<!--quoteo(post=1730360:date=Oct 3 2009, 12:29 AM:name=a_civilian)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (a_civilian @ Oct 3 2009, 12:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730360"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I actually agree with most of this post. NS is not very accessible. A new player is mostly helpless as skulk, and for some roles (fade and commander particularly), a player inexperienced in that role can easily cost a team the game. I suspect this was a significant factor limiting NS's popularity.
The point of contention is that this is not an issue of skill cap. You can make a game with a high skill cap that is also friendly to new players. Counter-Strike has a very high skill cap, and yet in that very post you laud it for its accessibility.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not really high skill capped when you can die from an unlucky shot, because no amount of skill will prevent that, that's what I mean by skill cap, being good at the game does not make you invincible because new players can easily have some advantage over you, hence why I support lockdown because it adds another way to get the advantage.
You can approach skill caps two ways, you can make it impossible to be good at the game, or you can make it impossible to be bad at the game, either way it caps the skill max because skill is relative, if everyone is good then being good becomes unremarkable. I don't really see any difference between the two because by doing either you compress the skill range of the game.
I see what you're saying Chris. The new visuals in NS2 look amazing, I hope there will be breathing space within the hectic combat to appreciate it. I remember when I was playing TF2 and I actually stopped to look up at the scenery, and its really well done and interesting, but there is no time to enjoy that feeling of immersion within the high tension combat. Striking a balance is difficult, and in the end gameplay takes priority. On your point about accessibility and skill-cap, Counter-Strike isn't a good example. Highly skilled Counter-Strike players walk all over new ones, spraying can only get you so far. That being said this is a thread about lock-down so you should start another one about your concerns.
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
To most of us, a skill cap means that it's possible to reach a skill level such that there's nothing left to improve in your game. Such a feature would kill competitive play, which is why so many people are adamantly opposed.
Allowing new players to score lucky kills isn't a skill cap, because a good player will still score more kills by aiming better. If anything it could be thought of more as a skill floor.
<!--quoteo(post=1730284:date=Oct 2 2009, 04:21 PM:name=dux)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dux @ Oct 2 2009, 04:21 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730284"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->One of the big problems I have with new games is they try and cater to too many people in too many ways. Let's look at TF2 for a second. Very amusing to play, but very boring as there's not much skill in it. There's sticky jumping but that's about it. When they took conq grenades away that was it for me. I also find everything far too slow in TF2 as well. What they did in my mind is take a very competetive game in TFC and turned it into a casual cluster bugger.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think TF2 catered very well to the general gaming audience. Just not to the hardcore one.
It is not a game that you play extensively but play occasionally knowing that for the short time you play it, you'll have fun. Even if you leave and return to it later, you can pick up where you left out with a similar skill level fairly quickly. Most importantly though, anyone pick it up fairly easily. Staying around too long will cause you get bored of it eventually, which causes a lot of hot air from people who expected it to be a game that you can play forever and ever.
I really liked NS1 and I don't want NS2 to be TF2. I want NS2 to be like NS1, but not feed on the blood of newbie players for sustenance.
Just throwing my 5 pennies here without looking too much at the posts above, since it doesn't concern them. Just my opinion (or digressing) I want to cast out to the devs:
I would hate to see any sort of too stagnant or slow gameplay. A heavyset exoskeleton/similar feature might be good. Gameplay can be quick even if there are some slower moving elements in the game, but as long as not everyone is a moving near-immobile turret, I'm okay with this.
For example: I hardly ever play anything else on TF2 except scout, because the gameplay in general seems so very slow-paced. I despise the heavy class for its immobility. However the 'heavy class' in Dystopia is fun to play because you can take a legbooster implant which makes it possible to sprint even as a massive tower of metal, for limited time. Also, the gameplay in general seems somewhat more fast paced.
I guess I'm trying to imply something like: Try to keep things upbeat and rapid, because I think there's a lot of people in this world that fast-paced games cater for and have been neglected in the recent years because of all the half-assed poor and slow mods/console ports that have appeared in the market. Well, at least I feel like so. NS1 had a good speed to it.
I hope NS2 can be as accesible as TF2 for new players but, unlike TF2, provide alot more options and abilities for highly-skilled play.
Also on the speed issue, plenty of people enjoying playing slower classes (Heavy, Soldier), if they can get into combat quickly (Teleporters). Mowing people down as Heavy is heaps of fun in TF2, wobbling all the way to combat isn't. So it isn't as simple as saying, if your slow its boring.
I apologize for the long mess but I can't bring myself to delete it and don't have any more time to fix it right now.... summary below.
