Personally I would like to have an always-on, but very subtle, alien vision effect. I would also like the shader effect to differ slightly between different classes. Naturally, in a darkened room, the effects would be far more pronounced. I was wondering what twiliteblue's vision mod would look like with even just 1% opacity.
I've never understood how whether or not aliens have alien vision is an arguable point. Aliens have alien vision because they do. It's part of the design, and what I believe to be more of an artistic and, for lack of better words, a story driven choice. The REST OF THE GAME should be balanced accordingly.
I'm not saying it shouldn't be tweaked visually, but alien vision should be in, and it should be usable all the time. It's kinda what aliens do, ya know? They have alien senses unlike ours. I would imagine the Kharaa not having to struggle with their own senses to sense humans.
EDIT: Just throwing this out there. It's not entirely constructive, but hopefully informative.
Subtle effect that could be always on (NS1 style) would work best imo. You should not lose any information with it - like flashlights or lerk gas but it should higlight enemies.
Something like that <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=114172&st=0" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...114172&st=0</a>
Powerful vision with tradeof (stamina/timer usage) is imo not needed, game is busy enough already to force people to constantly manage vision on and off.
Yeah. In a way, currently aliens are struggling with the interface/visuals - alien vision simply shuts those off, which is why people play with it. They have enough of a disadvantage as primarily melee units fighting against primarily ranged units, so an always-on alien vision that levels it out a bit in both light and dark areas is ideal. I mean, if anything, you want to add a disadvantage to alien vision in DARK areas to keep the playing field more level - but let's not go there.
Alien vision is already balanced with tradeoffs that make it situational, requiring the player to analyze the risk vs reward of using it. If you are playing with it on all the time you are not playing optimally. This discussion seems entirely ignorant of the balance already present in the game.
Here are some reasons why leaving alien vision on 100% of the time is disadvantageous: -You cannot see infestation. This was more relevant when infestation conferred silent movement, but it is still somewhat beneficial to know where your creep is during combat. -You cannot see lerk gas. This is important because an alien fighting in lerk gas is way more effective, so you need to know where it is. Once you know where it is you can flick alien vision back on so you can see the marines through it. -You cannot see flames from flamethrowers. This is important because you can't dodge as well what you can't see. -You can't see area lighting. This is important because area lighting tells you from a distance whether there is a power node up (and therefore an increased likelihood of marine presence). You also can't tell whether you are concealed in a shadow or have a spotlight on you. -You can't see player shadows. This is important because shadows give you advanced warning of marine presence around corners). -You can't see flashlight beams. This is important for the same reasons shadows are important. On top of those reasons, you can tell exactly where a marine is aiming by his flashlight (this is quicker than deducing aim from the player's model).
TL;DR: It's already balanced, so "fixing" it should not be a priority at all. There are way more important things to do.
Regardless, I wouldn't call them trade-offs when there is an objectively best option for every situation: sight on or sight off. Often, sight on is the objectively best option (reason for this thread). Trade-offs imply equal value in the options.
Also, I don't think you get to call the shots about what is high priority and of importance. But maybe you do, who knows?
<!--quoteo(post=1903485:date=Feb 15 2012, 02:34 PM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 15 2012, 02:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903485"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You make it sound like it was by design.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Intentions are irrelevant, it is the current state of the feature that matters. The current state is balanced whether UWE intended these effects or not. Speaking of intentions, what was your intention with that statement other than to make underhanded remarks about the ability of the developers (implying that any balance that hivesight has is accidental)?
<!--quoteo(post=1903485:date=Feb 15 2012, 02:34 PM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 15 2012, 02:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903485"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Regardless, I wouldn't call them trade-offs when there is an objectively best option for every situation: sight on or sight off. Often, sight on is the objectively best option.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're oversimplifying. Yes, there is an objectively best option for every situation, however the situation rapidly changes from moment to moment. This forces the player to constantly evaluate and re-evaluate what the best option is for the given situation. If a player is skilled, he will be rewarded for choosing correctly (he will see the flashlight of the marine about to round a corner for example). If he is unskilled or lazy (by leaving it on 100% of the time) he will be penalized (by not realizing that he is standing under a light and easily visible for example).
