The solution to smurf accounts is easy: Just make voice chat a requirement on the server. If someone doesn't want to talk, give them the boot.
When I first started playing NS2, I didn't have a mic. I got a mic not because it was a requirement, but because it looked like it would enhance the game experience quite a bit (it does). I wouldn't have stuck around so long if I had been treated like you're proposing.
I will concede that I have been tempted a few times to smurf to practice gorging (it's just so damn fun!!!), but I haven't done that yet. It'd be nice if there was a way to handicap your score before a balance if you plan on doing something like this (commanding, gorging, etc...), though keeping people honest would be the tricky part there.
There are a lot of nefarious reasons as to why someone chooses to smurf, but I don't think that people who do otherwise should be tarred with the same brush.
I just want to repeat this. I don't know anyone here, so I take them at their word, but your derision on this thread is honestly quite disgusting.
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 July 2015
@Aeglos I don't know how you you read both of those quotes and don't see them essentially saying the same thing??
There's no "derison" that I've made - there has been zero mockery from me. I have only highlighted the shortsightedness that has been spoken - something you clearly agree with based on your own quote there..?
The only difference being you are highlighting a case where some are unfairly victimized (that I obviously agree with) whereas I am highlighting that those same users do not speak for the nefarious ones - therefore you cannot claim it is a non issue.
It's akin to saying because you had lunch today that world hunger is solved; your own anecdotal evidence or intentions do not represent the entirety of the issue or what others experience... and that should be equally accounted for.
One of the downfalls of the hive ranking thing is that wins/losses due to early base rushes are inordinately rewarded (particularly if teams are stacked).
Care to elaborate? Base rushes are just another way to win, and easy to counter to boot.
You lose too many points for getting baserushed (especially early game) IMO. And, it's not particularly rare for a game to start as 8v9, so marines only have 1 IP. Then they get baserushed and lose their only IP and it's gg.
Also, hive skill should be calculated off of your stats, not just win-loss. That is to say, you shouldn't always gain points in a win (since you might be getting carried), and you shouldn't always lose points in a loss. The current formula rewards quitting too early if you're on the losing side.
It sounds like you want a qualitative metric for skill, which is nearly impossible. Qualitative data, while useful in specific areas, is not useful in a skill system.
I have always dislike that it is called hive skill, since it really is just a calculation of how probable it is that you win. So to determine a players probability of winning, you use quantitative win loss data.
It is probability, not you are X skill. It may correlated to an extent, that a 3000 player is more often than not truly more skilled than a 2000 player.
Both teams have over time have equal chance to base rush, therefor in the long run base rushes do not effect skill. If you drop 40 points from a base rush, you will probably gain it back. But then again, it does not matter if you have a 1500 or 1600 points. The number should be hidden. It is not your bank account number, so it does not matter what it is.
@Aeglos I don't know how you you read both of those quotes and don't see them essentially saying the same thing??
There's no "derison" that I've made - there has been zero mockery from me. I have only highlighted the shortsightedness that has been spoken - something you clearly agree with based on your own quote there..?
The only difference being you are highlighting a case where some are unfairly victimized (that I obviously agree with) whereas I am highlighting that those same users do not speak for the nefarious ones - therefore you cannot claim it is a non issue.
It's akin to saying because you had lunch today that world hunger is solved; your own anecdotal evidence or intentions do not represent the entirety of the issue or what others experience... and that should be equally accounted for.
Then I would always have to carry my team in order of having a chance of winning the round. So with my smurf account my intention was not to stack.
These sound like contradicting statements to me.... ?
You are clearly mocking their claims that they are trying to have more balanced games and indirectly calling them stackers. They clearly say "I", so I don't get where anyone is claiming it as a non issue, rather, your reaction to their claims clearly shows that you are grouping them together. The worst part of it is that you don't say it directly but express doubt.
To use your analogy, it is as if I told you I missed lunch because I was busy and you implied that I was actually anorexic.
What is it with everyone nowdays with a hidden underlying context in their sayings, words without meaning is like a flapping tongue. Be like a spear, straight and to the point!