<!--quoteo(post=1730366:date=Oct 2 2009, 07:46 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Oct 2 2009, 07:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730366"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>It's not really high skill capped when you can die from an unlucky shot</b>, because no amount of skill will prevent that, that's what I mean by skill cap, being good at the game does not make you invincible because new players can easily have some advantage over you, hence why I support lockdown because it adds another way to get the advantage.
<b>You can approach skill caps two ways, you can make it impossible to be good at the game, or you can make it impossible to be bad at the game</b>, either way it caps the skill max because skill is relative, if everyone is good then being good becomes unremarkable. I don't really see any difference between the two because by doing either you compress the skill range of the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you need to talk about skill gap rather than cap. And also please specify when you are talking about twitch skill (CS series) or real skill (Tribes series).
Regarding 1v1 play. In Counter-Strike (CS) crazy good players are going to be able to regularly own low skilled players like 99% or the time (that 1% is important for newer players, not wanting it to exist is wrong on your part). However the better the low skilled players get the lower that 99% will be getting down to 90% then to 80% and so on until equally good players reach the roughly 50% mark. This is bad for you? I think this is very good regarding accessibility. Playing in teams would also increase the chances of newer players to score kills on better players. if you can't shoot as well you can also compensate by being smart and playing as a team.
I a game like Tribes 2 a crazy good player will probably be able to own a newbie like 100% of the time in individual duels(maybe you should try this game) until the newbie reaches some play level much closer to the high skilled player. Tribes 2 counter acts this high skill gap by having lots of depth(which CS lacks). Like you can play flag defense, base defense/repair/build, flag runner, base raider, etc. and also in Tribes 2 teamwork is much more essential over the course of a round which balanced the super skill any one player can have over you. Kills are more shared you could can feel good that you put even just 20% damage in that guy because it helped your teammate kill him. In CS you barely ever share kill (duels are done in 1-2 seconds).
TF2 has indeed a very high skill gap and is also much deeper that CS but not as Tribes.
Summary: *Individual skill should NOT equal total pwnage in any TEAM based game. *Good games should have high skill gap, but remain fun for new players (base defense in tribes, playing Gorge in NS, chance of kills in CS)
<!--quoteo(post=1731019:date=Oct 6 2009, 10:07 AM:name=NeoSniper)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NeoSniper @ Oct 6 2009, 10:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731019"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->*Good games should have high skill gap, but remain fun for new players (base defense in tribes, playing Gorge in NS, chance of kills in CS)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This line bugs me a little bit...playing the gorge role in NS is fine for new players learning how the game works, but it won't teach them how to Fade. There's still a huge amount of team pressure when you go Fade - everyone expects you to play the part, which frequently amounts to something ridiculous like going 50-1
Even the top combat classes should constantly rely on teamwork in a team based game, and I don't feel that happens enough in NS1.
Twitch based skills are important of course, but they should only get you so far on their own
<!--quoteo(post=1731041:date=Oct 6 2009, 01:22 PM:name=monopolowa)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (monopolowa @ Oct 6 2009, 01:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731041"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This line bugs me a little bit...playing the gorge role in NS is fine for new players learning how the game works, but it won't teach them how to Fade. There's still a huge amount of team pressure when you go Fade - everyone expects you to play the part, which frequently amounts to something ridiculous like going 50-1
Even the top combat classes should constantly rely on teamwork in a team based game, and I don't feel that happens enough in NS1.
Twitch based skills are important of course, but they should only get you so far on their own<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Playing Gorge teaches a player the basics of the game without feeling the pressure of NS1's fast-combat. It is not an effective method to teach players the subtleties of another life form. You can only learn that by playing that lifeform or seeing other people doing it (preferably from their point of view).
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
<!--quoteo(post=1731041:date=Oct 6 2009, 01:22 PM:name=monopolowa)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (monopolowa @ Oct 6 2009, 01:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731041"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Even the top combat classes should constantly rely on teamwork in a team based game, and I don't feel that happens enough in NS1.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> A good fade playing against marines of comparable skill carrying anything better than LMGs very much does have to rely on teamwork.
