It's somewhat bad when it comes to defining the two teams, and I'm sure if they had more resources letting the aliens manage without a commander and really get down and dirty with balancing it, I think it would be better. But then it's not a bad thing either to have a commander, since it does open up a whole lot of other options that they can play around with.
The hive-comm is being added because NS2 will have more RTS elements than NS1, specifically on the kharaa side. Most competitive players of NS1 considered placing chambers beyond the necessary 3 upgrades to be wasteful because they were so ineffective. Hopefully the hive-comm and its responsibilities (managing chambers and DI as well as RTs and drifters) will add some needed strategic depth to the kharaa side.
In NS1 the two most important players are the comm and the early fade. I see the 're-balancing' of NS2 as a way to spread around this importance and responsibility to more players on both teams. It is retuning the game concept more inline with being a teamplay FPS with RTS structure.
At least give it a chance before siding with your nostalgic impulse for the 'good ole days'. As a song I like says, "There were never any good ol' days, they are today, they are tomorrow; it's a stupid thing we say cursing tomorrow with sorrow"
<!--quoteo(post=1781737:date=Jul 22 2010, 08:01 AM:name=TrC)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TrC @ Jul 22 2010, 08:01 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1781737"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm no fan of alien commander, it is not something that was really needed, anyone saying theres was no coordination on alien side is talking plain poop, every decent player...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And full stop. Every decent player has coordination. But not every NS player is any decent. Even terrible marines don't follow orders. And that's when the player actually called "The Commander" is commanding them as part of their given role. A peer telling them what to do (even if that peer A) is much more skilled and B) is telling them to do the right thing)? Fahgeddaboudit!
That's the big problem.
Aliens do need a commander. The NS1 aliens are uncoordinated until you get actually decent aliens who all know about teamwork, map control, and how integral resources are. It's an uncoordinated mess otherwise, and half the people in NS don't know these very necessary RTS or team-game concepts.
Basically; every single alien has to know "what's up" before the entire alien team can actually work as a team instead of individuals. Having just one player who knows "what's up" and has the authority to order around everyone who doesn't makes teamworks a LOT easier. It's the commander's goals being met, and commanders are fallible (make bad decisions), but at least some goals are being met as a team. And an alien team acting as a team (patrolling in squads, rushing in groups, specializing instead of generalizing) is unimaginably more effective than a team whose members get picked off one at a time because the other team was smart and did things together instead of individually.
Another problem is not having a combined resource pool. And that's an enormous glaring problem and Unknown Worlds are in the right for fixing it. The only way to properly manage a combined pool is to have a singular player operating with singular executive authority.
Imagine the marines without a commander. They could manage. Having a commander is not necessary. It makes things much, much, much more efficient. That's the entire point.
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
The need for alien commander is not a need for coordination. It is about a unified resource model, or at least, that's how I've always read it.
As yourbonesakin says, you could unify the resource model by removing the commander completely. The better option, imo, is to give the aliens a commander.
In NS1 you have various problems with res flow and team balance.
1. Res flow doesn't scale evenly with team size. - Small team sizes favour aliens as they get N resource towers worth of res between them => increased personal res flow - Large team sizes favour marines as personal alien res flow is reduced 2. Combat effectiveness doesn't scale well - the commander is 1/4 of a 4 man team's potential firepower. i.e. aliens have 33% more combat units in a 4v4 3. In public games the alien tech progression is ad-hoc and rarely planned. People are afraid to drop SC first. Nobody has the defacto decision making ability. Marines have optimal strategies but you still see more variation because *someone* is authorised to make the call.
I think by giving the aliens a commander, the process of making the game scale to different team sizes becomes an order of magnitude easier. Balance decisions will, in theory, be easier to make as the <b>constant</b> worry we had about breaking competitive NS or public NS with a change will largely disappear. This is why many items like RFK, tech costs, etc remained more or less static throughout the entire development of NS3.0. I think in NS2 the dev team will have much more creative flexibility in this area, as will modders.
<!--quoteo(post=1781772:date=Jul 22 2010, 05:24 PM:name=yourbonesakin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yourbonesakin @ Jul 22 2010, 05:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1781772"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The NS1 aliens are uncoordinated until you get actually decent aliens who all know about teamwork, map control, and how integral resources are. It's an uncoordinated mess otherwise, and half the people in NS don't know these very necessary RTS or team-game concepts.
Imagine the marines without a commander. They could manage. Having a commander is not necessary. It makes things much, much, much more efficient. That's the entire point.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I suppose you are right, but will people really listen? It might be a todays "playstyle" only but someone obeying my orders that isnt in same voicecomm is as rare as knifed onos. The gorges role being split in two is kind of risky, I fear it might become very boring commanding for alien side. As for gorges I was under they were given (even) more combat capablity giving them another role instead of just RT drop.
