Ns isnt dieing its more of a community shift. More new players who have no grasp of the game are downloading it, while more veteran players are quitting. If ns ever gets on the steam menu wow.... tons of people will play it and be refreshed. The mod itself is just so different from any other half-life mod imo. Im sure lots of people will feel the way i did when first downloading. Im never playing cs/ or any other hl mod again. Really all ns needs is Vac + being put on steam menu to propell it for many more years of gaming.
Fools. You think that NS is gonna go away because you think so? I've been reading and NO one has provided any actual proof as of yet to the condition of the game.
Just opinions and speculation.
All it would take is another beta patch or release and you guys will be back.
So quit the whining already.
And whether they revert it back to the 1.04 or the make it "perfect" it would be a waste of time quite frankly.
How many NS,CS, TFC and people on Steam are gonna ditch this game and all the other mods when HL2 comes out?
The magic bullet that can't be dodged is out there, and just about ready to be fired.
I don't think NS is growing, nor do I think it is dying. The whole "NS is dying" thing has been said over and over again since 1.04. If anything, the game gets a good boost with the release of newer versions as players from previous versions come back to give it another try, along with people who are new to the game. The same exact thing will most likely happen when 3.0 goes official. I believe this game still has for enormous potential in the Half-Life community. If NS is to make the "My Games" list in Steam (As I believe we have been told), it will pick up an enormous number of new players.
As for HL2 being a magic bullet, that is just something we cannot say will or will not happen. By the time HL2 is released, who knows whether Flayra will have his Unknown Worlds company off the ground and NS will have its own engine (Which I believe is what Flayra wants).
As for everyone who complains about how the next version will ruin the game (Myself included), I can only point to someones signature which reads something like "Noobs complain. Veterans <i>adapt</i>."
Obviosuly this is some time after the release. The first month after the release the lag will be enormous.
Think about it.
How many 14-30 year olds do you know. With a decent spec pc/intending to upgrade soon/intending to upgrade FOR hl2
I can say that about 60% of them will play HL2, and 40% of them for long periods. And that's just a small portion of the gaming world.
:\
Still, eventually, hype dies down, ppl realise how totally awesome NS really is, ppl return.
Besides, it will be great having only vets on the servers for a few months. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You should count players minutes monthly and not this. It's hardly disputable fact that servers are now more empty than before, yet, during same time, more people know about NS and have been playing it.
People come and go and then return again. For competitive play that stinks. Bases on what I have seen. Competitive play has declined a little but pub play is up. Depending on what u play more determines your veiw.
What I tend to notice, is that when there is a new release, I've seen upwards of 3-4 thousand people playing at one time. About a week later, it drops down to its normal value.
The main problem of NS in regards with keeping new players is that its "Point of inevitiability" is too long. What I mean about PoI is that there comes a point in every game, where the other team just CANNOT win. With NS, sometimes this can go upwards of 20 mins to a half hr, compared to other games like CS, which techinically do not have a PoI, because 1 player can take down the other team. Because a lot of CS players are in "Hero mode" they have a hard time accepting that even a group of skulks that uses teamwork will get slaughtered by HA/HMG, and a Lone LMG marine has no chance against an Onos.
Some people accept it because of the RTS counterparts, which creates that PoI (as it does in true RTS games), but the FPS players do not like the fact that sometimes no matter how hard they try, they are going to lose because of the other team's superior technology upgrades.
Thats why it dips back to around 1000-1100 players, because those are the people that accept the fact, that sometimes, no matter how talented, you are going to lose.
<!--QuoteBegin-Firewater+Jun 15 2004, 08:04 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Firewater @ Jun 15 2004, 08:04 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What I tend to notice, is that when there is a new release, I've seen upwards of 3-4 thousand people playing at one time. About a week later, it drops down to its normal value.
The main problem of NS in regards with keeping new players is that its "Point of inevitiability" is too long. What I mean about PoI is that there comes a point in every game, where the other team just CANNOT win. With NS, sometimes this can go upwards of 20 mins to a half hr, compared to other games like CS, which techinically do not have a PoI, because 1 player can take down the other team. Because a lot of CS players are in "Hero mode" they have a hard time accepting that even a group of skulks that uses teamwork will get slaughtered by HA/HMG, and a Lone LMG marine has no chance against an Onos.
