Please answer this: Why can a marine team invest 200 res on a base, but lose all the investment because someone killed the free power node by itself? Please follow up with why a gorge should undermine this ~15 minutes of investment with a single tunnel without referencing the minor lane blocking failure that is letting one skulk through. Maybe we should just go on voip and post the discussion afterward
It takes time to kill a PN for a single skulk. If the skulk kills the PN alone it means the Marine teamwork failed. Typical Rambo behavior consequence. End of story.
Can someone put together a mod quickly that removes the usage of cysts and powernodes, run the mod on a server for a few weeks and see how the gameplay pans out then? I know there was a NS classic mod for that but it changed alot more things to revert it to NS1 than just simply removing cysts and powernodes?
I would genuinely love to try myself but unfortunately too stupid to know how to do it haha
It wouldn't do it, unfortunately.
The Cyst is one of the many (Many, Many, Many, Many, Many...) ways NS2 has to slow down the Alien economy.
Power node are the only thing that make the marine look back.
Part of the motivation for this discussion is that I think ninja phase gates are a ton of fun for both sides, but they are so rarely effective that they are robbed of a bit of excitement. The aliens can afford to be slow to respond, confident that the PvE morass will keep the marines slowed down. The marines can focus all their energy and still not materially damage the aliens.
It depends with who is playing with you. Trust me, 4 competent marines that can keep it in the pants (no touching any alien structure or cyst) until the signal is given; are just equal to a dead hive in less than 1.30 minutes (less with shotguns). I'm afraid you got the wrong guys with you...
Usually on :
High level it doesn't happen as the teammates keep an eye everywhere (as much as possible).
Pub and low level: 'WTF you kill that cyst?! we said ''don't touch anything!!!""... ... ... ... ..." You get the picture.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
edited May 2015
Sigh. I am beginning to feel like I am hitting a wall here, as I feel having to keep repeating points I've already made is just indicative of them not actually being absorbed by those participating..
Because it creates predictable outcomes. Again... This in no way implies I am advocating for randomness, however.
It merely implies additional avenues for winning - in particular exploiting the mistakes of a team that is in the lead - capitalizing on their inability to remain infallible.
Which, by all accounts you would assume would be a legitimate tactic in any strategy game...?
I agree that more often than not a winning team will go on to win
Do you truly believe that your average pub doesn't suffer from those symptoms listed? Predictable outcomes, Rarely seeing all tiers of tech, Long frustrating ends, Anti climactic conceding
I have no problem with lower skill players having 'foo' mechanics so that they can still get kills, but 'comeback' mechanics balanced like that is really just damaging to gameplay.
You know I keep seeing this argument put forth, that there is actual damaging ramifications to mechanics such as BB, but I have yet to see an example provided of how it is damaging?
Even the example you just provided of a losing alien team 15 minutes in that pulled out a win only because marines screwed up sounds like a legitimate tactic that ended the round in an unpredictable way. Sounds fun, not damaging?
The reason I call that a 'coinflip' victory is because the entire round up to that point is essentially meaningless, its all decided within those few seconds. The commander being occupied elsewhere or some bad timing with marine locations can all but assure the alien victory.
So tossing that hyperbole of a label aside, what I see you saying essentially is that a round only has "purpose" to you when you win or lose based exclusively on a narrow set of skills that you consider to be the important ones. That when you lose because you or your team made mistakes, or because a team won utilizing skills that you don't consider to be as important, it is suddenly a "meaningless" round.
Is that an accurate assessment of that quote and your stance?
If so... I think what I've said already in this thread multiple times, covers my response to that.
Essentially, there are many worthy factors in assessing the more skilled team, (to include capitalizing on mistakes of your enemy) that not only allow for a more accurate assessment of team skill, but also create more varied rounds. It's hard to win even when playing properly with lane blocking, RT control, and coordination - but it's also easy to lose to not being situationally aware or responding to your enemy's telegraphed plans. Without this design, the winner would be even more apparent earlier on and not worth contending, due to less available options to win.
It's odd to me anyone would be against this design, because I know so many of you would immediately capitalize on your enemy's mistakes in the field without a moment's thought - yet when the obviously losing team does it and you lose to it, that's when it's unfair or when suddenly the discussion of who "deserved to win" comes up..
@xDragon Do you have any proposed solutions for the limited income sources that aren't RFK? I would love to hear em, and this is definitely the time / place to discuss them if you do.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
No, I do not, but..
1) Any adjustment at this point is a band aid because redesigning and re balancing the whole game from the ground up is not a reality, not by a long shot.
2) I have yet to hear a single alternative proposed solution that would remedy the symptoms laid out on page 1.
1) Any adjustment at this point is a band aid because redesigning and re balancing the whole game from the ground up is not a reality, not by a long shot.
2) I have yet to hear a single alternative proposed solution that would remedy the symptoms laid out on page 1.
1/ Still, let it like that will just 'end' it the same way.
2/ There are some. Instead of trying to cure symptoms maybe find the root cause would be better. A FT buff isn't close to do it.
Because it creates predictable outcomes. Again... This in no way implies I am advocating for randomness, however.
It merely implies additional avenues for winning - in particular exploiting the mistakes of a team that is in the lead - capitalizing on their inability to remain infallible.