I'm too deep in the mud to imagine marines without commander.
ssjyodaJoin Date: 2002-03-05Member: 274Members, Squad Five Blue
edited July 2010
so.. people who want an alien commander NEED someone to tell them what to do? you NEED to be guided? can't figure it out on your own? Stick to marines then... thats what made the game great. If you need that assurance then you played marines... Aliens didn't lack coordination, it was just different.. which fit for other player. I preferred playing alien because it gave you freedom of personal control. Each choice you made effects everyone else, which forces you to think more about what you're about to do. If you win, you have a stronger feeling of accomplishment because you know what you had done. To be directed around, the commander wins the game, not you. Neither way of playing is wrong, thats just how I see it and thats why I always pick aliens.
Other people prefer the opposite and thats ok, don't change what works for others just cause it doesn't work for you.. You can never please everyone, its not possible.. but keeping the options open for different people is better than trying to conform everyone.
and yes.. I'm one of those that rarely listen to a Comm as marines. Simply cause of the fact I find most incompetent. Marines = team of drones + 1 brain... Aliens = group of individual brains.
of course you always get a game breaking noob, but that can happen anytime no matter what is coded into the game. Someone new at something will ALWAYS make it harder on the ones who have been playing a while. It'd be like me joining the NHL, I could be of some use, but I'd likely hinder the teams ability.
If NS2 is a com vs com game, I won't be playing it much. I've paid my special-ed fee and the devs earned that money with NS1.
I suspect the alien com is a result of marketing-mentality and has little to do with the original thinking that spawned the NS1 model. Difficulty in playing has an inverse relationship to number of players and this relationship will be reflected in the profit curve. Please don't make the mistake of assuming the shapes of the relative curves, we're dealing with many unknowns (pun!) here.
I wish the devs the best of luck and have every confidence in their ability to achieve their desired level(s) of success with NS2.
The last time I posted on this subject, an admin locked the thread. I'd like to see that thread unlocked.
My main hope is that an educated team puts together a mod that provides sufficient intellectual challenge, but that's at least 18-24 months away from this date. I'd prefer something along the lines of NS1's pitting Command and Control vs Collaboration as management methodologies. Maybe NS2 will retain this from NS1, but I've read nothing that makes me think that's the case. I'll be watching mod development and volunteering my time to those that look promising.
<!--quoteo(post=1781787:date=Jul 22 2010, 11:25 AM:name=ssjyoda)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ssjyoda @ Jul 22 2010, 11:25 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1781787"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->so.. people who want an alien commander NEED someone to tell them what to do? you NEED to be guided? can't figure it out on your own? Stick to marines then... thats what made the game great. If you need that assurance then you played marines... Aliens didn't lack coordination, it was just different...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bogus argument. I have seen in very few cases online where someone said "hey, I'm rushing double, but we need at least 5 skulks to take it. Who's with me?" and 5 other people candidly and instantly reply "roger that! rushing double, comrade!". That NEVER EVER happens. No one wants to take the initiative. And if no one takes the initiative, then nothing gets done.
The aliens of NS1 are uncoordinated. No one understands a high level RTS game.... even LESS understand simple things like superior numbers and simultaneous rushing or even flanking (the essentials of team based tactics). It's all very complicated. Not everyone is a pro RTS gamer.
In addition, you are saying that newbies should survive the baptism of fire or GTFO.
That. Makes. No. Sense.
Not from a design point of view, not from a simple moral point of view, not from a sales point of view. The only point of view in which such a statement makes sense is an idiot L33T player who wants to keep every newbie's skill down so they can be full-body tackled like bowling pins. That's toxic and that doesn't belong anywhere in NS2 or any game.
I don't need any guidance. I AM the alien commander in almost every match I play NS. That's because I've been playing the game for YEARS now. You're asking complete newbies to have the experience of a years long veteran (understand the game enough to command other players) right from the get go. That's completely ridiculous. That's where the commander comes in. It eases the learning curve so zerglings can feel useful while learning the game instead of running into siege tank fire one by one over and over and over and over and over again until they learn by baptism of fire what to do. Baptism of fire takes a loooooong time to finally work and the game sucks like a black hole until the baptism is over. In short, that's a horrendous design goal. I applaud the talented staff at Unknown Worlds Entertainment for sticking to their principles and changing things that need to be changed without listening to the unprofessional, unpaid, armchair theorycrafting afraid-of-change-only-because-its-change segments of their otherwise awesome and intelligent community.
<b>So you're saying that we shouldn't have a commander because that would increase team work and help newbies learn quicker without a harsh baptism by fire. And that a baptism of fire which puts off newbies (who then tell their friends that the game is terribad and the word of mouth factor makes NS2 sales plummet like a satellite reverse thrusting out of geosynchronous orbit) AND worse team work is good.</b>
ssjyodaJoin Date: 2002-03-05Member: 274Members, Squad Five Blue
edited July 2010
you missed my point.. playing as aliens I find to be a completely different experience. Of course rarely anyone says, "lets rush this," because by looking at the hive site and in game map you should just KNOW where to go. Its not verbal communication at all. Perhaps making it clearer on the hud whats going on in the map would help. Red, yellow, white circles all over the screen can be confusing. Tweaking that to make it clearer could be a way to make the game easier for new players. But, its a completely different form of teamwork. If you can't get it, alright, thats cool.. but me and I know many others who DO. Stick to what you do best and others will stick to what they prefer, don't change the other side cause you don't get it. Keep them different to satisfy different play styles. No one is perfect and can grasp every side of the coin. That was my point.
