<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Oct 20 2004, 09:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Oct 20 2004, 09:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Insane+Oct 20 2004, 04:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Insane @ Oct 20 2004, 04:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Oct 20 2004, 09:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Oct 20 2004, 09:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Alibino the truth is that people do strictly post in the private forums over the general discussion, this place is shunned by the elite of the NS community. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Okay thanks for that info, I'd better go and start posting in private forums more so that I can live up to such an indisputable truth. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Dude it's no secret, after all the privite sections hold more importance as their influence is greater, if I had a choice of a limited number of posts (aka time) I'd place the private forums over the general ones.
And when was the last time you posted in the general forums insane...? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Maybe it actually has nothing to do with the 'elitism' and the 'shunning' of it, but more over that there are often threads in here that warrent no interest to some people?
I've gone periods of weeks when I've not posted in here or even read the threads because they are of no interest to me... but I've been consistently active in the guide and pt forum (since gaining access to them) - does that make me elitist? I sure hope not...
------------------------------
Some thing I think most of us around here should consider; (N.B. This is not aimed directly at Forlorn but it may appear as it is as I've just quoted him...)
None of us (with VERY few exceptions) are owed any thing by the NS team. This game has essentially been one persons livelyhood for the past 2 years. Many other people have sacrificed unimaginable amounts of time to bring us this game - some of whom go with barely a mention to their name, let alone any sort of a reward. When people turn around and say "That Dev is rubbish" or "why can't they just fix those bugs" - When was the last time you produced a game of this complexity? When was the last time you tackled some of the obstacles faced by the devs in working on a game this 'advanced' on an engine 7-8 years old?
Yes we all have good intentions by critisizing - we're trying to put across what we think will help to improve the game - but we have to remember that ultimately none of it is our decision. Rash statements backed up with little or no evidence serve absolutely no purpose except heighten tempers and result in pointless confrontations.
Marik_SteeleTo rule in hell...Join Date: 2002-11-20Member: 9466Members
edited October 2004
If any PT leads, devs, etc. have input on this subject, go ahead and post. I frankly haven't read the past page or few to see what led to some of the posts I had to edit, but I see where it's going and I'd like to lock it before it gets there.
[edit]I got a couple of PMs saying the thread might be worth re-opening if I took the time to read back (which I said I hadn't) and clean up any posts that may need it. Thread re-opened; hopefully I skimmed through & edited enough of the more recent posts that we can stay civilized.
<!--QuoteBegin--Lurker-+Oct 20 2004, 09:25 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (-Lurker- @ Oct 20 2004, 09:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-[UVic+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> ([UVic)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Albino Chinaman,Oct 20 2004, 04:21 PM] Posting info != jumping to conclusions. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's funny because it's true! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It is if its used with the intention to hide the entirety of the subject. A form of propaganda in essense, to which you only bring up factual information in support of one conclusion when the topic has a wide assortment of other facts that may differ from the conclusion that one would surmise from the begenning information.
Ps: Having players be 'good' does not mean they are going to be more productive then the current play testing team. Take the veteran program as example.
<!--QuoteBegin-Wither+Oct 20 2004, 10:03 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wither @ Oct 20 2004, 10:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> So yeah as a disclaimer, I'm a PT. Not a PT lead. Not a dev. Not the president. All I said up above was my personal opinion and does in no way reflect on the NS team, NS itself or any official NS figure. Thanks. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm glad you cleared that up!
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin-Wither+Oct 20 2004, 05:03 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wither @ Oct 20 2004, 05:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You make a good case though it gets muddled by flamebait. It's cool to have both sides of the issue at each other's throat, but I don't get how some of you guys are using post counts as a point of wanting more skilled players as PT's. If you just wanted skill players, post counts shouldn't be taken into consideration so it's a moot point.
I agree to most of this by the way. I'm not going to call people various things and insult e-privates-sizes, but certainly more skilled players wouldn't hurt the PT of things. Fact of the matter is, though, that what Bob said is true. Concerning 3.0 final, suggesting balance changes is a no go from our side. Our hands are tied. We give feedback on changes, we give minor suggestions that could balance them, but suggesting them isn't something we can do. It's not the I&S of Eden where every change is followed by a dev taking your hand and saying WOW DUDE UR ROX YOUR SUGGESTION IS IN. Coding takes time. The devs have lives. That doesn't leave enough time for testing every suggestion made in the release time for the next product. If we did this, B6 would be out somewhere in mid 2005.
Uh yeah, now back to what I was saying. Skilled players wouldn't hurt the PT team. Now they just need to be able to give constructive feedback and think things out and they would be the perfect candidate. I'd say it's about 50/50, it's a rare sight finding non clanners that are the same way and I'd also say the current PT group that attends are half clanner half non. Perhaps some no longer clan, but they certainly are able to give feedback and think things out well. Note that if you have any suggestions for PT's, even though I have no say in adding any, I wouldn't mind seeing PM's suggesting people and reasons for doing so.