Some people accept it because of the RTS counterparts, which creates that PoI (as it does in true RTS games), but the FPS players do not like the fact that sometimes no matter how hard they try, they are going to lose because of the other team's superior technology upgrades.
Thats why it dips back to around 1000-1100 players, because those are the people that accept the fact, that sometimes, no matter how talented, you are going to lose. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Exceptionally well thought out post.
Firewater is right, the time of games is just too long for many people. When you look at the way most gamers are accustomed to playing, it is in an entirely different manner than Natural Selection. Quicker and often more individually gratifying games satisfy somone more than NS might.
Probably not the place for this but the "POI" was brought up. Making it cost 1 res to spawn would help eliminate that wait and -- tieing it into the topic -- ultimately might make the game more appealing to new players.
Respawn prevents one-man-army situations in NS for the most part. (also heavy classes like Oni, Fades, and heavy armored marines) Each kill means alot more if it potentially prevents them from spawning.
It would need to be tested to see if wait times for low-res kharaa players was too long and boring. Could always put resource distribution priority to those who are waiting to spawn.
With this change you could also decrease the spawn wait time. (again, less waiting... more action)
I would be interested in hearing why this was disregarded during early testing and if it would work with the current form of NS.
<!--QuoteBegin-antfarm007+Jun 14 2004, 10:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (antfarm007 @ Jun 14 2004, 10:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> As for everyone who complains about how the next version will ruin the game (Myself included), I can only point to someones signature which reads something like "Noobs complain. Veterans <i>adapt</i>." <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Not true. Veterans whine as much (if not more) as anyone else. They just whine differently and with a lot more smugness.
<!--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-->Probably not the place for this but the "POI" was brought up. Making it cost 1 res to spawn would help eliminate that wait and -- tieing it into the topic -- ultimately might make the game more appealing to new players.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No good idea. Some dev or PT (i can't recall who it was) told me that this was tested once.
The comms where near insanity and kept screaming "Don't die! dont't die!"
Is that it? I thought it was something important. I already knew it was tested. I just want a logical answer as to why it was discarded and whether it would be different in this version -- after some balancing adjustments, of course.
PS. I want to point out that with RFK the other team gets TWO res for killing one of your teammates, and yet you don't hear the commander yelling "don't die".
I do not really know why they discarded it but is was tested and tehy descided not to implement it. Anyway, I do nit think it would really iprove the game that much, and I doubt it would be worth the effort of balancing it out.
There are more viable ways to improve the game that should be tested. Unchained chambers for instance...... I guess that would have a much greater impact on gameplay that respawn costs.
Besides, RFK are desinged to allow pinned down teams to GAIN resources and make a comeback (at least thats what I think its for). Respawn costs are the direct opposite of that and would just make gameending a bit easier. (not that this would be a bad thing).
The devs seem to prever the possibility of comeback over more descisive endgame. I do not know what is the better solution, but I trust Flayra on this.
<!--QuoteBegin-PseudoKnight+Jun 16 2004, 10:12 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (PseudoKnight @ Jun 16 2004, 10:12 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Is that it? I thought it was something important. I already knew it was tested. I just want a logical answer as to why it was discarded and whether it would be different in this version -- after some balancing adjustments, of course.
PS. I want to point out that with RFK the other team gets TWO res for killing one of your teammates, and yet you don't hear the commander yelling "don't die". <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Picture the following situation: You're commanding on a public server. Your budget is tight. Just so slowly, you manage to push your troops forward into a position to lay siege on the aliens. Anciously, you watch the res counter climb up while the four marines that actually follow your orders do a great job keeping the enemy at bay. Then, when you saved enough up, you start dropping buildings. And just as you want to drop the PG, three ramboing marines get gibbed by a stray Fade and respawn, throwing you below the res necessary to place the gate. The outpost is cut off from its reinforcements, everything invested into it is de-facto down the drain. Sufficient to say that it was just too frustrating all around.
That said, I'd appreciate if you kept the discussion of gameplay changes out of topics of different intention and in the appropriate forums.
Because pubbing vs marines isn't frustrating at all. Okay, I get it. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Your logic being that if someone limps with one leg, he shouldn't start looking for a doctor, but instead start limping with both legs?
