I remember that, in the past, people wanted to make rounds shorter because conceding was somewhat of a problem.
People should only be conceding (and generally only do so) with the idea that the round is already lost, with no point in playing it further. I find this logic to be flawed because making rounds shorter results in them being more predictable and one-sided. I really prefer the old "back-and-forth" style of gameplay that NS2 used to have.
If conceding is an issue, make it so people have a limited number of concedes per week. Then they will only concede if the game is truly lost.
loooooooool. No problem here, I just F4 then.
Agreed, and F4's are a lot more annoying than concedes. With conceding, you decide as a team, whereas if you F4, you may end up ruining it for everybody.
HandschuhJoin Date: 2005-03-08Member: 44338Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Community Developer
edited March 2017
But if ppl dont concede and just rather turtle I press f4 and do something else since I dislike wasting time like that.
It's over anyway and has no difference to pregame mode except you might get slaughtered more
MephillesGermanyJoin Date: 2013-08-07Member: 186634Members, NS2 Map Tester, NS2 Community Developer
Okay random theory incomming:
Actually if I remember back to the last newcomer tournament we had like 80% alien wins. The team that won in the end was the only team who was showing agressive behaviour on marine side and did conscious decisions to cripple the alien res flow. They won marine rounds with that. I wonder if this can be translated to pub games where marines just don't really try to delay alien tech. (can someone confirm how consciousthe decision to fight for the economy is in pub games?)
If that is the case then why is it like that? I can just assume that it still is not communicated clearly enough and people still don't get the importance of RTs. This might be, because RTs are not specified as a goal but only the main way how to achieve your goal (killing the enemy base).
If we just look at the resgame it is about which team has more RTs throughout the game (very basic explanation). It is something similar to the conquest gamemode in battlefield. I think the conquest gamemode in battlefield doesn't suffer with people not taking the flags. Maybe this is due to better communication on how important those flags are.
Let's take a look at how those flags are communicated in the HUD of battlefield
I see 4 ways in this picture that outline the importance of flags:
1. We can see how many points we have, how many the opponent has and how many are neutral right at the minimap
2. We see directly below the progress of the game and which team is in the lead. It is shown by numbers so even people who are not good at the game understand if they are in the lead or not
3. We see each point outlined on the minimap even if they are outside the minimap range
4. We have markers with arrows outlining the nearest flags on screen, even through walls.
Well since restricted access to informations is a thing in ns2 we can't just copy those ideas. But we can try to adapt those means.
Maybe in addition the the number of RTs we have already just give information on how much RTs there are on the map (maybe like "4/10 RTs" if you have 4 RTs capped and the map has a maximum of 10 RTs)
The outline of RTs on minimap and the markers on the screen can be implmented like that if you don't reveal if the RT belongs to the enemy or not.
Well and I can't think of an easy way to visualise if your team is in the lead or not.
Anyway this might enable marines to push more for RTs and therefore force more lifeform play on alien side.
I don't know where you find those game in which people actually care about objectives, but everytime I played conquest game mode (no matter which game) 90% of the people played Team Deatchmatch.
Now that you mention it: Back when I played it did feel like peopel were vaguely aware that resbiting was something they needed to do on the alien side, but you'd only rarely see marines that actively went for Harvesters. (In pub.)
I don't know where you find those game in which people actually care about objectives, but everytime I played conquest game mode (no matter which game) 90% of the people played Team Deatchmatch.
Yeah, it's sad. People just can't be arsed to play objectives. I'm playing a lot of titanfall right now, and the average player's favorite gamemode is just a random clusterfuck without any direction whatsoever.
I don't know where you find those game in which people actually care about objectives, but everytime I played conquest game mode (no matter which game) 90% of the people played Team Deatchmatch.
My impression is that the average players main objective is to hold what his team has got at all cost and turtle untill his team reaches the game ending tech (exo/jp/onos/bio mass 9) to end the game.
The opponents RTs are irrelevant as long as your team has the average amount of rts. Because of this, both teams only fight at the 2/3 map front line.
There is no in between for them, like trading RTs or pushing a hive without late game tech.
A lot of (alien) players perceive dropping down to 1 RT as automatic loss, no matter how many RTs the marines actually have at that moment, which is why they unnecessarily waste their life, because they think that losing RTs means losing the game.
Comparing it to age of empires 2, it is like fast teching to the imperial age, massing elephants and throwing them at the enemy.
Coordination and setting specific goals is the job of the commander. Limiting big picture info to the comm and not having it on ground troops HUD is one the defining characteristics of NS2 and IMO one of the things that make it fun. If players do not know to res bite or break cyst chains or push a hive that is more a failing of the comm than anything.
Why is this? Why is having the comm direct teams and not just build structures such a rare thing, especially on pubs?
