<!--quoteo(post=1730664:date=Oct 4 2009, 11:53 AM:name=dux)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dux @ Oct 4 2009, 11:53 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730664"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That was attempted before in ns1 and it didn't go down well.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would hope it wouldnt fly. Cant stand those games that give you "x" amount of points into your k:d ratio. You could have a k:d counter and a resource counter. Build stuff, repair, and kill to get res :)
Do kills still grant res? That would be the only reason I could see the point in a K:D display in the main scoreboard. Otherwise I would prefer points.
Team points wouldn't be appreciated, as despite NS being a team game, most people are also interested in how they stack up against the rest of the team.
However, I still think a K:D ratio is way too granular to give decent data. It rewards kill stealing, and hidey-hole camping, Neither of which tends to promote an enjoyable game. Far better would be a system that derives points based on the time spent doing certain activities.. so things like time spent attacking, time spent attacking <i>successfully</i>, time spent being attacked (per attacker), time spent being hit, then time spent doing other things deemed worthwhile.
This would tend to reward quality play far more than a simple K:D ratio does. After all, consider if you get ganged by four guys but manage to take one out. That should clearly be worth more than managing to take one guy out from behind and then getting shredded by the next guy you see. A simple K:D sees no difference between the two situations however.
TF2's solution is very good for the scoreboard. You can see all your own stats but nobody else has any idea what you got your points for and you get points for a bunch of different team helping stuff as well as just pure killing.
<!--quoteo(post=1730706:date=Oct 4 2009, 02:48 PM:name=MuYeah)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MuYeah @ Oct 4 2009, 02:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730706"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->TF2's solution is very good for the scoreboard. You can see all your own stats but nobody else has any idea what you got your points for and you get points for a bunch of different team helping stuff as well as just pure killing.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not only that. Points ranking can be stupid if they don't do it right, but I don't think I ever had issue with whoever was the points leader in TF2, because they were also clearly the most important player on the team.
There is the fact though that K:D ratio matters much more in NS than in TF2, so maybe that doesn't translate as well as we might think. You could do a points system that subtracted points when you die as a geared player (wasting resources), or something like that... Overall I agree with points ranking instead of K:D ranking for the obvious motivational benefits, but it may be something the team has to play around with to get a good system. I can't remember specifically why, but I remember I was against it when Charlie put points ranking in NS. I know that in CAL we had points tiebreakers for stalemate games around version 2.0, and they were incredibly stupid.
<!--quoteo(post=1730664:date=Oct 4 2009, 12:53 PM:name=dux)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dux @ Oct 4 2009, 12:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730664"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That was attempted before in ns1 and it didn't go down well.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
People don't like things taken away from them. If you don't have it at the start, it won't be an issue or be much less of one.
<!--quoteo(post=1730664:date=Oct 4 2009, 10:53 AM:name=dux)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dux @ Oct 4 2009, 10:53 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730664"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That was attempted before in ns1 and it didn't go down well.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was a good thought, because they wanted to promote teamwork and a focus on winning the game instead of checking on deathmatch stats, but yeah, wasn't too popular
I'd rather see hit% then straight kills, but that's just me.
I think some form of advanced movement is fine for aliens, but bunny hopping seems just wrong for marines. EDIT: Better still, multiple forms of advanced movement to allow for development of different skills.
That was one of the fails of NS1. As aliens you got a couple of res points for killing someone but you didn't get anything for chomping a res tower or healing team mates on attacking raids.
I would like to see Points:deaths ratio. As stated already.. similar to TF2. Also if you press tab you still get to see more in detail stats like kills and etc.
Though it may not even matter in NS2 due to it being a completely different system with an alien commander...
Anyway whatever happens I just hope the scoring and res allocation rewards not only kills but also support moves (healing, chomping res, etc). As well as on marines with welding armour and gates, building structures, covering fire bonuses etc.