My point stands. Hivesight is already balanced because it rewards players' decisions. People who have admitted to leaving it on all the time are simply admitting to being lazy or unskilled.
My intention with that statement was to illustrate to you that alien vision as it stands is a first pass that hasn't been further worked on due to <u>lack of time and lower priority</u> - a prototype at best. Any trade-offs/sacrifices (not balance) are accidental. If it was at all an underhanded remark, it was about <b>your</b> wilful justification, rather than the <u>ability</u> of the developers.
I don't see what you mean by "balanced". In what way is it "balanced"? There are some sacrifices you make when you turn on alien vision. It's not a trade-off. You're not trading speed for quick changes in direction in a racing game, for instance (nor does the trade-off scale, it's binary). It doesn't affect the marine-alien dynamic. It only affects how much information a player obtains, and alien vision being on is objectively the best option in almost all cases (reason for this thread). Even if you don't see the marine before he rounds the corner, that doesn't mean he sees you once he rounds the corner, so you can still react to the marine coming around the corner before he reacts to you. "Skill" and "laziness" have little to do with balance, except when you're balancing while assuming a certain degree of skill and diligence. In any case, alien vision on vs alien vision off is not a meaningful decision. It rewards "smart" players to a minor extent (use alien vision the right 90% of the time instead of 100% of the time, and you get 2% better performance), but it is not as if people are severely penalised for always using a feature given to them - <b>nor should they be</b>.
If you want to talk about <u>balance</u>, then some of the sentiment in this thread is that alien vision is <b>too good</b> (overpowered, unbalanced in favour of the aliens). The only thing that you have managed to establish is that alien vision can be <b>even better</b> in the right hands.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
with aliens currently the majority winner, statistically, i dont know if giving them always on marine highlighting with no drawbacks is "needed"... they seem to be doing just fine as is.
I don't think that's a relevant concern: that just means that almost everything in the game is currently balanced against marines. Particularly at the meta-level (see: gorge bilebomb power, 3 alternate win conditions). I'm sure that if we disabled alien vision for one build and replaced it with a flashlight (just for fun), the aliens would take a significant hit and the game would <b>seem</b> more balanced statistics-wise, but you haven't actually addressed the real issues.
Just patching up each issue as they crop up is never good - so the suggestions in this thread (if there are suggestions) are based on the idea that we design the game holistically, rather than modifying the current build. It's the same argument as "get all features in before <b>really</b> tackling balance".
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
i agree with what you are saying... i just dont think aliens need it. personally, i am able to skulk just fine without it until flame throwers or spores come into play. i think once performance increases more and more and some of the other ideas surrounding solving the "Chaos of battle" i think you will see less of a need for an <b>always on, no penalty vision.</b> its quite the advantage over marines. imagine if skulks were highlighted for marines and there was no alien vision? <u>it would be slaughter.</u>
but who knows... maybe if it was so so subtle , with a slight hint of an outline or glow... i could get behind it. i still have an issue with what seems to be lowering the skill ceiling by assisting the player in tracking the enemy.
I think it's more of an interface issue. The current graphics are so busy that stuff just blends into each other and it is harder to <b>identify</b> (not necessarily track) marines. Consider, for instance, Dota2 compared to the original DotA: it has been designed so that everything is clear and obvious - you're putting the focus on the players and their abilities, and removing the annoyance of struggling with the interface. Alien vision is basically an option that does that for the player. Also, I have discussed this before, but tracking marines for aliens should be easier than tracking aliens for marines, because marines have a range advantage. Also, aliens are far more dependent on the environment than marines are, and alien vision also helps immensely with that (by outlining edges etc.).