<!--quoteo(post=1731041:date=Oct 6 2009, 10:22 AM:name=monopolowa)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (monopolowa @ Oct 6 2009, 10:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731041"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Even the top combat classes should constantly rely on teamwork in a team based game, and I don't feel that happens enough in NS1.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm surprised you've never played a game where the fade player was constantly reminding people to parasite the shotgunners. I think it's obvious to most that marines work best in groups, but even the alien classes are oriented to specific roles, though you may not see them used that way often on public servers. If there's any criticism of NS1 that will stand, teamwork is not it.
a_civilianLikes seeing numbersJoin Date: 2003-01-08Member: 12041Members, NS1 Playtester, Playtest Lead
edited October 2009
<!--quoteo(post=1731124:date=Oct 6 2009, 06:13 PM:name=nizb0ag)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nizb0ag @ Oct 6 2009, 06:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731124"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think you're talking from your ###, you reach a skill level where you can compete with other people in your general skill level, hell i even learn things new to this day. After playing since the release of this game, those who think that there is nothing else to learn about the game are clearly arrogant or just noob from my POV. Take a look at the Koreans, the competitive scene is pretty much over from NS1 but they still learn new tactics and practice walljumping with combos over different things, sure you know how to bhop/fade/skulk/onos/gorge likewise for marines, control the map etc, but there is always someone better then you, that's the reason why i say you haven't learnt everything about a game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I think you're reading something in my post that isn't there. I didn't say NS had a skill cap, and I'm not even sure how you could have interpreted it that way. I was explaining why people didn't want NS2 to have a skill cap.
<!--quoteo(post=1731041:date=Oct 6 2009, 12:22 PM:name=monopolowa)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (monopolowa @ Oct 6 2009, 12:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731041"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This line bugs me a little bit...playing the gorge role in NS is fine for new players learning how the game works, but it won't teach them how to Fade. There's still a huge amount of team pressure when you go Fade - everyone expects you to play the part, which frequently amounts to something ridiculous like going 50-1
Even the top combat classes should constantly rely on teamwork in a team based game, and I don't feel that happens enough in NS1.
Twitch based skills are important of course, but they should only get you so far on their own<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I completely agreed with you there. Playing Gorge in Alien let's me have fun without needing so much skill. So it's good because I can have fun. However, It's bad because it does not lead toward me getting better at the other classes. So I've been stuck as Gorge/Skulk for years now(literally, but with the exception of combat.). Not everyone in the team can go fade and there will always be a better fade in my team so it make no sense for me to play fade (unless where are dominating like crazy... in which case I'm not going to face much opposition as a fade). There's a bit of a flaw in the design of NS1 where players are not able to rotate their roles without significant risk to their team. However this issue is inherent of having a Resource system where stronger units cost more. Sadly I can't really think of a fix.
Actually the fix I've just thought of could be something like having two separate resources. One used for buildings and team upgrades and the other a personal resource that the alien can use to evolve into different life forms. Or maybe have a population system a lá "spawn more overlords". Anyway I'm sure it's all been figured out differently for NS2 so I'll wait and see what they got not.
<!--quoteo(post=1731019:date=Oct 6 2009, 11:07 AM:name=NeoSniper)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (NeoSniper @ Oct 6 2009, 11:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731019"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I apologize for the long mess but I can't bring myself to delete it and don't have any more time to fix it right now.... summary below.
I think you need to talk about skill gap rather than cap. And also please specify when you are talking about twitch skill (CS series) or real skill (Tribes series).
Regarding 1v1 play. In Counter-Strike (CS) crazy good players are going to be able to regularly own low skilled players like 99% or the time (that 1% is important for newer players, not wanting it to exist is wrong on your part). However the better the low skilled players get the lower that 99% will be getting down to 90% then to 80% and so on until equally good players reach the roughly 50% mark. This is bad for you? I think this is very good regarding accessibility. Playing in teams would also increase the chances of newer players to score kills on better players. if you can't shoot as well you can also compensate by being smart and playing as a team.
I a game like Tribes 2 a crazy good player will probably be able to own a newbie like 100% of the time in individual duels(maybe you should try this game) until the newbie reaches some play level much closer to the high skilled player. Tribes 2 counter acts this high skill gap by having lots of depth(which CS lacks). Like you can play flag defense, base defense/repair/build, flag runner, base raider, etc. and also in Tribes 2 teamwork is much more essential over the course of a round which balanced the super skill any one player can have over you. Kills are more shared you could can feel good that you put even just 20% damage in that guy because it helped your teammate kill him. In CS you barely ever share kill (duels are done in 1-2 seconds).
TF2 has indeed a very high skill gap and is also much deeper that CS but not as Tribes.
Summary: *Individual skill should NOT equal total pwnage in any TEAM based game. *Good games should have high skill gap, but remain fun for new players (base defense in tribes, playing Gorge in NS, chance of kills in CS)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok this is kind of a derail but jeeeeeze whats with the hard on for Tribes, the game was mediocre and died accordingly. I'm a bit biased because I play competitive CS, but you really don't know anything about the skill in CS. For example, your quote "....twitch skill (CS series) or real skill (Tribes series)..." I mean wow. LOOOOOOOL. At high level CS everyone uses insanely low mouse sensitivity because the game is NOT about twitching. CS is a game of team work, player positioning and flashbang/HE/smoke grenade skill. The depth and skill in CS can be hard to pick up on as an inexperienced observer, but I assure you it is definitely there.
