Balance implications aside, I would like to point out how unintuitive this suggestion is when compared to how the rest of the marine tech tree works. You lose the ability to purchase all other tech when one of it's pre-reqs is destroyed or recycled, it doesn't make sense to have one piece of tech magically be an exception to that rule.
<!--quoteo(post=2053373:date=Dec 30 2012, 01:34 PM:name=MMZ_Torak)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MMZ_Torak @ Dec 30 2012, 01:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053373"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ok so who do I have to yell at about not allowing you to store missiles and missile launchers in my arms?!?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The game designers.
Although I agreed with the choice: <i>1. Multiplayer couldn't have been remotely balanced with complete customization freedom.</i> There were no shortage of completely broken mech configs in earlier Mechwarrior games. Recent titles like Hawken and Mechwarrior Online wisely avoid this mess of problems <i>2. Mechs with missiles in arms existed. </i> If you wanted a missile-heavy mech with missiles in arms, you chose one. Like the Catapult. <i>3. Silhouettes which indicate capabilities enable a layer of interesting tactical decisions.</i> Nearly every great PVP game out there (TF2, LoL, fighting games, etc) gives you some information on your opponent's capabilities prior to engagement. You have some known information on the enemy (based on their silhouette) and some unknown (based on their configuration, or which capabilities they end up employing.) In this case, you would see two mechs (one probably missile-heavy, another probably beam-heavy) and could make a choice to engage the one you were better prepared to handle -- but with the loadout system there was enough flexibility so that that Catapult might employ a beam-heavy loadout and trick you.
Pretty much the exact things i said before stand - single minigun exo on 1 cc after all researches are completed wouldnt change balance, this isnt a balance discussion its a feature request. That said, you basically want to make one piece of marine tech go against every other part of their tech tree, which is not really intuitive. Also, exo's being a major selling point and also saying that they are fun to play is your own personal opinion, and not one that is shared by every person that plays this game. What is fun for you is not always fun for others, and you also need to look at the impacts on the enjoyment of the alien team with this change, which is where I think it would cause the most harm. Most people that play aliens that I know do not enjoy fighting exo's, making it easier for marines to get exos in turtle situations wouldnt make alot of alien players happy, and you can pretty much guarantee this change only affects turtles as marines need to hold 2+ tech points mid game to have a chance at getting exos, so generally the only time youd have the research and lose the base is lategame. Also, it bears mentioning that jetpacks are also a pretty big interest drawing feature, why are they not included in this? I would like to have my fun and buy my jetpacks when the marines are loosing and turtling.... Your opening a can of worms with suggesting a single change to make the game more 'fun' for a team that is already loosing, and not at all taking into consideration the impact on the other team.
I also think you fail to see where balance effects fun, which is certainly a problem that NS2 has... And as for saying balance is easy, thats a complete joke that only proves that you have balance casual games in the past. As for saying things as 'someone' in the industry, I can assure you that many people here want to make NS2 funner while improving the balance, but changing a tech requirement to benefit a team that is loosing is not the answer.
Regarding NDAs and whatever, the fact that your afraid to mention previous games really shows that your balance ideas on a game of this design would not apply, as I have stated before balancing casual games vs more competitive focused games is totally different, especially a fps/rts hybrid with skill based gameplay.
<!--quoteo(post=2053438:date=Dec 30 2012, 04:34 PM:name=xDragon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xDragon @ Dec 30 2012, 04:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053438"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Pretty much the exact things i said before stand - single minigun exo on 1 cc after all researches are completed wouldnt change balance, this isnt a balance discussion its a feature request. That said, you basically want to make one piece of marine tech go against every other part of their tech tree, which is not really intuitive. Also, exo's being a major selling point and also saying that they are fun to play is your own personal opinion, and not one that is shared by every person that plays this game. What is fun for you is not always fun for others, and you also need to look at the impacts on the enjoyment of the alien team with this change, which is where I think it would cause the most harm. Most people that play aliens that I know do not enjoy fighting exo's, making it easier for marines to get exos in turtle situations wouldnt make alot of alien players happy, and you can pretty much guarantee this change only affects turtles as marines need to hold 2+ tech points mid game to have a chance at getting exos, so generally the only time youd have the research and lose the base is lategame. Also, it bears mentioning that jetpacks are also a pretty big interest drawing feature, why are they not included in this? I would like to have my fun and buy my jetpacks when the marines are loosing and turtling.... Your opening a can of worms with suggesting a single change to make the game more 'fun' for a team that is already loosing, and not at all taking into consideration the impact on the other team.