Naturally, I agree that the effect should be very subtle, because we don't want to detract from the visuals.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My intention with that statement was to illustrate to you that alien vision as it stands is a first pass that hasn't been further worked on due to lack of time and lower priority - a prototype at best. Any trade-offs/sacrifices (not balance) are accidental. If it was at all an underhanded remark, it was about your wilful justification, rather than the ability of the developers.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> What evidence do you have to back up your claim that these design decisions (not being able to see lighting and shadows, being able to see through particle effects, etc.) are accidental? This is an extraordinary claim you are making that is in no way self-evident, quite the opposite. When the developers wrote the code for hivesight, it was obviously not accidental that it was given the advantages and disadvantages that it has, first pass or otherwise.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't see what you mean by "balanced". In what way is it "balanced"?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you want to talk about balance, then some of the sentiment in this thread is that alien vision is too good (<b>overpowered, unbalanced in favour of the aliens)</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Clearly you see exactly what I mean by the term balance from your latter statement above, the bolded part in particular. I don’t think that alien vision is too good, and I clearly laid out my reasons why. Hivesight is balanced because it has advantages and disadvantages, and combined with several other features helps to equalize the range advantage that marines enjoy over aliens.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There are some sacrifices you make when you turn on alien vision. It's not a trade-off. You're not trading speed for quick changes in direction in a racing game, for instance (nor does the trade-off scale, it's binary). It doesn't affect the marine-alien dynamic.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Hivesight is very clearly a trade-off, how are you not seeing this? Are you being intentionally obtuse? I can’t think of any other explanation, especially when you contradict yourself from one sentence to the next. If there are sacrifices you are making when you turn hive sight on, then it is a tradeoff. You are trading the ability to see particle and lighting effects (which provide important information to the alien player) for the ability to more easily identify marines and to eliminate some of the confusion that the highly textured terrain can cause, as well as the ability to see in the dark. You are trading one set of advantages and disadvantages for another. You as a player are required to use your valuation skills to determine what the right situations for hive sight are so that you get the most out of the advantages while mitigating the disadvantages. This is good game design.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It only affects how much information a player obtains, and alien vision being on is objectively the best option in almost all cases (reason for this thread).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Information is power. Your use of the word “only†in the above statement leads me to believe that you don’t fully grasp some of the finer points of NS2. Alien vision being on is not objectively the best option in all cases (or even 90% of situations as you hyperbolically state). It is a meaningful decision to turn it on or off. You can repeat that hive sight being on is objectively better as much as you want, and you can cite made-up statistics all you want, but that does not make it true. The fact that there is a thread about it doesn’t make it true either, the “logic†behind that statement is staggering. If I make a thread that power nodes are indestructible and aliens have poor mobility, does that mean those statements are true? Of course not, that is absurd.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Even if you don't see the marine before he rounds the corner, that doesn't mean he sees you once he rounds the corner, so you can still react to the marine coming around the corner before he reacts to you. "Skill" and "laziness" have little to do with balance, except when you're balancing while assuming a certain degree of skill and diligence.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Reacting before the marine turns the corner is far more advantageous than reacting after he turns the corner, whether you are still reacting before the marine fires his weapon or not. This is the advantage that seeing a flashlight gives you which is mitigated by hivesight. Skill has quite a bit to do with balance; I’m not sure from where you are getting that misconception. For example, it would be quite imbalanced if the skill aspect was removed from aiming a weapon and all the bullets marines shot were heatseeking. The average skill level of players is definitely one of the things that is accounted for when balancing the damage on the ranged weapons.