<!--quoteo(post=1731192:date=Oct 7 2009, 01:25 AM:name=Norton)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Norton @ Oct 7 2009, 01:25 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731192"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ok this is kind of a derail but jeeeeeze whats with the hard on for Tribes, the game was mediocre and died accordingly. I'm a bit biased because I play competitive CS, but you really don't know anything about the skill in CS. For example, your quote "....twitch skill (CS series) or real skill (Tribes series)..." I mean wow. LOOOOOOOL. At high level CS everyone uses insanely low mouse sensitivity because the game is NOT about twitching. CS is a game of team work, player positioning and flashbang/HE/smoke grenade skill. The depth and skill in CS can be hard to pick up on as an inexperienced observer, but I assure you it is definitely there.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The derail happened a while ago :/ and sorry to keep it going.
So yeah I actually was kind of harsh on CS (sorry didn't have that much time to go over it) a game which I do like, and if I have a hard on for anything it is for what the gameplay in the Tribes series could potentially be (what it represents in the gaming spectrum), however today Tribes:V is almost dead... and the older Tribes 2 has become almost too hardcore to pick up again, but it was pretty epic and best in series.
CS is fun game about killing the other team and embodies the easy to learn, hard to master mantra (good thing). It's has a lot of depth in how you can kill, but being a game about killing (hostages/bombs are just there to avoid stalemates) people in round rounds, it is limited in general gameplay depth and does rely heavily on reflexes. I've played CS:S for a few months rather heavily so maybe I don't have the eye to really see all the nuances, but I'll grant you that they are there. The advance of CS:S is that it is able to maintain a community of casual player allowing the chance for people to get into it and maybe eventually go uber clan pro later on (if they wish to do so). Skill gap is smaller if a player walks into a room with two opponents he is very likely dead.
Tribes is about capturing the flag with high emphasis on base building and defense. Maps are bigger, luck kills harder, ideal games are long lasting epic triumphs of teamwork in which player assume a general role (with custom loadouts). but ultimately fails in being able to capture new players due to the skill gap (and lack of casual players) and also one super leet player can actually duel a pair of newer player much to easily. And the community basically ended up self destructing the series. ugh. Here's emptily hoping for a Tribes 3 that finally get things right.
<b>NS is a game about destroying the opponents base with high emphasis on fighting over resources (and map control coming in NS2). So it must take care of what it draws for these two series which are basically at opposite ends of the FPS spectrum.</b> I would like to have the accessibility of CS with the depth of NS1, and some gameplay element for the Tribes series.
We could add BF in here too. Successful series of games about area control with large maps, vehicles, and player classes. With high emphasis on killing as many enemies as posible (ticker) and TF2, class based about about CTF and other objectives (PL being my fav). High emphasis on Teamwork between different classes. I also think the skill cap is quite high but the effect is cushioned by the different classes having strengths against one another.
As a frequent Day of Defeat: Source player, it's pretty obvious what "lockdown mode" is. It would have to be similar to DoD's heavy machine gun. In normal "shooting from the hip" gunplay, the heavy machine gun in DoD is ridiculously inaccurate. However it can be "mounted" on level surfaces, rendering the player immobile, and giving you a ~30 degree swivel range of fire. When the gun is mounted it is extremely accurate and deadly within its limited cone of fire, however you can't move and it takes time to mount/unmount the weapon - so if the gun is outflanked, or 'naded, you are at an extreme disadvantage.
The point is, to those worrying about game balance problems, there has already been a quite successful prototype of this weapon style in other games. And the existence of a strategic commander (who can warn players of lockdown'd marine positions before they wander into the kill zone) will only make it more balanced. The idea of applying this concept to a dual-MG-wielding cyborg exoskeleton in a scifi setting is, frankly, quite awesome. I have been lurking on this forum for a while, but I had to register to let you guys know that any concern is totally unfounded. 1st post baby!
<!--quoteo(post=1731291:date=Oct 7 2009, 03:51 PM:name=zex)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (zex @ Oct 7 2009, 03:51 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731291"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As a frequent Day of Defeat: Source player, it's pretty obvious what "lockdown mode" is. It would have to be similar to DoD's heavy machine gun. In normal "shooting from the hip" gunplay, the heavy machine gun in DoD is ridiculously inaccurate. However it can be "mounted" on level surfaces, rendering the player immobile, and giving you a ~30 degree swivel range of fire. When the gun is mounted it is extremely accurate and deadly within its limited cone of fire, however you can't move and it takes time to mount/unmount the weapon - so if the gun is outflanked, or 'naded, you are at an extreme disadvantage.