So yeah as a disclaimer, I'm a PT. Not a PT lead. Not a dev. Not the president. All I said up above was my personal opinion and does in no way reflect on the NS team, NS itself or any official NS figure. Thanks. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think the point is that some people in the PT group need to max the game out in a certain area in terms of skill. PTs may be about bug fixing, but since there IS no group that balances the game (no vet group right now, and the number of current competitive players in the PT group is pretty low), PTs seem to be doing that as well. There need to be people that nearly break the game in order to see if things work or not. Just their prescence in the game may show something is unbalanced. You may be able to force changes, but I don't see why you can't just suggest them in the PT forum. If something is obviously broken from the competitive side, clan players will notice something is wrong immediately, and public play will shows its own flaws as well.
<!--QuoteBegin-SentrySteve+Oct 21 2004, 12:35 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SentrySteve @ Oct 21 2004, 12:35 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Wither+Oct 20 2004, 10:03 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wither @ Oct 20 2004, 10:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> So yeah as a disclaimer, I'm a PT. Not a PT lead. Not a dev. Not the president. All I said up above was my personal opinion and does in no way reflect on the NS team, NS itself or any official NS figure. Thanks. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm glad you cleared that up! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Opressed mass :/
the only issue I could see with having clanners in the PT build is they may gain an advatage over other clans by the simple fact they get to play what may possibly be a new release more so than other clans.
I liked the idea of releasing the build to everyone then having a few select vets then advise some changes. for that would keep it fair to all clans.
But having somone push the game to the next extreme is good.
<!--QuoteBegin-Gecko God Of DOOOM+Oct 20 2004, 06:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Gecko God Of DOOOM @ Oct 20 2004, 06:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> the only issue I could see with having clanners in the PT build is they may gain an advatage over other clans by the simple fact they get to play what may possibly be a new release more so than other clans. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Everything would be out in the open the moment their knowledge is used in a match. HLTV doesn't hide anything.
<!--QuoteBegin-[UVic]Albino Chinaman+Oct 20 2004, 07:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> ([UVic]Albino Chinaman @ Oct 20 2004, 07:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Gecko God Of DOOOM+Oct 20 2004, 06:44 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Gecko God Of DOOOM @ Oct 20 2004, 06:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> the only issue I could see with having clanners in the PT build is they may gain an advatage over other clans by the simple fact they get to play what may possibly be a new release more so than other clans. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Everything would be out in the open the moment their knowledge is used in a match. HLTV doesn't hide anything. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Providing HLTV is supported.
But they all have to record demos for matches, so yeah, he's right.
Even though it would give them a slight advantage in <u>a</u> match, skill will supercede once everyone adjusts... plus, if you give out playtest-type permissions to the top x clans, the clans would have motivation to work harder so they would get the ability to give feedback when the changes are more likely to be made.
I really doubt that any clan worth their salt wouldn't go through the changelogs and find the strong points of a build and even if they don't a simple "hay doodz what strategies do you use?" will work 9 times out of 10.
If there was any point in time which needed a change, now would be the best. If the developers do really wish NS to be able to compete with hl2 and mods once it released, they should increase active playtesters and remove inactive ones. The increase of active playtesters would also give more playtest sessions and eventually lead to faster updates (developers time permitting) this could easily give ns the edge that it has so lacked since its release.
The fact that the playtest group is comprised of half clanners and non-clanners gives it a diversity it needs. Even if bug-catching is the only thing that occurs, there is a higher probability that a bug would be fixed. The playtesters that have been testing for the past updates should be commended, there have been very few bugs that have gotten by. But, this should be looked to be optimized to a period where one update would fix bugs that had been spotted. (ideally once every 2 weeks) Where another update should be based on changes to the actual way ns is played. (This should be ideally every 4 weeks, although it can be noted builds can take longer to produce) If this was done correctly, there would be very little time for a playtester to play anything else, but because half the playtesters are clanners it is unlikely this would occur.
Any increase in pt, no matter how small could ultimately help keep ns alive and competing. My proposal would be a nomination system for new playtesters. Many people would want to join, but only a few would actually pass the qualifications. Go through basic questioning of the player and find the best qualified 30 or so individuals.
Many people who play ns do not actually post on the forums, but simply overview key things. I for one have not posted since january, I simply go over important threads and random updates. By nominating pts for interview it should keep ns in good shape and bring the best individuals forward if they are part of the ns forum community or not.
As for top clans receiving any part in pt, I doubt that would be effective. One pt per active clan might be more effective. (Preferably the most educated and hopefully most mature member) Most clans do use the same strat, build after build. It would not really benefit the clan, but more the community as a whole.
Pm me if any of this is confusing, as I just awoke and am kind of in a dazed state...
Yeah it would be a pretty good idea to get some more playtesters. NS really needs to be tested in the areas or 24+ people (to try to find ways to help out the aliens in those large games), and the current amount of PT's just doesn't seem to cut it.
<!--QuoteBegin-Phanneh+Oct 20 2004, 09:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Phanneh @ Oct 20 2004, 09:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If there was any point in time which needed a change, now would be the best. If the developers do really wish NS to be able to compete with hl2 and mods once it released, they should increase active playtesters and remove inactive ones. The increase of active playtesters would also give more playtest sessions and eventually lead to faster updates (developers time permitting) this could easily give ns the edge that it has so lacked since its release.