Which, by all accounts you would assume would be a legitimate tactic in any strategy game...?
To win a team must kill all the CCs or all the Hives. There are plenty of methods to do this. There are also plenty of opportunities to put yourself in a position to be able to accomplish this.
A good marine example is not a ninja PG, but a ninja upgrade killer. 15 or 20 tres for a 1/3 of your carapace or celerity is quite a lot.
I agree that more often than not a winning team will go on to win
These statements don't match up. I don't know what you're trying to say. Players are getting better and the winning team will more often than not go on to win can both be true at the same time.
Do you truly believe that your average pub doesn't suffer from those symptoms listed? Predictable outcomes, Rarely seeing all tiers of tech, Long frustrating ends, Anti climactic conceding
I do actually frequently play in and against comebacks, see onos stomp umbra vs jetpacks (albeit rarely exos), long equal endings until one big play gives the successful team a window of opportunity to lock down some game ending map control, and occasionally a quick and early concede.
Tram, veil, and jambi often lend themselves to create a lot of those scenarios.
Last night even, I played a game on tram and the aliens were left on one RT but then came back to beat us in a 25 minute game.
I'm almost not surprised though because the NA pub scene has a severe skill disparity problem (as well as other problems).
I've popped in a couple of times and given my opinion on certain things being discussed, but to get back to to overall topic at hand...
Back on page 1 it's talking about how BB is a great comeback tool... but I dont think it was supposed to be used as a hail mary tactic , it's just been exploited so frequently it's become normal practise to bile rush in dire situations. It's effectiveness is attributed to tunnels and the ability to go gorge anywhere.
The solution isn't to give marines a similar ability to cheese a round, but to improve the way a bile rush can take place so it's not as easy to pull off. Solutions for this have been offered. I've not gone through every post but a couple i've seen are:
1. Remove the ability to place tunnels off infestation
2. Only allow evolving when on infestation
Personally I think off-cyst tunnels are a key tool in giving aliens a way out of a bad situation, such as cyst chain harassment at chokepoints,increasing the directions you can attack from or getting a foothold in a room before infestation spreads. Removing this ability would be too damaging to aliens in the early-mid game. In addition, during the late game, aliens can afford the 7-10 cysts needed to reach the location a gorge wants. Sure, a marine is going to cut it along the path somewhere, but the gorge is at the far end, and capable of growing the nearest cyst before it pops, and placing the tunnel down takes a few seconds longer.
Only allowing aliens to evolve to other lifeforms on infestation makes it more difficult to get a gorge behind enemy lines in the first place and if successful it's down to marine failures, rather than a fortunate skulk with their increased movement speed and travel options (relative to the gorge). It also has the advantage of making it a little more difficult for those pesky vent gorges to cause chaos, having to travel to the vent and clog their way in. I wouldn't adjust the ability to select your traits off-infestation (crag/shell/veil upgrades) as it would be an annoyance for all lifeforms to need to go home when they become available.
This doesn't solve the snowballing issues with an RTS style economy, but it makes alien bilebomb rushes require more work than slipping behind enemy lines as a skulk and plopping a tunnel down, reducing the "cheese" factor.
Personally I feel that when it comes to the late-game, where a team is in a dominant position, the match is decided. That's how it goes in RTS games.. Short of a massive change in individual/team skill, that isn't going to change in NS2. I don't want to see mechanics thrown it at this stage that make it easier flip a game on it's head. I would rather see minor changes to bring the game to an end without 10 minutes of marine turtling.
The biggest problem I feel is that we often find ourselves with a team in a dominant position in the mid-game, thanks to the first 1 or 2 engagements. Not only is the match already decided, but the winning team hasn't yet got the tech to bring the match to an end. This is where comeback mechanics are needed, but I don't think buffing the flamethrower is the solution:
At this stage you're not dealing with a ton of PvE. The aliens are busy getting lifeform upgrades, they may have a couple of structures up in key rooms but it's not a serious problem, and if they are going overboard on them at the expense of upgrades, you've got grenades available to help clear them out, but they don't get used enough in pubs. I think allowing marines to pick up remaining grenades from fallen teammates could make them a little more appealing, but much like welders, there's no guarantee they'll make use of them no matter how useful they are... This isn't the aliens fault. it's a failure on the marine teams part.
Giving the flamethrower the ability to stop hive eggs spawning and making them available earlier would make an early-mid game marine rush devastating for aliens if they've not got a second hive location. Sure it would be a good comeback mechanic for a marine team in a really bad position mid game but in a match where the marines are ahead it'd be far too easy to egg-lock the aliens. It already provides a huge benefit by stopping the hive healing nearby aliens. I don't think anyone can argue it isn't already effective at PvE, that isn't why they don't get much use. Even with the buff I certainly wouldn't pick it up over a shotgun because a shotgun gives me survivability. I'd like a teammate to have one in a hive push, outside of that room, i'd rather they were packing a gun, PvE just isn't much of a problem till the late game, and there's already solutions available (Arcs, Grenades, GL's, Flamethrowers).
There's arguments that the snowballing largely boils down to skill differences between the indvidual players or teams, and I've got to agree with them, but it occurs so frequently that solutions should be looked at to keep matches interesting. however, you shouldn't implement a bad idea just because no one comes up with a good one.