The point is, to those worrying about game balance problems, there has already been a quite successful prototype of this weapon style in other games. And the existence of a strategic commander (who can warn players of lockdown'd marine positions before they wander into the kill zone) will only make it more balanced. The idea of applying this concept to a dual-MG-wielding cyborg exoskeleton in a scifi setting is, frankly, quite awesome. I have been lurking on this forum for a while, but I had to register to let you guys know that any concern is totally unfounded. 1st post baby!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Completely different game style.
DOD:S is about two roughly identical teams shooting similar weapons on ranged targets.
NS is a melee vs ranged game where movement ability is of vital importance.
NS is a melee vs ranged game where movement ability is of vital importance, which is exactly why this weapon style makes perfect sense for NS2. A good player will take advantage of his movement ability versus a lockdown'd gun's decreased mobility/field of fire by outflanking the gun. A good gunner will lockdown in a spot where his team can cover his back. Even in DoD, its not uncommon for mounted machine gunners to get melee'd. Spicing up the ranged vs melee combat by providing gameplay tradeoffs is exactly what we're talking about, and it is a badass idea. I'm glad this game is using it.
I think a locked down heavy with about a hundred degree firing arc would be great. Make it take 3 seconds or so to get in and out of it and he'll be a sitting duck without backup. As long as maps are designed well enough that there aren't many areas with rock solid choke holds.
Hell, make it so he can only pitch down so far in lockdown that an enterprising skulk could get up and chomp him in the nuts.
This isn't specifically about the lockdown ability, but one thing we don't know is if the exo-suit actually provides extra armor/damage resistance. It may simply be intended as a way to provide intense firepower in a tightly focused area, rather than be an all-around badass unit. If a skulk gets behind a deployed exo-marine, he might not have enough time to undeploy and still deal with the skulk.
If he is heavily armored, there may still be a chance to employ hit and run tactics from behind, and wear him down
It occurs to me that if aliens have no ranged attacks and no nades, it could be too easy to totally block off corridors with lockdown'd soldiers. To solve this issue, I just thought of a cool idea - lockdown should enable a spotlight (this game has dynamic lights right?) facing along with the guns, to give unsuspecting aliens an clue that they are walking into a deathtrap. With the availability of side passages and ventilation ducts, aliens could incorporate these level elements into their strategy to outflank gun positions.
<!--quoteo(post=1731328:date=Oct 8 2009, 01:13 AM:name=zex)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (zex @ Oct 8 2009, 01:13 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731328"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It occurs to me that if aliens have no ranged attacks and no nades, it could be too easy to totally block off corridors with lockdown'd soldiers. To solve this issue, I just thought of a cool idea - lockdown should enable a spotlight (this game has dynamic lights right?) facing along with the guns, to give unsuspecting aliens an clue that they are walking into a deathtrap. With the availability of side passages and ventilation ducts, aliens could incorporate these level elements into their strategy to outflank gun positions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The onos has a directional invincibility power, it'd be perfect for breaking lockdowns.
<!--quoteo(post=1731354:date=Oct 8 2009, 05:34 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Oct 8 2009, 05:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731354"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The onos has a directional invincibility power, it'd be perfect for breaking lockdowns.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Sounds like a relatively hard counter to me. It might be annoying to face lockdown without an onos.
<!--quoteo(post=1731355:date=Oct 8 2009, 03:44 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Oct 8 2009, 03:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731355"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sounds like a relatively hard counter to me. It might be annoying to face lockdown without an onos.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Endgame vs endgame... if you dont have a onos by then, you have been outplayed by resource deprivation.
<!--quoteo(post=1731361:date=Oct 8 2009, 07:27 AM:name=Tha)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tha @ Oct 8 2009, 07:27 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731361"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Endgame vs endgame... if you dont have a onos by then, you have been outplayed by resource deprivation.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Lifeforms tend to die sometimes. It's bad enough to lose the bigger lifeforms already with the NS1 marine firepower, now losing an onos sounds like even bigger deal. It's not fun to lose a 20 minute round to one dead onos. Losing the 1st fade is already bad enough in NS if you ask me, no need to make the lifeform death even more decisive.
Rushing to endgame isn't a particularly interesting mechanic either, it's much more interesting if earlier techs are somewhat able to fight off the final techs, with disadvantage of course. That's hopefully the case in NS2 too.