What is it with everyone nowdays with a hidden underlying context in their sayings, words without meaning is like a flapping tongue. Be like a spear, straight and to the point!
What is it with everyone nowdays with a hidden underlying context in their sayings, words without meaning is like a flapping tongue. Be like a spear, straight and to the point!
Because people want to try and appear intelligent in arguments, so they try verbose methods to validate their argument by appearing as a more intelligent authority. In fact, most these people fail to articulate their point in a constructive manner by doing so, thus leading to confusion and then the debate descending into semantics as both sides try to dissect what each other meant.
TL;DR Peeps tryna b 2 cleva
That TLDR actually made me realise that a lot of people trying to use fancy language struggle to get their point across just like people who excessively use text speak.
What is it with everyone nowdays with a hidden underlying context in their sayings, words without meaning is like a flapping tongue. Be like a spear, straight and to the point!
Because people want to try and appear intelligent in arguments, so they try verbose methods to validate their argument by appearing as a more intelligent authority. In fact, most these people fail to articulate their point in a constructive manner by doing so, thus leading to confusion and then the debate descending into semantics as both sides try to dissect what each other meant.
TL;DR Peeps tryna b 2 cleva
That TLDR actually made me realise that a lot of people trying to use fancy language struggle to get their point across just like people who excessively use text speak.
I know right, most of the time it just turns out to be a load of waffle, wish people just wrote more plainly instead their original meaning is just lost in a load of nonsense!
Both teams have over time have equal chance to base rush, therefor in the long run base rushes do not effect skill. If you drop 40 points from a base rush, you will probably gain it back.
No, this assumes you play both marines and aliens at an equal distribution, and also that both marines and aliens have an equal chance of success at a base rush (which is not true).
Both teams have over time have equal chance to base rush, therefor in the long run base rushes do not effect skill. If you drop 40 points from a base rush, you will probably gain it back.
No, this assumes you play both marines and aliens at an equal distribution, and also that both marines and aliens have an equal chance of success at a base rush (which is not true).
Some people don't seem to realize that the baserush, or threat of the baserush is to keep the marines honest about their splits, and expansion.
don't want to get base rushed? push evenly and don't overcommit.
Also if your team is crushed, and you lost your base within the first 5 minutes. that's not a base rush, that's just straight up losing.
sorry, just remembered a game where i tried to explain that to some people.
@amoral I missed the part where your comment was relevant to what I said.
It was likely the part that mentioned base rushes, in response to the part of your post that mentioned base rushes.
Hey look my comment is relevant to your's because we're both speaking English!
Do you see how my comment is irrelevant to your quote, like amoral's was to Pelagi's?
He commented about how marines and aliens don't both have an equal chance of "base rushing". The reply was that base rushes tend to happen because marines aren't watching their lanes properly. In effect, base rushes are enabled by what marines do, more-so than what aliens do; they depend on the opportunity being there. I often find myself saying something along the lines of "hey guys, there's 4 of us here in [location very near marine base], let's rush base!", much more often than I'll say from the beginning of the game "let's just base rush guys."
There also seems to be an assumption here that base rushes == instant win. That is just not true at all. I see base rushes fail more times than I see them succeed.
It was relevant, you just have to read into it a little bit more.
Speaking of relevant, your name is nachos. I quite enjoy eating nachos -- good nachos though, not that movie theater, liquid cheese garbage. If you want to enjoy nachos though, I mean REALLY enjoy them, you gotta make them from scratch, and at least have some refried beans and/or some taco meat with them. Plain cheese nachos is just wrong. Jalapenos and salsa go great with them too. YUM! I'd have them every day if I could...
You are clearly mocking their claims that they are trying to have more balanced games and indirectly calling them stackers.
You are reaching. Plain and simple, friend.
I've already mentioned how my only intention was to point out how others are attempting to make broad claims, like anzestral did when he said
"It is not about being not recognized. It is to lower the own skill to be able to intentionally play on a lower level and try new things"
No where in that post there did he say "For me personally it is only to do X, and yes I realize others also do Y"
That's how this argument has been framed by multiple users in this thread already. Heaven forbid I attempt to point out how such blanket statements are inaccurate..