TL:DR
Reduce "cheesy" bilebomb rush by making evolving to lifeforms only possible on infestation (not affecting shell/spur/veil upgrades) If you want a tunnel behind the marine lines, you must travel there as a gorge, not a skulk. Still makes a good comeback, but means marines must have had bigger failures to allow it to occur.
Making flamethrower stop eggs spawning and/or being available to early only plays into the hands of marine favoured matches, allowing egg-locking early game when aliens are still on 1 hive. Outside of the hive pushes I don't see any minor buffs making a difference as nobody will use it anyway. PvE in the mid-game is a non issue and solutions exist for both the mid and late game already.
I've not gone through every post but a couple i've seen are:
1. Remove the ability to place tunnels off infestation
2. Only allow evolving when on infestation
Personally I think off-cyst tunnels are a key tool in giving aliens a way out of a bad situation, such as cyst chain harassment at chokepoints,increasing the directions you can attack from or getting a foothold in a room before infestation spreads. Removing this ability would be too damaging to aliens in the early-mid game. In addition, during the late game, aliens can afford the 7-10 cysts needed to reach the location a gorge wants. Sure, a marine is going to cut it along the path somewhere, but the gorge is at the far end, and capable of growing the nearest cyst before it pops, and placing the tunnel down takes a few seconds longer.
Limiting tunnels to infestation is what I've been promoting, but it goes hand-in-hand with removing the requirement for cysting to build structures. Cysting would build automatically still (among other things) but gorges would be required to build off infestation.
But there's nothing to stop a cyst chain being made to the gorge. If it gets cut somewhere along the way it doesn't matter. the gorge just grows the end cyst and drops his tunnel down anyway. If I understand correctly, it'd also require the comm to drop a structure? such as a shade perhaps?
Edit: at least in regards to late game. it'd have a big impact on early-mid game though and if you're playing with Wooza's player counts I'd agree with you... but I don't see a problem with 1-2 gorges getting a foothold in rooms ahead of team res being invested there. that's part of the game. there's trade-off's made for those tunnels.
FrozenNew York, NYJoin Date: 2010-07-02Member: 72228Members, Constellation
@Chizzler hey yea, you're absolutely right. I haven't thought of everything haha. But bringing that up I would say that infestation should just not be able to exist in random places like that, so even if the cyst grows, infestation can't without being chained to the hive. Or gorges can't build cysts, either way. Either way I just think tunnels need to be limited to the parts of the map actually controlled and actually infested.
It leaves a nice dichotomy between tunnels and phase gates.
but to improve the way a bile rush can take place so it's not as easy to pull off.
Waaaaat are you even talking about. No one is bothered about how strong a bile rush is. We were disputing the fact that it's an awful example of a comeback mechanic and that you shouldn't be looking to implement more mechanics on such a terrible example.
Giving the flamethrower the ability to stop hive eggs spawning and making them available earlier would make an early-mid game marine rush devastating for aliens if they've not got a second hive location. Sure it would be a good comeback mechanic for a marine team in a really bad position mid game but in a match where the marines are ahead it'd be far too easy to egg-lock the aliens. It already provides a huge benefit by stopping the hive healing nearby aliens. I don't think anyone can argue it isn't already effective at PvE, that isn't why they don't get much use. Even with the buff I certainly wouldn't pick it up over a shotgun because a shotgun gives me survivability. I'd like a teammate to have one in a hive push, outside of that room, i'd rather they were packing a gun, PvE just isn't much of a problem till the late game, and there's already solutions available (Arcs, Grenades, GL's, Flamethrowers).
There's arguments that the snowballing largely boils down to skill differences between the indvidual players or teams, and I've got to agree with them, but it occurs so frequently that solutions should be looked at to keep matches interesting. however, you shouldn't implement a bad idea just because no one comes up with a good one.
@Chizzler hey yea, you're absolutely right. I haven't thought of everything haha. But bringing that up I would say that infestation should just not be able to exist in random places like that, so even if the cyst grows, infestation can't without being chained to the hive. Or gorges can't build cysts, either way. Either way I just think tunnels need to be limited to the parts of the map actually controlled and actually infested.
It leaves a nice dichotomy between tunnels and phase gates.
Where can you place structures? where can you place tunnels? and why is it suddenly complex to figure out where Is allowed? does the comm has to sporadically place structures around in the hope it creates infestation? if it needs to grow the chain all the way, one at at time, its very vulnerable to being taken out. cyst harassment at chokepoints is already a thing. tunnels allow you to escape it. you're looking to flip that.. but then you cant get tunnels out to defend those locations you've taken behind the chokepoints (assuming you don't need infestation to keep structures alive. purely for tunnels)
Not to mention it'd require a complete rework of the alien economy to accommodate such a change and severely cripple the ability for aliens to gain map control early game. making a bad start all the more difficult to recover from.
It's just not something i'm going to agree with you. I don't think we need to change the way aliens work so drastically. I don't think it would provide any ability to make a come back from a bad position, but make life more difficult for aliens.