All valid points :/ i may grudgingly give up my death grip on a K:D ratio :/ As long as skilled players come out on top. I dont want to see a Base B*tch be top of the team when they have 0 kills and 40 deaths.
I know a lot of you don't play NS anymore so you might not recall the way the scoreboard is now configured.
Players are rank ordered by score, not by kills.
I love the way it is in NS1. The comm has the full scope of information when examining the scoreboard. Information is always good.
On the alien side, while rt droppers and hive droppers might not have the kill count, they will get points should they go and kill rts/build useful things for the team.
Bad aliens that stay gorge the entire game dropping OCs, cluster at the bottom of the scoreboard.
NS2 should just copy the scoreboard of NS1. Kill assists might be a decent new idea to add.
<!--quoteo(post=1730447:date=Oct 3 2009, 09:35 AM:name=RisingSun)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RisingSun @ Oct 3 2009, 09:35 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730447"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Hopefully the spill over from the lockdown thread will come here.
I personally love the high skill cap in NS1 and hop NS2 will be along the same lines. Problem was new players being overwhelmed when they first would play. Servers themselves kind of helped this out by having very different player base.
Some servers were populated with newer players that tended to keep the experienced players away due to the lack of teamwork and skill.
Other servers you would almost enter the damn game with a 0-10 ratio if your skills were mediocre... I loved it!
But we need a way that doesn't rely on server communities. With the lack of a single playermode we lose the offline training or base level competent player. We did have access to the very well done field manual (NS texted base instruction booklet on game play). It was great for visual learner but leaves the auditory and tactile learners in the wind =(
a video tutorial would be cool but even better a simulator for each lifeform, marine, and comm would be awesome. I'm sure the community can come up with something so as to not impede on the creation of all of our dream game =)
so in conclusion: skill cap high, but a way to raise the base level players skill before they hit the multiplayer enviroment. Ideas?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Totally agree, and came to one of the main goals of <a href="http://www.nsplayer.net" target="_blank">NSPlayer</a>, a few past n present admins/community folks have wrote alot of guides to help new players get into the game and clan scene which hopefully we or someone alike will do again for NS2. <a href="http://www.nsplayer.net/intro.php" target="_blank">Info for new NSPlayers</a>
<!--quoteo(post=1730749:date=Oct 4 2009, 10:54 PM:name=Opprobrious)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Opprobrious @ Oct 4 2009, 10:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730749"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know a lot of you don't play NS anymore so you might not recall the way the scoreboard is now configured.
Players are rank ordered by score, not by kills.
I love the way it is in NS1. The comm has the full scope of information when examining the scoreboard. Information is always good.
On the alien side, while rt droppers and hive droppers might not have the kill count, they will get points should they go and kill rts/build useful things for the team.
Bad aliens that stay gorge the entire game dropping OCs, cluster at the bottom of the scoreboard.
NS2 should just copy the scoreboard of NS1. Kill assists might be a decent new idea to add.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Totally agree as well. Didnt notice the complete score board :( bad me lol. Been playing NS1 again for months >_< Woot BAD clan server
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1730749:date=Oct 4 2009, 11:54 PM:name=Opprobrious)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Opprobrious @ Oct 4 2009, 11:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730749"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know a lot of you don't play NS anymore so you might not recall the way the scoreboard is now configured.
Players are rank ordered by score, not by kills.
I love the way it is in NS1. The comm has the full scope of information when examining the scoreboard. Information is always good.
On the alien side, while rt droppers and hive droppers might not have the kill count, they will get points should they go and kill rts/build useful things for the team.
Bad aliens that stay gorge the entire game dropping OCs, cluster at the bottom of the scoreboard.
NS2 should just copy the scoreboard of NS1. Kill assists might be a decent new idea to add.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Agreed.
