Yeah mendasp, I can agree seeing frequent, paradigm shifting balance changes (especially with no patch notes) is extremely off-putting and not fun.
But I don't understand why anyone would still be willing to discuss these issues beyond for their own amusement if you already heard the designer of the game say (multiple times) he is not too interested in that form of feedback or discussion in actually formulating any changes.
And as dragon already mentioned, the pool of quality candidates for the balance team is extremely low.
Seeing UWE's internal stats api made public and more easily queried should be the real goal of this balance team if you actually want to see positive change. Being able to show problematic game mechanics with a set of irrefutable statistics is what you really want at this point. And yes I understand a lot of good could still be done by just having a few active players that can immediately point something out as being broken as a sort of consultation process, but that also presumes that opinion holds significant enough merit to stop / nerf that change and it probably doesn't based on Charlie's responses to how he acknowledges and evaluates feedback from players and the community.
I'm not disagreeing with how Charlie chooses to balance his game in all honesty. It's rational and understandable, but I don't think he makes actual rational deductions and proposals once he positively identifies an issue so it's kind of all for nought.
So just to re-iterate, rally for an open stats-api that is easily queried instead of a stupid, pointless balance team where nothing will be accomplished because there is nothing it could accomplish based on the criteria the game designer has already set out for you to meet in enacting any changes.
edit: With regards to the group being better than nothing, I disagree. You could have 1 or 2 people in it that really have very little to contribute and they could be extremely active and actually make negative contributions on the whole. So I could very easily see the balance group making negative changes as easily as positive changes based on the prospective pool of people interested in doing it should their opinions even be considered.
<!--quoteo(post=2025132:date=Nov 15 2012, 04:06 PM:name=eh?)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (eh? @ Nov 15 2012, 04:06 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2025132"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->edit: With regards to the group being better than nothing, I disagree. You could have 1 or 2 people in it that really have very little to contribute and they could be extremely active and actually make negative contributions on the whole.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
More likely: Dozens of well-known people will say the same ###### and be ignored. Minority voices will say something that Charlie likes and that will immediately make it into the game. All that changes between a group like this is whether those voices will claim to be dedicated funhavers (who just happen to not be very fun folks) or competitive players (who happen to be terrible at the game and really are only competitive in the sense that they have <i>tried</i> to compete, lack of success notwithstanding).
I just wanted to say, that I like the idea of a balancing team very much. I'm no competitive player, but I enjoy many pub games and I see the problem of constant changes in the balancing sector which aren't well tested... It's annoying for everyone to play the game today and to play a somewhat different game tomorrow without really knowing what changed and what not and with the overfixing problem.
I also like the idea of a group of dedicated players (pub, competitive, I don't really care) who play the game in the "what is unbalanced? how can we fix that?"-perspective. Imo (as I said, only pub) there is a constant "whining" (no offense) about either aliens or marines beeing op, which is (I believe so) merely based on bad experiences in previous games/rounds of the critics. I played some rounds myself where I feel the enemy overpowered, because their weapons hurt so much or they overrun us with Onos, but I always tell me, that "we" as a team let em do that. In other words: I don't see a problem with a 6 min onos, when the Marines don't care about restowers and stuff like that and the aliens can build unbothered. And I don't see a problem with lvl 3 weapons killing Skulks very easily as they can still kill a marine (takes longer, is more challenging) or they should be able to evolve in higher lifeforms.
What I want to say: don't let anger or bad experience in any way cloud your position on balancing, because (on a pub gaming point of view) most of the games get lost because of a better team, not an overpowered one.
But I have to say: I don't now how competitive games go. If the aliens can get an Onos in 6 minutes with the marines constantly bothering them (in other words: against a Marine team which is equally good) and the Onos is able to win the game (with a Gorge healing it), I see the problem. This goes for everything which may be unbalanced (weapons, crags, ...).
OFFTOPIC: I don't know, how you think about it, but I think the map Veil is unbalanced because the marines start way of to any 2nd com chair and aliens could camp in topographical and skylights and gain total map control since early on... But that's only my opinion based on bad experiences and my impression when I look on the map.
<!--quoteo(post=2024890:date=Nov 15 2012, 08:59 PM:name=xDragon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xDragon @ Nov 15 2012, 08:59 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2024890"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The fact that they, or the PT leads, have done NOTHING regarding this to date IMO shows exactly what their stance on this is.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm afraid your information on this is inaccurate. A balance team has been discussed for a very, very long time on the PT Leads side. There are many logistical and technical reasons why one is not around right now, though that does not mean there will not be one in the future.