Saying that a commander increases teamwork is an opinion, not a fact. I personally feel having a commander to tell players what to do hinders the learning curve. Teaching someone to just listen and not think for themselves doesn't help the individual, may help the team. What would said player do then if there was a poor commander in the chair, just blindly listen or question things? I find myself questioning a lot. I've also seen instances where a really good commander was in the game using more of a competitive league strategy and people will eject because its too foreign.
Of course I don't agree with shunning off new players, that would be stupid from a design standpoint.. But no matter what you do, a new player will ALWAYS hinder his team as he/she learns. I agree with making the game easier to learn so people can grasp the game easier, but thinking that someone can learn the ins and outs of a game in 5 minutes is insane.. with or without a commander.
<!--quoteo(post=1781788:date=Jul 22 2010, 08:27 AM:name=moku9)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (moku9 @ Jul 22 2010, 08:27 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1781788"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If NS2 is a com vs com game, I won't be playing it much. I've paid my special-ed fee and the devs earned that money with NS1. My main hope is that an educated team puts together a mod that provides sufficient intellectual challenge, Yes, I'm over educated.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> If you think that a commander role in this video game has any bearing on the "intellectual challenge" you may need some more education there. Playing marines and playing aliens in NS1 had the same intellectual challenge: not much. If you can read a map then you had all the information you need to decide where to go. Higher level (mentally) players can use the same map to analyse opposing players moods. A marine moving like <i>this</i> seems unsure, thus it's probable that their position is weak.
None of this changes because of the commander. The commander on a team should ideally be the player with the most foresight in this direction, but their role on the alien team in NS1 was identical. Aliens <i>had</i> a commander even though that player didn't get a top-down viewpoint. This was especially the case in competitive where it was often the same player on both rounds.
All of this is regardless of the way that UWE has described the role as a sort of hybridized support class and RTS player. The fact alone that there will be multiple commanders should clue you in that this is not intended to be a hand-holder role. In fact they seem determined that the way the commander worked in NS1 <i>added</i> to the difficulty of the game rather than simplified it, since a weak commander can screw over a good team and a strong one can lead a weak team to victory.
So if it's being put in for the res model, why haven't we considered just letting gorges suck the majority of the res?
I mean if they get a 70 / 30 ratio or something it would make being a career gorge more attractive without totally stealing the possibilities from fades and lerks. 70% of the res flow is divided among the gorges, the other 30% goes to the team. I suppose it would get split evenly when there are no gorges.
<!--quoteo(post=1781803:date=Jul 22 2010, 12:16 PM:name=ssjyoda)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ssjyoda @ Jul 22 2010, 12:16 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1781803"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->you missed my point.. playing as aliens I find to be a completely different experience. Of course rarely anyone says, "lets rush this," because by looking at the hive site and in game map you should just KNOW where to go. Its not verbal communication at all. Perhaps making it clearer on the hud whats going on in the map would help. Red, yellow, white circles all over the screen can be confusing. Tweaking that to make it clearer could be a way to make the game easier for new players. But, its a completely different form of teamwork. If you can't get it, alright, thats cool.. but me and I know many others who DO. Stick to what you do best and others will stick to what they prefer, don't change the other side cause you don't get it. Keep them different to satisfy different play styles. No one is perfect and can grasp every side of the coin. That was my point.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's fine to say you like how the game was. Subjective opinions can't be wrong. In any case, verbal communication is more effective than map position communication because a person can say why they are there instead of somewhere else AND can communicate where they will be in the future whereas with just map location teammates are in the dark about the why and they can only see what is going on RIGHT NOW. Planning movements is perhaps more holistic and instinctual without using verbal communication, but it is incredibly less effective, especially in the future. You cannot deny that in any way shape or form.
I get exactly what you're talking about. I played that way for years. And then I got a microphone and instantly played with a much higher level of communication. The older way just didn't work. Who gives a ###### if I'm walking to marine start? Is anyone else going to know that I'm attempting to bite down the AA and I need some help? No. They aren't. Are 5 more skulks going to appear out of thin air and follow my assault? No. They aren't. No one outside of very high level play has that much game sense, prediction, map awareness, familiarity with teammates' favored tactics, nor the initiative to actually do something.