When I was first learning the game I left hive sight on all the time. Then I quickly learned that doing so can directly cause my death, so I started toggling it on and off situationally (in a given minute I probably switch back and forth 10-30 times, depending on what is going on, and I am consistently rewarded for doing so). The fact that there are supposedly veteran players who leave it constantly on was very surprising to me.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In any case, alien vision on vs alien vision off is not a meaningful decision. It rewards "smart" players to a minor extent (use alien vision the right 90% of the time instead of 100% of the time, and you get 2% better performance), but it is not as if people are severely penalised for always using a feature given to them - nor should they be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> People should and are penalized for always using features that are given to them. Again, the logic behind your statement that they aren’t and shouldn’t be penalized for always using a feature boggles me. Walking is a feature given to skulks that has its own set of advantages and disadvantages just like hive sight. If a skulk were to walk all the time, is he penalized? Of course! Should he be? Of course! Substitute any feature you want and you’ll see how full of holes your statement that people shouldn’t be and aren’t penalized for always using features that are given to them is.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you want to talk about balance, then some of the sentiment in this thread is that alien vision is too good (<b>overpowered, unbalanced in favour of the aliens)</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Just because someone has an opinion that something is overpowered doesn’t make it so. Throughout this thread the disadvantages that hivesight confers were being vastly understated, which is strong evidence that people somehow don’t understand just how important it is to be able to see the effects which hive sight blocks. If UWE implemented some of the suggestions in this thread (have it be always on with increased opacity so that you can better see textures, lighting, particles, etc), then hive sight would be even more powerful of a tool than it currently is.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The only thing that you have managed to establish is that alien vision can be even better in the right hands.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, alien vision can be even better in the right hands, but so can walking, jumping, blinking, shooting, etc., so what is your point? What I also established is that alien vision can be a detriment to the player who employs the feature poorly, which is an inconvenient truth that you seem to be glossing over because you’d rather not be bothered with valuation decisions.
The only criticism I have regarding hive sight is how frequently one needs to toggle it in order to achieve optimal play. I wouldn’t complain if some of the suggestions in this thread were implemented, but this entire discussion up to my original post has been selling the hive sight mechanic short. Hive sight is currently a balanced feature with a high skill cap. Dumbing it down by eliminating the disadvantages (by implementing the suggestion to make it always on with increased opacity for example) would need to be a carefully thought out decision.
Btw, Hive Sight =/= Alien Vision, the former is tied to the floating text and icons you see through walls (for parasited Marines, friendly buildings & players, etc)
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What evidence do you have to back up your claim that these design decisions (not being able to see lighting and shadows, being able to see through particle effects, etc.) are accidental? This is an extraordinary claim you are making that is in no way self-evident, quite the opposite. When the developers wrote the code for hivesight, it was obviously not accidental that it was given the advantages and disadvantages that it has, first pass or otherwise.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm sure, given time, that I could find evidence for my supposedly extraordinary claims. But before I bother with that... What evidence do you have that they are not accidental?
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Clearly you see exactly what I mean by the term balance from your latter statement above, the bolded part in particular. <b>I don’t think</b> that alien vision is too good, and <b>I</b> clearly laid out <b>my reasons why</b>. Hivesight is balanced because it has advantages and disadvantages, and combined with several other features helps to equalize the range advantage that marines enjoy over aliens.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That is your opinion, and from the sentiment in this thread, it is not the most common opinion. As I said before, the only thing you have managed to establish is that alien vision can be <b>even better</b> in the right hands than for people who use alien vision 100% of the time. Personally I don't agree with either of you. I think that alien vision is not overpowered especially when considered in the range vs melee context, and that it should be used all the time (i.e. permanent, but with much improved visuals).
