Why 6 players
Nordic
Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
Comments
That is why I asked this. Maybe even 8v8 soon. 6v6 seems too little on large maps too.
Well the purpose of smaller players is to showcase individual player skill alongside teamwork instead of a herd-the-cats style of "competing." Most competitive players take pride not only in their teamwork, but in their individual ability. The larger the game, the less individual skill matters in the end, or the more it is diluted.
So, yes. Smaller amounts of players puts more emphasis on each individual's persons ability. 6v6 is the compromise between individual skill and team play.
I think it is possible for other player counts to play fine as well, but you have to remember that higher player counts are a lot more complex than just another player. IE Marines (specially early game) scale much better with larger player counts due to range vs melee asymmetry. Things like mines and hydras become a lot more spammable. Structures are also important considerations. A newly dropped hive might take a full marine team 30 seconds to kill in a 6v6, but only 15 seconds to kill in a 9v9. An RT might take marines 20 seconds to take down in a 6v6, but only 10 seconds to kill in a 9v9.
I think it could be nudged to 7v7, but I'm not sure why that would be an improvement. It could open up some new splits (2, 2, 2, or 3, 3, instead of 2, 3 or 2, 2, 1) but it could also lead to an even larger zergy base rush style as buildings would die 20% faster given the bump from 5->6 players on the field.
As I recall from NS1, 8v8 brackets sounded great on paper, but it really changed the strategic side of competitive play. All you really have to do as aliens is rush in one direction on a map and get a little lucky. If the marines split and you wipe them out, base rush and you'll probably destroy the CC before the other side gets back.
If all the marines rushed one way, and they don't pick they way you rushed, then boom, just 7 skulks on the CC and its GG.
Larger games can make the game more intense in some respects, but it does have its down sides. 7v7 might be good, but 6v6 is perfectly fine.
I'll just add this:
The more players you have, the harder it is to have regular organised games. Higher player numbers require more people to be on at one time. 99% of us are adults, we don't have 5 free nights like we used to.
Another reason was in NS1 6v6 was the balance between tres (marines ) and aliens (pres)
I'll just add this:
The more players you have, the harder it is to have regular organised games. Higher player numbers require more people to be on at one time. 99% of us are adults, we don't have 5 free nights like we used to.
Another reason was in NS1 6v6 was the balance between tres (marines ) and aliens (pres)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Gorgeous did sum it up well for me.
That is a good point too. Many, like myself, can't play every night.
This + time. As far as I know 6 wasn't some magic number for balance or performance in NS1, just habit. Even CS 1.6 had different playercounts, there were a couple competitive 6v6 leagues however these were all less popular than CAL and eventually died out. I agree with RedDragon and GORGEous that in general it feels the more people on a team, the less an individual player matters and more luck plays a factor.
That's not true, actually. NS1 was deliberately balanced around 6v6. Why they chose that number is unknown, however.
It just so happens that 6v6 is a good number for competitive play in NS2 as well, so yay.
Also, with regards to OP: obligatory "not this ###### again" comment.
It just so happens that 6v6 is a good number for competitive play in NS2 as well, so yay.
Also, with regards to OP: obligatory "not this ###### again" comment.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do not believe NS1 was originally balanced for 6v6 actually, which was why in the early days of Competitive play there were 7v7 and 8v8 brackets in addition to the 6v6 ones.
As I recall, when the community began organizing tournaments, the original idea was to take the Counterstrike model and add +1 to each team to compensate for the Marine commander. It seemed to work out, but maps were (not by todays standards) very large and often you would have people running around by themselves away from the action. Now, today that's sort of second hand, but when the NS community first began putting these things together, it seemed very unusual at the time and so we all started experimenting with larger bracket sizes with the expectation that it would lead to more consistent and frequent battles during matches.
I think it had mixed results, the downsides being those summed up best by Gorgeous.
I think after 1.04 the Developers may have begun deliberatly balancing the Competitive side of the game around a 6v6 bracket, but if they ever did then it was very likely due to the rather unanimous agreement from the community that teams of those sizes yielded a better balance of player skill and diverse tactics than any other bracket size.
Not sure what to make of your last comment.
There may have been some strange stuff going on during the first few months of play in the US, but even the majority of 1.04 tournaments were 6v6. I don't think the EU scene ever had any non-6v6 tournaments.
<!--quoteo(post=1976989:date=Sep 13 2012, 01:51 PM:name=RedDragon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RedDragon @ Sep 13 2012, 01:51 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1976989"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think after 1.04 the Developers may have begun deliberatly balancing the Competitive side of the game around a 6v6 bracket, but if they ever did then it was very likely due to the rather unanimous agreement from the community that teams of those sizes yielded a better balance of player skill and diverse tactics than any other bracket size.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
UWE have clearly stated on several occasions that NS1 was balanced around 6v6. If that was their original intent or if they only started doing it after the first version is something only they can answer.
<!--quoteo(post=1976989:date=Sep 13 2012, 01:51 PM:name=RedDragon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RedDragon @ Sep 13 2012, 01:51 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1976989"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Not sure what to make of your last comment.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The subject has been discussed ad nauseum in other threads.
Yes, I believe thats what I said.
No one played anything but 6v6 matches after our original experiments with larger bracket sizes, and I believe I've already adequately explained why.