Where can you place structures? where can you place tunnels? and why is it suddenly complex to figure out where Is allowed? does the comm has to sporadically place structures around in the hope it creates infestation? if it needs to grow the chain all the way, one at at time, its very vulnerable to being taken out. cyst harassment at chokepoints is already a thing. tunnels allow you to escape it. you're looking to flip that.. but then you cant get tunnels out to defend those locations you've taken behind the chokepoints (assuming you don't need infestation to keep structures alive. purely for tunnels)
Not to mention it'd require a complete rework of the alien economy to accommodate such a change and severely cripple the ability for aliens to gain map control early game. making a bad start all the more difficult to recover from.
It'd radically affect the entire match (in the marine teams favour) in order to solve a problem largely seen during the late game.
I don't want to remove the cysting and power requires FOR this tunnel thing. I just think it's ONE of the things it solves. You can place lame and crags etc to defend a point until cysting gets there, but the fight to get a tunnel up anywhere should be a fight. You should also have to travel the actual linear distance between tunnels in my opinion, but that I don't expect at all
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
What?
How does removing a mechanic that leads to more varied rounds remedy the symptoms laid out in this thread?
I wish people participating in this thread stopped thinking of this thread as a place to insert unrelated things they'd like to see, and instead attempt to come up with an alternative solution (to the symptoms described on page 1) to the one proposed if you dislike it.
Take you, @mattji104 as an example. You keep inserting this idea of removing cysts and powernodes but don't mention specifically, in detail, how that will address the symptoms exactly?
If anything you talk about how it will worsen things through improved defense.
adding additional factors/randomness that makes the lower skilled player win without deserving so is one of the worst things you can add to a game. Especially a competitive one...
I want to create less need to comeback. More fun times gathering advantage instead
I'd say that idea belongs in it's own thread once it's been fleshed out a bit. It's not small tweaks you're looking at, but a massive change in the way the game plays. You've not really explained the new roles of infestation and power, how the alien economy changes to deal with the way cyst chains work or how it leads to more interesting gameplay, only that aliens have more difficulty gaining a foothold in locations and restrictions to movement but the freedom to place structures anywhere (Except tunnels) and marines don't need power (but it provides unknown benefits) and have arc's which are far more powerful (Map makers have a hard enough time getting things set up for arcs as it is, their usefulness is limited for a reason.)
There's just not enough detail there to convince me it's a good idea, or worth the effort involved for the CDT to pursue it at this time. Equally i can't outright dismiss it because I don't know enough about it... but it doesn't really go into detail into how it relates to the issues presented in this thread, only that they wouldn't exist.
What?
How does removing a mechanic that leads to more varied rounds remedy the symptoms laid out in this thread?
I wish people participating in this thread stopped thinking of this thread as a place to insert unrelated things they'd like to see, and instead attempt to come up with an alternative solution (to the symptoms described on page 1) to the one proposed if you dislike it.
Take you, @mattji104 as an example. You keep inserting this idea of removing cysts and powernodes but don't mention specifically, in detail, how that will address the symptoms exactly?
If anything you talk about how it will worsen things through improved defense.
A. I'm not saying remove them, at all
B. You still haven't answered my questions.
C. I keep saying that it will allow the game to require less comeback mechanics. There's more that needs to be done than JUST allowing building to function without them
There's arguments that the snowballing largely boils down to skill differences between the indvidual players or teams, and I've got to agree with them, but it occurs so frequently that solutions should be looked at to keep matches interesting. however, you shouldn't implement a bad idea just because no one comes up with a good one.
If all I have posted did not say it well enough, "There's arguments that the snowballing largely boils down to skill differences between the indvidual players or teams, and I've got to agree with them, but it occurs so frequently that solutions should be looked at to keep matches interesting" is exactly what I have been trying to say. I just don't think anything will be done in ns2, so I have tried to put it in an ns3 design perspective.
I believe "solutions should be looked at to keep matches interesting" is one of @Ironhorse's main points too.
To me it sounds like certain people here think nothing should be done because no one has put forth a good idea. I don't know what it is yet, but something should be done. That is what I was hoping this discussion would turn into. A thread of people trying to figure out a good idea.
I want to create less need to comeback. More fun times gathering advantage instead
I'd say that idea belongs in it's own thread once it's been fleshed out a bit. It's not small tweaks you're looking at, but a massive change in the way the game plays. You've not really explained the new roles of infestation and power, how the alien economy changes to deal with the way cyst chains work or how it leads to more interesting gameplay, only that aliens have more difficulty gaining a foothold in locations and restrictions to movement but the freedom to place structures anywhere (Except tunnels) and marines don't need power (but it provides unknown benefits) and have arc's which are far more powerful (Map makers have a hard enough time getting things set up for arcs as it is, their usefulness is limited for a reason.)
There's just not enough detail there to convince me it's a good idea, or worth the effort involved for the CDT to pursue it at this time. Equally i can't outright dismiss it because I don't know enough about it... but it doesn't really go into detail into how it relates to the issues presented in this thread, only that they wouldn't exist.
I have been asking him to start a thread for that for awhile now. I think it could be an interesting discussion.
adding additional factors/randomness that makes the lower skilled player win without deserving so is one of the worst things you can add to a game. Especially a competitive one...
