Donate to Commander
xxswatelitexx
Join Date: 2012-11-16 Member: 171754Members
Join Date: 2012-11-16 Member: 171754Members
Comments
Even if you donated all your resouce com can't drop onos egg without 3 hives.
You could spam 3 hives fast though :P
EDIT:
How much Hives are needed for fade egg?
50 starting TRes
8 players ..start with about 25res = 200 PRes pool
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1 commander donate all its PRes = +25TRes
7 players on the field split to:
>> 5 skulks donate all = +125TRes
>> 2 gorges donate (except gorge and 3 hydra) = +12 TRes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
in total we got 50+25+125+12 -> 212TRes
2Hives cost 80TRes, then fto spend rest 132TRes ...
After all 3 hives are build you can make 2 onos eggs instant even with one harwester.
onoses after 2-3min is not fun at all :(
2Husar: fades requrements ...2hives + 50Tres
/thread
/unthread
>NO YOU CANT OBVIOUSLY LITERALLY ONLY ONE WAY TO PUT SOMETHING IN AND YOU NEVER ALLOWED TO CHANGE ANYTHING EVER
What?
It's such an easy fix but adds a great deal to teamwork. There's no reason why the TRes and PRes should be separate: I never go Onos and Gorge uses barely any resources at all (assuming you don't keep dying all the time).
First of all, one solution is to tier resource donation with cooldown.
Secondly, another solution is to make an exchange rate.
Thirdly, you could also realise just how much more important it is for aliens grow eggs over evolving yourself, since the time taken to evolve leaves you quite vulnerable AND the resource gain you get is tiny in comparison to TRes, you may as well not bother having PRes.
Also consider the marines, who need a lot of resources but have a turtle meta. Half the weapons are useless and rifle is incredibly powerful when upgraded at melting hives, so donate those resources and beat the alien expansion meta by getting your anti-onos exos in time. You can't possibly turtle if the aliens usually take resource/map dominance.
Well, our answers to xxswatelitexx are just as simplistic as his presentation of his/her suggestion which lacked elaboration from start. "Simple Idea", simple answers. Where as your additions to the idea make me thinking about it more.
It makes me thinking that it would make a difference between pub play and comp play without adding different pub/comp modes. So while pub players will certainly stick to their precious pres and nevertheless will probably win some games in a boring and standard way, comp players could come up with some crazy strategical ideas by sacrificing their pres.
Now that I have written my conclusion down I am beginning to like the idea. Weird.
Exchange rate <i>based on number of harvesters owned</i>. If you have less harvesters, you donate closer to 1:1, or even 1:2 from PRes to TRes. IF you have more, it becomes more 3:1 for P to T.
For PRes it doesn't make a difference as a marine whether you're 2 harvesters or 8: You just don't get resources at any decent rate. On the other hand you don't need to spend so much with free respawns.
For aliens, PRes is just too slow, especially since even a basic Gorge role costs at least 20, and it doesn't get any cheaper. However a high PRes count means Onos rush.
So if there are plenty of harvesters, there is a good chance of Onos eggs and POnos for aliens. But Aliens have auto-building on their side so this should be their common automatic edge.
Marines on the other hand have to manually build harvesters, which can get ninja'd fast by silent celerity skulks. As a result they have to turtle, and the best edge they have is fast Lvl 3 Weapons/Armour to massively ramp up their game. However you can't get this unless the TRes stays high, which isn't possible with only a few harvesters. Meanwhile the only expenditures you'll be making is Welders and Mines, shotguns being the same problem as consistently going Gorge with LESS survivability.
This feature would be a core tactic to Marines while a panic button for aliens, as well as extra depth for supportive Alien players: You can stay perma-gorge or even perma-ninja-skulk and donate all your gains to the team to help get more Onos pushed out and distracting the marines while you do their work, or save up for a co-ordinated Onos train through the middle.
>Peer pressure
You what?
You mean in a competitive environment, when they actually order you, as a team and/or superior in your fire team to donate for a strategy?
Or you mean in a public environment where people will be telling you how to play all the time anyway?
Why in particular is res donation the sole cause of this? Because I see this in Dota all the time, and there's nothing of the sort in that.
This really isn't good criticism as such as just stating opinion. Nothing wrong with having an opinion but if threads devolve into "+1" it just becomes one big logical fallacy, and then there's no visible ground for the whole idea to stand on.
EDIT: However I would concede that Gorges should have more construction options. Just hydras and clogs? Really? All that does is let you get places without a skulk partner. Oh hydras? Yeah complete waste of money, they just focus buildings over marines, do so little damage and get zoned and melted so easily by simple rifles. They also have a crap firing angle that makes them easier to zone up close.
Because in pub matches there are beneath the team player also lone ninjas who just don't want to share for the better good of the team. So it might end in a yelling and bidding chore like: "GIVE ALL YOUR PRES GOD DAMN IT WE LOSE THE GAME BECAUSE OF YOU!!!", "GIVE THE COMM YOUR MONEYZ YOUR FU**ING NOOB"... and so on.
