<!--QuoteBegin-I_Am_The_Force+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (I_Am_The_Force)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe the magic number is 12 when it activates reg ns maps and i think that would be a 6v6 game so i think flayra is telling us something here. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Even if the 'magic number' is 12, that tells me that 6v6 is considered the MINIMUM balanced game. IE, a game of less than 6v6 is not something that can be balanced because the teams are too small. That says that 6v6 balance is at the FAR END of the balance spectrum. In other words, you wouldn't make ideal balance 6v6 any more than you would make ideal balance 16vs16. The 'sweet spot' would likely be somewhere in between.
Forcing the game balance to be set at such a low number puts the game on a precarious edge, and makes it all but impossible to balance larger games.
<!--QuoteBegin-HAMBONE+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (HAMBONE)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In any experiment you try to lower the amount of variables. In any video game testing perhaps the largest variable of all is player skill. If you are able to secure a group of equally skilled players then you can more or less remove that variable from the equation. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Ahh, but there are two ways to approach this variable. You suggest identically skilled teams, which would provide a stable test bed, but wouldn't be realistic. Since it is a circumstance that would NEVER exist, why try and baance for it? There is no way you could say with 100% certainty that two teams of 'skilled players' were of truly equal skill. Not possible since 'SKILL' has too many variables. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Alternately, if you increase the test pool with LARGER teams, then the amount of impact an individual player has drops. As such, Skilled players cancel out lesser skilled players (to a degree) and so in your example you are more likely to achieve this 'even balance' in larger games.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->More importantly, does anyone have a quote of Flayra saying he balanced the game for clan play or for 6v6? Since its inception, Natural Selection has never been balanced for clan play. 2.0 was beta tested on one 20 player server that was generally full. In 3.0 public players outmembered clan players by about 3 to 1 and more importantly it did not stray far from the balance that 2.01 had achieved. 2.0 testing had many clan players, but it was not specifically balanced for clan play or for 6v6. The idea that this game is balanced for 6v6 or for clan play is an unsubstantiated myth.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I tend to agree, although attempts have been made to try and make clan play more enjoyable, an endeavour I fully support. My objections have always been against the arbitrary value given to clan play numbers, and that some people feel that the game should be balanced AROUND clan play. (something I vehemently disagree with) Many balance changes of late have been made to enhance clan balance but they have done so at the expense of public play balance and enjoyment. That is something I feel is in error and cannot be allowed to continue. You can't sacrifice one style of play for the other or you will destroy the game.
Some of my suggestions have impacted clan play in a positive manner, and I would not want to see the game made so that it was unplayable by clans. However, I would not want the alternate to happen either.
<!--QuoteBegin-Umbraed Monkey+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Umbraed Monkey)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->IMHO, the best thing that can come out of this is that the game is balanced for 8v8 to 10v10 CLAN PLAY. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I would absolutely LOVE to see this. A 9v9 and 10v10 game is in that sweet spot where you can have a good game but where you don't bump into each other around every corner. It also gives you a buffer should someone drop etc. In my experience I have found that these 'mid-sized' games tend to be more consistent (albeit not really balanced at present) but they have the potential to be the most stable of any game size.
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I think most clanners agree the most unbalancing factor between small and large games is the res flow for aliens.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Until Flayra changes his mind, that won't be changing anytime soon. His idea that 'a node is a node and it should provide the same amount of resources per tick regardless of players' is something that will have to be worked around.
I completely agree with marines being overpowered.
The major argument against this is saying that most marines just don't know how to push the aliens and/or aim. Supposedly, a skilled marine team will own a skilled alien team. I tend to disagree. While a skilled marine team will be able to do alot more than an unskilled one, a good alien team will be able to cut marines off whenever possible.
An undefended marine RT anywhere on the map (except rine spawn) will be dead within a minute of construction assuming the alien team is experienced. However, it does not work the other way around.
Comments
Forcing the game balance to be set at such a low number puts the game on a precarious edge, and makes it all but impossible to balance larger games.
<!--QuoteBegin-HAMBONE+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (HAMBONE)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In any experiment you try to lower the amount of variables. In any video game testing perhaps the largest variable of all is player skill. If you are able to secure a group of equally skilled players then you can more or less remove that variable from the equation. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Ahh, but there are two ways to approach this variable. You suggest identically skilled teams, which would provide a stable test bed, but wouldn't be realistic. Since it is a circumstance that would NEVER exist, why try and baance for it? There is no way you could say with 100% certainty that two teams of 'skilled players' were of truly equal skill. Not possible since 'SKILL' has too many variables. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Alternately, if you increase the test pool with LARGER teams, then the amount of impact an individual player has drops. As such, Skilled players cancel out lesser skilled players (to a degree) and so in your example you are more likely to achieve this 'even balance' in larger games.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->More importantly, does anyone have a quote of Flayra saying he balanced the game for clan play or for 6v6? Since its inception, Natural Selection has never been balanced for clan play. 2.0 was beta tested on one 20 player server that was generally full. In 3.0 public players outmembered clan players by about 3 to 1 and more importantly it did not stray far from the balance that 2.01 had achieved. 2.0 testing had many clan players, but it was not specifically balanced for clan play or for 6v6. The idea that this game is balanced for 6v6 or for clan play is an unsubstantiated myth.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I tend to agree, although attempts have been made to try and make clan play more enjoyable, an endeavour I fully support. My objections have always been against the arbitrary value given to clan play numbers, and that some people feel that the game should be balanced AROUND clan play. (something I vehemently disagree with) Many balance changes of late have been made to enhance clan balance but they have done so at the expense of public play balance and enjoyment. That is something I feel is in error and cannot be allowed to continue. You can't sacrifice one style of play for the other or you will destroy the game.
Some of my suggestions have impacted clan play in a positive manner, and I would not want to see the game made so that it was unplayable by clans. However, I would not want the alternate to happen either.
<!--QuoteBegin-Umbraed Monkey+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Umbraed Monkey)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->IMHO, the best thing that can come out of this is that the game is balanced for 8v8 to 10v10 CLAN PLAY. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I would absolutely LOVE to see this. A 9v9 and 10v10 game is in that sweet spot where you can have a good game but where you don't bump into each other around every corner. It also gives you a buffer should someone drop etc. In my experience I have found that these 'mid-sized' games tend to be more consistent (albeit not really balanced at present) but they have the potential to be the most stable of any game size.
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I think most clanners agree the most unbalancing factor between small and large games is the res flow for aliens.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Until Flayra changes his mind, that won't be changing anytime soon. His idea that 'a node is a node and it should provide the same amount of resources per tick regardless of players' is something that will have to be worked around.
Regards,
Savant
The major argument against this is saying that most marines just don't know how to push the aliens and/or aim. Supposedly, a skilled marine team will own a skilled alien team. I tend to disagree. While a skilled marine team will be able to do alot more than an unskilled one, a good alien team will be able to cut marines off whenever possible.
An undefended marine RT anywhere on the map (except rine spawn) will be dead within a minute of construction assuming the alien team is experienced. However, it does not work the other way around.