So please, stop reaching or assuming. All I've attempted to do was make the same points I clarified in my last post, but with humor.
Too bad my attempts at humor are met with assumptions of mockery and .. "tryna b 2 cleva" ? I apologize if they seemed derisive, trust me that was not my intention.
But I guess that's how language in text form can fall short, regardless of whether it's truncated or long winded..
@amoral I missed the part where your comment was relevant to what I said.
It was likely the part that mentioned base rushes, in response to the part of your post that mentioned base rushes.
Hey look my comment is relevant to your's because we're both speaking English!
Do you see how my comment is irrelevant to your quote, like amoral's was to Pelagi's?
He commented about how marines and aliens don't both have an equal chance of "base rushing". The reply was that base rushes tend to happen because marines aren't watching their lanes properly. In effect, base rushes are enabled by what marines do, more-so than what aliens do; they depend on the opportunity being there. I often find myself saying something along the lines of "hey guys, there's 4 of us here in [location very near marine base], let's rush base!", much more often than I'll say from the beginning of the game "let's just base rush guys."
There also seems to be an assumption here that base rushes == instant win. That is just not true at all. I see base rushes fail more times than I see them succeed.
It was relevant, you just have to read into it a little bit more.
Speaking of relevant, your name is nachos. I quite enjoy eating nachos -- good nachos though, not that movie theater, liquid cheese garbage. If you want to enjoy nachos though, I mean REALLY enjoy them, you gotta make them from scratch, and at least have some refried beans and/or some taco meat with them. Plain cheese nachos is just wrong. Jalapenos and salsa go great with them too. YUM! I'd have them every day if I could...
I'd read Palagi's comment as base rushing's relevance to hive skill and nothing about effectiveness of base rushing.
In order to clarify that his position was different from 2cough. Which was still about himself.
Whatever, there's not much point arguing over this. Since you have made your meaning clear, I apologise for falsely accusing you, but I can't see how it was humorous, then or now.
@amoral I missed the part where your comment was relevant to what I said.
It was likely the part that mentioned base rushes, in response to the part of your post that mentioned base rushes.
Hey look my comment is relevant to your's because we're both speaking English!
Do you see how my comment is irrelevant to your quote, like amoral's was to Pelagi's?
He commented about how marines and aliens don't both have an equal chance of "base rushing". The reply was that base rushes tend to happen because marines aren't watching their lanes properly. In effect, base rushes are enabled by what marines do, more-so than what aliens do; they depend on the opportunity being there. I often find myself saying something along the lines of "hey guys, there's 4 of us here in [location very near marine base], let's rush base!", much more often than I'll say from the beginning of the game "let's just base rush guys."
There also seems to be an assumption here that base rushes == instant win. That is just not true at all. I see base rushes fail more times than I see them succeed.
It was relevant, you just have to read into it a little bit more.
Speaking of relevant, your name is nachos. I quite enjoy eating nachos -- good nachos though, not that movie theater, liquid cheese garbage. If you want to enjoy nachos though, I mean REALLY enjoy them, you gotta make them from scratch, and at least have some refried beans and/or some taco meat with them. Plain cheese nachos is just wrong. Jalapenos and salsa go great with them too. YUM! I'd have them every day if I could...
more or less, this, marines don't base rush. aliens can baserush, but only because marines aren't doing their jobs. It is inherently unequal between the two sides. base rushing is almost exclusively an alien tactic, to punish marine greed.
except shot gun rushes on hive... which are about as all-in as you can get.
Both teams have over time have equal chance to base rush, therefor in the long run base rushes do not effect skill. If you drop 40 points from a base rush, you will probably gain it back.
No, this assumes you play both marines and aliens at an equal distribution, and also that both marines and aliens have an equal chance of success at a base rush (which is not true).
I play aliens about 2/3 of games. It is true, most people do not play each side 50/50. Spontaneous marine base rushes are harder to accomplish that alien ones. You are right. I did not say my point in a very well at all.