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Hivesight is very clearly a trade-off, how are you not seeing this? Are you being intentionally obtuse? I can’t think of any other explanation, especially when you contradict yourself from one sentence to the next. If there are sacrifices you are making when you turn hive sight on, then it is a tradeoff. You are trading the ability to see particle and lighting effects (which provide important information to the alien player) for the ability to more easily identify marines and to eliminate some of the confusion that the highly textured terrain can cause, as well as the ability to see in the dark. You are trading one set of advantages and disadvantages for another. You as a player are required to use your valuation skills to determine what the right situations for hive sight are so that you get the most out of the advantages while mitigating the disadvantages. This is good game design.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't consider it a trade-off because the options are not of equal value. I'm sorry if my words may be too ambiguous for you to follow.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Information is power. Your use of the word “only†in the above statement leads me to believe that you don’t fully grasp some of the finer points of NS2. Alien vision being on is not objectively the best option in all cases (or even 90% of situations as you hyperbolically state). It is a meaningful decision to turn it on or off. You can repeat that hive sight being on is objectively better as much as you want, and you can cite made-up statistics all you want, but that does not make it true. The fact that there is a thread about it doesn’t make it true either, the “logic†behind that statement is staggering. If I make a thread that power nodes are indestructible and aliens have poor mobility, does that mean those statements are true? Of course not, that is absurd.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> And "power" is relative. The "power" of different types of information is relative. Perhaps I should have made myself more clear: the information obtained without alien vision on has less "power" than the "power" gained from using alien vision all the time.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Reacting before the marine turns the corner is far more advantageous than reacting after he turns the corner, whether you are still reacting before the marine fires his weapon or not. This is the advantage that seeing a flashlight gives you which is mitigated by hivesight. Skill has quite a bit to do with balance; I’m not sure from where you are getting that misconception. For example, it would be quite imbalanced if the skill aspect was removed from aiming a weapon and all the bullets marines shot were heatseeking. The average skill level of players is definitely one of the things that is accounted for when balancing the damage on the ranged weapons.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Absolutely. But since alien vision is advantageous enough that you don't need to turn it off, then it doesn't matter much. Reacting before the marine turns the corner is more advantageous, but not <b>much</b> more advantageous.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->When I was first learning the game I left hive sight on all the time. Then I quickly learned that doing so can directly cause my death, so I started toggling it on and off situationally (in a given minute I probably switch back and forth 10-30 times, depending on what is going on, and I am consistently rewarded for doing so). The fact that there are supposedly veteran players who leave it constantly on was very surprising to me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're a very good player.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->People should and are penalized for always using features that are given to them. Again, the logic behind your statement that they aren’t and shouldn’t be penalized for always using a feature boggles me. Walking is a feature given to skulks that has its own set of advantages and disadvantages just like hive sight. If a skulk were to walk all the time, is he penalized? Of course! Should he be? Of course! Substitute any feature you want and you’ll see how full of holes your statement that people shouldn’t be and aren’t penalized for always using features that are given to them is.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> What is the <b>arbitrary</b> penalty of walking?
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Just because someone has an opinion that something is overpowered doesn’t make it so. Throughout this thread the disadvantages that hivesight confers were being vastly understated, which is strong evidence that people somehow don’t understand just how important it is to be able to see the effects which hive sight blocks. If UWE implemented some of the suggestions in this thread (have it be always on with increased opacity so that you can better see textures, lighting, particles, etc), then hive sight would be even more powerful of a tool than it currently is.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, that is my point. See above: Personally I don't agree with either of you. I think that alien vision is not overpowered especially when considered in the range vs melee context, and that it should be used all the time (i.e. permanent, but with much improved visuals).
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yes, alien vision can be even better in the right hands, but so can walking, jumping, blinking, shooting, etc., so what is your point? What I also established is that alien vision can be a detriment to the player who employs the feature poorly, which is an inconvenient truth that you seem to be glossing over because you’d rather not be bothered with valuation decisions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The point that was lost on you was that, the people who created this thread believe that alien vision is too powerful (hence it is used all the time, to the detriment of the visuals) i.e. it is imbalanced; so all you have managed to do is say that no, it is even more powerful if you use it a bit less, i.e. it <b>can be</b> even more imbalanced. Thanks for the tip, coach.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The only criticism I have regarding hive sight is how frequently one needs to toggle it in order to achieve optimal play. I wouldn’t complain if some of the suggestions in this thread were implemented, but this entire discussion up to my original post has been selling the hive sight mechanic short. Hive sight is currently a balanced feature with a high skill cap. Dumbing it down by eliminating the disadvantages (by implementing the suggestion to make it always on with increased opacity for example) would need to be a carefully thought out decision.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is irrelevant, but: decreased opacity actually. You meant increased transparency. Again, this use of the word "balanced". You need to define what you mean by "balanced", because it certainly doesn't mean the same as team balance. "Dumbing it down" is just a bad label used to push your point. Someone else would call the same thing "making it more accessible". The former is subjective, the latter could be subjective or objective depending on intent.