Comments
The point of contention is that this is not an issue of skill cap. You can make a game with a high skill cap that is also friendly to new players. Counter-Strike has a very high skill cap, and yet in that very post you laud it for its accessibility.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not really high skill capped when you can die from an unlucky shot, because no amount of skill will prevent that, that's what I mean by skill cap, being good at the game does not make you invincible because new players can easily have some advantage over you, hence why I support lockdown because it adds another way to get the advantage.
You can approach skill caps two ways, you can make it impossible to be good at the game, or you can make it impossible to be bad at the game, either way it caps the skill max because skill is relative, if everyone is good then being good becomes unremarkable. I don't really see any difference between the two because by doing either you compress the skill range of the game.
Allowing new players to score lucky kills isn't a skill cap, because a good player will still score more kills by aiming better. If anything it could be thought of more as a skill floor.
I think TF2 catered very well to the general gaming audience. Just not to the hardcore one.
It is not a game that you play extensively but play occasionally knowing that for the short time you play it, you'll have fun. Even if you leave and return to it later, you can pick up where you left out with a similar skill level fairly quickly. Most importantly though, anyone pick it up fairly easily. Staying around too long will cause you get bored of it eventually, which causes a lot of hot air from people who expected it to be a game that you can play forever and ever.
I really liked NS1 and I don't want NS2 to be TF2. I want NS2 to be like NS1, but not feed on the blood of newbie players for sustenance.
I would hate to see any sort of too stagnant or slow gameplay. A heavyset exoskeleton/similar feature might be good. Gameplay can be quick even if there are some slower moving elements in the game, but as long as not everyone is a moving near-immobile turret, I'm okay with this.
For example: I hardly ever play anything else on TF2 except scout, because the gameplay in general seems so very slow-paced. I despise the heavy class for its immobility. However the 'heavy class' in Dystopia is fun to play because you can take a legbooster implant which makes it possible to sprint even as a massive tower of metal, for limited time. Also, the gameplay in general seems somewhat more fast paced.
I guess I'm trying to imply something like: Try to keep things upbeat and rapid, because I think there's a lot of people in this world that fast-paced games cater for and have been neglected in the recent years because of all the half-assed poor and slow mods/console ports that have appeared in the market. Well, at least I feel like so. NS1 had a good speed to it.
Also on the speed issue, plenty of people enjoying playing slower classes (Heavy, Soldier), if they can get into combat quickly (Teleporters). Mowing people down as Heavy is heaps of fun in TF2, wobbling all the way to combat isn't. So it isn't as simple as saying, if your slow its boring.
1. Stop my movement completely (wouldn't mind a slowing effect as if having both miniguns firing at once takes more muscle and control)
2. Force a locked view point/ only on direction of fire.
This is not even going into how it is used such as a sentry turret that needs time to deploy and wrap up or like TF2 a toggle. I rather the latter.
<!--quoteo(post=1730366:date=Oct 2 2009, 07:46 PM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Oct 2 2009, 07:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1730366"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><b>It's not really high skill capped when you can die from an unlucky shot</b>, because no amount of skill will prevent that, that's what I mean by skill cap, being good at the game does not make you invincible because new players can easily have some advantage over you, hence why I support lockdown because it adds another way to get the advantage.
<b>You can approach skill caps two ways, you can make it impossible to be good at the game, or you can make it impossible to be bad at the game</b>, either way it caps the skill max because skill is relative, if everyone is good then being good becomes unremarkable. I don't really see any difference between the two because by doing either you compress the skill range of the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you need to talk about skill gap rather than cap. And also please specify when you are talking about twitch skill (CS series) or real skill (Tribes series).
Regarding 1v1 play. In Counter-Strike (CS) crazy good players are going to be able to regularly own low skilled players like 99% or the time (that 1% is important for newer players, not wanting it to exist is wrong on your part). However the better the low skilled players get the lower that 99% will be getting down to 90% then to 80% and so on until equally good players reach the roughly 50% mark. This is bad for you? I think this is very good regarding accessibility. Playing in teams would also increase the chances of newer players to score kills on better players. if you can't shoot as well you can also compensate by being smart and playing as a team.
I a game like Tribes 2 a crazy good player will probably be able to own a newbie like 100% of the time in individual duels(maybe you should try this game) until the newbie reaches some play level much closer to the high skilled player. Tribes 2 counter acts this high skill gap by having lots of depth(which CS lacks). Like you can play flag defense, base defense/repair/build, flag runner, base raider, etc. and also in Tribes 2 teamwork is much more essential over the course of a round which balanced the super skill any one player can have over you. Kills are more shared you could can feel good that you put even just 20% damage in that guy because it helped your teammate kill him. In CS you barely ever share kill (duels are done in 1-2 seconds).
TF2 has indeed a very high skill gap and is also much deeper that CS but not as Tribes.