In the long run base rushes do not effect the accuracy of skill value, or probability of winning. If you are rushed and you lose unfairly, your skill value will be less than what it should be. The hive system will balance accordingly to the new, now lower skill value (probability of winning). This should cause you to start winning more because the skill value was just a tiny bit off. Your hive skill value, or probability of winning will go back to where it was.
If instead, it keeps going down do to base rushes you are losing more often. Therefor your probability of winning is in reality less, and your skill value needs to go down. This is where amorals post has relevance. Base rushing is a tactic which aliens can, and do use often. It is often predictable and they fail more often than they succeed. If aliens succeed with a base rush, marines or a marine somewhere did not do something they were supposed to do.
In the long run base rushes do not effect the accuracy of skill value, or probability of winning.
You can argue about base rushes being a valid tactic, and balance wise if they should be a thing. Nachos and others made some very good points about this regarding gorge tunnels. None of this has anything to do with the hive skill system.
I wonder if the people complaining about this play marine most of the time. There is a problem with unequal distribution of playing which team. Aliens have a ~55% global win rate, and marines ~45%. That right there can skew skill value accuracy. A good marine is not always good alien and vice versa. I am a so so marine and a good alien, or at least I like to think. Right now the skill values are some number between your marine probability of winning and your alien probability of winning. There is much room for criticism on this point, but the rebuilt hive skill system will have split marine and alien skill values.
He commented about how marines and aliens don't both have an equal chance of "base rushing".
In such a tangential manner it added nothing to the discussion in quotes, much like my post was to you... The real discussion was not about how not to get base rushed, but the assumption that...
Both teams have over time have equal chance to base rush, therefor in the long run base rushes do not effect skill. If you drop 40 points from a base rush, you will probably gain it back.
No, this assumes you play both marines and aliens at an equal distribution, and also that both marines and aliens have an equal chance of success at a base rush (which is not true).
Sorry @IronHorse, I was not trying to imply your messages are deliberately too complicated, I think you are one of the few people who can articulate themselves well (as I've mentioned in my "dangerous influence" comments before )
I still don't really get why base rush is such an issue for people.
They usually say the hive skill system is ok but they hate to loose a game because of a base rush. Therefore they are loosing skill point in hive system. As pointed out earlier, a base rush is the punishment for being careless or greedy, period. It also require a bit of planning and teamwork.
This suggest on another layer that these players, while supporting the skill system do want other means to measure skill simply because they feel the base rush is cheezy or do not require skill. Dichotomy would probably be a good definition for that.
If I remember correctly short games have less impact on your skill value in hive so early game base rushes won't effect your skill that much anyway.
Of course it can happen fast. I would say it tends to be after 7 minutes with an alien team that is ok. More time is needed in other cases. The observation i can make is this.
For a game with teams we can say are:
Low skill = base rush comes late as it is difficult to organise.
Medium skill = base rush can be at any moment as it is usually an awareness / reaction problem
High skill = late as the players are aware of what is going on and do prevent such outcome by using voice, lane blocking, deployment, etc. So it will be more difficult to achieve that action early.
If the long games can influence more the hive score, the last category of players (high skill) will be more hateful about base rush. Therefore more eager to hate hive skill in such situations. It is an observation from my experiences. It may be different for someone else.
Comments
When I first started playing NS2, I didn't have a mic. I got a mic not because it was a requirement, but because it looked like it would enhance the game experience quite a bit (it does). I wouldn't have stuck around so long if I had been treated like you're proposing.
I will concede that I have been tempted a few times to smurf to practice gorging (it's just so damn fun!!!), but I haven't done that yet. It'd be nice if there was a way to handicap your score before a balance if you plan on doing something like this (commanding, gorging, etc...), though keeping people honest would be the tricky part there.
I just want to repeat this. I don't know anyone here, so I take them at their word, but your derision on this thread is honestly quite disgusting.
There's no "derison" that I've made - there has been zero mockery from me. I have only highlighted the shortsightedness that has been spoken - something you clearly agree with based on your own quote there..?
The only difference being you are highlighting a case where some are unfairly victimized (that I obviously agree with) whereas I am highlighting that those same users do not speak for the nefarious ones - therefore you cannot claim it is a non issue.