For now it's Charlie's full-time job to balance the game. If he requests a balance team, one will be formed. Until then, things will stay as they are.
Edit: I was happy to see the comp community balance team happen, and send suggestions to Charlie - it worked for numerous changes to the game. There is nothing stopping anyone from forming their own balance team and sending the information on.
Well, speaking of balance changes.. check out the latest steam workshop submitted by Flayra. Some interesting changes in it (no fade HP increase, no removal of commander drops though :/ )
<!--quoteo(post=2024871:date=Nov 15 2012, 02:35 PM:name=rantology)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rantology @ Nov 15 2012, 02:35 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2024871"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Any kind of balance group would be better than no balance group. Out of curiosity, how did Jiriki and others do it with NS1? was there a balance group or was it just changes that had been talked about by the competitive community for the months prior that were implemented?
Even if it was not a perfect group, it would still be better than what goes on now (one man trying to do it all by himself).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
ArgathorJoin Date: 2011-07-18Member: 110942Members, Squad Five Blue
While a balance group sounds good, it is a lot more difficult to implement in a productive way. It is a complete waste of time to the people best capable of doing it and the members need to be able to explain things in a way Charlie will understand (or it will simply cause frustration), which also means finding a very specific type of person.
In the end the most likely outcome is a group that is allowed to post feedback which is 'observed' by the developers, more like the beta forums than a real balance team. Full of people with an intermediate level of understanding and ability (because it is a waste of time for anyone with the ability, they are likely to leave quickly).
Either way, I hope UWE begin taking balance more seriously. The game needs fundamental changes which will then require a complete re-balancing of the game. Either it will not be possible in the current environment or it will take months if not a year or more to sort out. NS2 has a lot of potential, but it is far short of that potential at the moment.
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
Unfortunately, I don't think a balance team would work. It is much more effective to seek out rational and objective <b>representatives</b> from the scene and talk to them regularly. Then based on your understanding of the game and their feedback be very careful to slowly make changes that bring the game to balance. It may not be true that the PTs do balance testing but they must absolutely be used to find glaring balance issues in a patch.
People have rose-tinted glasses about how ns1 was balanced. We got there eventually but it took a long time and many of our changes were hated by the competitive scene at first. Plus there are also outstanding issues with ns1 that were, unfortunately, never solved.
<!--quoteo(post=2025589:date=Nov 16 2012, 01:32 PM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Nov 16 2012, 01:32 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2025589"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Unfortunately, I don't think a balance team would work. It is much more effective to seek out rational and objective <b>representatives</b> from the scene and talk to them regularly. Then based on your understanding of the game and their feedback be very careful to slowly make changes that bring the game to balance.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, this is how I approached balance changes to summit and it has worked for me.
It doesn't actually have to be a team, per se. What it can't be is 1 or 2 people doing the entire balancing without external opinions, and you can't certainly throw out a patch without gathering ANY feedback now. You also can't do 100% what a "team" decides (if they propose solutions), but you should at least acknowledge the issues exposed and try to do something about it.
I can think of 2-3 names off the top of my head that have made excellent posts/documents on balance and would be great to have them closer to the devs, provided they would do something with this feedback.
All I know is that we can't go forward with the methods used up until now, they simply won't cut it.
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
I'm not disagreeing with you Mendasp, I just think a formalised balance team will work and it is better dealt with ad-hoc.
For example, given that UWE can push out betas on steam, why doesn't ENSL dedicate a couple of nights for beta pcws and then have a couple of smart people summarise their findings and submit them.
I'm agreeing with you, all I'm saying is that very valid people have submitted feedback in the past and it's been ignored, and that's something that has to change.
That kind of thing where an external team has done tests and sent results to UWE has been done too...
<!--quoteo(post=2025564:date=Nov 16 2012, 12:08 PM:name=kalakuja)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kalakuja @ Nov 16 2012, 12:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2025564"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also how about giving reasons behind every balance change you make. It will feel less and less random if you have a reason behind the changes.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is just ridiculous. You don't see a single company that does this because they do not have to defend their changes is any way.