WRT to the OP: <!--quoteo(post=1726924:date=Sep 11 2009, 10:12 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Sep 11 2009, 10:12 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1726924"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'd prefer <a href="http://unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=106995" target="_blank">challenges</a> for commanders and <a href="http://unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=104013" target="_blank">achievements</a> for non-comms to combined with an <a href="http://unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=104062" target="_blank">integrated reserved slot system</a>(or at least server playstyle tagging for servers to specify whether they are newbie, casual, open, or competitive)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1730749:date=Oct 4 2009, 11:54 PM:name=Opprobrious)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Opprobrious @ Oct 4 2009, 11:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730749"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I know a lot of you don't play NS anymore so you might not recall the way the scoreboard is now configured.
Players are rank ordered by score, not by kills.
I love the way it is in NS1. The comm has the full scope of information when examining the scoreboard. Information is always good.
On the alien side, while rt droppers and hive droppers might not have the kill count, they will get points should they go and kill rts/build useful things for the team.
Bad aliens that stay gorge the entire game dropping OCs, cluster at the bottom of the scoreboard.
NS2 should just copy the scoreboard of NS1. Kill assists might be a decent new idea to add.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Compromise could be that the commanders of either side have access to the information. And if players are ordered by score, if you took away k/d from the board, what would there be to complain about, assuming a good reward system is in place for people who do weld, build, assist, etc
<!--quoteo(post=1730852:date=Oct 5 2009, 03:24 PM:name=FuNiOnZ)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FuNiOnZ @ Oct 5 2009, 03:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730852"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Compromise could be that the commanders of either side have access to the information. And if players are ordered by score, if you took away k/d from the board, what would there be to complain about, assuming a good reward system is in place for people who do weld, build, assist, etc<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because a player's k/d is vital information.
If a marine leads the score by virtue of kills, it is good for the commander to know if he also leads the team in deaths. A marine that got 20 kills by kamikazing the hive 30 times is not someone you want to spend your res on.
Even if a marine does good things like building and welding, he might not be the comm's first choice for a heavy suit should he have a 0 and 10 score.
<!--quoteo(post=1730855:date=Oct 5 2009, 01:51 PM:name=Opprobrious)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Opprobrious @ Oct 5 2009, 01:51 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730855"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Because a player's k/d is vital information.
If a marine leads the score by virtue of kills, it is good for the commander to know if he also leads the team in deaths. A marine that got 20 kills by kamikazing the hive 30 times is not someone you want to spend your res on.
Even if a marine does good things like building and welding, he might not be the comm's first choice for a heavy suit should he have a 0 and 10 score.
I don't see how you can oppose information.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> K:D was vital in NS, whether or not it is in NS2 will be something to see. With the marines outfitting <i>themselves</i> it may not be. At any rate, a points system could replace and/or offer <i>more information</i> than a K:D ratio. In NS you get no points or recognition for building, welding, defending a location or recapping resource nodes while your team gets all the kills. None of those involve kills or deaths but still impact the overall utility of the player. In TF2 the difference between a good medic and a bad medic are obvious, since the good medic is likely on top of the scoreboard. That should be possible in NS2.
Like I said earlier I was against the way NS did points, probably for the reasons you outline. But I still think a good points system would be superior to a straightup K:D list, which is what NS has right now (regardless of the fact that it's organized by points, almost always the points and K:Ds line up).
<!--quoteo(post=1730855:date=Oct 5 2009, 08:51 PM:name=Opprobrious)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Opprobrious @ Oct 5 2009, 08:51 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730855"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Because a player's k/d is vital information.
If a marine leads the score by virtue of kills, it is good for the commander to know if he also leads the team in deaths. A marine that got 20 kills by kamikazing the hive 30 times is not someone you want to spend your res on.
Even if a marine does good things like building and welding, he might not be the comm's first choice for a heavy suit should he have a 0 and 10 score.
I don't see how you can oppose information.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we're buying our own stuff this time around I don't see why it matters what the comm thinks.
<!--quoteo(post=1730855:date=Oct 5 2009, 04:51 PM:name=Opprobrious)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Opprobrious @ Oct 5 2009, 04:51 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730855"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Because a player's k/d is vital information.