It's akin to saying because you had lunch today that world hunger is solved; your own anecdotal evidence or intentions do not represent the entirety of the issue or what others experience... and that should be equally accounted for.
You lose too many points for getting baserushed (especially early game) IMO. And, it's not particularly rare for a game to start as 8v9, so marines only have 1 IP. Then they get baserushed and lose their only IP and it's gg.
Also, hive skill should be calculated off of your stats, not just win-loss. That is to say, you shouldn't always gain points in a win (since you might be getting carried), and you shouldn't always lose points in a loss. The current formula rewards quitting too early if you're on the losing side.
I have always dislike that it is called hive skill, since it really is just a calculation of how probable it is that you win. So to determine a players probability of winning, you use quantitative win loss data.
It is probability, not you are X skill. It may correlated to an extent, that a 3000 player is more often than not truly more skilled than a 2000 player.
Both teams have over time have equal chance to base rush, therefor in the long run base rushes do not effect skill. If you drop 40 points from a base rush, you will probably gain it back. But then again, it does not matter if you have a 1500 or 1600 points. The number should be hidden. It is not your bank account number, so it does not matter what it is.
*between idiots
Let me to quote it for you. Here.
You are clearly mocking their claims that they are trying to have more balanced games and indirectly calling them stackers. They clearly say "I", so I don't get where anyone is claiming it as a non issue, rather, your reaction to their claims clearly shows that you are grouping them together. The worst part of it is that you don't say it directly but express doubt.
To use your analogy, it is as if I told you I missed lunch because I was busy and you implied that I was actually anorexic.
Yojimbo, 2015.
Because people want to try and appear intelligent in arguments, so they try verbose methods to validate their argument by appearing as a more intelligent authority. In fact, most these people fail to articulate their point in a constructive manner by doing so, thus leading to confusion and then the debate descending into semantics as both sides try to dissect what each other meant.
TL;DR Peeps tryna b 2 cleva
That TLDR actually made me realise that a lot of people trying to use fancy language struggle to get their point across just like people who excessively use text speak.
I know right, most of the time it just turns out to be a load of waffle, wish people just wrote more plainly instead their original meaning is just lost in a load of nonsense!
No, this assumes you play both marines and aliens at an equal distribution, and also that both marines and aliens have an equal chance of success at a base rush (which is not true).
Some people don't seem to realize that the baserush, or threat of the baserush is to keep the marines honest about their splits, and expansion.
don't want to get base rushed? push evenly and don't overcommit.
Also if your team is crushed, and you lost your base within the first 5 minutes. that's not a base rush, that's just straight up losing.
sorry, just remembered a game where i tried to explain that to some people.
It was likely the part that mentioned base rushes, in response to the part of your post that mentioned base rushes.
Hey look my comment is relevant to your's because we're both speaking English!
Do you see how my comment is irrelevant to your quote, like amoral's was to Pelagi's?
yours*
Nice englando.
He commented about how marines and aliens don't both have an equal chance of "base rushing". The reply was that base rushes tend to happen because marines aren't watching their lanes properly. In effect, base rushes are enabled by what marines do, more-so than what aliens do; they depend on the opportunity being there. I often find myself saying something along the lines of "hey guys, there's 4 of us here in [location very near marine base], let's rush base!", much more often than I'll say from the beginning of the game "let's just base rush guys."
There also seems to be an assumption here that base rushes == instant win. That is just not true at all. I see base rushes fail more times than I see them succeed.
It was relevant, you just have to read into it a little bit more.
Speaking of relevant, your name is nachos. I quite enjoy eating nachos -- good nachos though, not that movie theater, liquid cheese garbage. If you want to enjoy nachos though, I mean REALLY enjoy them, you gotta make them from scratch, and at least have some refried beans and/or some taco meat with them. Plain cheese nachos is just wrong. Jalapenos and salsa go great with them too. YUM! I'd have them every day if I could...
I've already mentioned how my only intention was to point out how others are attempting to make broad claims, like anzestral did when he said
"It is not about being not recognized. It is to lower the own skill to be able to intentionally play on a lower level and try new things"
No where in that post there did he say "For me personally it is only to do X, and yes I realize others also do Y"
That's how this argument has been framed by multiple users in this thread already. Heaven forbid I attempt to point out how such blanket statements are inaccurate..