I also think you fail to see where balance effects fun, which is certainly a problem that NS2 has... And as for saying balance is easy, thats a complete joke that only proves that you have balance casual games in the past. As for saying things as 'someone' in the industry, I can assure you that many people here want to make NS2 funner while improving the balance, but changing a tech requirement to benefit a team that is loosing is not the answer.
Regarding NDAs and whatever, the fact that your afraid to mention previous games really shows that your balance ideas on a game of this design would not apply, as I have stated before balancing casual games vs more competitive focused games is totally different, especially a fps/rts hybrid with skill based gameplay.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While I'm in favor of experimenting with 1-tech Exos, the idea that it <i>"wouldn't change balance"</i> is <b>completely wrong</b>. That's the point of the entire discussion!
Quite obviously if the marines lose a CC, they have a better chance of winning if they still have Single Exos than if they don't. That's a change in balance.
Personally I'm more interested in discussing details of the various ways this idea could be implemented. For example, even before this thread I felt it might be interesting for Jetpacks and Single Exos to remain available (provided you had a Proto Lab and the research) but at <b>double cost</b>.
As I've stated before, the Marine Turtle Problem should be considered (and solved) separately. Reducing base stats and upgrade strength, but providing a stat boost for each built Command Station seems to be a rather elegant solution. It could be balanced so that marines are effectively around Armor/Weapons 1.5 when they're at one tech point, even with full upgrades. Although I still think superweapon-style resource sinks might be a fun addition to the game (things which go beyond Exo/Onos and aren't very efficient expenditures but which are capable of decisively ending a round.)
But those solutions are separate from the game flow issue of Exos, and the fair suggestion of having Single Exos be available in some way without 2 tech points.
<!--quoteo(post=2053441:date=Dec 30 2012, 07:00 PM:name=Axehilt)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Axehilt @ Dec 30 2012, 07:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2053441"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As I've stated before, the Marine Turtle Problem should be considered (and solved) separately. Reducing base stats and upgrade strength, but providing a stat boost for each built Command Station seems to be a rather elegant solution. It could be balanced so that marines are effectively around Armor/Weapons 1.5 when they're at one tech point, even with full upgrades.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I've been saying the same thing. People seem to think there is no turtle problem now without the change, when there very much is.
Part of the problem isn't just the marine team, it's the lack of 'courage' on the alien team to pull up their pants and finish the game. I've played as alien and people are playing cat and mouse while I keep saying we should group up and finish it. Yet so many with their Onos are afraid to die that it ends up prolonging the game.
I agree though, the endgame stalemate is a whole other problem that needs its own solution.
It's really poor form to suggest an idea which will massively inflame a pre-existing problem and then simply write the problem off as unrelated.
Also, if you do this for exos then we should be expanding that to 1-cc jetpacks, GLs even if the AA dies, leap if the second hive dies, etc. I think it would be more acceptable to argue that a single arm exosuit should be available for research with just 1-cc, perhaps also the protolab but jp and dual exo still requiring 2-cc. At least that wouldn't be mechanically inconsistent with the entire rest of the game. I also don't see any immediate imbalance from this change given that single arm exos are completely useless for trying to win the game.
Comments
The game designers.