If a marine leads the score by virtue of kills, it is good for the commander to know if he also leads the team in deaths. A marine that got 20 kills by kamikazing the hive 30 times is not someone you want to spend your res on.
Even if a marine does good things like building and welding, he might not be the comm's first choice for a heavy suit should he have a 0 and 10 score.
I don't see how you can oppose information.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In my post I touched on that. If the commander has access to that information, he has the proper tools to make his selection. If he's the only one that needs it to be functional in some capacity, then it's no loss to the regular grunts if they can't see K:D ratio
<!--quoteo(post=1730897:date=Oct 6 2009, 01:19 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Oct 6 2009, 01:19 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730897"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If we're buying our own stuff this time around I don't see why it matters what the comm thinks.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> As long as the commander has the map and birdeye camera, he's the one that has the best chances of creating any kind of strategy, it's not just giving out equipment. For example I wouldn't rush a hive with 1 guy going 50-3 and the rest 5-15. On more equal frags I could consider it.
<!--quoteo(post=1730956:date=Oct 6 2009, 01:54 AM:name=FuNiOnZ)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FuNiOnZ @ Oct 6 2009, 01:54 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730956"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In my post I touched on that. If the commander has access to that information, he has the proper tools to make his selection. If he's the only one that needs it to be functional in some capacity, then it's no loss to the regular grunts if they can't see K:D ratio<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You haven't given a single compelling reason to hide K:D ratio.
Other than vague unsupported assertions about players being concerned about it.
The only people who I've seen who want to hide their performance, in most aspects of life, are those that preform poorly.
Should a baseball player be able to hide his batting average?
<!--quoteo(post=1731101:date=Oct 6 2009, 04:23 PM:name=Opprobrious)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Opprobrious @ Oct 6 2009, 04:23 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731101"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You haven't given a single compelling reason to hide K:D ratio.
Other than vague unsupported assertions about players being concerned about it.
The only people who I've seen who want to hide their performance, in most aspects of life, are those that preform poorly.
Should a baseball player be able to hide his batting average?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah because the implications of hiding a K:D ratio and switching to a point based system in order to promote overall team cohesion is clearly without merit. Comparing a game to a major sport is completely different, a batting average is used to determine batting order along with overall worth to the team. If his team didn't know his batting average but his coach did the same job gets accomplished.
We can continue to do the straw man thing or just agree to disagree.
<!--quoteo(post=1730640:date=Oct 4 2009, 04:55 AM:name=steppin'razor)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (steppin'razor @ Oct 4 2009, 04:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730640"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As long as the skulk movement skill is intuitive, easy to learn and hard to master, everyone should be happy.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> so you mean something not like bunnyhopping. I never thought it was intuitive, easy to learn, or easy to use. Which is yet another reason I play as a perma-gorge.
<!--quoteo(post=1731134:date=Oct 6 2009, 03:05 PM:name=[WHO]Mr.Black)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE ([WHO]Mr.Black @ Oct 6 2009, 03:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731134"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> so you man something not like bunnyhopping. I never thought it was intuitive, easy to learn, or easy to use. Which is yet another reason I play as a perma-gorge.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A perma-gorge knows how to bhop, otherwise its called a fail-gorge.
<!--quoteo(post=1731138:date=Oct 6 2009, 06:32 PM:name=homicide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (homicide @ Oct 6 2009, 06:32 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731138"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->A perma-gorge knows how to bhop, otherwise its called a fail-gorge.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
LoooooooooooL. I really did laugh out loud =/
if you took a hour out of your gameplay, bunny hopping wasn't hard to get a least a small speed boost. Change my jump button and bam! ( or a script)
<!--quoteo(post=1731012:date=Oct 6 2009, 03:04 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Oct 6 2009, 03:04 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731012"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As long as the commander has the map and birdeye camera, he's the one that has the best chances of creating any kind of strategy, it's not just giving out equipment. For example I wouldn't rush a hive with 1 guy going 50-3 and the rest 5-15. On more equal frags I could consider it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, what the commander thinks is somewhat irrelevant, the players will go where they want to go, if the aliens are in the hive, they'll go there.
