I wouldn't mind a revised score system <b>as long as it has no impact on gameplay other than the psychological one</b>. So it would encourage teamwork for those that care, and won't annoy those that don't care.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I think the marines' ability to dodge alien melee attacks, either by jumping or running, should be removed completely. This would greatly increase teamwork because it would force the marines to rely on concentrated firepower, instead of good dodging skills, to prevent aliens from entering melee range.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed. If the skulk gets close, it should have an extremely high chance of killing the marine.
I think giving scores to encourage people play together isn't a very good solution. I think it's not even an option. Marines should work as a team because they HAVE TO in order to survive. Not because they want to look good on the scoreboard. The result may be the same, but the feeling is completely different.
This actually leads an idea in to my head which might actually solve this thing. What if marines turning rate would be somehow slowed? Is this possible on HL engine?
The results would be outstanding... Rambo runs around the map but he can't really cover well his sides or back because he can't turn fast enough. He dies easily for even one Skulk. Group of marines walk around map and they mow all the Skulks to ground because they cover all directions have all their own fire-sector. Even same sized Skulk group loses to marine group.
Here we would really enforce the idea of 'marines live in groups but die solo' In essence, this is what makes groups good in combat in real world, or for example, in movie Aliens. <b>Covering each others backs</b> Ah, I love the idea. Marines weapons should be made a tad more powerful in exchange for the slower turning rate, but I think it might even work.
One thign I saw suggested to coerce marine teamwork was to give skulks double damage when attacking from behind. Now I admit to an alien bias, but I still think it's a good idea. Now marines HAVE TO travel in groups if they want to survive. It also promotes skulks to use their sneakyness.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This actually leads an idea in to my head which might actually solve this thing. What if marines turning rate would be somehow slowed? Is this possible on HL engine?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dread, if it is possible with the HL engine, I think that's an effective solution. It would be even more effective in that it sufficiently nerfs HMGs.
<!--QuoteBegin--Agkelos+Jun 28 2003, 09:37 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Agkelos @ Jun 28 2003, 09:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I respect your oppinion, but the game shouldnt be changed or modified to adjust to a bad community, the community should modify itself to adjust to the game. =/ <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The GAME isn't really changing- just the way score is kept. Absolutely nothing to do with gameplay is being changed- unless the negative score = slow respawn is implemented.
You saying that the players should change.. that's EXACTLY what this is designed to do. Changed the way players play without changing the game design. They're just numbers...
<!--QuoteBegin--Dread+Jun 30 2003, 04:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dread @ Jun 30 2003, 04:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This actually leads an idea in to my head which might actually solve this thing. What if marines turning rate would be somehow slowed? Is this possible on HL engine? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think you're wanting the Rainbow 6 aiming system.
You can move your aim around as fast as you want, but the faster you move it, the more inaccurate your shots are. The effect is barely noticable with pistols, tolerable with SMGs, irritating with rifles, and positively cumbersome with light machine guns.
That said, guns are just uber-lethal in R6, so if you DO get the jump on someone, they're toast. Coversely, if they get the jump on you, you have no real chance to effectively return fire.
It would be interesting to see NS played like this. You'd see almost no use of the HMG, except for supressing fire and killing structures. And you'd see a lot of pistol kills.
<!--emo&::skulk::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/skulk.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='skulk.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::marine::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/marine.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='marine.gif'><!--endemo--> Just my $0.02.
I think that people who don't neccesarily stick with the team on some maps ought not be punished outright, via the scoreboard or any other sort of mechanism.
Let me just explain this a bit:
My first day of NS, I was a horrible newbie. To put it really clearly, I was used to Desert Crisis and Counter-Strike, and even to the occasional bout of Day of Defeat. Needless to say, my first game was a rude awakening, at best. The map was nancy, and I was marine. Made sense at the time, considering my experience in the past. Anyway, like an idiot, I ramboed it (is rambo an actual verb? Screw it... <!--emo&::sentry::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/turret.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='turret.gif'><!--endemo--> ).