I'd challenge that idea. I don't believe that is correct at all. Many highly competitive sports and games have random elements of chance. Poker the perfect example. I'd even say CS successfully add elements of chance, although I'm sure that example is more controversial.
You may or may not be correct in the case of NS2, but I reject the notion that it applies across all games, competitive or not.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
There are better ways to frame this than skill vs randomness.
Stability vs instability: Stable games don't change that much from moment to moment. Each team makes small decisions and advantage slowly accumulates. Unstable games have wild swings of advantage and moment to moment decisions bring each side close to the brink.
I personally think unstable games are more exciting, and that the game should be more unstable when aliens are winning.
There are better ways to frame this than skill vs randomness.
Stability vs instability: Stable games don't change that much from moment to moment. Each team makes small decisions and advantage slowly accumulates. Unstable games have wild swings of advantage and moment to moment decisions bring each side close to the brink.
I personally think unstable games are more exciting, and that the game should be more unstable when aliens are winning.
I do agree with your direction, but I worry more about dynamic vs static. If you look at the visual someone posted about how the game changes with tech increases you can consider primarily dynamic. I'm looking to introduce changes that would stress static sections within the game (2nd hive growing, mildly static tech zone) where the teams clash more than they fight for advantages around the map.
I personally think unstable games are more exciting, and that the game should be more unstable when aliens are winning.
The aliens win when it's done. A statement. The rest of the game is actually getting back in the game.
Would you mind posting in your first language in a spoiler, and then posting the google translate? If you do have anything to say I'll never really know otherwise
There are better ways to frame this than skill vs randomness.
Stability vs instability: Stable games don't change that much from moment to moment. Each team makes small decisions and advantage slowly accumulates. Unstable games have wild swings of advantage and moment to moment decisions bring each side close to the brink.
I personally think unstable games are more exciting, and that the game should be more unstable when aliens are winning.
On the other hand, early game could be more stable. Perhaps through higher minimum income (eg 2 or 3 Tres per tick instead of 1 with the initial RT) and tougher spawners (IPs and eggs).
Ideally, I believe each game should start simple and stable, and gradually grow in difficulty (for both teams) as higher tech are unlocked. Late game upgrades and "weapons" should not simply give players more power without drawbacks, instead, they should require more skill to fully utilize, and have unique weaknesses that can be exploited. (Onos' weakness to JP, and lone GL's vulnerability to Lerk are good example). That would introduce more volatility and excitement to late game.
I feel that Fade and Medpack spam are two of the negative elements in the game, because they are currently too too difficult to counter, add too much volatility to the game, thus require rebalancing.
Back on the topic of giving Marine more opportunities for comebacks, perhaps hand grenades and Mines are worth rebalancing (buffing) to make them more relevant and worth their cost for mid-late game.
On hand grenades: making them more like ns1 could be helpful. Let marines spawn with a (one) standard frag grenade, then buy upgraded and specialized versions for specific situations (1 at a time).
Phasing through a gate with the pin pulled has saved many a phase gate (saved gate = map control = winning)
On hand grenades: making them more like ns1 could be helpful. Let marines spawn with a (one) standard frag grenade, then buy upgraded and specialized versions for specific situations (1 at a time).
Phasing through a gate with the pin pulled has saved many a phase gate (saved gate = map control = winning)
Would you mind posting in your first language in a spoiler, and then posting the google translate? If you do have anything to say I'll never really know otherwise
Would you mind stop trying to make fun of people while your suggestions (about cyst and such) are no way near to be considered serious.
On the other hand, early game could be more stable. Perhaps through higher minimum income (eg 2 or 3 Tres per tick instead of 1 with the initial RT) and tougher spawners (IPs and eggs).
(A) Ideally, I believe each game should start simple and stable, and gradually grow in difficulty (for both teams) as higher tech are unlocked. Late game upgrades and "weapons" should not simply give players more power without drawbacks, instead, they should require more skill to fully utilize, and have unique weaknesses that can be exploited. (Onos' weakness to JP, and lone GL's vulnerability to Lerk are good example). That would introduce more volatility and excitement to late game.
I feel that Fade and Medpack spam are two of the negative elements in the game, because (B) they are currently too too difficult to counter, add too much volatility to the game, thus require rebalancing.
Back on the topic of giving Marine more opportunities for comebacks, perhaps hand (C) grenades and Mines are worth rebalancing (buffing) to make them more relevant and worth their cost for mid-late game.
(A) Not only to give something that will ensure PRES to go up, it's also motivating for rookie to see things lasting a little bit. Where i play, if the aliens have the 2 natural RTs up and never destroyed during the early/mid game, it's Christmas. And BTW humiliating for the marines that won't be able to have the proper equipment when Lerk/fades are out.
(B) Yup, Killing a fade is actually a "medpack rain" when i command even when we have the proper upgrade and equipment. And a dead fade is unforgiving for the aliens. As suggested before, lowering life points or speed and re-buy for a cheaper price would probably give some results (same system for shotguns etc) without harming other things. Plus; rookies would not be so frustrated about that 'unforgiving' thing.
Most people want the big gun/fade especially rookies. Right now the game isn't providing such access to rookies unless the team they're in, is dominating the entire map. It's the only moment they can train and get better at it. In other situations they just get "flashed". It's usually hard to re-buy something and train in this situation.