<!--quoteo(post=2025599:date=Nov 16 2012, 03:52 AM:name=Mendasp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mendasp @ Nov 16 2012, 03:52 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2025599"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, this is how I approached balance changes to summit and it has worked for me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You, and many mappers in NS history, have been pretty excellent about this. They are usually also not crap at the game or completely divorced from the competitive community. No matter what we do or what process comes beforehand, there remains a guy somewhere who has to make very subjective calls on what changes to pull the trigger on.
And for NS2, it's Flayra's baby in the end, so unless he decides to really let go of things or completely changes his mind, it's staying on the strict thalidomide-diet that has been the hallmark of NS2 development.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->People have rose-tinted glasses about how ns1 was balanced.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The problem is the opposite: Many of us remember the time it took to get anywhere reasonable and the amount of resistance on the way. And that things stayed bad long enough to keep the game very niche. And here we are, a decade later, seemingly having taken several steps back from even 1.4.
<!--quoteo(post=2025589:date=Nov 16 2012, 11:32 AM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Nov 16 2012, 11:32 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2025589"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Unfortunately, I don't think a balance team would work. It is much more effective to seek out rational and objective <b>representatives</b> from the scene and talk to them regularly. Then based on your understanding of the game and their feedback be very careful to slowly make changes that bring the game to balance. It may not be true that the PTs do balance testing but they must absolutely be used to find glaring balance issues in a patch.
People have rose-tinted glasses about how ns1 was balanced. We got there eventually but it took a long time and many of our changes were hated by the competitive scene at first. Plus there are also outstanding issues with ns1 that were, unfortunately, never solved.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Talking about having a team is worthless to me, and I think most of the other people here. No action was ever taken on those 'discussions', and whos decision that was is unknown to me, the end result is the same. Its UWE's decision to make and act upon. If the old balance teams actually did manage to influence changes in the game, they sure did a ridiculous job in communicating that to us.. Any of the changes I saw that could have been influenced by what we were suggesting were so different in key ways that in the end, they often did more harm than good.
And with regards to how the balance teams are formed and discussed, I saw the comments made by many PTs about such groups, and honestly the fact that you would try to encourage them then have a completely different attitude behind closed doors is probably a leading cause in why the devs feel the way they do about them, and why an official one was never created.
In the end I think puzl's approach is best, commenting on balance and mechanics after the fact is worthless.. There needs to be a couple key people (2/3 probably tops) that work with Charlie/UWE in regards to balance and mechanics. Its up to UWE to make that call however.
<!--quoteo(post=2025602:date=Nov 16 2012, 07:54 AM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Nov 16 2012, 07:54 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2025602"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->why doesn't ENSL dedicate a couple of nights for beta pcws and then have a couple of smart people summarise their findings and submit them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They don't because nothing will be done with the suggestions, people's time will get wasted and they will be upset by the lack of support from developers. There already are and always have been very experienced players who give out their suggestions, either playtesters or forumers yet nobody has any idea as to what will actually be changed and almost all of the time nothing would that was expected and needed. That is why we need a balance ground in the first place. Either way, something needs to be changed, because it's becoming clear that whatever we have now is not working.
With the experience I can say that a balance team is not worth the effort if its not made by UWE. It needs to be players that they trust and are ready to work with. Does not matter how much arguments or efforts you put into it if they don't want that feedback.
It is a lot of work and is best done with few clever individuals. They need to be open and flexible to suggestions and be able to understand how a single change can affect the game from the beginning to the end. I think there are few players in the community that can and are willing to put up that effort. But finding the right people that UWE can truly work with can be a very complicated process.
<!--quoteo(post=2025807:date=Nov 16 2012, 08:21 AM:name=Grissi)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Grissi @ Nov 16 2012, 08:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2025807"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->With the experience I can say that a balance team is not worth the effort if its not made by UWE. It needs to be players that they trust and are ready to work with. Does not matter how much arguments or efforts you put into it if they don't want that feedback.
It is a lot of work and is best done with few clever individuals. They need to be open and flexible to suggestions and be able to understand how a single change can affect the game from the beginning to the end. I think there are few players in the community that can and are willing to put up that effort. But finding the right people that UWE can truly work with can be a very complicated process.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Its more then just balance tho. I can sit here and say take out powernodes and creep it hurts the flow of the game. But because they spent time on it somehow that makes it worth keeping in the game. I would actually like to know UWE reasoning for things like powernodes and creep. They just seem like things to show off the engine. And tbh the lighting effects when the power goes out looks bad. Really bad.