Summary:
*Individual skill should NOT equal total pwnage in any TEAM based game.
*Good games should have high skill gap, but remain fun for new players (base defense in tribes, playing Gorge in NS, chance of kills in CS)
This line bugs me a little bit...playing the gorge role in NS is fine for new players learning how the game works, but it won't teach them how to Fade. There's still a huge amount of team pressure when you go Fade - everyone expects you to play the part, which frequently amounts to something ridiculous like going 50-1
Even the top combat classes should constantly rely on teamwork in a team based game, and I don't feel that happens enough in NS1.
Twitch based skills are important of course, but they should only get you so far on their own
Even the top combat classes should constantly rely on teamwork in a team based game, and I don't feel that happens enough in NS1.
Twitch based skills are important of course, but they should only get you so far on their own<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Playing Gorge teaches a player the basics of the game without feeling the pressure of NS1's fast-combat. It is not an effective method to teach players the subtleties of another life form. You can only learn that by playing that lifeform or seeing other people doing it (preferably from their point of view).
A good fade playing against marines of comparable skill carrying anything better than LMGs very much does have to rely on teamwork.
I'm surprised you've never played a game where the fade player was constantly reminding people to parasite the shotgunners. I think it's obvious to most that marines work best in groups, but even the alien classes are oriented to specific roles, though you may not see them used that way often on public servers. If there's any criticism of NS1 that will stand, teamwork is not it.
I think you're reading something in my post that isn't there. I didn't say NS had a skill cap, and I'm not even sure how you could have interpreted it that way. I was explaining why people didn't want NS2 to have a skill cap.
Even the top combat classes should constantly rely on teamwork in a team based game, and I don't feel that happens enough in NS1.
Twitch based skills are important of course, but they should only get you so far on their own<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I completely agreed with you there. Playing Gorge in Alien let's me have fun without needing so much skill. So it's good because I can have fun. However, It's bad because it does not lead toward me getting better at the other classes. So I've been stuck as Gorge/Skulk for years now(literally, but with the exception of combat.). Not everyone in the team can go fade and there will always be a better fade in my team so it make no sense for me to play fade (unless where are dominating like crazy... in which case I'm not going to face much opposition as a fade). There's a bit of a flaw in the design of NS1 where players are not able to rotate their roles without significant risk to their team. However this issue is inherent of having a Resource system where stronger units cost more. Sadly I can't really think of a fix.
Actually the fix I've just thought of could be something like having two separate resources. One used for buildings and team upgrades and the other a personal resource that the alien can use to evolve into different life forms. Or maybe have a population system a lá "spawn more overlords". Anyway I'm sure it's all been figured out differently for NS2 so I'll wait and see what they got not.
human turrets ftw
Takin a guess and gonna say your gonna find this game alot more easier to get right into, but harder to master, aye it is one of their design mantras.
Easy to learn, hard to master.
I think you need to talk about skill gap rather than cap. And also please specify when you are talking about twitch skill (CS series) or real skill (Tribes series).
Regarding 1v1 play. In Counter-Strike (CS) crazy good players are going to be able to regularly own low skilled players like 99% or the time (that 1% is important for newer players, not wanting it to exist is wrong on your part). However the better the low skilled players get the lower that 99% will be getting down to 90% then to 80% and so on until equally good players reach the roughly 50% mark. This is bad for you? I think this is very good regarding accessibility. Playing in teams would also increase the chances of newer players to score kills on better players. if you can't shoot as well you can also compensate by being smart and playing as a team.
I a game like Tribes 2 a crazy good player will probably be able to own a newbie like 100% of the time in individual duels(maybe you should try this game) until the newbie reaches some play level much closer to the high skilled player. Tribes 2 counter acts this high skill gap by having lots of depth(which CS lacks). Like you can play flag defense, base defense/repair/build, flag runner, base raider, etc. and also in Tribes 2 teamwork is much more essential over the course of a round which balanced the super skill any one player can have over you. Kills are more shared you could can feel good that you put even just 20% damage in that guy because it helped your teammate kill him. In CS you barely ever share kill (duels are done in 1-2 seconds).
TF2 has indeed a very high skill gap and is also much deeper that CS but not as Tribes.
Summary:
*Individual skill should NOT equal total pwnage in any TEAM based game.
*Good games should have high skill gap, but remain fun for new players (base defense in tribes, playing Gorge in NS, chance of kills in CS)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok this is kind of a derail but jeeeeeze whats with the hard on for Tribes, the game was mediocre and died accordingly. I'm a bit biased because I play competitive CS, but you really don't know anything about the skill in CS. For example, your quote "....twitch skill (CS series) or real skill (Tribes series)..." I mean wow. LOOOOOOOL. At high level CS everyone uses insanely low mouse sensitivity because the game is NOT about twitching. CS is a game of team work, player positioning and flashbang/HE/smoke grenade skill. The depth and skill in CS can be hard to pick up on as an inexperienced observer, but I assure you it is definitely there.