And I don't know Dota, never played it. I think comparisons to other games in a discussion are tricky because one has to have played that game to know what you mean.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This really isn't good criticism as such as just stating opinion. Nothing wrong with having an opinion but if threads devolve into "+1" it just becomes one big logical fallacy, and then there's no visible ground for the whole idea to stand on.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
+1
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->EDIT: However I would concede that Gorges should have more construction options. Just hydras and clogs? Really? All that does is let you get places without a skulk partner. Oh hydras? Yeah complete waste of money, they just focus buildings over marines, do so little damage and get zoned and melted so easily by simple rifles. They also have a crap firing angle that makes them easier to zone up close.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hydras aren't useless, they are holding back marines for quite a while. They do exactly what they are supposed to do. But I agree that gorge lacks variety of choice of structures to build.
+1
BTW: I like your Darwinia avatar picture, nice hidden message to say 'Natural Selection' in a different way. :)
+1
You what?
You mean in a competitive environment, when they actually order you, as a team and/or superior in your fire team to donate for a strategy?
Or you mean in a public environment where people will be telling you how to play all the time anyway?
Why in particular is res donation the sole cause of this? Because I see this in Dota all the time, and there's nothing of the sort in that.
This really isn't good criticism as such as just stating opinion. Nothing wrong with having an opinion but if threads devolve into "+1" it just becomes one big logical fallacy, and then there's no visible ground for the whole idea to stand on.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't know what you're talking about, my post was a legitimate complaint not a +1. Yes there is always a certain level of pressure in team games to play in a way that contributes to the team - my point is that this is why it's a bad idea to introduce strategies that many players would find unfun, like giving away all your own money. Some people might love to do that but most would much rather spend it themselves, and for them the game is made less fun by the existence of a donate option. When an ability like this exists the game has to be balanced around it, which means there will be situations in which you have to give away your PRes to win, again forcing players into a lose-lose situation.
>Don't like to do it in a competitive environment
>Your team falls apart and you lose the game, the team may get mad at you understandably. You never get picked again.
>Don't like to do it in a public environment
>Nothing at all matters, quit getting mad at videogames.
You have no legitimacy in this argument. There is no reason at all to deny this feature based on that weak argument.
From the sounds of it you're just jumping to faulty conclusions based on faulty logic.
Edit: Quick question: You <b>do</b> know what the definition of the word "Donate" is don't you?
>Your team falls apart and you lose the game, the team may get mad at you understandably. You never get picked again.
>Don't like to do it in a public environment
>Nothing at all matters, quit getting mad at videogames.
You have no legitimacy in this argument. There is no reason at all to deny this feature based on that weak argument.
From the sounds of it you're just jumping to faulty conclusions based on faulty logic.
Edit: Quick question: You <b>do</b> know what the definition of the word "Donate" is don't you?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're a real charmer aren't you? I'm telling you as an objective fact that this would make the game less fun for me if it were added. That's why I'm arguing against it. If nothing matters in pubs then why even bother making suggestions?
>Objective
Where? Where's the statistics? The peer reviews? The video footage examples? There is none because this feature does not exist for a start.
On top of that:
>Implying anything in pubs matter
Well obviously. If people on your team are bad, odds are their team might have bads. Or it's just one game in a million, and the bads will be on their team or randomly spread.
If the comm goes without obs the entire game he might get ######ed at. However, besides not being able to scan cloaked hives, does this make or break the entire game?
If I went and did nothing but mine EVERYWHERE and used pistol only, would I automatically lose the game every time?
Pub games are just that, public. Anything goes, will go, and has gone. Trying to balance for PURE CHAOS results in pure chaos, in which case your argument falls apart: There's no reason NOT to do anything at all, just like Minecraft!
Where? Where's the statistics? The peer reviews? The video footage examples? There is none because this feature does not exist for a start.
On top of that:
>Implying anything in pubs matter
Well obviously. If people on your team are bad, odds are their team might have bads. Or it's just one game in a million, and the bads will be on their team or randomly spread.
If the comm goes without obs the entire game he might get ######ed at. However, besides not being able to scan cloaked hives, does this make or break the entire game?
If I went and did nothing but mine EVERYWHERE and used pistol only, would I automatically lose the game every time?
Pub games are just that, public. Anything goes, will go, and has gone. Trying to balance for PURE CHAOS results in pure chaos, in which case your argument falls apart: There's no reason NOT to do anything at all, just like Minecraft!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've played with similar res donation concepts as mods in NS1, didn't care for it.
It's very simple really. Commander says "Zek, Player X, and Player Y, donate me your res so I can do fast hive and upgrades". Then either we do it and all our PRes is gone with nothing to show for it, or we're letting our whole team down by ignoring the commander. Nope, don't want this feature.
>Your team falls apart and you lose the game, the team may get mad at you understandably. You never get picked again.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Obviously a clan would fall apart quickly if it there is no team work.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->>Don't like to do it in a public environment
>Nothing at all matters, quit getting mad at videogames.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Public gaming DOES matter, at least for me. I am not in a clan so I play pub only. Those are the masses and I am one of them!