Non verbal communication is less effective, and gets worse at the lower levels. Verbal communication conveys more information. It is inherently superior from just that perspective. From an atmospheric, aesthetic, or "flavor" perspective non verbal communication has it beat. There's nothing more immersion breaking than another supposedly alien lifeform speaking in my language, using gamer vernacular and acronyms (A skulk says to another "I'm going to kill some RT's and then bite down the AA researching, cos the 3 minutes is almost up. We can't let them get JPs. That's gg. SOMEONE DROP SOME RT'S!!!"). However, if a skulk starts running in a certain direction and I follow it, both skulks have a silent understanding about what's going on.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Saying that a commander increases teamwork is an opinion, not a fact.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's an observational opinion that is either true or false. My line of thinking is when the comm tells the marines "PHASE THROUGH THE NINJA GATE AND SHOOT DOWN THE HIVE NOW" and the marines move as a group and work together to shoot down that hive, that's the definition of teamwork. Caused by a commander commanding other players. Giving a player the authority that comes with the name "Commander" and actual role difference (Not just another field soldier with a higher class shouting orders, but someone who actually has tools which lend to commanding) means that the team will more likely follow the orders of the person who wants to be the major verbal communicator...
More people following the same plan = team work. That's the definition (I think it is, anyway. If you have a better opinion am I happy to discuss it and perhaps adopt yours instead). A commander facilitates people following the same plan. Thus, a commander facilitates team work.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I personally feel having a commander to tell players what to do hinders the learning curve. Teaching someone to just listen and not think for themselves doesn't help the individual, may help the team.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Telling players to follow orders "BECAUSE I'M THE COMM, THAT'S WHY!!!!one" is absolute crap. We agree on that point. Telling players to follow orders "Because this will help us win the game, and here's why..." actually does teach inexperienced players what strategies work and what don't. Blindly following = crap. Being told what works = HELPING the learning difficulty.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Of course I don't agree with shunning off new players, that would be stupid from a design standpoint.. But no matter what you do, a new player will ALWAYS hinder his team as he/she learns. I agree with making the game easier to learn so people can grasp the game easier, but thinking that someone can learn the ins and outs of a game in 5 minutes is insane.. with or without a commander.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> We absolutely agree on this. There is just one caveat. A commander can tell a 5 minute newbie where to go to be the most effective. The newbie doesn't need to know anything about the game, but they can still help out their team because a more experienced player gave them advice (Example: "Okay, NSPlayer(5), go and watch this chokepoint for a couple of minutes while the other aliens are attacking marine territory. If a marine walks by, they are trying to build a phase gate inside OUR territory and attack our hives. Tell us if that happens, okay?")
<!--quoteo(post=1781819:date=Jul 22 2010, 12:58 PM:name=Locane)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Locane @ Jul 22 2010, 12:58 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1781819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So if it's being put in for the res model, why haven't we considered just letting gorges suck the majority of the res?
I mean if they get a 70 / 30 ratio or something it would make being a career gorge more attractive without totally stealing the possibilities from fades and lerks. 70% of the res flow is divided among the gorges, the other 30% goes to the team. I suppose it would get split evenly when there are no gorges.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This used to be the case. People would go gorge to save res for onos because it was quicker, but that's besides the point.
It is too difficult to balance a resource system which spreads resources evenly for different team sizes.
NS1 was balanced for 6v6 play. Can you tell? It takes AGES to get the resources for a fade or hive in NS1 in a 15v15. And did you die with your lifeform? So sorry. Guess you're going to have to wait for another 50 resources. Oh, forgot to mention that your team will probably lose the game before then because no one else has a fade.
But the marines can recycle guns. And a shotgun+JP only costs 20 resources and is a very fair opponent to a fade. And half of that resource cost can be recycled (the shotgun).
So the fade has to be worth a huge chunk of resources (since one probably can't go fade twice in a game, that's the definition of huge resource expenditure) but still not be overpowered? That is a balance nightmare.
So for NS2, simple was decided to be better. You notice how in Starcraft 1 none of the races has a different resource model. They are totally asymetric (more so in SC2!) but also balanced against each other. But it takes Blizzard (the most prestigious game developing company on the planet) to balance Spawn Larva-Chrono Boost-Summon Mule which ARE asymetric resource models for SC2.
Is Unknown Worlds Entertainment Blizzard? No. They can't do something that difficult to balance without a hitch. They just don't have the resource (no pun intended). So making the two teams more similar in the name of balance is the way they have to go.
Is it a good thing?
I think so, but that's just an opinion. We'll tell when we start playing the game. And if a majority of players like the new system more, then it is better. If they didn't, then its not.
I'm scared too. Aliens don't take a lot of coordination, at the beginning of the round people will normally pick roles:
"I'll save for hive", "I'm saving for fade", "I'll go gorge" x2, "I'm saving all my monies for onos" x6
It's what made the alien side unique. Alien coordination was aided by hive sight & a lot of mic chatter. I don't see any need for an alien commander as it makes them too similar to the marines.
I'll be very surprised if it is very well received once game play starts up. We'll see... I hope I'm wrong and its a grand success.
I don't think there are enough details about the alien commander for people to be getting too worked up about it. They said something about the hive-com using nymphs for scouting and other neat things, and I believe they said they don't plan on having its role being to issue waypoints and crap like the marine-com, so who really knows how it will play? Everything is just speculation at this point. Personally, I'm excited to see what role the alien commander will take.