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
It's not irrelevant. NS2 is still a team game even if the marines are becoming slightly less reliant on the commander, so having everyone run around deathmatching would not be an effective strategy.
<!--quoteo(post=1731159:date=Oct 6 2009, 08:56 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Oct 6 2009, 08:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731159"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, what the commander thinks is somewhat irrelevant, the players will go where they want to go, if the aliens are in the hive, they'll go there.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1731166:date=Oct 7 2009, 03:00 AM:name=a_civilian)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (a_civilian @ Oct 7 2009, 03:00 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731166"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's not irrelevant. NS2 is still a team game even if the marines are becoming slightly less reliant on the commander, so having everyone run around deathmatching would not be an effective strategy.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're right it wouldn't, but I don't see what the commander can do about it, the commander can't remote control his players so he has no means of stopping people charging madly into rooms, which people will do if they think they can get kills/have nothing else to do, especially if he can't just avoid giivng them stuff so that they can't kill anything.
Just because nobody does it at the moment doesn't mean people won't when you release the game to a wide audience including people who haven't been playing it for years.
In a game where players are free to do what they want, you should expect them to do whatever they find most entertaining, if there aren't many enemies to fight/they can't fight them on their own they will cluster with the rest of the team and kill the enemies there, if you don't give them guns that can shoot round corners, that means running into the hive room.
If a player has 3 kills and 30 deaths chances are they haven't grasped the idea that rushing into rooms gets you killed, or possibly they just don't have a better strategy, either way it means they're quite willing to get killed, so chances are they will happily blunder into dangerous places, and there's not much you can do about it.
Similarly if a player has 30 kills and 3 deaths, chances are they are pretty confident in their abilities, and as such they could easily attack if they thought it was the best idea, especially if they bought a gun that can kill structures, as the ability to kill aliens is pretty separate from the ability to follow orders. Either way it's not really the commander's decision, unless the players in question decide that it should be.
Commanding by consent basically means people will do what the commander wants for as long as it lines up with what they want, or at least it does for most people I know. It's not just that I think the commander shouldn't make those decisions (although I do) but it's that the commander can't make them, because this is an FPS and the 'units' have free will, and you can't shoot them for not doing what you say. While it is a good idea to follow a unified strategy if you want the team to win, it isn't neccesarily fun to do so, in fact it can be quite boring, so don't expect very skilled or unskilled fighters to do it all the time, unless they coincidentally happen to have a desire to be ordered around or a particularly strong element of team spirit.
However, games like TF2 or battlefield don't usually require these, you go and kill people with your gun and get points, there is never really an instance where going and killing people with your gun is ever a bad thing, in NS however it sometimes can be because it might not be very effective, it might be more effective to sit and defend the siege turrets or something, and that creates a bit of a problem and means some players won't do it.
This is the point where you admit that NS is a somewhat niche genre and have to settle with the idea that you can't dumb it down further into TDM. It is blatantly played better in organised games than pubs and that is what the devs should be focussing on: an easy way to make decent pick up games/matchmaking your team to someone elses team of the same level.
Comments
I would hope it wouldnt fly. Cant stand those games that give you "x" amount of points into your k:d ratio. You could have a k:d counter and a resource counter. Build stuff, repair, and kill to get res :)
However, I still think a K:D ratio is way too granular to give decent data. It rewards kill stealing, and hidey-hole camping, Neither of which tends to promote an enjoyable game. Far better would be a system that derives points based on the time spent doing certain activities.. so things like time spent attacking, time spent attacking <i>successfully</i>, time spent being attacked (per attacker), time spent being hit, then time spent doing other things deemed worthwhile.