Folks, realize that nobody has ever tried something like NS before. It takes a damn lot of trying to get it right (and I'll feed the first person claiming that Flayra 'got it right with 1.04' to the sharks pool that was General during the later days of .04). Yes, there are gameplay aspects that are frustrating, yes, there is stuff that isn't fun. Neither excuses the inclusion of new needlessly frustrating aspects.
i think its growing. just not in a good way. most of the new players seem to be playing Co and nothing else <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif' /><!--endemo-->
hello people there is a lot more to this game than Co...
<!--QuoteBegin-e.Nadagast+Jun 16 2004, 09:20 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (e.Nadagast @ Jun 16 2004, 09:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> 2.01 was *DAMN* close to being 100% balanced. If it was unbalanced at all, marines had a TINY advantadge... but it was a ton better than 3.0 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> ...Which also happens to be in beta status. Not to mention that we weren't discussing balance at all.
<!--QuoteBegin-Nemesis Zero+Jun 16 2004, 04:19 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ Jun 16 2004, 04:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Your logic being that if someone limps with one leg, he shouldn't start looking for a doctor, but instead start limping with both legs? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Some measures are always going to be remotely punitive. Its like saying "Dieing as a fade is too frustrating, make it stop" - its also a core part of what makes NS exciting, and being a marine dull and easy. Ask anyone that started playing with 3.0, they'll probably remember when they were mortally scared of the "ka-chick" noise of someone pulling out their LMG, but can't remotely recall when an Alien seemed scary.
The utter lack of punitive measures for marine failure right now is one of the things thats wrong, in my opinion.
/me waves the original point of the topic bye-bye...
I'm inclined to agree, but such a punitive measure would have to be put on the level of the individual marine, because he, the man in the field, is supposed to be scared. Punishing the commander for marine mistakes won't make the aliens more intimidating to the grunts.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ahnteis+Jun 16 2004, 02:46 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ahnteis @ Jun 16 2004, 02:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-antfarm007+Jun 14 2004, 10:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (antfarm007 @ Jun 14 2004, 10:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> As for everyone who complains about how the next version will ruin the game (Myself included), I can only point to someones signature which reads something like "Noobs complain. Veterans <i>adapt</i>." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not true. Veterans whine as much (if not more) as anyone else. They just whine differently and with a lot more smugness. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You bet they whine, but then again its your post is a shining example of what they whine about
<!--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-->/me waves the original point of the topic bye-bye...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Not much more to talk about concerning the original topic... so why not move with the flow, as normal discussion tends to move on as a subject runs dry or, in this case, moves to practical application.
SaltzBad covered what I was going to say.
<!--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--> throwing you below the res necessary to place the gate.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I take it that they had negative res in this implementation? Interesting. My point was to prevent spawning.
In any case, I'll concede the thought. I know there are higher priorities (ie. "unchaining chambers") but I wasn't going to be redundant. Besides, it would take quite a bit of balancing to make the spawn cost change effective.
<!--QuoteBegin-Ahnteis+Jun 16 2004, 02:46 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ahnteis @ Jun 16 2004, 02:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-antfarm007+Jun 14 2004, 10:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (antfarm007 @ Jun 14 2004, 10:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> As for everyone who complains about how the next version will ruin the game (Myself included), I can only point to someones signature which reads something like "Noobs complain. Veterans <i>adapt</i>." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not true. Veterans whine as much (if not more) as anyone else. They just whine differently and with a lot more smugness. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually my signature does not apply to All people with the NS Vet icon. I've been using that signature since I started competitive CS, which was about 4 years ago. It means that newbies, a long with scrubs will blame the game (or anyone else other than themselves) for their own shortcommings. Veterans, or pro players, will accept that the game is the way it is and learn that if they die its THEIR OWN FAULT. Accepting that dying is one's own fault allows one to acknowledge a mistake. When a mistake is acknowledged, one can learn from it, and correct, hence making oneself a better player by learning and correcting mistakes that are made during the course of the game. Newbies/scrubs who blame the game, believe that they did not do anything wrong, and its a game design flaw, "Someone cheating",the commander, stupid gorge, **** hacker, etc... Accepting no responsibility for dying/losing, and continue to make the same mistakes because they the newbies/scrubs feel that they did not make any, so there is nothing to learn from no mistakes being made.
Just a brief explanation of my signature, if anyone wants to go more in depth, please PM me on IRC or in the forums.
<!--QuoteBegin-Nemesis Zero+Jun 16 2004, 04:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Nemesis Zero @ Jun 16 2004, 04:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> /me waves the original point of the topic bye-bye...