The fact that the playtest group is comprised of half clanners and non-clanners gives it a diversity it needs. Even if bug-catching is the only thing that occurs, there is a higher probability that a bug would be fixed. The playtesters that have been testing for the past updates should be commended, there have been very few bugs that have gotten by. But, this should be looked to be optimized to a period where one update would fix bugs that had been spotted. (ideally once every 2 weeks) Where another update should be based on changes to the actual way ns is played. (This should be ideally every 4 weeks, although it can be noted builds can take longer to produce) If this was done correctly, there would be very little time for a playtester to play anything else, but because half the playtesters are clanners it is unlikely this would occur.
Any increase in pt, no matter how small could ultimately help keep ns alive and competing. My proposal would be a nomination system for new playtesters. Many people would want to join, but only a few would actually pass the qualifications. Go through basic questioning of the player and find the best qualified 30 or so individuals.
Many people who play ns do not actually post on the forums, but simply overview key things. I for one have not posted since january, I simply go over important threads and random updates. By nominating pts for interview it should keep ns in good shape and bring the best individuals forward if they are part of the ns forum community or not.
As for top clans receiving any part in pt, I doubt that would be effective. One pt per active clan might be more effective. (Preferably the most educated and hopefully most mature member) Most clans do use the same strat, build after build. It would not really benefit the clan, but more the community as a whole.
Pm me if any of this is confusing, as I just awoke and am kind of in a dazed state... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> To paragraph one, good point.
To paragraph two, most people would agree it is mostly non-clanners as of right now.
To paragraph three, nomination makes no sense if there is no credibility behind those who nominate.
To paragraph four, considering there has never been an effective implementation of the top clans in a playtest setting, then there is no way to surmise that, however we do have plenty of other high calibur games that take only the best player's input, which are very popular that suggests to me otherwise.
My statement directed about top clans was more dierected toward Roberto than to the community, excuse me for the confussion. As far as the nominations was concerned, I was at a loss to figure out how it could be correctly and efficiently implemented and was hopeful for someone to supply an answer. But, its only a suggestion and more likely than not will not be implemented. But, there should be something done to rejuvenate the game. The proposal of increased smaller build releases could create this. But, it would need to start with the people behind the scenes first.
I was thinking that a few of the top clans in the playtest, at least the balancing part, would be that new ideas of "it would be neat if..." "wow, that is really unbalanced" would be found before they hit the full clan base and are implemented into "strategy," since they are part of the release, so it can't be an exploit, right?
Someone got into how the who knows more a dev with a stat tracker or a player in the competitive community arguement.
Well Flay and voogru may know a lot about which team is stronger in your average pub but I gurantee you neither of them has any clue how to use nor has the ability to counter nor has put any thought into pancaking because none of the devs have to deal with it.
Frankly most of the pts don't either. Its sad that issues like this don't get addressed because the people who make the balance decisions never have to deal with it.
If you're not good, why are you playtesting? Only thing I can think of is bughunting. Another argument I've seen before is to 'balance the game for pubs, not only matches'. This argument is worthless. No successful game balances for public play over competitive play. Is CS balanced for pubs? Is wc3 balanced for every newbie who plays? No.
GrendelAll that is fear...Join Date: 2002-07-19Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
<!--QuoteBegin-k33l3m+Oct 21 2004, 09:27 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (k33l3m @ Oct 21 2004, 09:27 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If you're not good, why are you playtesting? Only thing I can think of is bughunting. Another argument I've seen before is to 'balance the game for pubs, not only matches'. This argument is worthless. No successful game balances for public play over competitive play. Is CS balanced for pubs? Is wc3 balanced for every newbie who plays? No. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, yes.
The primary reason for balancing difficulty (excepting exploits and difficult to access skillsets) is the interaction between players.
A newbie playing a 1v1 in WC3 has total control over the tools available to him. A person playing NS does not. He cannot both Skulk and provide umbra support. He cannot both sweep the field for marines whilst putting pressure on nodes.
In CS, 1 guy can win a round. He just has to shoot a lot of hostiles. Besides which, a few fairly cosmetic differences aside, both teams have access to the same equipment or can easily acquire it.
ShockehIf a packet drops on the web and nobody's near to see it...Join Date: 2002-11-19Member: 9336NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
edited October 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Oct 20 2004, 10:48 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Oct 20 2004, 10:48 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Alkiller, they've made a good choice by ignoring issues untill they present themselves a blister such as this thread? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> So I don't post in the public forums? Just wondering....
It's absolutely correct to everyone you cannot perfectly balance public & clan play simultaneously. But likewise, you need a semblance of balance to the new player. How many CS'ers currently don't play NS because they tried it once, decided it sucked and then quit? Half of these people will never download NS again, because first opinion counts for a LOT.
If you don't at least make it fun and at least appearing balanced to public players, we'll never get anymore clans to play that perfect game, apart from a cliquey 'elite' group who already know all the tricks, and play each other over & over. The sad bit being, some would describe this as a good thing....