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You have no legitimacy in this argument. There is no reason at all to deny this feature based on that weak argument.
From the sounds of it you're just jumping to faulty conclusions based on faulty logic.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What weaknesses and faulty conclusions?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Edit: Quick question: You <b>do</b> know what the definition of the word "Donate" is don't you?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>It is a voluntary gift without the expectation of return of investment.</b>
The voluntariness in pub play would be rendered non-existent if someone would be bullied to 'donate' his pres. That's the problem.
It has to be viable to win with and without donating pres. Donating has to be just an addition to the strategy count. But either way if you have in you team a few lone wolfs playing just for themselves you loose anyway.
The voluntariness in pub play would be rendered non-existent if someone would be bullied to 'donate' his pres. That's the problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's still voluntary at the end of the day. Nobody is holding your parents/dog hostage at gunpoint forcing you to donate. As a result I don't see a problem here...
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It has to be viable to win with and without donating pres. Donating has to be just an addition to the strategy count. But either way if you have in you team a few lone wolfs playing just for themselves you loose anyway.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This I agree with though. Which is why I proposed:
>Cooldowns based on how much you donated
>An exchange rate (e.g. 2 Pres = 1 Tres)
>An exchange rate based on the number of harvesters owned
There could be more, but it's clear having 5 marines with 30 Pres against 2 Onos + Gorges would lose every time when quick thinking could have 5 marines donate 30 Pres and get 2-3 Exos and flamethrowers out to counter attack (a last ditch gamble since if it fails the marines lost all their res and it's GG).
Also pub games don't matter, because they literally don't matter. I mean competitive games don't matter much either but everything is taken much more seriously for the sake of sport. However if it's "open football day" then you can't possibly control how people behave, what positions people take, the player's individual performance etc. and as such all arguments for "Nerf/Buff/Change" go out the window unless it affects top tier games where you have 12 a side well mannered olympians having the same problem.
Indeed, now that you say it, it seems more of a social problem than a problem in terms of the game mechanic.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This I agree with though. Which is why I proposed:
>Cooldowns based on how much you donated
>An exchange rate (e.g. 2 Pres = 1 Tres)
>An exchange rate based on the number of harvesters owned<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which is why I said that I start to like that idea.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There could be more, but it's clear having 5 marines with 30 Pres against 2 Onos + Gorges would lose every time when quick thinking could have 5 marines donate 30 Pres and get 2-3 Exos and flamethrowers out to counter attack (a last ditch gamble since if it fails the marines lost all their res and it's GG).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We won't know how it would affect the game just from discussion. It has to be tried out and play tested because it isn't just a buff and nerf, it is more of a game changer or sort of.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also pub games don't matter, because they literally don't matter. I mean competitive games don't matter much either but everything is taken much more seriously for the sake of sport. However if it's "open football day" then you can't possibly control how people behave, what positions people take, the player's individual performance etc. and as such all arguments for "Nerf/Buff/Change" go out the window unless it affects top tier games where you have 12 a side well mannered olympians having the same problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here goes the clash of opinions. It doesn't matter for you but it does matter for me (and for UWE I guess). Were do all these comp players come from? Do we pick them from trees like ripe fruits? Pub play has to be fun to attract average Joe gamers and potential comp players, which is not easy to achieve I admit. If public gaming won't be taken in consideration, well then it's natural selection time and Natural Selection 2 just sorts it self out from the public AND the competitive gamersphere. I don't say the game has to be dumbed down but there is a balance to be found to make it fun and competitive so it serves both sides of the spectrum.
But I guess that we agree to disagree in this special point.
In one tick an extractor gathers 1 TRes and 0.125 PRes for each player. Regardless of player count you get 0.125 PRes from an extractor tick. I.e. the conversion rate from PRes to TRes <b>should</b> have player count in the denominator. If there are more players on the team, it must not mean earlier hive, earlier upgrades etc.
The commander can drop PRes equipment for TRes; this cost does not scale inversely with player count(violating the reasons and principles UWE put forth for creating two res pools).
If every player donates all starting PRes the comm must not get more than 25 TRes. Otherwise if a team has only one player, he can donate to TRes and purchase more equipment for himself than the Pres he donated could purchase.
So is it ever worth donating PRes to TRes if the conversion rate must be so low? No, probably not. In other news. If you remove the ability of the comm to purchase PRes items for TRes or make the cost scale inversely with player count you can choose a more sensible conversion ratio. If the comm has too much TRes he can be given the ability to convert it to PRes per player. There should probably be some slight conversion loss in both directions.
Regarding two pools, and static 0.125res per tick per player:
- in games where are more players, the count of harvesters and extractors are bigger (players can cower wider area, and so..)
- also death of higher classes is more common as in game 4:4 the onos will not die if he is not the brainless sh**, therefore the income requirement is higher.
when there will be conversion ration something like 1: 0.125, there will not make sense to donate ... because it will hurt team instead of help.
There is another idea out there ... RFK. If you want to help team do a kill, then RFK will be counted to TRes.
Tres/pres split back plz. This was in the original design of NS2, because it dictated when things would appear in the game.