Predictably, I got my *** chomped off. Now, this was shocking, and it took me about four spawns to really work out the problem. So, the next few rounds, I refused to go anywhere unless there were already at least three other marines there. This meant that I rarely left the base (Port engine room, I figure). Anyhow, this didn't deter me, and I was thrilled at the fact that I was actual playing on a team. Moreso then even in DoD.
So, anyway, I got much better as a marine, and started doing Rambo again. But not without a clear purpose, given to me by the comm each time. Or, alternately, if another trooper needed aid, I'd Rambo up to him, and help out, and then proceed to request orders.
Lately, I have come to the conclusion that sometimes being a Rambo, or a small (2-3) group of Rambo's is the best approach. For example, take the map (mebbe hera?) in which you spawn in a cargo bay, with a huge elevator to the west of the comm chair, and that is the only exit to the room (other then the vents on the east wall through which a seemingly endless flow of skulks tend to come <!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif'><!--endemo--> ). A team of about four marines is just barely enough to hold the room, even if the skulks are coming from one direction. Now, in the beginning game, you need to cap some resources, and you need to do it fast. In atmosphere processing, there are two rather convenient resource nodes. But, lo, if you send an entire group of Marines, you are vulnerable back at base. If you instead send a team of two Rambos, with one to cap and one to cover, then getting that foothold is much easier early on.
Also, how many times have you seen a massive assault force of marines get all tripped up on one another , because there are just too many trying to move through too small a space too quickly? The vents in nancy are a deathtrap for more than perhaps two marines travelling close together; the Marine in front tries to move back to fire on a charging Skulk, gets caught on the guy behind him, who can't help because the front guy is blocking his line of fire, and then the front guy gets crunched. And then the next guy. And so on, and so forth. I witnessed a relatively expensive rush brought to its knees by two skulks lurking in the vents. All because the amount of troopers used was too high considering the task at hand. Tannith, incidentally, is also a great example of this; the corridors and vents make fighting en masse very hard for marines to do, until they get into a nice big open area.
Additionally, when you need to attack an outcropping of OC's, a Rambo is the ideal choice. Think of it this way: The OC is taking aim at the front man in a 4 man assault. Even if it misses him, it has a good chance of hitting a teammate. A large body of troops is easier to hit than a single soldier. Ergo, if we instead send in one trooper, and if he uses proper cover while assaulting, we can take out such an outpost without having to even send in a medkit (if he is fairly skiled and/or lucky).
Rambo's shouldn't be shunned; in fact, sometimes they are the BEST way to get something done, if they know what they are doing.
And additionally, for anyone doubting the teamplay factor of this. As a Rambo, I find that I have a better chance of coming across teamates in distress and actually doing some good (shotgunning the little skulks right before they kill my squaddies), then I do if I am just wandering about with a few other dolts. Also, in the real life military, Rambos are used for very specific purposes. For instance, in 'Nam, tunnel rats were used to help root out the vietcong. Especially in those instances, sending in whole squads would be a really bad idea, and was. Also, it is often easier for one or two grunts to slip in unobserved than for a whole bunch to just march in, especially considering how noisy that is (noise in ns = badness).
All I'm saying is that Rambo is a perfectly valid choice to persue, so long as you aren't just wasting resources.
I should perhaps clarify here what I mean by the Rambo Problem. Because it's possible I'm not even on the same page as Savant and others here.
IMO, the problem isn't people moving around the map alone, or completing objectives with small teams. The problem is people whose entire experience of the game consists of:
1. Spawn 2. Hump armory 3. Wander around looking for something to kill 4. Die, go to 1.
IMO, these people aren't even playing the same game. They're playing Team Deathmatch In Space. As such, I think their impact on the game should be minimized. TDIS players should be rapidly munched by the system, and spat out into the respawn queue, over and over, until they get the idea that they're not playing Skulk Hunter 2003.