As far as it fitting into the storyline, I think its great. Let me add that I've never read the lore so forgive me if I'm way off base. I always just assumed the aliens were controlled by a hive-mind so it makes sense that there is an overarching 'will' that is guiding all the parts of the whole to a singular objective. In my mind the aliens should be more cohesive than the marines because they essentially share the same brain whereas the marines are individual people with individual thoughts. Sure, they're soldiers trained under a hierarchical system to remove as much of the individual from the equation as possible, but an individual they remain, and thus more prone to do what they want, act on their own personal feelings or act for self preservation over the well being of the group. Individuality? That ###### don't fly with the over-mind! At least not in my mind...
ssjyodaJoin Date: 2002-03-05Member: 274Members, Squad Five Blue
Bones.. Thats one way to look at things, though I know plenty of people that would rather not have the verbal communication and just a visual sense. Either they aren't comfortable, share a room, whatever, they prefer to not have the mic on. You believe a commander helps teamplay and coordination, I believe the players themselves create the coordination. So why not leave leave both methods in the game to fit both ways of play. Pushing an alien commander into the game, and pushing the aliens to play more like marines would eliminate some of the appeal to players that prefer the individual freedom in their play. I'd rather both sides be satisfied of the arguement be satisfied instead of one side forcing the other to concede to changing. Players can still talk to each other and coordinate an attack/ambush.. but I'd rather do it myself, not have a commander figuring out my next move. What works for some doesn't work for others.. obviously what works for you wouldn't work for me.
I'm still curious to see how much control over the game an alien commander will have.. though I don't think I'll like it much.
- they did it most likely to unify the ressource system, so that it can be balanced on variabel sizes. - if the feeling between alien / marine or alien commander / marine commander isn't different and it misses the expected atmosphere, they failed.
it might be just that simple, the only problem is, we have to wait <b>at least</b> until alpha (monday, YAY !) so we can judge this properly.
I am as well anticipating the aCom with mixed feelings. We have to few information to be able to expect anything, and thats the problem.
It's like seeing the wrapped up christmas presents half a month prior christmas' eve, "is it that ultra cool robot toy everyone wants this year, or another sweater from gramma?".
I understand why they created the alien comm- definitely simplifies/shortens the learning curve. I can't say I'm a huge fan of it though. I loved the difference between marines and aliens. I trust the devs so we'll all just have to wait till the release and judge it from there. Just my two cents.
Perhaps there will be a small resurgance of NS1 for those who don't like change?
I personally am still on the fence about the alien commander but im sure that they are going to try and keep ns2 similar to the orignal NS feel, with that said im sure it will come out awesome and be a great additional role.
Comments
But then it's not a bad thing either to have a commander, since it does open up a whole lot of other options that they can play around with.
My opinion anyway.
In NS1 the two most important players are the comm and the early fade. I see the 're-balancing' of NS2 as a way to spread around this importance and responsibility to more players on both teams. It is retuning the game concept more inline with being a teamplay FPS with RTS structure.
At least give it a chance before siding with your nostalgic impulse for the 'good ole days'. As a song I like says, "There were never any good ol' days, they are today, they are tomorrow; it's a stupid thing we say cursing tomorrow with sorrow"
And full stop. Every decent player has coordination. But not every NS player is any decent. Even terrible marines don't follow orders. And that's when the player actually called "The Commander" is commanding them as part of their given role. A peer telling them what to do (even if that peer A) is much more skilled and B) is telling them to do the right thing)? Fahgeddaboudit!
That's the big problem.
Aliens do need a commander. The NS1 aliens are uncoordinated until you get actually decent aliens who all know about teamwork, map control, and how integral resources are. It's an uncoordinated mess otherwise, and half the people in NS don't know these very necessary RTS or team-game concepts.
Basically; every single alien has to know "what's up" before the entire alien team can actually work as a team instead of individuals. Having just one player who knows "what's up" and has the authority to order around everyone who doesn't makes teamworks a LOT easier. It's the commander's goals being met, and commanders are fallible (make bad decisions), but at least some goals are being met as a team. And an alien team acting as a team (patrolling in squads, rushing in groups, specializing instead of generalizing) is unimaginably more effective than a team whose members get picked off one at a time because the other team was smart and did things together instead of individually.
Another problem is not having a combined resource pool. And that's an enormous glaring problem and Unknown Worlds are in the right for fixing it. The only way to properly manage a combined pool is to have a singular player operating with singular executive authority.
Imagine the marines without a commander. They could manage. Having a commander is not necessary. It makes things much, much, much more efficient. That's the entire point.
+1.
I couldn't have put it better myself. I think a commader for the aliens is completly nessasary and it will also appeal to a bigger crowd.
As yourbonesakin says, you could unify the resource model by removing the commander completely. The better option, imo, is to give the aliens a commander.
In NS1 you have various problems with res flow and team balance.