Of course recycling weapons would have to go away. It was hilarious (and awkward) when a marine was trying keep alive 2 shotguns while his 2 (previously dead) teammates run to get there (See NSL videos on Mineral).
(C) I feel the same with this. It's like the grenade (and other things) are like toys.
Comments
It wouldn't do it, unfortunately.
- The Cyst is one of the many (Many, Many, Many, Many, Many...) ways NS2 has to slow down the Alien economy.
- Power node are the only thing that make the marine look back.
It would tremendously make things dumbs.It depends with who is playing with you. Trust me, 4 competent marines that can keep it in the pants (no touching any alien structure or cyst) until the signal is given; are just equal to a dead hive in less than 1.30 minutes (less with shotguns). I'm afraid you got the wrong guys with you...
Usually on :
And shotguns are a lot more deadly in the right hands... The price is delaying it enough to give some space for the Lerks.
It merely implies additional avenues for winning - in particular exploiting the mistakes of a team that is in the lead - capitalizing on their inability to remain infallible.
Which, by all accounts you would assume would be a legitimate tactic in any strategy game...?
Oh come on, even you don't believe that : Do you truly believe that your average pub doesn't suffer from those symptoms listed? Predictable outcomes, Rarely seeing all tiers of tech, Long frustrating ends, Anti climactic conceding
Even the example you just provided of a losing alien team 15 minutes in that pulled out a win only because marines screwed up sounds like a legitimate tactic that ended the round in an unpredictable way. Sounds fun, not damaging?
So tossing that hyperbole of a label aside, what I see you saying essentially is that a round only has "purpose" to you when you win or lose based exclusively on a narrow set of skills that you consider to be the important ones. That when you lose because you or your team made mistakes, or because a team won utilizing skills that you don't consider to be as important, it is suddenly a "meaningless" round.
Is that an accurate assessment of that quote and your stance?
If so... I think what I've said already in this thread multiple times, covers my response to that.
Essentially, there are many worthy factors in assessing the more skilled team, (to include capitalizing on mistakes of your enemy) that not only allow for a more accurate assessment of team skill, but also create more varied rounds. It's hard to win even when playing properly with lane blocking, RT control, and coordination - but it's also easy to lose to not being situationally aware or responding to your enemy's telegraphed plans. Without this design, the winner would be even more apparent earlier on and not worth contending, due to less available options to win.
It's odd to me anyone would be against this design, because I know so many of you would immediately capitalize on your enemy's mistakes in the field without a moment's thought - yet when the obviously losing team does it and you lose to it, that's when it's unfair or when suddenly the discussion of who "deserved to win" comes up..
@xDragon Do you have any proposed solutions for the limited income sources that aren't RFK? I would love to hear em, and this is definitely the time / place to discuss them if you do.
1) Any adjustment at this point is a band aid because redesigning and re balancing the whole game from the ground up is not a reality, not by a long shot.
2) I have yet to hear a single alternative proposed solution that would remedy the symptoms laid out on page 1.
1/ Still, let it like that will just 'end' it the same way.
2/ There are some. Instead of trying to cure symptoms maybe find the root cause would be better. A FT buff isn't close to do it.
To win a team must kill all the CCs or all the Hives. There are plenty of methods to do this. There are also plenty of opportunities to put yourself in a position to be able to accomplish this.
A good marine example is not a ninja PG, but a ninja upgrade killer. 15 or 20 tres for a 1/3 of your carapace or celerity is quite a lot.
These statements don't match up. I don't know what you're trying to say. Players are getting better and the winning team will more often than not go on to win can both be true at the same time.
I do actually frequently play in and against comebacks, see onos stomp umbra vs jetpacks (albeit rarely exos), long equal endings until one big play gives the successful team a window of opportunity to lock down some game ending map control, and occasionally a quick and early concede.
Tram, veil, and jambi often lend themselves to create a lot of those scenarios.
Last night even, I played a game on tram and the aliens were left on one RT but then came back to beat us in a 25 minute game.
I'm almost not surprised though because the NA pub scene has a severe skill disparity problem (as well as other problems).
Back on page 1 it's talking about how BB is a great comeback tool... but I dont think it was supposed to be used as a hail mary tactic , it's just been exploited so frequently it's become normal practise to bile rush in dire situations. It's effectiveness is attributed to tunnels and the ability to go gorge anywhere.
The solution isn't to give marines a similar ability to cheese a round, but to improve the way a bile rush can take place so it's not as easy to pull off. Solutions for this have been offered. I've not gone through every post but a couple i've seen are:
1. Remove the ability to place tunnels off infestation
2. Only allow evolving when on infestation
Personally I think off-cyst tunnels are a key tool in giving aliens a way out of a bad situation, such as cyst chain harassment at chokepoints,increasing the directions you can attack from or getting a foothold in a room before infestation spreads. Removing this ability would be too damaging to aliens in the early-mid game. In addition, during the late game, aliens can afford the 7-10 cysts needed to reach the location a gorge wants. Sure, a marine is going to cut it along the path somewhere, but the gorge is at the far end, and capable of growing the nearest cyst before it pops, and placing the tunnel down takes a few seconds longer.