There are things that UWE want in THEIR game, and thats completely their choice. If people were to work with UWE regarding balance/mechanics, they need to understand what the vision for the game is, and help Charlie balance the game around what HE wants. Thats part of what makes that role difficult, and reduces the potential pool of people. You cannot just say remove X/Y/Z because I dont like it and it doesnt work well, you need to understand what he wants said features to accomplish/fix, and provide insight on how they can achieve those goals in a balanced, fun to play way.
<!--quoteo(post=2025839:date=Nov 16 2012, 12:44 PM:name=nSidia)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nSidia @ Nov 16 2012, 12:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2025839"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Its more then just balance tho. I can sit here and say take out powernodes and creep it hurts the flow of the game. But because they spent time on it somehow that makes it worth keeping in the game. I would actually like to know UWE reasoning for things like powernodes and creep. They just seem like things to show off the engine. And tbh the lighting effects when the power goes out looks bad. Really bad.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> If you were making your own game I'm pretty sure you would stick with what you want in the game. Its up to UWE what stays in the game, the main thing is to get these ideas to work as well as possible. When thinking of a team to help UWE to make the game better its important that this team will work with their ideas and vision as close as possible, otherwise it won't work. The ideas behind the power nodes and the infestation is actually pretty good but the current implentation of them feels incomplete. I'm sure there are ways to make these 2 mechanics really great for the gameplay. It will however take time and a lot of effort(brainstorming) to get it right.
As others have stated, the problem is not a lack of individuals willing or able to help give detailed, reasoned feedback about game balance; the problem is UWE's historic and for all signs continuing outward disinterest in any sort of external influence on the balancing process. Plenty of people can and will help, but their help doesn't seem to be wanted.
If the developers decide to change their trend, they know where to find a wealth of interested players. To date, however, all publicly available information points to an established paradigm of mute disinterest; there's not much we can do for now but look on, wait, and make balance mods in the mean time. As an added bonus, if your mod gets popular enough, it will get renewed visibility from the team.
So anyway, here's my balance team leaders wishlist: Grissi, Fana, Zeikko, Dragon, Rantology and Elodea.
Charlie has come halfway with this survey if it's actually meant to result in anything, and let's hope it doesn't because of the quality of feedback I can see already in the comments, but if it's intended to- that in itself means that he's ok with and encouraging direct feedback. The next step in this is getting intelligent people who understand the game to give useful productive feedback.
Let them conduct pugs/scrims with players of their choosing, compile opinions and data from those games and then with eachother before submitting suggestions to UWE. Even in survey form if need be.
Edit: I'm talking about cancelling this public initiative and instead going with the above, to be clear.
While Valve <a href="http://store.steampowered.com/news/9392/" target="_blank">publicly thanks high-level CS clans in their patch notes for their balance input</a>, we get a public survey to comment on feedback where nothing is filtered.
What was discussed in Cologne in regards to balance? Was it used at all?
Comments
But I don't understand why anyone would still be willing to discuss these issues beyond for their own amusement if you already heard the designer of the game say (multiple times) he is not too interested in that form of feedback or discussion in actually formulating any changes.
And as dragon already mentioned, the pool of quality candidates for the balance team is extremely low.
Seeing UWE's internal stats api made public and more easily queried should be the real goal of this balance team if you actually want to see positive change. Being able to show problematic game mechanics with a set of irrefutable statistics is what you really want at this point. And yes I understand a lot of good could still be done by just having a few active players that can immediately point something out as being broken as a sort of consultation process, but that also presumes that opinion holds significant enough merit to stop / nerf that change and it probably doesn't based on Charlie's responses to how he acknowledges and evaluates feedback from players and the community.
I'm not disagreeing with how Charlie chooses to balance his game in all honesty. It's rational and understandable, but I don't think he makes actual rational deductions and proposals once he positively identifies an issue so it's kind of all for nought.
So just to re-iterate, rally for an open stats-api that is easily queried instead of a stupid, pointless balance team where nothing will be accomplished because there is nothing it could accomplish based on the criteria the game designer has already set out for you to meet in enacting any changes.
edit: With regards to the group being better than nothing, I disagree. You could have 1 or 2 people in it that really have very little to contribute and they could be extremely active and actually make negative contributions on the whole. So I could very easily see the balance group making negative changes as easily as positive changes based on the prospective pool of people interested in doing it should their opinions even be considered.
