The loss of asymmetic gameplay
Rebel
Join Date: 2003-04-10 Member: 15371Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Subnautica Playtester
Join Date: 2003-04-10 Member: 15371Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Subnautica Playtester
One of the *MAJOR* draws for me about NS was just how asymmetric the gameplay was, the aliens having no commander and no central resource pool (giveres mod excluded here) had to rely on natural teamplay to succeed while still allowing complete independence over their actions yet the marines had to group together and rely on the comm to get stuff done as well as sharing a central resource pool for weapons & upgrades.
Now both teams have a commander, both teams rely on techpoints to tier on the their tech trees and both have the same sort of resource gathering and use. (also seems right now that the gorge role has been depreciated to the point of being nearly superfluous although being alpha things might change still) so while there are some VERY nice features such as power nodes I can't help feeling that both sides now have a much more symmetrical approach (marines can purchase weapons out of their own pool regardless of the sort of firepower packages the commander would like to see etc, aliens need the commander to put crags up for forward posts) so tactically it plays more like a traditional RTS where each side has differing classes but play in the same way.
Now both teams have a commander, both teams rely on techpoints to tier on the their tech trees and both have the same sort of resource gathering and use. (also seems right now that the gorge role has been depreciated to the point of being nearly superfluous although being alpha things might change still) so while there are some VERY nice features such as power nodes I can't help feeling that both sides now have a much more symmetrical approach (marines can purchase weapons out of their own pool regardless of the sort of firepower packages the commander would like to see etc, aliens need the commander to put crags up for forward posts) so tactically it plays more like a traditional RTS where each side has differing classes but play in the same way.
Comments
besides what you already mentioned,
both teams also have the traditional "worker units" that make buildings. (SCV & drone mechanics)
also think it's VERY unrealistic that they hover seemingly effortlessly.
why do marines suddenly have to expand??
marines make a base, or the structures they need (which can be spread out).
aliens become stronger the more "nourishing" points they infest with hives, logical. larger infestation is stronger infestation.
so aliens must control area to become stronger (tech up), while marines rely on TECHNOLOGY and are more "nomadic" and not crippled by this.
and why would facilities be built with some sort of "tech points"? what exactly is a tech point? I find it very unrealistic and arcady.
i get the feeling that this is becoming closer to the C&C style games, where both sides more or less only have different "skins".
the only asymmetry in NS2 will be ranged weapons vs melee attacks. when NS1 had so much more!
i'm not saying this will necessarily lead to bad NS2 gameplay, but it's no longer that which i liked so much with NS1.
The community has been asking for a unit that can hovar without flapping for some time - something like a scorpian iirc.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->why do marines suddenly have to expand??<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My guess at this one is that there were maybe too many games on NS where the marines turtled and got so much income from res for kills that they could still tech up and eventually win with overpowering JP/HMG rushes - particularly if the marines relocated to a hive.
We can be hopeful that there'll still be enough differences to make things fun - and if not that there'll be a NSClassic mod to undo the changes :)
[edit]Speaking of dynamic... Infestation...
[edit]Speaking of dynamic... Infestation...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This.
It is very hard to balance a asymmetrical game with different kinds of income like NS1, so streamlining both sides' economy gives them a chance to release a more balanced product in the end.
And why do marines have to expand? <i><b>Nanites</b></i>.
If I were to create a mod for the game, that'd be the first thing I'd change. I'd remove the alien commander and divert all its control to the Gorges. Unfortunately some alien commander abilities would need to be reworked.
I wish it was like that by default, though. It's not going to ruin my fun, but it's unfortunate that they thought that was necessary -- it isn't.
BTW, asymmetry is one of the primary reasons NS blew the socks off of every other FPS/RTS.
In ns1 the alien teams lack of commander lead to each alien player performing the role they knew best (or actually wanted to do, which lead to a boost in team morale overall).
Because the alien team lacked a commander, they were not impeded by a commander making mistakes with res. It wasn't like they needed to ask anyones permission to go lork or fade or onos. Also as a result the alien team could change lifeforms quickly to adapt to the changing battle in realtime (meanwhile the coms brain is still trying to process what he sees from his tunnel-vision view of the battle + what every marine is saying + providing health packs + keeping marine start stocked with hmgs...).
The high speed of the skulk meant that within the first 3 minutes of the game he could race completely across the map to a res-node and then gorge and then drop the node (which may not be in any real danger from marine attack for 15-30 minutes of game time = aliens getting boost in res). Also there were FEW if any maps that were not force multipliers that benefited the alien teams asymmetrical grabbing of res most of the time (every vent, concave ceiling, and rt far from marine start was there to assist the aliens teams control of the entire map against lmg wielding marines...).