And THIS is why I think the commander issue is so important. If people are not being tasked and organized, they'll eventually just start to wander around, looking for something to shoot at.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->IMO, these people aren't even playing the same game. They're playing Team Deathmatch In Space. As such, I think their impact on the game should be minimized. TDIS players should be rapidly munched by the system, and spat out into the respawn queue, over and over, until they get the idea that they're not playing Skulk Hunter 2003.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This doesn't minimize the impact. It greatly amplifies it. Right now a rambo can be useful in that he can kill stuff for you (and in 1.1 he would reap some rewards for the commander). Even if he dies all the time it won't change a thing since right now rambos continue to do their thing when Fades show up (which require at least 2 to 1 per fade at sub level 3 guns). What does this mean for your average pub game? All rambos would basically be empty space. Half your team are rambos and leaves the marines 6 v 12 on a 24 player server. Not fun. Right now, rambos are at least half way useful to the commander.
Sure, I think we'd all like to see the TDIS guys learn their lesson. However, if possible, it'd be great if we could do this without restricting ramboing as a tool for the commander.
I know that a lot of the time I employ ramboing as a great tool -- as people repeatedly point out, one marine can take out 3-4 uncarapaced skulks, and while there's killing on one side of the map, there's RT building on the other.
Ramboing is a great way to confuse the alien team. If there's a group of 6 marines headed to a hive, all the aliens go there. What happens if there's a group of 2 marines going to each hive? What'll the aliens do then? If they send a few aliens to each hive, they'll all get slaughtered -- because marines can take out many aliens, and the only time they don't is when other marines are blocking their field of fire!
Of course, if I'm trying to siege, that's another story, but usually I use ramboing to my advantage. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
You can move your aim around as fast as you want, but the faster you move it, the more inaccurate your shots are. The effect is barely noticable with pistols, tolerable with SMGs, irritating with rifles, and positively cumbersome with light machine guns.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Deacon, I think he's talking about putting a cap on turn rate.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->All I'm saying is that Rambo is a perfectly valid choice to persue, so long as you aren't just wasting resources.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indeed it is valid. But should it be? We're not arguing whether rambo-ing is effective, because it obviously is in many cases.
ZunniThe best thing to happen to I&S in a long whileJoin Date: 2002-11-26Member: 10016Members
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Sure, I think we'd all like to see the TDIS guys learn their lesson. However, if possible, it'd be great if we could do this without restricting ramboing as a tool for the commander.
I know that a lot of the time I employ ramboing as a great tool -- as people repeatedly point out, one marine can take out 3-4 uncarapaced skulks, and while there's killing on one side of the map, there's RT building on the other.
Ramboing is a great way to confuse the alien team. If there's a group of 6 marines headed to a hive, all the aliens go there. What happens if there's a group of 2 marines going to each hive? What'll the aliens do then? If they send a few aliens to each hive, they'll all get slaughtered -- because marines can take out many aliens, and the only time they don't is when other marines are blocking their field of fire! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly what the game isn't supposed to be (IMHO) , have one or two players bring down an entire other team..... Same problem with spawn camping...
I guess we'll just have to put the game out and see. If there are problems with pubs, they'll become immediately apparent. One thing Flay added to 1.1 very early was the ability to easily and quickly patch 'numbers balance' on servers, where the change involves tweaks to values but not code. We fully intend to patch the crap out NS 1.1 after letting it burn in with a few zillion pub players.
Be sure to blame all the vets and PT's for the bugs and inbalances you find too, they love when you do that, in my experience <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Jul 1 2003, 02:31 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Jul 1 2003, 02:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Be sure to blame all the vets and PT's for the bugs and inbalances you find too, they love when you do that, in my experience <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> bring it
<!--QuoteBegin--Dread+Jun 30 2003, 04:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dread @ Jun 30 2003, 04:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This actually leads an idea in to my head which might actually solve this thing. What if marines turning rate would be somehow slowed? Is this possible on HL engine? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes. pEdict->v.yaw_speed and pEdict->v.pitch_speed (type is edict_t) controls the rate of yaw and pitch per tick respectively.