Although I agreed with the choice:
<i>1. Multiplayer couldn't have been remotely balanced with complete customization freedom.</i> There were no shortage of completely broken mech configs in earlier Mechwarrior games. Recent titles like Hawken and Mechwarrior Online wisely avoid this mess of problems
<i>2. Mechs with missiles in arms existed. </i> If you wanted a missile-heavy mech with missiles in arms, you chose one. Like the Catapult.
<i>3. Silhouettes which indicate capabilities enable a layer of interesting tactical decisions.</i> Nearly every great PVP game out there (TF2, LoL, fighting games, etc) gives you some information on your opponent's capabilities prior to engagement. You have some known information on the enemy (based on their silhouette) and some unknown (based on their configuration, or which capabilities they end up employing.) In this case, you would see two mechs (one probably missile-heavy, another probably beam-heavy) and could make a choice to engage the one you were better prepared to handle -- but with the loadout system there was enough flexibility so that that Catapult might employ a beam-heavy loadout and trick you.
But yeah, that's all offtopic.
I also think you fail to see where balance effects fun, which is certainly a problem that NS2 has... And as for saying balance is easy, thats a complete joke that only proves that you have balance casual games in the past. As for saying things as 'someone' in the industry, I can assure you that many people here want to make NS2 funner while improving the balance, but changing a tech requirement to benefit a team that is loosing is not the answer.
Regarding NDAs and whatever, the fact that your afraid to mention previous games really shows that your balance ideas on a game of this design would not apply, as I have stated before balancing casual games vs more competitive focused games is totally different, especially a fps/rts hybrid with skill based gameplay.
I also think you fail to see where balance effects fun, which is certainly a problem that NS2 has... And as for saying balance is easy, thats a complete joke that only proves that you have balance casual games in the past. As for saying things as 'someone' in the industry, I can assure you that many people here want to make NS2 funner while improving the balance, but changing a tech requirement to benefit a team that is loosing is not the answer.
Regarding NDAs and whatever, the fact that your afraid to mention previous games really shows that your balance ideas on a game of this design would not apply, as I have stated before balancing casual games vs more competitive focused games is totally different, especially a fps/rts hybrid with skill based gameplay.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While I'm in favor of experimenting with 1-tech Exos, the idea that it <i>"wouldn't change balance"</i> is <b>completely wrong</b>. That's the point of the entire discussion!
Quite obviously if the marines lose a CC, they have a better chance of winning if they still have Single Exos than if they don't. That's a change in balance.
Personally I'm more interested in discussing details of the various ways this idea could be implemented. For example, even before this thread I felt it might be interesting for Jetpacks and Single Exos to remain available (provided you had a Proto Lab and the research) but at <b>double cost</b>.
As I've stated before, the Marine Turtle Problem should be considered (and solved) separately. Reducing base stats and upgrade strength, but providing a stat boost for each built Command Station seems to be a rather elegant solution. It could be balanced so that marines are effectively around Armor/Weapons 1.5 when they're at one tech point, even with full upgrades. Although I still think superweapon-style resource sinks might be a fun addition to the game (things which go beyond Exo/Onos and aren't very efficient expenditures but which are capable of decisively ending a round.)
But those solutions are separate from the game flow issue of Exos, and the fair suggestion of having Single Exos be available in some way without 2 tech points.
Part of the problem isn't just the marine team, it's the lack of 'courage' on the alien team to pull up their pants and finish the game. I've played as alien and people are playing cat and mouse while I keep saying we should group up and finish it. Yet so many with their Onos are afraid to die that it ends up prolonging the game.
I agree though, the endgame stalemate is a whole other problem that needs its own solution.
Also, if you do this for exos then we should be expanding that to 1-cc jetpacks, GLs even if the AA dies, leap if the second hive dies, etc. I think it would be more acceptable to argue that a single arm exosuit should be available for research with just 1-cc, perhaps also the protolab but jp and dual exo still requiring 2-cc. At least that wouldn't be mechanically inconsistent with the entire rest of the game. I also don't see any immediate imbalance from this change given that single arm exos are completely useless for trying to win the game.