So please, stop reaching or assuming. All I've attempted to do was make the same points I clarified in my last post, but with humor.
Too bad my attempts at humor are met with assumptions of mockery and .. "tryna b 2 cleva" ? I apologize if they seemed derisive, trust me that was not my intention.
But I guess that's how language in text form can fall short, regardless of whether it's truncated or long winded..
I'd read Palagi's comment as base rushing's relevance to hive skill and nothing about effectiveness of base rushing.
Edit - Missed @IronHorse 's post.
In order to clarify that his position was different from 2cough. Which was still about himself.
Whatever, there's not much point arguing over this. Since you have made your meaning clear, I apologise for falsely accusing you, but I can't see how it was humorous, then or now.
classy motherfucker.....
more or less, this, marines don't base rush. aliens can baserush, but only because marines aren't doing their jobs. It is inherently unequal between the two sides. base rushing is almost exclusively an alien tactic, to punish marine greed.
except shot gun rushes on hive... which are about as all-in as you can get.
This thread has become pure apple sauce.
I play aliens about 2/3 of games. It is true, most people do not play each side 50/50. Spontaneous marine base rushes are harder to accomplish that alien ones. You are right. I did not say my point in a very well at all.
In the long run base rushes do not effect the accuracy of skill value, or probability of winning. If you are rushed and you lose unfairly, your skill value will be less than what it should be. The hive system will balance accordingly to the new, now lower skill value (probability of winning). This should cause you to start winning more because the skill value was just a tiny bit off. Your hive skill value, or probability of winning will go back to where it was.
If instead, it keeps going down do to base rushes you are losing more often. Therefor your probability of winning is in reality less, and your skill value needs to go down. This is where amorals post has relevance. Base rushing is a tactic which aliens can, and do use often. It is often predictable and they fail more often than they succeed. If aliens succeed with a base rush, marines or a marine somewhere did not do something they were supposed to do.
In the long run base rushes do not effect the accuracy of skill value, or probability of winning.
You can argue about base rushes being a valid tactic, and balance wise if they should be a thing. Nachos and others made some very good points about this regarding gorge tunnels. None of this has anything to do with the hive skill system.
I wonder if the people complaining about this play marine most of the time. There is a problem with unequal distribution of playing which team. Aliens have a ~55% global win rate, and marines ~45%. That right there can skew skill value accuracy. A good marine is not always good alien and vice versa. I am a so so marine and a good alien, or at least I like to think. Right now the skill values are some number between your marine probability of winning and your alien probability of winning. There is much room for criticism on this point, but the rebuilt hive skill system will have split marine and alien skill values.
In such a tangential manner it added nothing to the discussion in quotes, much like my post was to you... The real discussion was not about how not to get base rushed, but the assumption that...
Sorry @IronHorse, I was not trying to imply your messages are deliberately too complicated, I think you are one of the few people who can articulate themselves well (as I've mentioned in my "dangerous influence" comments before
They usually say the hive skill system is ok but they hate to loose a game because of a base rush. Therefore they are loosing skill point in hive system. As pointed out earlier, a base rush is the punishment for being careless or greedy, period. It also require a bit of planning and teamwork.
This suggest on another layer that these players, while supporting the skill system do want other means to measure skill simply because they feel the base rush is cheezy or do not require skill. Dichotomy would probably be a good definition for that.
Of course it can happen fast. I would say it tends to be after 7 minutes with an alien team that is ok. More time is needed in other cases. The observation i can make is this.
For a game with teams we can say are:
Low skill = base rush comes late as it is difficult to organise.
Medium skill = base rush can be at any moment as it is usually an awareness / reaction problem
High skill = late as the players are aware of what is going on and do prevent such outcome by using voice, lane blocking, deployment, etc. So it will be more difficult to achieve that action early.
If the long games can influence more the hive score, the last category of players (high skill) will be more hateful about base rush. Therefore more eager to hate hive skill in such situations. It is an observation from my experiences. It may be different for someone else.