<!--quoteo(post=1976993:date=Sep 13 2012, 08:57 AM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Sep 13 2012, 08:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1976993"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->UWE have clearly stated on several occasions that NS1 was balanced around 6v6. If that was their original intent or if they only started doing it after the first version is something only they can answer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, and I'm sure they did do so rather deliberatly at some point. But as I said, there was a time, I believe it was Jan - Feb of '03 actually, when we first began organizing Competitions that no one really knew what to do with Natural Selection. There was actually a rather vocal, if small, group of people who did not think Natural Selection could really be played Competitively, and that even if you tried, it certainly couldn't qualify as an eSport simply because the game was too asymetrical for "balanced" play.
I dont know what took place in the EU as in those days Ping issues were a much bigger issue and generally kept regions very issolated. Still, it didn't stop us from organizing the International tournament, which I fondly remember playing against (I think it was) the New Zealand team(?) and everyone from the NA had pings well over 300.
Try chasing down a Jetpacker with a 1.04 Lerk with that kind of ping. Good times.
<!--quoteo(post=1976993:date=Sep 13 2012, 08:57 AM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Sep 13 2012, 08:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1976993"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The subject has been discussed ad nauseum in other threads.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So has the subject of your boorish comments, and yet here we are. Should my remark be considered obligatory then?
There are many reasons for this, For examble:
*More teams and easier to organize pcw/scrims.
*Indvituals have more chance to shine.
*Easier for spectators to focus on most of the action.
*Easier to organize tournaments. This is very important if the game wants to get to any bigger tournaments later, 6v6 already requires space for 12 players to play a single game. Going higher than that is not a good idea.
*Less rewards for players if they win a tournament, if its evenly split.
*Less chance of spnsorship because the company has to invest in more players, if the game ever goes that far.
And the list goes on. There is nothing preventing teams from playing 7v7 or 8v8 but there is no reason to increase the player limit at this point.
There are 2 older threads where this was discussed and go into more details.
I think 5v5 has it's merits due to smaller organizational challenges and it being the esports standard in quite a few ways. I feel it could still be debated a bit when the game finally somewhat stabilizes.
Meanwhile 7v7 seems to drive the game furher away from competetive ideals. I can see some occassional benefits in strategical possibilities and such, but no concrete reason that would outweight the downsides.
I didn't find any threads discussing this. Since there is two out there besides mine, I looked harder. All I found was one, if anyone is interested. It does go into a lot of the detail of why 6v6. <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=114029&st=0" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....114029&st=0</a>
If only you were as good at writing content as you are at being a hypocrite...
I didn't find any threads discussing this. Since there is two out there besides mine, I looked harder. All I found was one, if anyone is interested. It does go into a lot of the detail of why 6v6. <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=114029&st=0" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....114029&st=0</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That was actually a rather enlightening read, thanks for posting that James.
Interesting, never knew there was an effort to balance the game around a specific player count. Learn something new everyday. I wonder why there's not a similar effort for 6v6 balance in NS2. I know this has been discussed ad nauseum in other threads but right now it feels like the economy isn't balanced for any player count, much less 6v6.
Ever tried being polite?
I really like 6v6. I think it complements the game really well on damage values, pushes, etc.
I really like 6v6. I think it complements the game really well on damage values, pushes, etc.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Great, but it means that there is only 1 proper squad per team. 5 people, 1 comm (on and off) so if team is attacking some spot it cannot also attack another area. 10 vs 10 allows that.
If CS(:S) becomes pub-like with 10 vs 10, it doesn't mean that EVERY game has to try to limit amount of people playing.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->and it being the esports standard in quite a few ways<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ha, ha, ha. I've never heard something that had less to do with topic being mentioned that usual "other people do the same".
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*More teams and easier to organize pcw/scrims.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How is that an issue? Some teams will start in 6vs6 some will start in 10 vs 10. Game that is well made will work in both cases. Actually, it has to work in both cases if it's made to support traditional, low count, competitive group and normal public games on servers.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*Indvituals have more chance to shine.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What does it have to do with anything? I'd rather see 10 individuals "shining" than 6. I haven't seen squad aspect in NS2 6vs6 games, only 1 team going somewhere as a horde.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*Easier for spectators to focus on most of the action.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Spectators don't want stuff to be easy but want it to be interesting. First person view and/or streamlining will help.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*Easier to organize tournaments. This is very important if the game wants to get to any bigger tournaments later, 6v6 already requires space for 12 players to play a single game. Going higher than that is not a good idea.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's the reason I hate "esports". They reduce team game into just 5 vs 5 because it's cheaper for sponsors.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*Less rewards for players if they win a tournament, if its evenly split.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That has nothing to do with NS2. To be more precise attractiveness of unpaid 5 vs 5 and unpaid 10 vs 10 for spectators could be in favor of 10 vs 10 but the difference would probably be not high enough to compensate for 5 more people in a team in paid competitions.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*Less chance of spnsorship because the company has to invest in more players, if the game ever goes that far.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Same, little to do with the game, all to do with how big esports market for that game is.
The impression I got from the topic was that the question is why 10 vs 10 or similar doesn't get played? It wasn't a question about economic viability or any of that (it's obvious that in competitions more people cost more).
and 2*3 = 6 = 6v6
But you cannot do anything with 7v7:
7v7 = 14 = 5
2*5 = 10 = ??
Doesn't work clearly.
Then how the ###### do you think we are supposed to play public games with 10+ vs 10+? How is that irrelevant?