High speed aliens meant an alien anywhere in the map (with possible exception of gorges) could attack marines cooperatively at any point in the map. Compare with the slowness and operational costs of establishing and defending a pg setup at any point in the map.
OC structures. It's a significant effort for the marine commander to get a marine in a strategic position to survive long enough to get an expensive and almost useless tf farm established which generally lead to their non-use. Compare this to a gorge that's just walking around plopping them down wherever and in a matter of minutes you know how that minimap will look.
Therefore the "loss of asymmetric gameplay" is probably because the devs are actually trying to make NS2 balanced. And naturally not just for clans, but for pub games also. It would seem that they are sticking with the melee vs rifles approach as the only form of asymmetrical theme in the game, but ironically the close quarters of the maps means that the marines are practically fighting aliens toe to toe in a melee vs melee sense.
Because the alien team lacked a commander, they were not impeded by a commander making mistakes with res. It wasn't like they needed to ask anyones permission to go lork or fade or onos. Also as a result the alien team could change lifeforms quickly to adapt to the changing battle in realtime (meanwhile the coms brain is still trying to process what he sees from his tunnel-vision view of the battle + what every marine is saying + providing health packs + keeping marine start stocked with hmgs...).
The high speed of the skulk meant that within the first 3 minutes of the game he could race completely across the map to a res-node and then gorge and then drop the node (which may not be in any real danger from marine attack for 15-30 minutes of game time = aliens getting boost in res). Also there were FEW if any maps that were not force multipliers that benefited the alien teams asymmetrical grabbing of res most of the time (every vent, concave ceiling, and rt far from marine start was there to assist the aliens teams control of the entire map against lmg wielding marines...).
High speed aliens meant an alien anywhere in the map (with possible exception of gorges) could attack marines cooperatively at any point in the map. Compare with the slowness and operational costs of establishing and defending a pg setup at any point in the map.
OC structures. It's a significant effort for the marine commander to get a marine in a strategic position to survive long enough to get an expensive and almost useless tf farm established which generally lead to their non-use. Compare this to a gorge that's just walking around plopping them down wherever and in a matter of minutes you know how that minimap will look.
Therefore the "loss of asymmetric gameplay" is probably because the devs are actually trying to make NS2 balanced. And naturally not just for clans, but for pub games also. It would seem that they are sticking with the melee vs rifles approach as the only form of asymmetrical theme in the game, but ironically the close quarters of the maps means that the marines are practically fighting aliens toe to toe in a melee vs melee sense.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i dont feel that kharaa were overpowered in NS at all, unless the marine commander was incompetent or the marine team was in total disarray (all rambos).
If the marines win by turtleing then so be it, it is a mistake by aliens to "feed" them no reason the change perfectly good concept just because people are playing "wrong". Holding 3 bases without phase gates 6v6 practically impossible and when you start balancing game by pub standards it goes very wrong on different levels.
I hope we get to test soon enough.
<!--quoteo(post=1805541:date=Nov 14 2010, 09:00 PM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Nov 14 2010, 09:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1805541"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The game is becoming more dynamic like this, instead of promoting turtlepower. Sure games could still be dynamic using fps skilled players, but now it is enforced just a tad bit more...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How did you come into conclusion that is it less spamfest / turtle and more dynamic?
If you are referring to a game state where marines sit up in the base killing stuff that come in the game has already ended it has nothing to do with turtling just ignorant people.
If you are referring to a game state where marines sit up in the base killing stuff that come in the game has already ended it has nothing to do with turtling just ignorant people.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You just described a big part of turtling and slapped an endgame label on it. Let me guess, you're also one of those guys that sells the base when things didn't go according to plan so everyone has to F4, because it is "end game"...
This is actually my "conclusion" on the current ideas floating around in the alpha...
By making the power of your folks/creatures on the battlements dependent on how much of the map you control actually promotes expansion. And that is a good thing. Slower resflow means slower upgrades means slower advancement. The game gets more dynamic if you actually have to defend and conquer areas not just for resource towers, but for map control.
Company of Heroes does a good job at introducing a much more fluid and dynamic flow across the map, due to dependence on how much of the map you control. It seems to me they are trying to take stuff from NS1 and combine it with some of the elements of CoH. I think I remember reading about this somewhere (probably this forum) as well...
NS2 is most likely going to be a power struggle between ever more powerful lifeforms and Dynamic infestation VS Powergrid. I like that concept a lot. Let's not make NS2 into NS1 shall we, we've already got one of those called NS1. A good game, but seriously lacking in RTS elements, due to engine limitations mostly...
<i><b>Sidenote/disclaimer!</b>
Conclusions based on outside information currently available and/or provided to use is in no way a valid conclusion. I do not pretend to know all of this, it is just an observation and should be taken as such...</i>
It shouldn't be all that difficult as the basics are already done. but keep in mind it will most likely require special maps made for it, think marine vs marine ns1 servers.