This would tend to reward quality play far more than a simple K:D ratio does. After all, consider if you get ganged by four guys but manage to take one out. That should clearly be worth more than managing to take one guy out from behind and then getting shredded by the next guy you see. A simple K:D sees no difference between the two situations however.
Not only that. Points ranking can be stupid if they don't do it right, but I don't think I ever had issue with whoever was the points leader in TF2, because they were also clearly the most important player on the team.
There is the fact though that K:D ratio matters much more in NS than in TF2, so maybe that doesn't translate as well as we might think. You could do a points system that subtracted points when you die as a geared player (wasting resources), or something like that... Overall I agree with points ranking instead of K:D ranking for the obvious motivational benefits, but it may be something the team has to play around with to get a good system. I can't remember specifically why, but I remember I was against it when Charlie put points ranking in NS. I know that in CAL we had points tiebreakers for stalemate games around version 2.0, and they were incredibly stupid.
People don't like things taken away from them. If you don't have it at the start, it won't be an issue or be much less of one.
It was a good thought, because they wanted to promote teamwork and a focus on winning the game instead of checking on deathmatch stats, but yeah, wasn't too popular
I think some form of advanced movement is fine for aliens, but bunny hopping seems just wrong for marines.
EDIT: Better still, multiple forms of advanced movement to allow for development of different skills.
I would like to see Points:deaths ratio. As stated already.. similar to TF2. Also if you press tab you still get to see more in detail stats like kills and etc.
Though it may not even matter in NS2 due to it being a completely different system with an alien commander...
Anyway whatever happens I just hope the scoring and res allocation rewards not only kills but also support moves (healing, chomping res, etc). As well as on marines with welding armour and gates, building structures, covering fire bonuses etc.
Players are rank ordered by score, not by kills.
I love the way it is in NS1. The comm has the full scope of information when examining the scoreboard. Information is always good.
On the alien side, while rt droppers and hive droppers might not have the kill count, they will get points should they go and kill rts/build useful things for the team.
Bad aliens that stay gorge the entire game dropping OCs, cluster at the bottom of the scoreboard.
NS2 should just copy the scoreboard of NS1. Kill assists might be a decent new idea to add.
I personally love the high skill cap in NS1 and hop NS2 will be along the same lines. Problem was new players being overwhelmed when they first would play. Servers themselves kind of helped this out by having very different player base.
Some servers were populated with newer players that tended to keep the experienced players away due to the lack of teamwork and skill.
Other servers you would almost enter the damn game with a 0-10 ratio if your skills were mediocre... I loved it!
But we need a way that doesn't rely on server communities. With the lack of a single playermode we lose the offline training or base level competent player. We did have access to the very well done field manual (NS texted base instruction booklet on game play). It was great for visual learner but leaves the auditory and tactile learners in the wind =(
a video tutorial would be cool but even better a simulator for each lifeform, marine, and comm would be awesome. I'm sure the community can come up with something so as to not impede on the creation of all of our dream game =)
so in conclusion: skill cap high, but a way to raise the base level players skill before they hit the multiplayer enviroment. Ideas?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Totally agree, and came to one of the main goals of <a href="http://www.nsplayer.net" target="_blank">NSPlayer</a>, a few past n present admins/community folks have wrote alot of guides to help new players get into the game and clan scene which hopefully we or someone alike will do again for NS2.
<a href="http://www.nsplayer.net/intro.php" target="_blank">Info for new NSPlayers</a>
Players are rank ordered by score, not by kills.
I love the way it is in NS1. The comm has the full scope of information when examining the scoreboard. Information is always good.
On the alien side, while rt droppers and hive droppers might not have the kill count, they will get points should they go and kill rts/build useful things for the team.
Bad aliens that stay gorge the entire game dropping OCs, cluster at the bottom of the scoreboard.
NS2 should just copy the scoreboard of NS1. Kill assists might be a decent new idea to add.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Totally agree as well. Didnt notice the complete score board :( bad me lol. Been playing NS1 again for months >_< Woot BAD clan server
Players are rank ordered by score, not by kills.