ChurchMeatshield grunt-fodder // Has pre-ordered NS2Join Date: 2002-12-31Member: 11646Members, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin--boobs+Jul 1 2003, 02:38 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (boobs @ Jul 1 2003, 02:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Jul 1 2003, 02:31 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Jul 1 2003, 02:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Be sure to blame all the vets and PT's for the bugs and inbalances you find too, they love when you do that, in my experience <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> bring it <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Hey Boobs when you say 'bring it' are you talking to Monse or the Pubbers? <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Yes, it's independent of the control sensitivity setting. Adjusting these values downward in the game engine has the effect of making the player controls feel like molasses.
<!--QuoteBegin--Rhuadin+Jul 1 2003, 09:02 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Rhuadin @ Jul 1 2003, 09:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Sure, I think we'd all like to see the TDIS guys learn their lesson. However, if possible, it'd be great if we could do this without restricting ramboing as a tool for the commander. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Okay, I think we're in agreement here. I believe there is a distinct, yet critical difference between the TDIS guys and a group of two or three marines that self-assemble in order to run back a failed alien offensive:
1. The TDIS guys are not actively playing the larger hive-killing game. The rushers are key to the larger game. 2. The TDIS guys are oblivious to their team. The rushers are in The Zone, and are instinctively thinking as a group, and acting in support of team goals. 3. The TDIS guys can get the same experience from any FPS. The rushers are interacting with the game and each other in a way that is unique to NS.
IMO, the rushers need better tools to do their thing, and the TDIS guys need a kick in the groin.
<!--QuoteBegin--mutt+Jul 1 2003, 04:32 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (mutt @ Jul 1 2003, 04:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yes. pEdict->v.yaw_speed and pEdict->v.pitch_speed (type is edict_t) controls the rate of yaw and pitch per tick respectively. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> If I understand this correctly, the player's controls set the "ideal" direction they want to look, and these variables control how fast the "actual" direction comes into alignment with the "ideal" direction. IIRC, planetside had something like this, and it made the mouse control feel really gooey and clumsy.
Personally, I prefer the R6 method, where you can move your viewpoint around as fast as you want, but doing so affects your fire cone. YMMV.
Comments
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I think the marines' ability to dodge alien melee attacks, either by jumping or running, should be removed completely. This would greatly increase teamwork because it would force the marines to rely on concentrated firepower, instead of good dodging skills, to prevent aliens from entering melee range.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed. If the skulk gets close, it should have an extremely high chance of killing the marine.
This actually leads an idea in to my head which might actually solve this thing. What if marines turning rate would be somehow slowed? Is this possible on HL engine?
The results would be outstanding...
Rambo runs around the map but he can't really cover well his sides or back because he can't turn fast enough. He dies easily for even one Skulk.
Group of marines walk around map and they mow all the Skulks to ground because they cover all directions have all their own fire-sector. Even same sized Skulk group loses to marine group.
Here we would really enforce the idea of 'marines live in groups but die solo' In essence, this is what makes groups good in combat in real world, or for example, in movie Aliens. <b>Covering each others backs</b> Ah, I love the idea. Marines weapons should be made a tad more powerful in exchange for the slower turning rate, but I think it might even work.
Dread, if it is possible with the HL engine, I think that's an effective solution. It would be even more effective in that it sufficiently nerfs HMGs.
The GAME isn't really changing- just the way score is kept. Absolutely nothing to do with gameplay is being changed- unless the negative score = slow respawn is implemented.
You saying that the players should change.. that's EXACTLY what this is designed to do. Changed the way players play without changing the game design. They're just numbers...
I think you're wanting the Rainbow 6 aiming system.
You can move your aim around as fast as you want, but the faster you move it, the more inaccurate your shots are. The effect is barely noticable with pistols, tolerable with SMGs, irritating with rifles, and positively cumbersome with light machine guns.
That said, guns are just uber-lethal in R6, so if you DO get the jump on someone, they're toast. Coversely, if they get the jump on you, you have no real chance to effectively return fire.
It would be interesting to see NS played like this. You'd see almost no use of the HMG, except for supressing fire and killing structures. And you'd see a lot of pistol kills.
I think that people who don't neccesarily stick with the team on some maps ought not be punished outright, via the scoreboard or any other sort of mechanism.