Let UWE work their magic and if it shows a loss in interest then that's where mods begin to happen. I personally never likes NS1 without lurk spikes, giveres and the good 'ol gorge grapple that amx and metamod offered. Tell me who didn't enjoy spider gorge?
You can't even troll properly. No one said anything about not being able to talk :D
Now both teams have a commander, both teams rely on techpoints to tier on the their tech trees and both have the same sort of resource gathering and use. (also seems right now that the gorge role has been depreciated to the point of being nearly superfluous although being alpha things might change still) so while there are some VERY nice features such as power nodes I can't help feeling that both sides now have a much more symmetrical approach (marines can purchase weapons out of their own pool regardless of the sort of firepower packages the commander would like to see etc, aliens need the commander to put crags up for forward posts) so tactically it plays more like a traditional RTS where each side has differing classes but play in the same way.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There's not a single value judgment on NS2 in this post.
Do you think your single example of increased symmetry is good or bad?
I have no idea how to respond to someone who doesn't even have an opinion and only tells me what I already know.
Thanks? This is old news.
PS: NS2's teams are more different than NS1's teams; the identical resource acquisition model is overpowered by everything else.
Do you think your single example of increased symmetry is good or bad?
I have no idea how to respond to someone who doesn't even have an opinion and only tells me what I already know.
Thanks? This is old news.
PS: NS2's teams are more different than NS1's teams; the identical resource acquisition model is overpowered by everything else.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How are NS2 teams more different then NS1???????? Skulks, Gorg, Lerk, Fade an Onos as the first VS light, HV, JP only now both sides have a commander instead of just one...
Instead of being a central res pool vs player individual pools both teams now have both...
What the hell is it about these forums where you can't actually discuss the gamplay mechinics as they are unfolding (again with it being Alpha things are not set yet and I do also have faith in UWE to deliver a fantastic end product), it just seems to be composed entirely of flamewars and trolling, if you don't know how to respond that's fine, don't respond, there is a saying about if you can't say anything nice....
In response to the OP though, I totally agree. Asymmetry creates an interesting emergent metagame, symmetrical game design really fails at doing that to any strong degree. I guess UWE traded the potential depth of gameplay/metagame for a reduced chance of screwing up the game balance on release (hi NS1 v1.04). You can't really blame them for that if you ask me.
I agree that gorges are currently marginalized (completely worthless once grenade launchers come into play), but Kharaa are lacking so many features right now it's hardly worth mentioning. I'm sure it will get more abilities for it to provide a better support role.
In response to the OP though, I totally agree. Asymmetry creates an interesting emergent metagame, symmetrical game design really fails at doing that to any strong degree. I guess UWE traded the potential depth of gameplay/metagame for a reduced chance of screwing up the game balance on release (hi NS1 v1.04). You can't really blame them for that if you ask me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is a little harsh I think. Everyone should have an opinion.
The thing about NS1 was how public games and pro games were completely different. The pros (check any of blind's videos) crafted NS1 into its most efficient form, whereby both sides tend to leave out the unessential upgrades and buildings and go for the kill.
That highlights the clear issues with the system.
The public players make full use of what is available to them and play the game in full.
But they highlight other issues, such as a players ability to command and how the game is effected by a whole range of players and playing styles.
----
In response to the topic, I really can't see how the asymmetric game-play is being lost through having an alien commander.
In a perfect world it would work like NS1, but it is not. The marines rely on having a good commander. If the aliens have a bad player it is no bother, you also have an extra player on the map.
The fact that you have a team that relies heavily on upgrades and moving in groups, compared to a bunch of aliens classes who attack more based on movement skills and can run quite freely about the map I really fail to see the symmetry.
You have to consider the human factors in game design, not just 1 + 1 = 2, because people are not numbers. Instead it is (pro + noob + played 20 games = mess) / (Game Mechanics)...
That highlights the clear issues with the system.
The public players make full use of what is available to them and play the game in full.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't really understand what your point is. The difference between high-level team games and relatively high-level pub games of 20+ players are really not that great. There are still options which are far more cost-effective and important than others! Any competent commander would chose a1 over an electrified res node regardless of the situation.
What you're saying is that lesser skilled players utilise a larger amount of the tech tree by using branches of the tech tree which are basically ineffective or extremely cost-ineffective. That happens in any game. This is not unique to NS1.
That does not illustrate any clear issue with any system - that illustrates competent players understanding what is effective and what is not effective.
<!--quoteo(post=1805646:date=Nov 15 2010, 07:11 PM:name=Runteh)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Runteh @ Nov 15 2010, 07:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1805646"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In response to the topic, I really can't see how the asymmetric game-play is being lost through having an alien commander.