I love the way it is in NS1. The comm has the full scope of information when examining the scoreboard. Information is always good.
On the alien side, while rt droppers and hive droppers might not have the kill count, they will get points should they go and kill rts/build useful things for the team.
Bad aliens that stay gorge the entire game dropping OCs, cluster at the bottom of the scoreboard.
NS2 should just copy the scoreboard of NS1. Kill assists might be a decent new idea to add.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed.
WRT to the OP:
<!--quoteo(post=1726924:date=Sep 11 2009, 10:12 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Sep 11 2009, 10:12 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1726924"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'd prefer <a href="http://unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=106995" target="_blank">challenges</a> for commanders and <a href="http://unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=104013" target="_blank">achievements</a> for non-comms to combined with an <a href="http://unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=104062" target="_blank">integrated reserved slot system</a>(or at least server playstyle tagging for servers to specify whether they are newbie, casual, open, or competitive)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Players are rank ordered by score, not by kills.
I love the way it is in NS1. The comm has the full scope of information when examining the scoreboard. Information is always good.
On the alien side, while rt droppers and hive droppers might not have the kill count, they will get points should they go and kill rts/build useful things for the team.
Bad aliens that stay gorge the entire game dropping OCs, cluster at the bottom of the scoreboard.
NS2 should just copy the scoreboard of NS1. Kill assists might be a decent new idea to add.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Compromise could be that the commanders of either side have access to the information. And if players are ordered by score, if you took away k/d from the board, what would there be to complain about, assuming a good reward system is in place for people who do weld, build, assist, etc
Because a player's k/d is vital information.
If a marine leads the score by virtue of kills, it is good for the commander to know if he also leads the team in deaths. A marine that got 20 kills by kamikazing the hive 30 times is not someone you want to spend your res on.
Even if a marine does good things like building and welding, he might not be the comm's first choice for a heavy suit should he have a 0 and 10 score.
I don't see how you can oppose information.
If a marine leads the score by virtue of kills, it is good for the commander to know if he also leads the team in deaths. A marine that got 20 kills by kamikazing the hive 30 times is not someone you want to spend your res on.
Even if a marine does good things like building and welding, he might not be the comm's first choice for a heavy suit should he have a 0 and 10 score.
I don't see how you can oppose information.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
K:D was vital in NS, whether or not it is in NS2 will be something to see. With the marines outfitting <i>themselves</i> it may not be. At any rate, a points system could replace and/or offer <i>more information</i> than a K:D ratio. In NS you get no points or recognition for building, welding, defending a location or recapping resource nodes while your team gets all the kills. None of those involve kills or deaths but still impact the overall utility of the player. In TF2 the difference between a good medic and a bad medic are obvious, since the good medic is likely on top of the scoreboard. That should be possible in NS2.
Like I said earlier I was against the way NS did points, probably for the reasons you outline. But I still think a good points system would be superior to a straightup K:D list, which is what NS has right now (regardless of the fact that it's organized by points, almost always the points and K:Ds line up).
If a marine leads the score by virtue of kills, it is good for the commander to know if he also leads the team in deaths. A marine that got 20 kills by kamikazing the hive 30 times is not someone you want to spend your res on.
Even if a marine does good things like building and welding, he might not be the comm's first choice for a heavy suit should he have a 0 and 10 score.
I don't see how you can oppose information.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If we're buying our own stuff this time around I don't see why it matters what the comm thinks.
If a marine leads the score by virtue of kills, it is good for the commander to know if he also leads the team in deaths. A marine that got 20 kills by kamikazing the hive 30 times is not someone you want to spend your res on.
Even if a marine does good things like building and welding, he might not be the comm's first choice for a heavy suit should he have a 0 and 10 score.