Coordination and setting specific goals is the job of the commander. Limiting big picture info to the comm and not having it on ground troops HUD is one the defining characteristics of NS2 and IMO one of the things that make it fun. If players do not know to res bite or break cyst chains or push a hive that is more a failing of the comm than anything.
Why is this? Why is having the comm direct teams and not just build structures such a rare thing, especially on pubs?
One reason is that those who have the experience to direct the team properly generally have high elo, which means that if they were to go commander, the rest of the team will be left outskilled.
However, it isn't necessarily the commanders job to do it. It would be ideal, but a field commander can work just as much.
Also, not biting res towers is not the failing of the comm. It isn't his job to remind people to res bite. Res biting is a fundamental job of the skulk (/lerk) and it is the skulks job to remind the life forms to help him doing so.
Also, not biting res towers is not the failing of the comm. It isn't his job to remind people to res bite. Res biting is a fundamental job of the skulk (/lerk) and it is the skulks job to remind the life forms to help him doing so.
I agree, skulks should know to res bite. I think it would be more accurate to say that the comm should sometimes direct who, when, and where to res bite. Experienced skulks do not need very much direction, but they still don't have the big picture, so it may be beneficial to guide (not direct) even them.
For rookies, it is primarily the job of the comm to direct them, and that includes res biting. It's great to have a field commander guide people, but that is plan B, IMO.
Also, not biting res towers is not the failing of the comm. It isn't his job to remind people to res bite. Res biting is a fundamental job of the skulk (/lerk) and it is the skulks job to remind the life forms to help him doing so.
I agree, skulks should know to res bite. I think it would be more accurate to say that the comm should sometimes direct who, when, and where to res bite. Experienced skulks do not need very much direction, but they still don't have the big picture, so it may be beneficial to guide (not direct) even them.
I think if an experienced skulk doesn't have the big picture, he's probably doing it wrong.
In my experience, having the commander direct everything doesn't work out to well (in pub). It's much more efficiently if everyone organically organizes themselves and communicates what they are doing. More like a swarm than a military unit.
HandschuhJoin Date: 2005-03-08Member: 44338Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Community Developer
A comm is actually not able to see the entire picture since he doesn't have sound and a fieldplayer can actually have a better view of the situation than a comm if he's paying attention
In his mind it would be nice for him to push a location whereas I as a fieldplayer can better estimate our chances of succeeding.. thats why it's important that fieldplayers can deny an order for valid reasons...
OK, yes, a skulk should know to res bite, they do have a different perspective from the comm that in some ways is better, the comm is not a babysitter. But what do you do when you have a newbie skulk who is running around just charging face first into bullets, not coordinating or communicating, while they sit on 30+ res for no good reason? Field commanders are not always there, and even when they are, they can't see the behavior of this newbie skulk the same way the comm can.
My point is that in most games I have played the only meaningful thing the comm does is drop structures. They barely try to guide or direct players. At most comms say "They are in/not in [place] everyone go there now!". They rely on people who already know what to do to use any other tactics and strategy. That's a poor mindset and is not using the tools of the comm to maximum potential.
EDIT: I'm talking about pubbing. Even moderately experienced teams do not need such hand-holding.
Just being communicative helps. Not screaming about where and where needing help but telling people what you are planning to do and being on the same page. Comm and field should work together instead of being reliant on either side.
Pubs are indeed scatterbrained messes. Who on the team can, in general, best increase communication and coordination? The comm. Of course, the degree to which the comm is best is debatable and dependent on the players in any given game.
I'll be back here to say more and read everyone's posts, but my hypothesis about the proto coming before the AA is probably because many marine losses come between the AA's completion and the proto (it's a large 60-65 res gap between the AA and jets or exos). Only when the marines have the res to buy the AA in an earlier stage is the proto viable in the normal match length (20 minutes). This would certainly explain the stats that are being observed and would justify my experience as marine commander
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
@Mephilles You should try it briefly and then provide feedback on the matter.
I think all the tutorials already communicate it clearly, but suggestions to improve this are welcome.
I also believe that once in the command station, you see the cost of various techs and structures and in my humble opinion get a better sense of how valuable res is and what a commander can be expected to have at various stages of the game based on his/her income. That being said, experience with the game (and gentle guidance from experienced players) can quickly teach new players the value of nodes and which structures should be prioritized.
Comments
People should only be conceding (and generally only do so) with the idea that the round is already lost, with no point in playing it further. I find this logic to be flawed because making rounds shorter results in them being more predictable and one-sided. I really prefer the old "back-and-forth" style of gameplay that NS2 used to have.
loooooooool. No problem here, I just F4 then.
Agreed, and F4's are a lot more annoying than concedes. With conceding, you decide as a team, whereas if you F4, you may end up ruining it for everybody.