More likely: Dozens of well-known people will say the same ###### and be ignored. Minority voices will say something that Charlie likes and that will immediately make it into the game. All that changes between a group like this is whether those voices will claim to be dedicated funhavers (who just happen to not be very fun folks) or competitive players (who happen to be terrible at the game and really are only competitive in the sense that they have <i>tried</i> to compete, lack of success notwithstanding).
I just wanted to say, that I like the idea of a balancing team very much. I'm no competitive player, but I enjoy many pub games and I see the problem of constant changes in the balancing sector which aren't well tested... It's annoying for everyone to play the game today and to play a somewhat different game tomorrow without really knowing what changed and what not and with the overfixing problem.
I also like the idea of a group of dedicated players (pub, competitive, I don't really care) who play the game in the "what is unbalanced? how can we fix that?"-perspective. Imo (as I said, only pub) there is a constant "whining" (no offense) about either aliens or marines beeing op, which is (I believe so) merely based on bad experiences in previous games/rounds of the critics. I played some rounds myself where I feel the enemy overpowered, because their weapons hurt so much or they overrun us with Onos, but I always tell me, that "we" as a team let em do that.
In other words: I don't see a problem with a 6 min onos, when the Marines don't care about restowers and stuff like that and the aliens can build unbothered. And I don't see a problem with lvl 3 weapons killing Skulks very easily as they can still kill a marine (takes longer, is more challenging) or they should be able to evolve in higher lifeforms.
What I want to say: don't let anger or bad experience in any way cloud your position on balancing, because (on a pub gaming point of view) most of the games get lost because of a better team, not an overpowered one.
But I have to say: I don't now how competitive games go. If the aliens can get an Onos in 6 minutes with the marines constantly bothering them (in other words: against a Marine team which is equally good) and the Onos is able to win the game (with a Gorge healing it), I see the problem. This goes for everything which may be unbalanced (weapons, crags, ...).
OFFTOPIC: I don't know, how you think about it, but I think the map Veil is unbalanced because the marines start way of to any 2nd com chair and aliens could camp in topographical and skylights and gain total map control since early on... But that's only my opinion based on bad experiences and my impression when I look on the map.
I'm afraid your information on this is inaccurate. A balance team has been discussed for a very, very long time on the PT Leads side. There are many logistical and technical reasons why one is not around right now, though that does not mean there will not be one in the future.
For now it's Charlie's full-time job to balance the game. If he requests a balance team, one will be formed. Until then, things will stay as they are.
Edit: I was happy to see the comp community balance team happen, and send suggestions to Charlie - it worked for numerous changes to the game. There is nothing stopping anyone from forming their own balance team and sending the information on.
Even if it was not a perfect group, it would still be better than what goes on now (one man trying to do it all by himself).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Man how much does everyone miss puzl ? srsly
In the end the most likely outcome is a group that is allowed to post feedback which is 'observed' by the developers, more like the beta forums than a real balance team. Full of people with an intermediate level of understanding and ability (because it is a waste of time for anyone with the ability, they are likely to leave quickly).
Either way, I hope UWE begin taking balance more seriously. The game needs fundamental changes which will then require a complete re-balancing of the game. Either it will not be possible in the current environment or it will take months if not a year or more to sort out. NS2 has a lot of potential, but it is far short of that potential at the moment.
People have rose-tinted glasses about how ns1 was balanced. We got there eventually but it took a long time and many of our changes were hated by the competitive scene at first. Plus there are also outstanding issues with ns1 that were, unfortunately, never solved.
Well, this is how I approached balance changes to summit and it has worked for me.
It doesn't actually have to be a team, per se. What it can't be is 1 or 2 people doing the entire balancing without external opinions, and you can't certainly throw out a patch without gathering ANY feedback now. You also can't do 100% what a "team" decides (if they propose solutions), but you should at least acknowledge the issues exposed and try to do something about it.
I can think of 2-3 names off the top of my head that have made excellent posts/documents on balance and would be great to have them closer to the devs, provided they would do something with this feedback.
All I know is that we can't go forward with the methods used up until now, they simply won't cut it.
For example, given that UWE can push out betas on steam, why doesn't ENSL dedicate a couple of nights for beta pcws and then have a couple of smart people summarise their findings and submit them.
That kind of thing where an external team has done tests and sent results to UWE has been done too...
That is just ridiculous. You don't see a single company that does this because they do not have to defend their changes is any way.
You, and many mappers in NS history, have been pretty excellent about this. They are usually also not crap at the game or completely divorced from the competitive community. No matter what we do or what process comes beforehand, there remains a guy somewhere who has to make very subjective calls on what changes to pull the trigger on.