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
edited October 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+Oct 21 2004, 03:56 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Oct 21 2004, 03:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-k33l3m+Oct 21 2004, 09:27 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (k33l3m @ Oct 21 2004, 09:27 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This argument is worthless. No successful game balances for public play over competitive play. Is CS balanced for pubs? Is wc3 balanced for every newbie who plays? No. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, yes.
The primary reason for balancing difficulty (excepting exploits and difficult to access skillsets) is the interaction between players.
A newbie playing a 1v1 in WC3 has total control over the tools available to him. A person playing NS does not. He cannot both Skulk and provide umbra support. He cannot both sweep the field for marines whilst putting pressure on nodes.
In CS, 1 guy can win a round. He just has to shoot a lot of hostiles. Besides which, a few fairly cosmetic differences aside, both teams have access to the same equipment or can easily acquire it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He asked if the game is balanced for newbies playing games, and the answer is no it isn't. A new player will play WC3 online and get DESTROYED by anyone with any experience? Why? They don't have the essential skills and knowledge to win yet. The smart ones find out quickly, the not so smart ones whine "OMG THIS IS SO UNFAIR THAT STRAT IS <insert random idiot comment here>", when in fact said strategy has a very solid and viable counter (Pre-TFT hunt massing anyone?). You can't balance games for people that probably don't even understand how the game works, otherwise it seriously kills balance for competitive players. If you gave the fade a 180 degree swipe radius and made its stats 500/250, even the most newbie of players could rack up insane scores like some of the best fades in NS do right now, with 0 experience at fading. However the current good fades would be impossible to kill, literally. This is why games aren't balanced for newbies at all.
The argument about different players doesn't hold weight either. It's very obvious when something is breaking balance significantly, you don't need the entire team to function perfectly in order to see that. A good player playing against other good players will reveal imbalance. You can't stack the really good PTs against some of the others and expect to see "balance" from that, it's absurd. It's like pubbing and putting 5 clan players on on marines and the aliens have no experienced players, they'll get stomped into the ground.
<!--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--> Someone got into how the who knows more a dev with a stat tracker or a player in the competitive community arguement.
Well Flay and voogru may know a lot about which team is stronger in your average pub but I gurantee you neither of them has any clue how to use nor has the ability to counter nor has put any thought into pancaking because none of the devs have to deal with it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
THANK YOU, someone understands. This is exactly the type of stuff I'm talking about.
EDIT: I was asked to make this a little less flammable, and to point out that I wasn't attempting to flame Grendel, I just got a little over-zealous in defending my point
tankefuglOne Script To Rule Them All...Trondheim, NorwayJoin Date: 2002-11-14Member: 8641Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
I believe you all are a bit off-target here.
It's not the skills of a programmer that's required to balance the game. It's not the twitch and good aim of a competitive player either. It's an dedicated, analytic, observing and creative mind.
Though some few have all those properties, it doesn't guarantee that anyone with either of those have any of the other.
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
I agree that being in an active competitive player doesn't make you suddenly capable of balancing the game, but just today I made a list of some 40ish people nearly off the top of my head after a PT asked me who I thought would be in the clanscene that could help balance NS based on a few requirements. The people definitely exist.
tankefuglOne Script To Rule Them All...Trondheim, NorwayJoin Date: 2002-11-14Member: 8641Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited October 2004
Yes, of course they do.
As for recruiting PTs, I will leave that to the PT leads to comment, though.
However, as I have previously stated, they all do not need to be in the PT group to have their say on current balance issues. Just like WC3 (since it was mentioned) and SC, the <b>real</b> balancing starts when it's released to the public.
I'd love to see some independent group of highly active competitive players agreeing and putting down how they would see NS done to be balanced. You might even consider this statement a challenge <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Again, Adj, you guys are stuck on the concept of balancing for "newbies." I don't think anyone here is suggesting that. We are talking about balancing for PUBS. Pubs have a number of significant differences from scrims that need to be balanced for, besides skill level. Most significant is the difference in teamwork level. This is a factor that doesn't typically come into play for WC3 balancing. Pub servers are going to have weaker teamwork by definition because the teams aren't pre-determined, and so if the game requires a scrim level of teamwork to be balanced, then you've broken pub servers. Unlike Warcraft 3 where newbies can eventually grow to become skilled enough to use the appropriate counters, a pub server will never have a high end level of teamwork.
How do you balance for an enviroment with no constants? Lets take the example of balancing the fade. Now your average player public player is not a very good fade, they blink into a few shotgunners, walk around and die. Should we then boost the fade? No. The same fade in a different players hand could lead to total decimation of the marine team. Should we then nerf the fade? No.
Should we improve the Lmgs to counter the good fades who ramapage through teams? Should we nerf everything to allow the newer players to actually stay alive? You simply cannot balance for that sort of enviroment, it's like trying to make 10kg and 20kg weigh the same. The varying level of skill in a public match and the lack of organisation in who does what means that the game can't be balanced. Even and epic matches are merely a result of equal levels of incompetance.