It's over anyway and has no difference to pregame mode except you might get slaughtered more
Actually if I remember back to the last newcomer tournament we had like 80% alien wins. The team that won in the end was the only team who was showing agressive behaviour on marine side and did conscious decisions to cripple the alien res flow. They won marine rounds with that. I wonder if this can be translated to pub games where marines just don't really try to delay alien tech. (can someone confirm how consciousthe decision to fight for the economy is in pub games?)
If that is the case then why is it like that? I can just assume that it still is not communicated clearly enough and people still don't get the importance of RTs. This might be, because RTs are not specified as a goal but only the main way how to achieve your goal (killing the enemy base).
If we just look at the resgame it is about which team has more RTs throughout the game (very basic explanation). It is something similar to the conquest gamemode in battlefield. I think the conquest gamemode in battlefield doesn't suffer with people not taking the flags. Maybe this is due to better communication on how important those flags are.
Let's take a look at how those flags are communicated in the HUD of battlefield
I see 4 ways in this picture that outline the importance of flags:
1. We can see how many points we have, how many the opponent has and how many are neutral right at the minimap
2. We see directly below the progress of the game and which team is in the lead. It is shown by numbers so even people who are not good at the game understand if they are in the lead or not
3. We see each point outlined on the minimap even if they are outside the minimap range
4. We have markers with arrows outlining the nearest flags on screen, even through walls.
Well since restricted access to informations is a thing in ns2 we can't just copy those ideas. But we can try to adapt those means.
Maybe in addition the the number of RTs we have already just give information on how much RTs there are on the map (maybe like "4/10 RTs" if you have 4 RTs capped and the map has a maximum of 10 RTs)
The outline of RTs on minimap and the markers on the screen can be implmented like that if you don't reveal if the RT belongs to the enemy or not.
Well and I can't think of an easy way to visualise if your team is in the lead or not.
Anyway this might enable marines to push more for RTs and therefore force more lifeform play on alien side.
Now that you mention it: Back when I played it did feel like peopel were vaguely aware that resbiting was something they needed to do on the alien side, but you'd only rarely see marines that actively went for Harvesters. (In pub.)
I like the UI improvement suggestions.
Yeah, it's sad. People just can't be arsed to play objectives. I'm playing a lot of titanfall right now, and the average player's favorite gamemode is just a random clusterfuck without any direction whatsoever.
I don't. Just doing alot of assumptions
The opponents RTs are irrelevant as long as your team has the average amount of rts. Because of this, both teams only fight at the 2/3 map front line.
There is no in between for them, like trading RTs or pushing a hive without late game tech.
A lot of (alien) players perceive dropping down to 1 RT as automatic loss, no matter how many RTs the marines actually have at that moment, which is why they unnecessarily waste their life, because they think that losing RTs means losing the game.
Comparing it to age of empires 2, it is like fast teching to the imperial age, massing elephants and throwing them at the enemy.
You're right. I didn't think about that.
Why is this? Why is having the comm direct teams and not just build structures such a rare thing, especially on pubs?
One reason is that those who have the experience to direct the team properly generally have high elo, which means that if they were to go commander, the rest of the team will be left outskilled.
However, it isn't necessarily the commanders job to do it. It would be ideal, but a field commander can work just as much.
Also, not biting res towers is not the failing of the comm. It isn't his job to remind people to res bite. Res biting is a fundamental job of the skulk (/lerk) and it is the skulks job to remind the life forms to help him doing so.
I agree, skulks should know to res bite. I think it would be more accurate to say that the comm should sometimes direct who, when, and where to res bite. Experienced skulks do not need very much direction, but they still don't have the big picture, so it may be beneficial to guide (not direct) even them.
For rookies, it is primarily the job of the comm to direct them, and that includes res biting. It's great to have a field commander guide people, but that is plan B, IMO.
Note I'm speaking in generalities, not absolutes.
I think if an experienced skulk doesn't have the big picture, he's probably doing it wrong.
In my experience, having the commander direct everything doesn't work out to well (in pub). It's much more efficiently if everyone organically organizes themselves and communicates what they are doing. More like a swarm than a military unit.
In his mind it would be nice for him to push a location whereas I as a fieldplayer can better estimate our chances of succeeding.. thats why it's important that fieldplayers can deny an order for valid reasons...
My point is that in most games I have played the only meaningful thing the comm does is drop structures. They barely try to guide or direct players. At most comms say "They are in/not in [place] everyone go there now!". They rely on people who already know what to do to use any other tactics and strategy. That's a poor mindset and is not using the tools of the comm to maximum potential.
EDIT: I'm talking about pubbing. Even moderately experienced teams do not need such hand-holding.
Most experienced player should comm whatever their role is because they are the most experienced. Lead by example.
Or would that be a thing for advanced tutorials?
I think all the tutorials already communicate it clearly, but suggestions to improve this are welcome.