Only allowing aliens to evolve to other lifeforms on infestation makes it more difficult to get a gorge behind enemy lines in the first place and if successful it's down to marine failures, rather than a fortunate skulk with their increased movement speed and travel options (relative to the gorge). It also has the advantage of making it a little more difficult for those pesky vent gorges to cause chaos, having to travel to the vent and clog their way in. I wouldn't adjust the ability to select your traits off-infestation (crag/shell/veil upgrades) as it would be an annoyance for all lifeforms to need to go home when they become available.
This doesn't solve the snowballing issues with an RTS style economy, but it makes alien bilebomb rushes require more work than slipping behind enemy lines as a skulk and plopping a tunnel down, reducing the "cheese" factor.
Personally I feel that when it comes to the late-game, where a team is in a dominant position, the match is decided. That's how it goes in RTS games.. Short of a massive change in individual/team skill, that isn't going to change in NS2. I don't want to see mechanics thrown it at this stage that make it easier flip a game on it's head. I would rather see minor changes to bring the game to an end without 10 minutes of marine turtling.
The biggest problem I feel is that we often find ourselves with a team in a dominant position in the mid-game, thanks to the first 1 or 2 engagements. Not only is the match already decided, but the winning team hasn't yet got the tech to bring the match to an end. This is where comeback mechanics are needed, but I don't think buffing the flamethrower is the solution:
At this stage you're not dealing with a ton of PvE. The aliens are busy getting lifeform upgrades, they may have a couple of structures up in key rooms but it's not a serious problem, and if they are going overboard on them at the expense of upgrades, you've got grenades available to help clear them out, but they don't get used enough in pubs. I think allowing marines to pick up remaining grenades from fallen teammates could make them a little more appealing, but much like welders, there's no guarantee they'll make use of them no matter how useful they are... This isn't the aliens fault. it's a failure on the marine teams part.
Giving the flamethrower the ability to stop hive eggs spawning and making them available earlier would make an early-mid game marine rush devastating for aliens if they've not got a second hive location. Sure it would be a good comeback mechanic for a marine team in a really bad position mid game but in a match where the marines are ahead it'd be far too easy to egg-lock the aliens. It already provides a huge benefit by stopping the hive healing nearby aliens. I don't think anyone can argue it isn't already effective at PvE, that isn't why they don't get much use. Even with the buff I certainly wouldn't pick it up over a shotgun because a shotgun gives me survivability. I'd like a teammate to have one in a hive push, outside of that room, i'd rather they were packing a gun, PvE just isn't much of a problem till the late game, and there's already solutions available (Arcs, Grenades, GL's, Flamethrowers).
There's arguments that the snowballing largely boils down to skill differences between the indvidual players or teams, and I've got to agree with them, but it occurs so frequently that solutions should be looked at to keep matches interesting. however, you shouldn't implement a bad idea just because no one comes up with a good one.
TL:DR
Reduce "cheesy" bilebomb rush by making evolving to lifeforms only possible on infestation (not affecting shell/spur/veil upgrades) If you want a tunnel behind the marine lines, you must travel there as a gorge, not a skulk. Still makes a good comeback, but means marines must have had bigger failures to allow it to occur.
Making flamethrower stop eggs spawning and/or being available to early only plays into the hands of marine favoured matches, allowing egg-locking early game when aliens are still on 1 hive. Outside of the hive pushes I don't see any minor buffs making a difference as nobody will use it anyway. PvE in the mid-game is a non issue and solutions exist for both the mid and late game already.
Limiting tunnels to infestation is what I've been promoting, but it goes hand-in-hand with removing the requirement for cysting to build structures. Cysting would build automatically still (among other things) but gorges would be required to build off infestation.
Edit: at least in regards to late game. it'd have a big impact on early-mid game though and if you're playing with Wooza's player counts I'd agree with you... but I don't see a problem with 1-2 gorges getting a foothold in rooms ahead of team res being invested there. that's part of the game. there's trade-off's made for those tunnels.
It leaves a nice dichotomy between tunnels and phase gates.
Agreed
Waaaaat are you even talking about. No one is bothered about how strong a bile rush is. We were disputing the fact that it's an awful example of a comeback mechanic and that you shouldn't be looking to implement more mechanics on such a terrible example.
+++ points particularly the last sentence
Not to mention it'd require a complete rework of the alien economy to accommodate such a change and severely cripple the ability for aliens to gain map control early game. making a bad start all the more difficult to recover from.
It's just not something i'm going to agree with you. I don't think we need to change the way aliens work so drastically. I don't think it would provide any ability to make a come back from a bad position, but make life more difficult for aliens.
I don't want to remove the cysting and power requires FOR this tunnel thing. I just think it's ONE of the things it solves. You can place lame and crags etc to defend a point until cysting gets there, but the fight to get a tunnel up anywhere should be a fight. You should also have to travel the actual linear distance between tunnels in my opinion, but that I don't expect at all
http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/comment/2238685/#Comment_2238685
I want to create less need to comeback. More fun times gathering advantage instead
How does removing a mechanic that leads to more varied rounds remedy the symptoms laid out in this thread?