I don't see how you can oppose information.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In my post I touched on that. If the commander has access to that information, he has the proper tools to make his selection. If he's the only one that needs it to be functional in some capacity, then it's no loss to the regular grunts if they can't see K:D ratio
As long as the commander has the map and birdeye camera, he's the one that has the best chances of creating any kind of strategy, it's not just giving out equipment. For example I wouldn't rush a hive with 1 guy going 50-3 and the rest 5-15. On more equal frags I could consider it.
You haven't given a single compelling reason to hide K:D ratio.
Other than vague unsupported assertions about players being concerned about it.
The only people who I've seen who want to hide their performance, in most aspects of life, are those that preform poorly.
Should a baseball player be able to hide his batting average?
Other than vague unsupported assertions about players being concerned about it.
The only people who I've seen who want to hide their performance, in most aspects of life, are those that preform poorly.
Should a baseball player be able to hide his batting average?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah because the implications of hiding a K:D ratio and switching to a point based system in order to promote overall team cohesion is clearly without merit. Comparing a game to a major sport is completely different, a batting average is used to determine batting order along with overall worth to the team. If his team didn't know his batting average but his coach did the same job gets accomplished.
We can continue to do the straw man thing or just agree to disagree.
so you mean something not like bunnyhopping. I never thought it was intuitive, easy to learn, or easy to use. Which is yet another reason I play as a perma-gorge.
so you man something not like bunnyhopping. I never thought it was intuitive, easy to learn, or easy to use. Which is yet another reason I play as a perma-gorge.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A perma-gorge knows how to bhop, otherwise its called a fail-gorge.
LoooooooooooL. I really did laugh out loud =/
if you took a hour out of your gameplay, bunny hopping wasn't hard to get a least a small speed boost. Change my jump button and bam! ( or a script)
Again, what the commander thinks is somewhat irrelevant, the players will go where they want to go, if the aliens are in the hive, they'll go there.
Chris is obviously a troll civ.
Don't even bother.
You're right it wouldn't, but I don't see what the commander can do about it, the commander can't remote control his players so he has no means of stopping people charging madly into rooms, which people will do if they think they can get kills/have nothing else to do, especially if he can't just avoid giivng them stuff so that they can't kill anything.
Just because nobody does it at the moment doesn't mean people won't when you release the game to a wide audience including people who haven't been playing it for years.
In a game where players are free to do what they want, you should expect them to do whatever they find most entertaining, if there aren't many enemies to fight/they can't fight them on their own they will cluster with the rest of the team and kill the enemies there, if you don't give them guns that can shoot round corners, that means running into the hive room.
If a player has 3 kills and 30 deaths chances are they haven't grasped the idea that rushing into rooms gets you killed, or possibly they just don't have a better strategy, either way it means they're quite willing to get killed, so chances are they will happily blunder into dangerous places, and there's not much you can do about it.
Similarly if a player has 30 kills and 3 deaths, chances are they are pretty confident in their abilities, and as such they could easily attack if they thought it was the best idea, especially if they bought a gun that can kill structures, as the ability to kill aliens is pretty separate from the ability to follow orders. Either way it's not really the commander's decision, unless the players in question decide that it should be.
Commanding by consent basically means people will do what the commander wants for as long as it lines up with what they want, or at least it does for most people I know. It's not just that I think the commander shouldn't make those decisions (although I do) but it's that the commander can't make them, because this is an FPS and the 'units' have free will, and you can't shoot them for not doing what you say. While it is a good idea to follow a unified strategy if you want the team to win, it isn't neccesarily fun to do so, in fact it can be quite boring, so don't expect very skilled or unskilled fighters to do it all the time, unless they coincidentally happen to have a desire to be ordered around or a particularly strong element of team spirit.
However, games like TF2 or battlefield don't usually require these, you go and kill people with your gun and get points, there is never really an instance where going and killing people with your gun is ever a bad thing, in NS however it sometimes can be because it might not be very effective, it might be more effective to sit and defend the siege turrets or something, and that creates a bit of a problem and means some players won't do it.