In a perfect world it would work like NS1, but it is not. The marines rely on having a good commander. If the aliens have a bad player it is no bother, you also have an extra player on the map.
The fact that you have a team that relies heavily on upgrades and moving in groups, compared to a bunch of aliens classes who attack more based on movement skills and can run quite freely about the map I really fail to see the symmetry.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't understand how you can not see this. Look at the very first sentence in this quote: "I really can't see how the asymmetric game-play is being lost through having an alien commander.". One team is given something that the other team has. This makes them more similar than they were before. How is that NOT removing asymmetry?
The point is not "seeing" the symmetry, its "seeing" the reduction/removal of asymmetry in the game.
Using the same resource and commander models for both teams makes the two teams play more similarly than they did in NS1. That is an irrefutable fact, and something you need to get your head around.
was a very marginal activity in number 1, what % of people comm'd? even experienced players
What you're saying is that lesser skilled players utilise a larger amount of the tech tree by using branches of the tech tree which are basically ineffective or extremely cost-ineffective. That happens in any game. This is not unique to NS1.
That does not illustrate any clear issue with any system - that illustrates competent players understanding what is effective and what is not effective.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The point is not everyone is a pro. This game is not for pros, it is for everyone but should cater for pros. Counter strike was not complicated, yet the difference between high a low skill is massive. What percentage of players do you think are pros? This should first and fore mostly be about fun..
Yeah, you are right. The pros are extremely cost effective and competent... they realise how useless large parts of the game are and discard them. Yes it does happen in other games.. BECAUSE things have not been thoroughly thought through.
If they are using a stripped version it means the game is lacking different strategic options that effective units and upgrades could bring.
<!--quoteo(post=1805669:date=Nov 15 2010, 10:12 PM:name=marks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (marks @ Nov 15 2010, 10:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1805669"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't understand how you can not see this. Look at the very first sentence in this quote: "I really can't see how the asymmetric game-play is being lost through having an alien commander.". One team is given something that the other team has. This makes them more similar than they were before. How is that NOT removing asymmetry?
The point is not "seeing" the symmetry, its "seeing" the reduction/removal of asymmetry in the game.
Using the same resource and commander models for both teams makes the two teams play more similarly than they did in NS1. That is an irrefutable fact, and something you need to get your head around.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, adding an alien comm is making the teams more symmetrical. But as what effects symmetry only tends to be noticeable in-game between players, the commander factor is really of no concern to most on a server.
The only aspect it will really effect is the gorge. Moving on from this even further (as I mentioned) is the different styles of play for marines and alien classes, where things are a lot more noticeable. They will progress even further with wall walking being made easier with its own collision engine, classes being better defined (now skulk bites, and lerk fires spikes again, but it defines the difference between classes further) and thus encounters with aliens for the marines will be made even more diverse.
If you had read what I stated it was that it is for reasons of balance. Fun for the majority (public shambles, lets hope not in ns2) yet utilizes more of the game and different strategy for pros (sentries being a much quicker and obtainable tech now).
You are thinking from the point of view that most public servers were successful... as marines they were not. But the player base of NS1 was and has always been quite specialised and fond group of people, but a small group.
This is to be a commercial game aimed at a large majority, not some mod you download for HL.
Also:
<!--quoteo(post=1805674:date=Nov 15 2010, 10:32 PM:name=_Thresh_)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (_Thresh_ @ Nov 15 2010, 10:32 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1805674"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think one upside of two commanders will be more people that learn
was a very marginal activity in number 1, what % of people comm'd? even experienced players<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This.
I think game developers need full control over what they are building/doing in terms of gameplay mechanics. As both feed from the same resources it is very hard to do so.
Games like L4D2 can be different because neither team shares a common resource. The fact NS has resources just complicates things further.
The point is that there is a bigger picture than just saying 'the game is less asymmetric now' and not considering the reasons for why things have changed. It is called compromise.
My responses are perfectly rational, not sure what the hissy fit is about?
As far as competitive play is concerned:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This game is not for pros, it is for everyone but should cater for pros.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But you have to be a new player before you can be a pro, which is why the pit falls of commanding need to be shared between the two teams.
When I was younger I was in one of the best teams in the UK, and we were top of one of the UK's biggest leagues at the time in CS. I also played NS a lot on the side.
I think competitive play is something that should be promoted, but you need new players who enjoy the game (and continue to enjoy it) to do so.
That is why I am all for good balance, innovation and understandable interface when it comes to game design (particularly NS2).
This is to be a commercial game aimed at a large majority, not some mod you download for HL.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the point is that there are correct ways to use / tech stuff, correct ways to "counter" stuff and long time competitive players have better understanding of each decision and how it effects the outcome. Nothing has to be "discarded" it is just how to adjust to opponents moves.
Even though by luck that mod is one of the most successful games out there, why not take example from it.