HAMBoneProbably the best CommanderJoin Date: 2003-04-02Member: 15139Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
edited October 2004
Ive always been for public betas, afaik 3.0 is still a public beta but iirc there was a lot of behind the scenes stuff going on and they have had to rebuild a lot of their team from scratch and a lot of bugs and things of that nature are being fixed. The NS team is made up of extremely competent people, if 3.0b6 has balance issues then they will release a 3.0b7 to address them quickly, at least that has always been my experience. I do believe that games should be balanced for the top players, and I can't really recall a change in any game that i've played that was intended to balance the top tier games that didnt also balance the lower tier games - to put it more simply when you balance for the top tier it will also achieve greater balance in the public games, strategies/items that are too good in clan matches are usually even more overpowered in pub games. However IMO balance is more of the icing on the cake, the difficult stuff is finding/fixing bugs and making art and maps and adding features and managing a community and making the game fun. It is going to be pretty difficult for anyone to mess up the balance in NS, and if they do mess it up, then it is going to be easy for them to fix it. Balance is identifying overpowered/underpowered strategies/items and bringing them up to speed by either nerfing them or giving the other team's soft counter a boost. Generally top players and teams are more sneaky and conniving and they tend to seek out imbalanced strategies and exploit them with great vigor which should make the balance process easier and faster(also the more players with access to the game the more people to find exploitable strats). You could compare balance testing to bug testing, the objective is to "break" the game in a sense by finding a strategy/item that is too good, and then fix it(finding strategies/items that arent good enough and making them better is just as important). Bug testing is harder but it is the same kind of mindset used in balance testing.
In regards to what forlorn said, just to clarify, the role I played was mostly reading the forums and gathering the popular opinion and presenting it to flayra. I like to think that I was especially good at finding the strategies that were "too good" but a lot of the time I was presenting widely known issues and I never had any type of final say, I was more of a consultant.
Anyways I guess the point id like to make in this post is that the pts are all smart guys and they have all devoted a significant amount of time into this game and they all have the same motive which is to aid in the creation of a fun, balanced, bug-free game - if any of the changes they are making cause any serious balance issues, the issue will be short lived.
I think the best way to do it would be to have a smaller group of PTs do alpha testing, testing bugs and maps and giving input on features and ways to make the game more fun and helping with the primary balance testing for new features, then release the game to the public, let them have at it, release a balance patch or two, rinse and repeat, and to my knowledge that is more or less how they are doing things now. The primary goal should be getting a working product out to the public asap - yes clans are really good for balance, and their opinions on balance should be listened to with open ears and taken very seriously, but discussing wether or not clans should be involved in the internal PT pushes balance back into being an internal affair and delays public release further, you cant balance until the bugs are gone and the game works and if the bugs are gone and the game works then it should be in the hands of the people. The top teams/players are going to be able to compile balance data 10x faster if its a public release than they would if it were just 5-10 teams playing amongst themselves privately, for a number of reasons. Sorry this post is so long, its a very interesting debate
EDIT: I just want to clarify even further because rereading my post I dont know if i did a good job in relation to the current discussion. When we had just 10 clans in the 2.0 vet program it was not very productive at all, it was very hard to schedule games, etc. As soon as 2.0 was released and became the CAL version, all the clans jumped into action and started playing "for real", at which point the existing balance issues became apparent very quickly. This was the same thing that happened with 3.0 iirc. I do think that it is important to let the teams know that their opinion matters and is very important, I just don't think that realistically the teams are going to be able to get much work done until the release is public and in CAL.
<!--QuoteBegin-tankefugl+Oct 21 2004, 06:54 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (tankefugl @ Oct 21 2004, 06:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yes, of course they do.
As for recruiting PTs, I will leave that to the PT leads to comment, though.
However, as I have previously stated, they all do not need to be in the PT group to have their say on current balance issues. Just like WC3 (since it was mentioned) and SC, the <b>real</b> balancing starts when it's released to the public.
I'd love to see some independent group of highly active competitive players agreeing and putting down how they would see NS done to be balanced. You might even consider this statement a challenge <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> 1. Thank you for ignoring our arguments. This not only goes to tankfugel but to everyone. It's been stated that competetive players make the ideal canidates for balancing for pub play as well as competetive play because they do both. Whereas pub only PT's do not have both.
2. A list of changes agreed on by good competetive players has already been done, and submitted to Flayra. We are still waiting to see what goes in or not.
I think the PTs are being overrated here, we are basically just bug finders and obvious gameplay problem illustrators. Replace all the current PTs with the very best possible PTs and I think it'd make little difference to the changes made to NS. Sure PTs make suggestions, but so does everybody. Most of the changes in the current version were playtesting appear to have come from the I&S forums rather than any PTs suggestions. Sometimes PT suggestions are taken on board, but its more a case of if they think the idea is good they will implement it, it doesn't matter who it came from.
Comments
Okay thanks for that info, I'd better go and start posting in private forums more so that I can live up to such an indisputable truth. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dude it's no secret, after all the privite sections hold more importance as their influence is greater, if I had a choice of a limited number of posts (aka time) I'd place the private forums over the general ones.