I'm inclined to agree, but such a punitive measure would have to be put on the level of the individual marine, because he, the man in the field, is supposed to be scared. Punishing the commander for marine mistakes won't make the aliens more intimidating to the grunts. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, its a teambased game - and as such there is currently, and unfortuantely will probably be for a long time to come, no accounting for disregarding your team entirely. The same way alien punitive measures all (except for the ressource loss) rain down on the team, and only indirectly punish the individual in the form of losing (leading to some frustration).
In the same way, its not the commanders ressources that get diminished - its the teams ressources. That death is a medpack you're not getting, or as you said can eat away the res for vital structures.
I agree though that the system and manner of application is not perfect - cost could for example be paid to spawn the marine, <i>not</i> for him to die, and an option could/should be included to refuse payment and thus spawn at maybe half the rate (one spawn per 20 seconds, and only 1 IP works). That balances the way in which measures are applied a bit better, if you ask me.
The sci-fi setting, the buildings, the commander view, the alien mode, the teamwork
I only played CS when it was beta. The real beta, pre v1.0. I enjoyed Unreal Tournament and Return to Castle Wolfenstein immensely. Team based, fast movement fast decision games.
Perhaps it is because people are used to CS or to Quake. I know and you all should know as well, that many people are reluctant to change, to learn new things, to break old habits, because they are motherfuckn lazy and stupid. How can we lure them ?
<!--QuoteBegin-PseudoKnight+Jun 15 2004, 09:50 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (PseudoKnight @ Jun 15 2004, 09:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Probably not the place for this but the "POI" was brought up. Making it cost 1 res to spawn would help eliminate that wait and -- tieing it into the topic -- ultimately might make the game more appealing to new players.
Respawn prevents one-man-army situations in NS for the most part. (also heavy classes like Oni, Fades, and heavy armored marines) Each kill means alot more if it potentially prevents them from spawning.
It would need to be tested to see if wait times for low-res kharaa players was too long and boring. Could always put resource distribution priority to those who are waiting to spawn.
With this change you could also decrease the spawn wait time. (again, less waiting... more action)
I would be interested in hearing why this was disregarded during early testing and if it would work with the current form of NS. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The PoI theory is entirely appropriate, it would suggest that at a new release, a lot more people play because its new. In some pubs the PoI can turn off new players if they aren't having fun during that time period. It is an explantaion for if NS is growing or not.
Comments
<!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::fade::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/fade.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='fade.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Fools. You think that NS is gonna go away because you think so? I've been reading and NO one has provided any actual proof as of yet to the condition of the game.
Just opinions and speculation.
All it would take is another beta patch or release and you guys will be back.
So quit the whining already.
And whether they revert it back to the 1.04 or the make it "perfect" it would be a waste of time quite frankly.
How many NS,CS, TFC and people on Steam are gonna ditch this game and all the other mods when HL2 comes out?
The magic bullet that can't be dodged is out there, and just about ready to be fired.
As for HL2 being a magic bullet, that is just something we cannot say will or will not happen. By the time HL2 is released, who knows whether Flayra will have his Unknown Worlds company off the ground and NS will have its own engine (Which I believe is what Flayra wants).
As for everyone who complains about how the next version will ruin the game (Myself included), I can only point to someones signature which reads something like "Noobs complain. Veterans <i>adapt</i>."
Obviosuly this is some time after the release. The first month after the release the lag will be enormous.
Think about it.
How many 14-30 year olds do you know.
With a decent spec pc/intending to upgrade soon/intending to upgrade FOR hl2
I can say that about 60% of them will play HL2, and 40% of them for long periods.
And that's just a small portion of the gaming world.
:\
Still, eventually, hype dies down, ppl realise how totally awesome NS really is, ppl return.
Besides, it will be great having only vets on the servers for a few months. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
The main problem of NS in regards with keeping new players is that its "Point of inevitiability" is too long. What I mean about PoI is that there comes a point in every game, where the other team just CANNOT win. With NS, sometimes this can go upwards of 20 mins to a half hr, compared to other games like CS, which techinically do not have a PoI, because 1 player can take down the other team. Because a lot of CS players are in "Hero mode" they have a hard time accepting that even a group of skulks that uses teamwork will get slaughtered by HA/HMG, and a Lone LMG marine has no chance against an Onos.
