive than the current model. (gain map control to gain tech, but dont lose tech as you lose map control?)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're saying we take the mechanism that the aliens used to rely on and give it to the marines? So aliens can get tech without a second hive, but marines need a second cc for certain tech? What do you do about the aliens, then?
I think it would be perhaps interesting if the marrines had some sort of incentive (although not vital) to get a second cc giving some sort of minor bonus (not sure what).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
One incentive is to have the techpoints give a smaller amount of res, as suggested in point #3 here:
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=117830" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...howtopic=117830</a>
No i am suggesting both teams lose tech when they lose map control. (it can be in other forms besides techpoints.. but since they are there already..)
Sounds awesome :D