The derail happened a while ago :/ and sorry to keep it going.
So yeah I actually was kind of harsh on CS (sorry didn't have that much time to go over it) a game which I do like, and if I have a hard on for anything it is for what the gameplay in the Tribes series could potentially be (what it represents in the gaming spectrum), however today Tribes:V is almost dead... and the older Tribes 2 has become almost too hardcore to pick up again, but it was pretty epic and best in series.
CS is fun game about killing the other team and embodies the easy to learn, hard to master mantra (good thing). It's has a lot of depth in how you can kill, but being a game about killing (hostages/bombs are just there to avoid stalemates) people in round rounds, it is limited in general gameplay depth and does rely heavily on reflexes. I've played CS:S for a few months rather heavily so maybe I don't have the eye to really see all the nuances, but I'll grant you that they are there. The advance of CS:S is that it is able to maintain a community of casual player allowing the chance for people to get into it and maybe eventually go uber clan pro later on (if they wish to do so). Skill gap is smaller if a player walks into a room with two opponents he is very likely dead.
Tribes is about capturing the flag with high emphasis on base building and defense. Maps are bigger, luck kills harder, ideal games are long lasting epic triumphs of teamwork in which player assume a general role (with custom loadouts). but ultimately fails in being able to capture new players due to the skill gap (and lack of casual players) and also one super leet player can actually duel a pair of newer player much to easily. And the community basically ended up self destructing the series. ugh. Here's emptily hoping for a Tribes 3 that finally get things right.
<b>NS is a game about destroying the opponents base with high emphasis on fighting over resources (and map control coming in NS2). So it must take care of what it draws for these two series which are basically at opposite ends of the FPS spectrum.</b> I would like to have the accessibility of CS with the depth of NS1, and some gameplay element for the Tribes series.
We could add BF in here too. Successful series of games about area control with large maps, vehicles, and player classes. With high emphasis on killing as many enemies as posible (ticker) and TF2, class based about about CTF and other objectives (PL being my fav). High emphasis on Teamwork between different classes. I also think the skill cap is quite high but the effect is cushioned by the different classes having strengths against one another.
The point is, to those worrying about game balance problems, there has already been a quite successful prototype of this weapon style in other games. And the existence of a strategic commander (who can warn players of lockdown'd marine positions before they wander into the kill zone) will only make it more balanced.
The idea of applying this concept to a dual-MG-wielding cyborg exoskeleton in a scifi setting is, frankly, quite awesome. I have been lurking on this forum for a while, but I had to register to let you guys know that any concern is totally unfounded. 1st post baby!
The point is, to those worrying about game balance problems, there has already been a quite successful prototype of this weapon style in other games. And the existence of a strategic commander (who can warn players of lockdown'd marine positions before they wander into the kill zone) will only make it more balanced.
The idea of applying this concept to a dual-MG-wielding cyborg exoskeleton in a scifi setting is, frankly, quite awesome. I have been lurking on this forum for a while, but I had to register to let you guys know that any concern is totally unfounded. 1st post baby!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Completely different game style.
DOD:S is about two roughly identical teams shooting similar weapons on ranged targets.
NS is a melee vs ranged game where movement ability is of vital importance.
Hell, make it so he can only pitch down so far in lockdown that an enterprising skulk could get up and chomp him in the nuts.
If he is heavily armored, there may still be a chance to employ hit and run tactics from behind, and wear him down
The onos has a directional invincibility power, it'd be perfect for breaking lockdowns.
Sounds like a relatively hard counter to me. It might be annoying to face lockdown without an onos.
Endgame vs endgame... if you dont have a onos by then, you have been outplayed by resource deprivation.
</troll>
Lifeforms tend to die sometimes. It's bad enough to lose the bigger lifeforms already with the NS1 marine firepower, now losing an onos sounds like even bigger deal. It's not fun to lose a 20 minute round to one dead onos. Losing the 1st fade is already bad enough in NS if you ask me, no need to make the lifeform death even more decisive.
Rushing to endgame isn't a particularly interesting mechanic either, it's much more interesting if earlier techs are somewhat able to fight off the final techs, with disadvantage of course. That's hopefully the case in NS2 too.
<!--quoteo(post=1731354:date=Oct 8 2009, 05:34 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Oct 8 2009, 05:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1731354"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The onos has a directional invincibility power, it'd be perfect for breaking lockdowns.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->