Let me just explain this a bit:
My first day of NS, I was a horrible newbie. To put it really clearly, I was used to Desert Crisis and Counter-Strike, and even to the occasional bout of Day of Defeat. Needless to say, my first game was a rude awakening, at best. The map was nancy, and I was marine. Made sense at the time, considering my experience in the past. Anyway, like an idiot, I ramboed it (is rambo an actual verb? Screw it... <!--emo&::sentry::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/turret.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='turret.gif'><!--endemo--> ).
Predictably, I got my *** chomped off. Now, this was shocking, and it took me about four spawns to really work out the problem. So, the next few rounds, I refused to go anywhere unless there were already at least three other marines there. This meant that I rarely left the base (Port engine room, I figure). Anyhow, this didn't deter me, and I was thrilled at the fact that I was actual playing on a team. Moreso then even in DoD.
So, anyway, I got much better as a marine, and started doing Rambo again. But not without a clear purpose, given to me by the comm each time. Or, alternately, if another trooper needed aid, I'd Rambo up to him, and help out, and then proceed to request orders.
Lately, I have come to the conclusion that sometimes being a Rambo, or a small (2-3) group of Rambo's is the best approach. For example, take the map (mebbe hera?) in which you spawn in a cargo bay, with a huge elevator to the west of the comm chair, and that is the only exit to the room (other then the vents on the east wall through which a seemingly endless flow of skulks tend to come <!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif'><!--endemo--> ). A team of about four marines is just barely enough to hold the room, even if the skulks are coming from one direction. Now, in the beginning game, you need to cap some resources, and you need to do it fast. In atmosphere processing, there are two rather convenient resource nodes. But, lo, if you send an entire group of Marines, you are vulnerable back at base. If you instead send a team of two Rambos, with one to cap and one to cover, then getting that foothold is much easier early on.
Also, how many times have you seen a massive assault force of marines get all tripped up on one another , because there are just too many trying to move through too small a space too quickly? The vents in nancy are a deathtrap for more than perhaps two marines travelling close together; the Marine in front tries to move back to fire on a charging Skulk, gets caught on the guy behind him, who can't help because the front guy is blocking his line of fire, and then the front guy gets crunched. And then the next guy. And so on, and so forth. I witnessed a relatively expensive rush brought to its knees by two skulks lurking in the vents. All because the amount of troopers used was too high considering the task at hand. Tannith, incidentally, is also a great example of this; the corridors and vents make fighting en masse very hard for marines to do, until they get into a nice big open area.
Additionally, when you need to attack an outcropping of OC's, a Rambo is the ideal choice. Think of it this way: The OC is taking aim at the front man in a 4 man assault. Even if it misses him, it has a good chance of hitting a teammate. A large body of troops is easier to hit than a single soldier. Ergo, if we instead send in one trooper, and if he uses proper cover while assaulting, we can take out such an outpost without having to even send in a medkit (if he is fairly skiled and/or lucky).
Rambo's shouldn't be shunned; in fact, sometimes they are the BEST way to get something done, if they know what they are doing.
And additionally, for anyone doubting the teamplay factor of this. As a Rambo, I find that I have a better chance of coming across teamates in distress and actually doing some good (shotgunning the little skulks right before they kill my squaddies), then I do if I am just wandering about with a few other dolts. Also, in the real life military, Rambos are used for very specific purposes. For instance, in 'Nam, tunnel rats were used to help root out the vietcong. Especially in those instances, sending in whole squads would be a really bad idea, and was. Also, it is often easier for one or two grunts to slip in unobserved than for a whole bunch to just march in, especially considering how noisy that is (noise in ns = badness).
All I'm saying is that Rambo is a perfectly valid choice to persue, so long as you aren't just wasting resources.
IMO, the problem isn't people moving around the map alone, or completing objectives with small teams. The problem is people whose entire experience of the game consists of:
1. Spawn
2. Hump armory
3. Wander around looking for something to kill
4. Die, go to 1.
IMO, these people aren't even playing the same game. They're playing Team Deathmatch In Space. As such, I think their impact on the game should be minimized. TDIS players should be rapidly munched by the system, and spat out into the respawn queue, over and over, until they get the idea that they're not playing Skulk Hunter 2003.