And when was the last time you posted in the general forums insane...? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe it actually has nothing to do with the 'elitism' and the 'shunning' of it, but more over that there are often threads in here that warrent no interest to some people?
I've gone periods of weeks when I've not posted in here or even read the threads because they are of no interest to me... but I've been consistently active in the guide and pt forum (since gaining access to them) - does that make me elitist? I sure hope not...
------------------------------
Some thing I think most of us around here should consider; (N.B. This is not aimed directly at Forlorn but it may appear as it is as I've just quoted him...)
None of us (with VERY few exceptions) are owed any thing by the NS team. This game has essentially been one persons livelyhood for the past 2 years. Many other people have sacrificed unimaginable amounts of time to bring us this game - some of whom go with barely a mention to their name, let alone any sort of a reward. When people turn around and say "That Dev is rubbish" or "why can't they just fix those bugs" - When was the last time you produced a game of this complexity? When was the last time you tackled some of the obstacles faced by the devs in working on a game this 'advanced' on an engine 7-8 years old?
Yes we all have good intentions by critisizing - we're trying to put across what we think will help to improve the game - but we have to remember that ultimately none of it is our decision. Rash statements backed up with little or no evidence serve absolutely no purpose except heighten tempers and result in pointless confrontations.
[edit]I got a couple of PMs saying the thread might be worth re-opening if I took the time to read back (which I said I hadn't) and clean up any posts that may need it. Thread re-opened; hopefully I skimmed through & edited enough of the more recent posts that we can stay civilized.
It's funny because it's true! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is if its used with the intention to hide the entirety of the subject. A form of propaganda in essense, to which you only bring up factual information in support of one conclusion when the topic has a wide assortment of other facts that may differ from the conclusion that one would surmise from the begenning information.
Ps: Having players be 'good' does not mean they are going to be more productive then the current play testing team. Take the veteran program as example.
I'm glad you cleared that up!
I agree to most of this by the way. I'm not going to call people various things and insult e-privates-sizes, but certainly more skilled players wouldn't hurt the PT of things. Fact of the matter is, though, that what Bob said is true. Concerning 3.0 final, suggesting balance changes is a no go from our side. Our hands are tied. We give feedback on changes, we give minor suggestions that could balance them, but suggesting them isn't something we can do. It's not the I&S of Eden where every change is followed by a dev taking your hand and saying WOW DUDE UR ROX YOUR SUGGESTION IS IN. Coding takes time. The devs have lives. That doesn't leave enough time for testing every suggestion made in the release time for the next product. If we did this, B6 would be out somewhere in mid 2005.
Uh yeah, now back to what I was saying. Skilled players wouldn't hurt the PT team. Now they just need to be able to give constructive feedback and think things out and they would be the perfect candidate. I'd say it's about 50/50, it's a rare sight finding non clanners that are the same way and I'd also say the current PT group that attends are half clanner half non. Perhaps some no longer clan, but they certainly are able to give feedback and think things out well. Note that if you have any suggestions for PT's, even though I have no say in adding any, I wouldn't mind seeing PM's suggesting people and reasons for doing so.
So yeah as a disclaimer, I'm a PT. Not a PT lead. Not a dev. Not the president. All I said up above was my personal opinion and does in no way reflect on the NS team, NS itself or any official NS figure. Thanks. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the point is that some people in the PT group need to max the game out in a certain area in terms of skill. PTs may be about bug fixing, but since there IS no group that balances the game (no vet group right now, and the number of current competitive players in the PT group is pretty low), PTs seem to be doing that as well. There need to be people that nearly break the game in order to see if things work or not. Just their prescence in the game may show something is unbalanced. You may be able to force changes, but I don't see why you can't just suggest them in the PT forum. If something is obviously broken from the competitive side, clan players will notice something is wrong immediately, and public play will shows its own flaws as well.
I'm glad you cleared that up! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Opressed mass :/
I liked the idea of releasing the build to everyone then having a few select vets then advise some changes. for that would keep it fair to all clans.
But having somone push the game to the next extreme is good.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Everything would be out in the open the moment their knowledge is used in a match. HLTV doesn't hide anything.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Everything would be out in the open the moment their knowledge is used in a match. HLTV doesn't hide anything. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Providing HLTV is supported.
But they all have to record demos for matches, so yeah, he's right.
The fact that the playtest group is comprised of half clanners and non-clanners gives it a diversity it needs. Even if bug-catching is the only thing that occurs, there is a higher probability that a bug would be fixed. The playtesters that have been testing for the past updates should be commended, there have been very few bugs that have gotten by. But, this should be looked to be optimized to a period where one update would fix bugs that had been spotted. (ideally once every 2 weeks) Where another update should be based on changes to the actual way ns is played. (This should be ideally every 4 weeks, although it can be noted builds can take longer to produce) If this was done correctly, there would be very little time for a playtester to play anything else, but because half the playtesters are clanners it is unlikely this would occur.