And for NS2, it's Flayra's baby in the end, so unless he decides to really let go of things or completely changes his mind, it's staying on the strict thalidomide-diet that has been the hallmark of NS2 development.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->People have rose-tinted glasses about how ns1 was balanced.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The problem is the opposite: Many of us remember the time it took to get anywhere reasonable and the amount of resistance on the way. And that things stayed bad long enough to keep the game very niche. And here we are, a decade later, seemingly having taken several steps back from even 1.4.
People have rose-tinted glasses about how ns1 was balanced. We got there eventually but it took a long time and many of our changes were hated by the competitive scene at first. Plus there are also outstanding issues with ns1 that were, unfortunately, never solved.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<img src="http://i.imgur.com/zpx7R.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
And with regards to how the balance teams are formed and discussed, I saw the comments made by many PTs about such groups, and honestly the fact that you would try to encourage them then have a completely different attitude behind closed doors is probably a leading cause in why the devs feel the way they do about them, and why an official one was never created.
In the end I think puzl's approach is best, commenting on balance and mechanics after the fact is worthless.. There needs to be a couple key people (2/3 probably tops) that work with Charlie/UWE in regards to balance and mechanics. Its up to UWE to make that call however.
They don't because nothing will be done with the suggestions, people's time will get wasted and they will be upset by the lack of support from developers. There already are and always have been very experienced players who give out their suggestions, either playtesters or forumers yet nobody has any idea as to what will actually be changed and almost all of the time nothing would that was expected and needed. That is why we need a balance ground in the first place. Either way, something needs to be changed, because it's becoming clear that whatever we have now is not working.
It is a lot of work and is best done with few clever individuals. They need to be open and flexible to suggestions and be able to understand how a single change can affect the game from the beginning to the end. I think there are few players in the community that can and are willing to put up that effort. But finding the right people that UWE can truly work with can be a very complicated process.
It is a lot of work and is best done with few clever individuals. They need to be open and flexible to suggestions and be able to understand how a single change can affect the game from the beginning to the end. I think there are few players in the community that can and are willing to put up that effort. But finding the right people that UWE can truly work with can be a very complicated process.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Its more then just balance tho. I can sit here and say take out powernodes and creep it hurts the flow of the game. But because they spent time on it somehow that makes it worth keeping in the game. I would actually like to know UWE reasoning for things like powernodes and creep. They just seem like things to show off the engine. And tbh the lighting effects when the power goes out looks bad. Really bad.
If you were making your own game I'm pretty sure you would stick with what you want in the game. Its up to UWE what stays in the game, the main thing is to get these ideas to work as well as possible. When thinking of a team to help UWE to make the game better its important that this team will work with their ideas and vision as close as possible, otherwise it won't work.
The ideas behind the power nodes and the infestation is actually pretty good but the current implentation of them feels incomplete. I'm sure there are ways to make these 2 mechanics really great for the gameplay. It will however take time and a lot of effort(brainstorming) to get it right.
If the developers decide to change their trend, they know where to find a wealth of interested players. To date, however, all publicly available information points to an established paradigm of mute disinterest; there's not much we can do for now but look on, wait, and make balance mods in the mean time. As an added bonus, if your mod gets popular enough, it will get renewed visibility from the team.
lol
Charlie has come halfway with this survey if it's actually meant to result in anything, and let's hope it doesn't because of the quality of feedback I can see already in the comments, but if it's intended to- that in itself means that he's ok with and encouraging direct feedback. The next step in this is getting intelligent people who understand the game to give useful productive feedback.
Let them conduct pugs/scrims with players of their choosing, compile opinions and data from those games and then with eachother before submitting suggestions to UWE. Even in survey form if need be.
Edit: I'm talking about cancelling this public initiative and instead going with the above, to be clear.
While Valve <a href="http://store.steampowered.com/news/9392/" target="_blank">publicly thanks high-level CS clans in their patch notes for their balance input</a>, we get a public survey to comment on feedback where nothing is filtered.
What was discussed in Cologne in regards to balance? Was it used at all?
...everything else was bizarre / pointless to be extremely positive honestly.
<!--quoteo(post=2026836:date=Nov 17 2012, 05:21 AM:name=Mendasp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mendasp @ Nov 17 2012, 05:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2026836"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->A public survey.
lol<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And all the feedback will be taken from all the wrong people, as usual.