<b>The fact is:</b> Alien vision is too advantageous compared to without that people use it all the time. This is reflected in the fact that many people use alien vision the vast majority of the time. <b>My belief is:</b> However, even if it were a little more powerful, alien vision is not too advantageous on a <b>team-balance</b> level, when you consider such factors as the melee vs range aspect. <b>So my conclusion is:</b> Do not gimp alien vision further, in fact, "solve" the issue (crappy visuals) of people using it all the time by forcing a use all the time and improving the visuals.
Regardless of all this, I don't think that darkness is a good game mechanic in the first place, for reasons I've already stated many times before.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
<!--quoteo(post=1903675:date=Feb 15 2012, 10:17 PM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 15 2012, 10:17 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903675"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think it's more of an interface issue. The current graphics are so busy that stuff just blends into each other and it is harder to <b>identify</b> (not necessarily track) marines. Consider, for instance, Dota2 compared to the original DotA: it has been designed so that everything is clear and obvious - you're putting the focus on the players and their abilities, and removing the annoyance of struggling with the interface. Alien vision is basically an option that does that for the player. Also, I have discussed this before, but tracking marines for aliens should be easier than tracking aliens for marines, because marines have a range advantage. Also, aliens are far more dependent on the environment than marines are, and alien vision also helps immensely with that (by outlining edges etc.).
Naturally, I agree that the effect should be very subtle, because we don't want to detract from the visuals.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I totally get what you mean, but have you ever played any of the call of duty games or battlefield games? being able to identify the enemy is the single largest contributor to your brain telling your hand to move the mouse and click. :-P<i> and it aint always easy in those games!!</i>
In fact, *ahem* despite me being able to wreck whole teams in these FPS games, my friends and loved ones who also sometimes play games always ask me "how the hell did you see them?" or "how can you possibly tell the difference? theres so much going on?" and i believe its relating to a term i heard 8 years ago while i was in the Marines:<u> Image Acquisition.</u> i have a really great knack for it. i've won bets with "wheres waldo" books. :) perhaps this is why i almost <b>never </b>use alien vision? its a non issue for me to see giant, green/black human figures walking down a hallway with flashlights beaming everywhere. but i understand that not all are at this skill level.... <b>but why cap it so low? </b> why not leave this skill ceiling high by <b>not </b>making advantageous alien vision permanent?? better skulks will not be as apparent when everyone sees bright glowing enemies 24/7.
NS2 is a lot busier, visually, than NS1 but this is mainly due to the technology. think i'm wrong here? go visit any game engine circa 1998 and compare it to a game released this year... there's a lot more content than can fit on screen these days. NS2 did not go the way of cartoony TF2 and so this is one of the differences. its not a bad thing. plenty of modern games are visually busy as i mentioned above. it is my humble opinion that a busier environment creates a better player in regards to image acquisition.
I am completely on board with a permanent alien vision<u> which outlines edges </u>etc, however. This definitely fits into place with better balancing between navigating the environment since they are melee bound.
as for "tracking" marines. i believe its the single largest contributor to the issue of "chaos of battle". those damn legs vanish from my screen everytime. and i'll be honest.. as a marine i make skulks work for their meal.. i jump more than a jack rabbit on a trampoline. something must be done! *puts fist back down*...
"the information obtained without alien vision on has less "power" than the "power" gained from using alien vision all the time." i respectfully disagree. this is a team game, supposedly requiring teamwork to win, and knowing who and what is under attack so that i may contribute is the largest cause for me keeping this vision OFF. Simpler terms: One individual's ability to kill an enemy in front of him should not be as important as the teamwork he is willing to provide, even if this means helping kill. :)
Comments
I'm not saying it shouldn't be tweaked visually, but alien vision should be in, and it should be usable all the time. It's kinda what aliens do, ya know? They have alien senses unlike ours. I would imagine the Kharaa not having to struggle with their own senses to sense humans.