Any increase in pt, no matter how small could ultimately help keep ns alive and competing. My proposal would be a nomination system for new playtesters. Many people would want to join, but only a few would actually pass the qualifications. Go through basic questioning of the player and find the best qualified 30 or so individuals.
Many people who play ns do not actually post on the forums, but simply overview key things. I for one have not posted since january, I simply go over important threads and random updates. By nominating pts for interview it should keep ns in good shape and bring the best individuals forward if they are part of the ns forum community or not.
As for top clans receiving any part in pt, I doubt that would be effective. One pt per active clan might be more effective. (Preferably the most educated and hopefully most mature member) Most clans do use the same strat, build after build. It would not really benefit the clan, but more the community as a whole.
Pm me if any of this is confusing, as I just awoke and am kind of in a dazed state...
The fact that the playtest group is comprised of half clanners and non-clanners gives it a diversity it needs. Even if bug-catching is the only thing that occurs, there is a higher probability that a bug would be fixed. The playtesters that have been testing for the past updates should be commended, there have been very few bugs that have gotten by. But, this should be looked to be optimized to a period where one update would fix bugs that had been spotted. (ideally once every 2 weeks) Where another update should be based on changes to the actual way ns is played. (This should be ideally every 4 weeks, although it can be noted builds can take longer to produce) If this was done correctly, there would be very little time for a playtester to play anything else, but because half the playtesters are clanners it is unlikely this would occur.
Any increase in pt, no matter how small could ultimately help keep ns alive and competing. My proposal would be a nomination system for new playtesters. Many people would want to join, but only a few would actually pass the qualifications. Go through basic questioning of the player and find the best qualified 30 or so individuals.
Many people who play ns do not actually post on the forums, but simply overview key things. I for one have not posted since january, I simply go over important threads and random updates. By nominating pts for interview it should keep ns in good shape and bring the best individuals forward if they are part of the ns forum community or not.
As for top clans receiving any part in pt, I doubt that would be effective. One pt per active clan might be more effective. (Preferably the most educated and hopefully most mature member) Most clans do use the same strat, build after build. It would not really benefit the clan, but more the community as a whole.
Pm me if any of this is confusing, as I just awoke and am kind of in a dazed state... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
To paragraph one, good point.
To paragraph two, most people would agree it is mostly non-clanners as of right now.
To paragraph three, nomination makes no sense if there is no credibility behind those who nominate.
To paragraph four, considering there has never been an effective implementation of the top clans in a playtest setting, then there is no way to surmise that, however we do have plenty of other high calibur games that take only the best player's input, which are very popular that suggests to me otherwise.
Well Flay and voogru may know a lot about which team is stronger in your average pub but I gurantee you neither of them has any clue how to use nor has the ability to counter nor has put any thought into pancaking because none of the devs have to deal with it.
Frankly most of the pts don't either. Its sad that issues like this don't get addressed because the people who make the balance decisions never have to deal with it.
Another argument I've seen before is to 'balance the game for pubs, not only matches'. This argument is worthless. No successful game balances for public play over competitive play. Is CS balanced for pubs? Is wc3 balanced for every newbie who plays? No.
Another argument I've seen before is to 'balance the game for pubs, not only matches'. This argument is worthless. No successful game balances for public play over competitive play. Is CS balanced for pubs? Is wc3 balanced for every newbie who plays? No. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, yes.
The primary reason for balancing difficulty (excepting exploits and difficult to access skillsets) is the interaction between players.
A newbie playing a 1v1 in WC3 has total control over the tools available to him. A person playing NS does not. He cannot both Skulk and provide umbra support. He cannot both sweep the field for marines whilst putting pressure on nodes.
In CS, 1 guy can win a round. He just has to shoot a lot of hostiles. Besides which, a few fairly cosmetic differences aside, both teams have access to the same equipment or can easily acquire it.
So I don't post in the public forums? Just wondering....
It's absolutely correct to everyone you cannot perfectly balance public & clan play simultaneously. But likewise, you need a semblance of balance to the new player. How many CS'ers currently don't play NS because they tried it once, decided it sucked and then quit? Half of these people will never download NS again, because first opinion counts for a LOT.
If you don't at least make it fun and at least appearing balanced to public players, we'll never get anymore clans to play that perfect game, apart from a cliquey 'elite' group who already know all the tricks, and play each other over & over. The sad bit being, some would describe this as a good thing....
- Shockwave
Actually, yes.
The primary reason for balancing difficulty (excepting exploits and difficult to access skillsets) is the interaction between players.
A newbie playing a 1v1 in WC3 has total control over the tools available to him. A person playing NS does not. He cannot both Skulk and provide umbra support. He cannot both sweep the field for marines whilst putting pressure on nodes.