I wish people participating in this thread stopped thinking of this thread as a place to insert unrelated things they'd like to see, and instead attempt to come up with an alternative solution (to the symptoms described on page 1) to the one proposed if you dislike it.
Take you, @mattji104 as an example. You keep inserting this idea of removing cysts and powernodes but don't mention specifically, in detail, how that will address the symptoms exactly?
If anything you talk about how it will worsen things through improved defense.
I'd say that idea belongs in it's own thread once it's been fleshed out a bit. It's not small tweaks you're looking at, but a massive change in the way the game plays. You've not really explained the new roles of infestation and power, how the alien economy changes to deal with the way cyst chains work or how it leads to more interesting gameplay, only that aliens have more difficulty gaining a foothold in locations and restrictions to movement but the freedom to place structures anywhere (Except tunnels) and marines don't need power (but it provides unknown benefits) and have arc's which are far more powerful (Map makers have a hard enough time getting things set up for arcs as it is, their usefulness is limited for a reason.)
There's just not enough detail there to convince me it's a good idea, or worth the effort involved for the CDT to pursue it at this time. Equally i can't outright dismiss it because I don't know enough about it... but it doesn't really go into detail into how it relates to the issues presented in this thread, only that they wouldn't exist.
A. I'm not saying remove them, at all
B. You still haven't answered my questions.
C. I keep saying that it will allow the game to require less comeback mechanics. There's more that needs to be done than JUST allowing building to function without them
If all I have posted did not say it well enough, "There's arguments that the snowballing largely boils down to skill differences between the indvidual players or teams, and I've got to agree with them, but it occurs so frequently that solutions should be looked at to keep matches interesting" is exactly what I have been trying to say. I just don't think anything will be done in ns2, so I have tried to put it in an ns3 design perspective.
I believe "solutions should be looked at to keep matches interesting" is one of @Ironhorse's main points too.
To me it sounds like certain people here think nothing should be done because no one has put forth a good idea. I don't know what it is yet, but something should be done. That is what I was hoping this discussion would turn into. A thread of people trying to figure out a good idea.
I have been asking him to start a thread for that for awhile now. I think it could be an interesting discussion.
You may or may not be correct in the case of NS2, but I reject the notion that it applies across all games, competitive or not.
Stability vs instability: Stable games don't change that much from moment to moment. Each team makes small decisions and advantage slowly accumulates. Unstable games have wild swings of advantage and moment to moment decisions bring each side close to the brink.
I personally think unstable games are more exciting, and that the game should be more unstable when aliens are winning.
I do agree with your direction, but I worry more about dynamic vs static. If you look at the visual someone posted about how the game changes with tech increases you can consider primarily dynamic. I'm looking to introduce changes that would stress static sections within the game (2nd hive growing, mildly static tech zone) where the teams clash more than they fight for advantages around the map.
The aliens win when it's done. A statement. The rest of the game is actually getting back in the game.
Would you mind posting in your first language in a spoiler, and then posting the google translate? If you do have anything to say I'll never really know otherwise
On the other hand, early game could be more stable. Perhaps through higher minimum income (eg 2 or 3 Tres per tick instead of 1 with the initial RT) and tougher spawners (IPs and eggs).
Ideally, I believe each game should start simple and stable, and gradually grow in difficulty (for both teams) as higher tech are unlocked. Late game upgrades and "weapons" should not simply give players more power without drawbacks, instead, they should require more skill to fully utilize, and have unique weaknesses that can be exploited. (Onos' weakness to JP, and lone GL's vulnerability to Lerk are good example). That would introduce more volatility and excitement to late game.
I feel that Fade and Medpack spam are two of the negative elements in the game, because they are currently too too difficult to counter, add too much volatility to the game, thus require rebalancing.
Back on the topic of giving Marine more opportunities for comebacks, perhaps hand grenades and Mines are worth rebalancing (buffing) to make them more relevant and worth their cost for mid-late game.
Phasing through a gate with the pin pulled has saved many a phase gate (saved gate = map control = winning)
Don't be telling our secrets cuzn @Benson
(A) Not only to give something that will ensure PRES to go up, it's also motivating for rookie to see things lasting a little bit. Where i play, if the aliens have the 2 natural RTs up and never destroyed during the early/mid game, it's Christmas. And BTW humiliating for the marines that won't be able to have the proper equipment when Lerk/fades are out.
(B) Yup, Killing a fade is actually a "medpack rain" when i command even when we have the proper upgrade and equipment. And a dead fade is unforgiving for the aliens. As suggested before, lowering life points or speed and re-buy for a cheaper price would probably give some results (same system for shotguns etc) without harming other things. Plus; rookies would not be so frustrated about that 'unforgiving' thing.
Most people want the big gun/fade especially rookies. Right now the game isn't providing such access to rookies unless the team they're in, is dominating the entire map. It's the only moment they can train and get better at it. In other situations they just get "flashed". It's usually hard to re-buy something and train in this situation.
Of course recycling weapons would have to go away. It was hilarious (and awkward) when a marine was trying keep alive 2 shotguns while his 2 (previously dead) teammates run to get there (See NSL videos on Mineral).
(C) I feel the same with this. It's like the grenade (and other things) are like toys.