1. Res flow doesn't scale evenly with team size.
- Small team sizes favour aliens as they get N resource towers worth of res between them => increased personal res flow
- Large team sizes favour marines as personal alien res flow is reduced
2. Combat effectiveness doesn't scale well
- the commander is 1/4 of a 4 man team's potential firepower. i.e. aliens have 33% more combat units in a 4v4
3. In public games the alien tech progression is ad-hoc and rarely planned. People are afraid to drop SC first. Nobody has the defacto decision making ability. Marines have optimal strategies but you still see more variation because *someone* is authorised to make the call.
I think by giving the aliens a commander, the process of making the game scale to different team sizes becomes an order of magnitude easier. Balance decisions will, in theory, be easier to make as the <b>constant</b> worry we had about breaking competitive NS or public NS with a change will largely disappear. This is why many items like RFK, tech costs, etc remained more or less static throughout the entire development of NS3.0. I think in NS2 the dev team will have much more creative flexibility in this area, as will modders.
Imagine the marines without a commander. They could manage. Having a commander is not necessary. It makes things much, much, much more efficient. That's the entire point.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I suppose you are right, but will people really listen? It might be a todays "playstyle" only but someone obeying my orders that isnt in same voicecomm is as rare as knifed onos. The gorges role being split in two is kind of risky, I fear it might become very boring commanding for alien side. As for gorges I was under they were given (even) more combat capablity giving them another role instead of just RT drop.
I'm too deep in the mud to imagine marines without commander.
Good argument for change
Neither way of playing is wrong, thats just how I see it and thats why I always pick aliens.
Other people prefer the opposite and thats ok, don't change what works for others just cause it doesn't work for you.. You can never please everyone, its not possible.. but keeping the options open for different people is better than trying to conform everyone.
and yes.. I'm one of those that rarely listen to a Comm as marines. Simply cause of the fact I find most incompetent. Marines = team of drones + 1 brain... Aliens = group of individual brains.
of course you always get a game breaking noob, but that can happen anytime no matter what is coded into the game. Someone new at something will ALWAYS make it harder on the ones who have been playing a while. It'd be like me joining the NHL, I could be of some use, but I'd likely hinder the teams ability.
I suspect the alien com is a result of marketing-mentality and has little to do with the original thinking that spawned the NS1 model. Difficulty in playing has an inverse relationship to number of players and this relationship will be reflected in the profit curve. Please don't make the mistake of assuming the shapes of the relative curves, we're dealing with many unknowns (pun!) here.
I wish the devs the best of luck and have every confidence in their ability to achieve their desired level(s) of success with NS2.
The last time I posted on this subject, an admin locked the thread. I'd like to see that thread unlocked.
My main hope is that an educated team puts together a mod that provides sufficient intellectual challenge, but that's at least 18-24 months away from this date. I'd prefer something along the lines of NS1's pitting Command and Control vs Collaboration as management methodologies. Maybe NS2 will retain this from NS1, but I've read nothing that makes me think that's the case. I'll be watching mod development and volunteering my time to those that look promising.
Yes, I'm over educated.
Bogus argument. I have seen in very few cases online where someone said "hey, I'm rushing double, but we need at least 5 skulks to take it. Who's with me?" and 5 other people candidly and instantly reply "roger that! rushing double, comrade!". That NEVER EVER happens. No one wants to take the initiative. And if no one takes the initiative, then nothing gets done.
The aliens of NS1 are uncoordinated. No one understands a high level RTS game.... even LESS understand simple things like superior numbers and simultaneous rushing or even flanking (the essentials of team based tactics). It's all very complicated. Not everyone is a pro RTS gamer.
In addition, you are saying that newbies should survive the baptism of fire or GTFO.
That. Makes. No. Sense.
Not from a design point of view, not from a simple moral point of view, not from a sales point of view. The only point of view in which such a statement makes sense is an idiot L33T player who wants to keep every newbie's skill down so they can be full-body tackled like bowling pins. That's toxic and that doesn't belong anywhere in NS2 or any game.
I don't need any guidance. I AM the alien commander in almost every match I play NS. That's because I've been playing the game for YEARS now. You're asking complete newbies to have the experience of a years long veteran (understand the game enough to command other players) right from the get go. That's completely ridiculous. That's where the commander comes in. It eases the learning curve so zerglings can feel useful while learning the game instead of running into siege tank fire one by one over and over and over and over and over again until they learn by baptism of fire what to do. Baptism of fire takes a loooooong time to finally work and the game sucks like a black hole until the baptism is over. In short, that's a horrendous design goal. I applaud the talented staff at Unknown Worlds Entertainment for sticking to their principles and changing things that need to be changed without listening to the unprofessional, unpaid, armchair theorycrafting afraid-of-change-only-because-its-change segments of their otherwise awesome and intelligent community.
<b>So you're saying that we shouldn't have a commander because that would increase team work and help newbies learn quicker without a harsh baptism by fire. And that a baptism of fire which puts off newbies (who then tell their friends that the game is terribad and the word of mouth factor makes NS2 sales plummet like a satellite reverse thrusting out of geosynchronous orbit) AND worse team work is good.</b>
Really?
Let me reiterate that.
REALLY?