In CS, 1 guy can win a round. He just has to shoot a lot of hostiles. Besides which, a few fairly cosmetic differences aside, both teams have access to the same equipment or can easily acquire it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He asked if the game is balanced for newbies playing games, and the answer is no it isn't. A new player will play WC3 online and get DESTROYED by anyone with any experience? Why? They don't have the essential skills and knowledge to win yet. The smart ones find out quickly, the not so smart ones whine "OMG THIS IS SO UNFAIR THAT STRAT IS <insert random idiot comment here>", when in fact said strategy has a very solid and viable counter (Pre-TFT hunt massing anyone?). You can't balance games for people that probably don't even understand how the game works, otherwise it seriously kills balance for competitive players. If you gave the fade a 180 degree swipe radius and made its stats 500/250, even the most newbie of players could rack up insane scores like some of the best fades in NS do right now, with 0 experience at fading. However the current good fades would be impossible to kill, literally. This is why games aren't balanced for newbies at all.
The argument about different players doesn't hold weight either. It's very obvious when something is breaking balance significantly, you don't need the entire team to function perfectly in order to see that. A good player playing against other good players will reveal imbalance. You can't stack the really good PTs against some of the others and expect to see "balance" from that, it's absurd. It's like pubbing and putting 5 clan players on on marines and the aliens have no experienced players, they'll get stomped into the ground.
<!--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--> Someone got into how the who knows more a dev with a stat tracker or a player in the competitive community arguement.
Well Flay and voogru may know a lot about which team is stronger in your average pub but I gurantee you neither of them has any clue how to use nor has the ability to counter nor has put any thought into pancaking because none of the devs have to deal with it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
THANK YOU, someone understands. This is exactly the type of stuff I'm talking about.
EDIT: I was asked to make this a little less flammable, and to point out that I wasn't attempting to flame Grendel, I just got a little over-zealous in defending my point
It's not the skills of a programmer that's required to balance the game. It's not the twitch and good aim of a competitive player either. It's an dedicated, analytic, observing and creative mind.
Though some few have all those properties, it doesn't guarantee that anyone with either of those have any of the other.
As for recruiting PTs, I will leave that to the PT leads to comment, though.
However, as I have previously stated, they all do not need to be in the PT group to have their say on current balance issues. Just like WC3 (since it was mentioned) and SC, the <b>real</b> balancing starts when it's released to the public.
I'd love to see some independent group of highly active competitive players agreeing and putting down how they would see NS done to be balanced. You might even consider this statement a challenge <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Should we improve the Lmgs to counter the good fades who ramapage through teams? Should we nerf everything to allow the newer players to actually stay alive? You simply cannot balance for that sort of enviroment, it's like trying to make 10kg and 20kg weigh the same. The varying level of skill in a public match and the lack of organisation in who does what means that the game can't be balanced. Even and epic matches are merely a result of equal levels of incompetance.
In regards to what forlorn said, just to clarify, the role I played was mostly reading the forums and gathering the popular opinion and presenting it to flayra. I like to think that I was especially good at finding the strategies that were "too good" but a lot of the time I was presenting widely known issues and I never had any type of final say, I was more of a consultant.
Anyways I guess the point id like to make in this post is that the pts are all smart guys and they have all devoted a significant amount of time into this game and they all have the same motive which is to aid in the creation of a fun, balanced, bug-free game - if any of the changes they are making cause any serious balance issues, the issue will be short lived.
I think the best way to do it would be to have a smaller group of PTs do alpha testing, testing bugs and maps and giving input on features and ways to make the game more fun and helping with the primary balance testing for new features, then release the game to the public, let them have at it, release a balance patch or two, rinse and repeat, and to my knowledge that is more or less how they are doing things now. The primary goal should be getting a working product out to the public asap - yes clans are really good for balance, and their opinions on balance should be listened to with open ears and taken very seriously, but discussing wether or not clans should be involved in the internal PT pushes balance back into being an internal affair and delays public release further, you cant balance until the bugs are gone and the game works and if the bugs are gone and the game works then it should be in the hands of the people. The top teams/players are going to be able to compile balance data 10x faster if its a public release than they would if it were just 5-10 teams playing amongst themselves privately, for a number of reasons. Sorry this post is so long, its a very interesting debate
EDIT: I just want to clarify even further because rereading my post I dont know if i did a good job in relation to the current discussion. When we had just 10 clans in the 2.0 vet program it was not very productive at all, it was very hard to schedule games, etc. As soon as 2.0 was released and became the CAL version, all the clans jumped into action and started playing "for real", at which point the existing balance issues became apparent very quickly. This was the same thing that happened with 3.0 iirc. I do think that it is important to let the teams know that their opinion matters and is very important, I just don't think that realistically the teams are going to be able to get much work done until the release is public and in CAL.
As for recruiting PTs, I will leave that to the PT leads to comment, though.
However, as I have previously stated, they all do not need to be in the PT group to have their say on current balance issues. Just like WC3 (since it was mentioned) and SC, the <b>real</b> balancing starts when it's released to the public.
I'd love to see some independent group of highly active competitive players agreeing and putting down how they would see NS done to be balanced. You might even consider this statement a challenge <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Thank you for ignoring our arguments. This not only goes to tankfugel but to everyone. It's been stated that competetive players make the ideal canidates for balancing for pub play as well as competetive play because they do both. Whereas pub only PT's do not have both.
2. A list of changes agreed on by good competetive players has already been done, and submitted to Flayra. We are still waiting to see what goes in or not.