EDIT: Just throwing this out there. It's not entirely constructive, but hopefully informative.
You should not lose any information with it - like flashlights or lerk gas but it should higlight enemies.
Something like that <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=114172&st=0" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...114172&st=0</a>
Powerful vision with tradeof (stamina/timer usage) is imo not needed, game is busy enough already to force people to constantly manage vision on and off.
I mean, if anything, you want to add a disadvantage to alien vision in DARK areas to keep the playing field more level - but let's not go there.
Here are some reasons why leaving alien vision on 100% of the time is disadvantageous:
-You cannot see infestation. This was more relevant when infestation conferred silent movement, but it is still somewhat beneficial to know where your creep is during combat.
-You cannot see lerk gas. This is important because an alien fighting in lerk gas is way more effective, so you need to know where it is. Once you know where it is you can flick alien vision back on so you can see the marines through it.
-You cannot see flames from flamethrowers. This is important because you can't dodge as well what you can't see.
-You can't see area lighting. This is important because area lighting tells you from a distance whether there is a power node up (and therefore an increased likelihood of marine presence). You also can't tell whether you are concealed in a shadow or have a spotlight on you.
-You can't see player shadows. This is important because shadows give you advanced warning of marine presence around corners).
-You can't see flashlight beams. This is important for the same reasons shadows are important. On top of those reasons, you can tell exactly where a marine is aiming by his flashlight (this is quicker than deducing aim from the player's model).
TL;DR: It's already balanced, so "fixing" it should not be a priority at all. There are way more important things to do.
Regardless, I wouldn't call them trade-offs when there is an objectively best option for every situation: sight on or sight off. Often, sight on is the objectively best option (reason for this thread). Trade-offs imply equal value in the options.
Also, I don't think you get to call the shots about what is high priority and of importance. But maybe you do, who knows?
Intentions are irrelevant, it is the current state of the feature that matters. The current state is balanced whether UWE intended these effects or not. Speaking of intentions, what was your intention with that statement other than to make underhanded remarks about the ability of the developers (implying that any balance that hivesight has is accidental)?
<!--quoteo(post=1903485:date=Feb 15 2012, 02:34 PM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau @ Feb 15 2012, 02:34 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903485"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Regardless, I wouldn't call them trade-offs when there is an objectively best option for every situation: sight on or sight off. Often, sight on is the objectively best option.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're oversimplifying. Yes, there is an objectively best option for every situation, however the situation rapidly changes from moment to moment. This forces the player to constantly evaluate and re-evaluate what the best option is for the given situation. If a player is skilled, he will be rewarded for choosing correctly (he will see the flashlight of the marine about to round a corner for example). If he is unskilled or lazy (by leaving it on 100% of the time) he will be penalized (by not realizing that he is standing under a light and easily visible for example).
My point stands. Hivesight is already balanced because it rewards players' decisions. People who have admitted to leaving it on all the time are simply admitting to being lazy or unskilled.
I don't see what you mean by "balanced". In what way is it "balanced"? There are some sacrifices you make when you turn on alien vision. It's not a trade-off. You're not trading speed for quick changes in direction in a racing game, for instance (nor does the trade-off scale, it's binary). It doesn't affect the marine-alien dynamic. It only affects how much information a player obtains, and alien vision being on is objectively the best option in almost all cases (reason for this thread). Even if you don't see the marine before he rounds the corner, that doesn't mean he sees you once he rounds the corner, so you can still react to the marine coming around the corner before he reacts to you. "Skill" and "laziness" have little to do with balance, except when you're balancing while assuming a certain degree of skill and diligence. In any case, alien vision on vs alien vision off is not a meaningful decision. It rewards "smart" players to a minor extent (use alien vision the right 90% of the time instead of 100% of the time, and you get 2% better performance), but it is not as if people are severely penalised for always using a feature given to them - <b>nor should they be</b>.