And THIS is why I think the commander issue is so important. If people are not being tasked and organized, they'll eventually just start to wander around, looking for something to shoot at.
This doesn't minimize the impact. It greatly amplifies it. Right now a rambo can be useful in that he can kill stuff for you (and in 1.1 he would reap some rewards for the commander). Even if he dies all the time it won't change a thing since right now rambos continue to do their thing when Fades show up (which require at least 2 to 1 per fade at sub level 3 guns). What does this mean for your average pub game? All rambos would basically be empty space. Half your team are rambos and leaves the marines 6 v 12 on a 24 player server. Not fun. Right now, rambos are at least half way useful to the commander.
I know that a lot of the time I employ ramboing as a great tool -- as people repeatedly point out, one marine can take out 3-4 uncarapaced skulks, and while there's killing on one side of the map, there's RT building on the other.
Ramboing is a great way to confuse the alien team. If there's a group of 6 marines headed to a hive, all the aliens go there. What happens if there's a group of 2 marines going to each hive? What'll the aliens do then? If they send a few aliens to each hive, they'll all get slaughtered -- because marines can take out many aliens, and the only time they don't is when other marines are blocking their field of fire!
Of course, if I'm trying to siege, that's another story, but usually I use ramboing to my advantage. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Rhuadin
You can move your aim around as fast as you want, but the faster you move it, the more inaccurate your shots are. The effect is barely noticable with pistols, tolerable with SMGs, irritating with rifles, and positively cumbersome with light machine guns.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Deacon, I think he's talking about putting a cap on turn rate.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->All I'm saying is that Rambo is a perfectly valid choice to persue, so long as you aren't just wasting resources.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indeed it is valid. But should it be? We're not arguing whether rambo-ing is effective, because it obviously is in many cases.
I know that a lot of the time I employ ramboing as a great tool -- as people repeatedly point out, one marine can take out 3-4 uncarapaced skulks, and while there's killing on one side of the map, there's RT building on the other.
Ramboing is a great way to confuse the alien team. If there's a group of 6 marines headed to a hive, all the aliens go there. What happens if there's a group of 2 marines going to each hive? What'll the aliens do then? If they send a few aliens to each hive, they'll all get slaughtered -- because marines can take out many aliens, and the only time they don't is when other marines are blocking their field of fire!
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly what the game isn't supposed to be (IMHO) , have one or two players bring down an entire other team..... Same problem with spawn camping...
Be sure to blame all the vets and PT's for the bugs and inbalances you find too, they love when you do that, in my experience <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
bring it
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes. pEdict->v.yaw_speed and pEdict->v.pitch_speed (type is edict_t) controls the rate of yaw and pitch per tick respectively.
-mutt
bring it <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hey Boobs when you say 'bring it' are you talking to Monse or the Pubbers? <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Yes, it's independent of the control sensitivity setting. Adjusting these values downward in the game engine has the effect of making the player controls feel like molasses.
-mutt
Okay, I think we're in agreement here. I believe there is a distinct, yet critical difference between the TDIS guys and a group of two or three marines that self-assemble in order to run back a failed alien offensive:
1. The TDIS guys are not actively playing the larger hive-killing game. The rushers are key to the larger game.
2. The TDIS guys are oblivious to their team. The rushers are in The Zone, and are instinctively thinking as a group, and acting in support of team goals.
3. The TDIS guys can get the same experience from any FPS. The rushers are interacting with the game and each other in a way that is unique to NS.
IMO, the rushers need better tools to do their thing, and the TDIS guys need a kick in the groin.
If I understand this correctly, the player's controls set the "ideal" direction they want to look, and these variables control how fast the "actual" direction comes into alignment with the "ideal" direction. IIRC, planetside had something like this, and it made the mouse control feel really gooey and clumsy.
Personally, I prefer the R6 method, where you can move your viewpoint around as fast as you want, but doing so affects your fire cone. YMMV.