Some people accept it because of the RTS counterparts, which creates that PoI (as it does in true RTS games), but the FPS players do not like the fact that sometimes no matter how hard they try, they are going to lose because of the other team's superior technology upgrades.
Thats why it dips back to around 1000-1100 players, because those are the people that accept the fact, that sometimes, no matter how talented, you are going to lose.
The main problem of NS in regards with keeping new players is that its "Point of inevitiability" is too long. What I mean about PoI is that there comes a point in every game, where the other team just CANNOT win. With NS, sometimes this can go upwards of 20 mins to a half hr, compared to other games like CS, which techinically do not have a PoI, because 1 player can take down the other team. Because a lot of CS players are in "Hero mode" they have a hard time accepting that even a group of skulks that uses teamwork will get slaughtered by HA/HMG, and a Lone LMG marine has no chance against an Onos.
Some people accept it because of the RTS counterparts, which creates that PoI (as it does in true RTS games), but the FPS players do not like the fact that sometimes no matter how hard they try, they are going to lose because of the other team's superior technology upgrades.
Thats why it dips back to around 1000-1100 players, because those are the people that accept the fact, that sometimes, no matter how talented, you are going to lose. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exceptionally well thought out post.
Firewater is right, the time of games is just too long for many people. When you look at the way most gamers are accustomed to playing, it is in an entirely different manner than Natural Selection. Quicker and often more individually gratifying games satisfy somone more than NS might.
Respawn prevents one-man-army situations in NS for the most part. (also heavy classes like Oni, Fades, and heavy armored marines) Each kill means alot more if it potentially prevents them from spawning.
It would need to be tested to see if wait times for low-res kharaa players was too long and boring. Could always put resource distribution priority to those who are waiting to spawn.
With this change you could also decrease the spawn wait time. (again, less waiting... more action)
I would be interested in hearing why this was disregarded during early testing and if it would work with the current form of NS.
Not true. Veterans whine as much (if not more) as anyone else. They just whine differently and with a lot more smugness.
No good idea. Some dev or PT (i can't recall who it was) told me that this was tested once.
The comms where near insanity and kept screaming "Don't die! dont't die!"
I already knew it was tested. I just want a logical answer as to why it was discarded and whether it would be different in this version -- after some balancing adjustments, of course.
PS. I want to point out that with RFK the other team gets TWO res for killing one of your teammates, and yet you don't hear the commander yelling "don't die".
Anyway, I do nit think it would really iprove the game that much, and I doubt it would be worth the effort of balancing it out.
There are more viable ways to improve the game that should be tested. Unchained chambers for instance......
I guess that would have a much greater impact on gameplay that respawn costs.
Besides, RFK are desinged to allow pinned down teams to GAIN resources and make a comeback (at least thats what I think its for).
Respawn costs are the direct opposite of that and would just make gameending a bit easier. (not that this would be a bad thing).
The devs seem to prever the possibility of comeback over more descisive endgame. I do not know what is the better solution, but I trust Flayra on this.
I already knew it was tested. I just want a logical answer as to why it was discarded and whether it would be different in this version -- after some balancing adjustments, of course.
PS. I want to point out that with RFK the other team gets TWO res for killing one of your teammates, and yet you don't hear the commander yelling "don't die". <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Picture the following situation: You're commanding on a public server. Your budget is tight. Just so slowly, you manage to push your troops forward into a position to lay siege on the aliens. Anciously, you watch the res counter climb up while the four marines that actually follow your orders do a great job keeping the enemy at bay. Then, when you saved enough up, you start dropping buildings. And just as you want to drop the PG, three ramboing marines get gibbed by a stray Fade and respawn, throwing you below the res necessary to place the gate. The outpost is cut off from its reinforcements, everything invested into it is de-facto down the drain.
Sufficient to say that it was just too frustrating all around.
That said, I'd appreciate if you kept the discussion of gameplay changes out of topics of different intention and in the appropriate forums.
Folks, realize that nobody has ever tried something like NS before. It takes a damn lot of trying to get it right (and I'll feed the first person claiming that Flayra 'got it right with 1.04' to the sharks pool that was General during the later days of .04). Yes, there are gameplay aspects that are frustrating, yes, there is stuff that isn't fun. Neither excuses the inclusion of new needlessly frustrating aspects.
hello people there is a lot more to this game than Co...
stupid Co... bringing in all these DM'ers
...Which also happens to be in beta status. Not to mention that we weren't discussing balance at all.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Some measures are always going to be remotely punitive. Its like saying "Dieing as a fade is too frustrating, make it stop" - its also a core part of what makes NS exciting, and being a marine dull and easy. Ask anyone that started playing with 3.0, they'll probably remember when they were mortally scared of the "ka-chick" noise of someone pulling out their LMG, but can't remotely recall when an Alien seemed scary.