Saying that a commander increases teamwork is an opinion, not a fact. I personally feel having a commander to tell players what to do hinders the learning curve. Teaching someone to just listen and not think for themselves doesn't help the individual, may help the team. What would said player do then if there was a poor commander in the chair, just blindly listen or question things? I find myself questioning a lot. I've also seen instances where a really good commander was in the game using more of a competitive league strategy and people will eject because its too foreign.
Of course I don't agree with shunning off new players, that would be stupid from a design standpoint.. But no matter what you do, a new player will ALWAYS hinder his team as he/she learns. I agree with making the game easier to learn so people can grasp the game easier, but thinking that someone can learn the ins and outs of a game in 5 minutes is insane.. with or without a commander.
My main hope is that an educated team puts together a mod that provides sufficient intellectual challenge,
Yes, I'm over educated.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you think that a commander role in this video game has any bearing on the "intellectual challenge" you may need some more education there. Playing marines and playing aliens in NS1 had the same intellectual challenge: not much. If you can read a map then you had all the information you need to decide where to go. Higher level (mentally) players can use the same map to analyse opposing players moods. A marine moving like <i>this</i> seems unsure, thus it's probable that their position is weak.
None of this changes because of the commander. The commander on a team should ideally be the player with the most foresight in this direction, but their role on the alien team in NS1 was identical. Aliens <i>had</i> a commander even though that player didn't get a top-down viewpoint. This was especially the case in competitive where it was often the same player on both rounds.
All of this is regardless of the way that UWE has described the role as a sort of hybridized support class and RTS player. The fact alone that there will be multiple commanders should clue you in that this is not intended to be a hand-holder role. In fact they seem determined that the way the commander worked in NS1 <i>added</i> to the difficulty of the game rather than simplified it, since a weak commander can screw over a good team and a strong one can lead a weak team to victory.
I mean if they get a 70 / 30 ratio or something it would make being a career gorge more attractive without totally stealing the possibilities from fades and lerks. 70% of the res flow is divided among the gorges, the other 30% goes to the team. I suppose it would get split evenly when there are no gorges.
It's fine to say you like how the game was. Subjective opinions can't be wrong. In any case, verbal communication is more effective than map position communication because a person can say why they are there instead of somewhere else AND can communicate where they will be in the future whereas with just map location teammates are in the dark about the why and they can only see what is going on RIGHT NOW. Planning movements is perhaps more holistic and instinctual without using verbal communication, but it is incredibly less effective, especially in the future. You cannot deny that in any way shape or form.
I get exactly what you're talking about. I played that way for years. And then I got a microphone and instantly played with a much higher level of communication. The older way just didn't work. Who gives a ###### if I'm walking to marine start? Is anyone else going to know that I'm attempting to bite down the AA and I need some help? No. They aren't. Are 5 more skulks going to appear out of thin air and follow my assault? No. They aren't. No one outside of very high level play has that much game sense, prediction, map awareness, familiarity with teammates' favored tactics, nor the initiative to actually do something.
Non verbal communication is less effective, and gets worse at the lower levels. Verbal communication conveys more information. It is inherently superior from just that perspective. From an atmospheric, aesthetic, or "flavor" perspective non verbal communication has it beat. There's nothing more immersion breaking than another supposedly alien lifeform speaking in my language, using gamer vernacular and acronyms (A skulk says to another "I'm going to kill some RT's and then bite down the AA researching, cos the 3 minutes is almost up. We can't let them get JPs. That's gg. SOMEONE DROP SOME RT'S!!!"). However, if a skulk starts running in a certain direction and I follow it, both skulks have a silent understanding about what's going on.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Saying that a commander increases teamwork is an opinion, not a fact.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's an observational opinion that is either true or false. My line of thinking is when the comm tells the marines "PHASE THROUGH THE NINJA GATE AND SHOOT DOWN THE HIVE NOW" and the marines move as a group and work together to shoot down that hive, that's the definition of teamwork. Caused by a commander commanding other players. Giving a player the authority that comes with the name "Commander" and actual role difference (Not just another field soldier with a higher class shouting orders, but someone who actually has tools which lend to commanding) means that the team will more likely follow the orders of the person who wants to be the major verbal communicator...
More people following the same plan = team work. That's the definition (I think it is, anyway. If you have a better opinion am I happy to discuss it and perhaps adopt yours instead). A commander facilitates people following the same plan. Thus, a commander facilitates team work.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I personally feel having a commander to tell players what to do hinders the learning curve. Teaching someone to just listen and not think for themselves doesn't help the individual, may help the team.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Telling players to follow orders "BECAUSE I'M THE COMM, THAT'S WHY!!!!one" is absolute crap. We agree on that point. Telling players to follow orders "Because this will help us win the game, and here's why..." actually does teach inexperienced players what strategies work and what don't. Blindly following = crap. Being told what works = HELPING the learning difficulty.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Of course I don't agree with shunning off new players, that would be stupid from a design standpoint.. But no matter what you do, a new player will ALWAYS hinder his team as he/she learns. I agree with making the game easier to learn so people can grasp the game easier, but thinking that someone can learn the ins and outs of a game in 5 minutes is insane.. with or without a commander.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
We absolutely agree on this. There is just one caveat. A commander can tell a 5 minute newbie where to go to be the most effective. The newbie doesn't need to know anything about the game, but they can still help out their team because a more experienced player gave them advice (Example: "Okay, NSPlayer(5), go and watch this chokepoint for a couple of minutes while the other aliens are attacking marine territory. If a marine walks by, they are trying to build a phase gate inside OUR territory and attack our hives. Tell us if that happens, okay?")