The utter lack of punitive measures for marine failure right now is one of the things thats wrong, in my opinion.
I'm inclined to agree, but such a punitive measure would have to be put on the level of the individual marine, because he, the man in the field, is supposed to be scared. Punishing the commander for marine mistakes won't make the aliens more intimidating to the grunts.
Not true. Veterans whine as much (if not more) as anyone else. They just whine differently and with a lot more smugness. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You bet they whine, but then again its your post is a shining example of what they whine about
SaltzBad covered what I was going to say.
<!--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--> throwing you below the res necessary to place the gate.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->I take it that they had negative res in this implementation? Interesting. My point was to prevent spawning.
In any case, I'll concede the thought. I know there are higher priorities (ie. "unchaining chambers") but I wasn't going to be redundant. Besides, it would take quite a bit of balancing to make the spawn cost change effective.
Not true. Veterans whine as much (if not more) as anyone else. They just whine differently and with a lot more smugness. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually my signature does not apply to All people with the NS Vet icon. I've been using that signature since I started competitive CS, which was about 4 years ago. It means that newbies, a long with scrubs will blame the game (or anyone else other than themselves) for their own shortcommings. Veterans, or pro players, will accept that the game is the way it is and learn that if they die its THEIR OWN FAULT. Accepting that dying is one's own fault allows one to acknowledge a mistake. When a mistake is acknowledged, one can learn from it, and correct, hence making oneself a better player by learning and correcting mistakes that are made during the course of the game. Newbies/scrubs who blame the game, believe that they did not do anything wrong, and its a game design flaw, "Someone cheating",the commander, stupid gorge, **** hacker, etc... Accepting no responsibility for dying/losing, and continue to make the same mistakes because they the newbies/scrubs feel that they did not make any, so there is nothing to learn from no mistakes being made.
Just a brief explanation of my signature, if anyone wants to go more in depth, please PM me on IRC or in the forums.
I'm inclined to agree, but such a punitive measure would have to be put on the level of the individual marine, because he, the man in the field, is supposed to be scared. Punishing the commander for marine mistakes won't make the aliens more intimidating to the grunts. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, its a teambased game - and as such there is currently, and unfortuantely will probably be for a long time to come, no accounting for disregarding your team entirely. The same way alien punitive measures all (except for the ressource loss) rain down on the team, and only indirectly punish the individual in the form of losing (leading to some frustration).
In the same way, its not the commanders ressources that get diminished - its the teams ressources. That death is a medpack you're not getting, or as you said can eat away the res for vital structures.
I agree though that the system and manner of application is not perfect - cost could for example be paid to spawn the marine, <i>not</i> for him to die, and an option could/should be included to refuse payment and thus spawn at maybe half the rate (one spawn per 20 seconds, and only 1 IP works). That balances the way in which measures are applied a bit better, if you ask me.
The sci-fi setting, the buildings, the commander view, the alien mode, the teamwork
I only played CS when it was beta. The real beta, pre v1.0. I enjoyed Unreal Tournament and Return to Castle Wolfenstein immensely. Team based, fast movement fast decision games.
Perhaps it is because people are used to CS or to Quake. I know and you all should know as well, that many people are reluctant to change, to learn new things, to break old habits, because they are motherfuckn lazy and stupid. How can we lure them ?
Respawn prevents one-man-army situations in NS for the most part. (also heavy classes like Oni, Fades, and heavy armored marines) Each kill means alot more if it potentially prevents them from spawning.
It would need to be tested to see if wait times for low-res kharaa players was too long and boring. Could always put resource distribution priority to those who are waiting to spawn.
With this change you could also decrease the spawn wait time. (again, less waiting... more action)
I would be interested in hearing why this was disregarded during early testing and if it would work with the current form of NS. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The PoI theory is entirely appropriate, it would suggest that at a new release, a lot more people play because its new. In some pubs the PoI can turn off new players if they aren't having fun during that time period. It is an explantaion for if NS is growing or not.