I mean if they get a 70 / 30 ratio or something it would make being a career gorge more attractive without totally stealing the possibilities from fades and lerks. 70% of the res flow is divided among the gorges, the other 30% goes to the team. I suppose it would get split evenly when there are no gorges.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This used to be the case. People would go gorge to save res for onos because it was quicker, but that's besides the point.
It is too difficult to balance a resource system which spreads resources evenly for different team sizes.
NS1 was balanced for 6v6 play. Can you tell? It takes AGES to get the resources for a fade or hive in NS1 in a 15v15. And did you die with your lifeform? So sorry. Guess you're going to have to wait for another 50 resources. Oh, forgot to mention that your team will probably lose the game before then because no one else has a fade.
But the marines can recycle guns. And a shotgun+JP only costs 20 resources and is a very fair opponent to a fade. And half of that resource cost can be recycled (the shotgun).
So the fade has to be worth a huge chunk of resources (since one probably can't go fade twice in a game, that's the definition of huge resource expenditure) but still not be overpowered? That is a balance nightmare.
So for NS2, simple was decided to be better. You notice how in Starcraft 1 none of the races has a different resource model. They are totally asymetric (more so in SC2!) but also balanced against each other. But it takes Blizzard (the most prestigious game developing company on the planet) to balance Spawn Larva-Chrono Boost-Summon Mule which ARE asymetric resource models for SC2.
Is Unknown Worlds Entertainment Blizzard? No. They can't do something that difficult to balance without a hitch. They just don't have the resource (no pun intended). So making the two teams more similar in the name of balance is the way they have to go.
Is it a good thing?
I think so, but that's just an opinion. We'll tell when we start playing the game. And if a majority of players like the new system more, then it is better. If they didn't, then its not.
I'm scared too. Aliens don't take a lot of coordination, at the beginning of the round people will normally pick roles:
"I'll save for hive", "I'm saving for fade", "I'll go gorge" x2, "I'm saving all my monies for onos" x6
It's what made the alien side unique. Alien coordination was aided by hive sight & a lot of mic chatter. I don't see any need for an alien commander as it makes them too similar to the marines.
I'll be very surprised if it is very well received once game play starts up. We'll see... I hope I'm wrong and its a grand success.
My 2 cents.
As far as it fitting into the storyline, I think its great. Let me add that I've never read the lore so forgive me if I'm way off base. I always just assumed the aliens were controlled by a hive-mind so it makes sense that there is an overarching 'will' that is guiding all the parts of the whole to a singular objective. In my mind the aliens should be more cohesive than the marines because they essentially share the same brain whereas the marines are individual people with individual thoughts. Sure, they're soldiers trained under a hierarchical system to remove as much of the individual from the equation as possible, but an individual they remain, and thus more prone to do what they want, act on their own personal feelings or act for self preservation over the well being of the group. Individuality? That ###### don't fly with the over-mind! At least not in my mind...
You believe a commander helps teamplay and coordination, I believe the players themselves create the coordination. So why not leave leave both methods in the game to fit both ways of play. Pushing an alien commander into the game, and pushing the aliens to play more like marines would eliminate some of the appeal to players that prefer the individual freedom in their play. I'd rather both sides be satisfied of the arguement be satisfied instead of one side forcing the other to concede to changing.
Players can still talk to each other and coordinate an attack/ambush.. but I'd rather do it myself, not have a commander figuring out my next move.
What works for some doesn't work for others.. obviously what works for you wouldn't work for me.
I'm still curious to see how much control over the game an alien commander will have.. though I don't think I'll like it much.
- they did it most likely to unify the ressource system, so that it can be balanced on variabel sizes.
- if the feeling between alien / marine or alien commander / marine commander isn't different and it misses the expected atmosphere, they failed.
it might be just that simple, the only problem is, we have to wait <b>at least</b> until alpha (monday, YAY !) so we can judge this properly.
We have to few information to be able to expect anything, and thats the problem.
It's like seeing the wrapped up christmas presents half a month prior christmas' eve, "is it that ultra cool robot toy everyone wants this year, or another sweater from gramma?".
also the commander is ONE change out of quite a large list of changes that will factor together to make a new game. yes new game :)
Perhaps there will be a small resurgance of NS1 for those who don't like change?
Why did you write "Yes," here?
Over educated != Succinct Writer.
In a lot of cases, being very educated makes one's writing style an abyssal mess (if one studies science instead of english).