If you want to talk about <u>balance</u>, then some of the sentiment in this thread is that alien vision is <b>too good</b> (overpowered, unbalanced in favour of the aliens). The only thing that you have managed to establish is that alien vision can be <b>even better</b> in the right hands.
Just patching up each issue as they crop up is never good - so the suggestions in this thread (if there are suggestions) are based on the idea that we design the game holistically, rather than modifying the current build. It's the same argument as "get all features in before <b>really</b> tackling balance".
i think once performance increases more and more and some of the other ideas surrounding solving the "Chaos of battle" i think you will see less of a need for an <b>always on, no penalty vision.</b>
its quite the advantage over marines. imagine if skulks were highlighted for marines and there was no alien vision? <u>it would be slaughter.</u>
but who knows... maybe if it was so so subtle , with a slight hint of an outline or glow... i could get behind it.
i still have an issue with what seems to be lowering the skill ceiling by assisting the player in tracking the enemy.
Naturally, I agree that the effect should be very subtle, because we don't want to detract from the visuals.
What evidence do you have to back up your claim that these design decisions (not being able to see lighting and shadows, being able to see through particle effects, etc.) are accidental? This is an extraordinary claim you are making that is in no way self-evident, quite the opposite. When the developers wrote the code for hivesight, it was obviously not accidental that it was given the advantages and disadvantages that it has, first pass or otherwise.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't see what you mean by "balanced". In what way is it "balanced"?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you want to talk about balance, then some of the sentiment in this thread is that alien vision is too good (<b>overpowered, unbalanced in favour of the aliens)</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Clearly you see exactly what I mean by the term balance from your latter statement above, the bolded part in particular. I don’t think that alien vision is too good, and I clearly laid out my reasons why. Hivesight is balanced because it has advantages and disadvantages, and combined with several other features helps to equalize the range advantage that marines enjoy over aliens.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There are some sacrifices you make when you turn on alien vision. It's not a trade-off. You're not trading speed for quick changes in direction in a racing game, for instance (nor does the trade-off scale, it's binary). It doesn't affect the marine-alien dynamic.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hivesight is very clearly a trade-off, how are you not seeing this? Are you being intentionally obtuse? I can’t think of any other explanation, especially when you contradict yourself from one sentence to the next. If there are sacrifices you are making when you turn hive sight on, then it is a tradeoff. You are trading the ability to see particle and lighting effects (which provide important information to the alien player) for the ability to more easily identify marines and to eliminate some of the confusion that the highly textured terrain can cause, as well as the ability to see in the dark. You are trading one set of advantages and disadvantages for another. You as a player are required to use your valuation skills to determine what the right situations for hive sight are so that you get the most out of the advantages while mitigating the disadvantages. This is good game design.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It only affects how much information a player obtains, and alien vision being on is objectively the best option in almost all cases (reason for this thread).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Information is power. Your use of the word “only†in the above statement leads me to believe that you don’t fully grasp some of the finer points of NS2. Alien vision being on is not objectively the best option in all cases (or even 90% of situations as you hyperbolically state). It is a meaningful decision to turn it on or off. You can repeat that hive sight being on is objectively better as much as you want, and you can cite made-up statistics all you want, but that does not make it true. The fact that there is a thread about it doesn’t make it true either, the “logic†behind that statement is staggering. If I make a thread that power nodes are indestructible and aliens have poor mobility, does that mean those statements are true? Of course not, that is absurd.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Even if you don't see the marine before he rounds the corner, that doesn't mean he sees you once he rounds the corner, so you can still react to the marine coming around the corner before he reacts to you. "Skill" and "laziness" have little to do with balance, except when you're balancing while assuming a certain degree of skill and diligence.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Reacting before the marine turns the corner is far more advantageous than reacting after he turns the corner, whether you are still reacting before the marine fires his weapon or not. This is the advantage that seeing a flashlight gives you which is mitigated by hivesight. Skill has quite a bit to do with balance; I’m not sure from where you are getting that misconception. For example, it would be quite imbalanced if the skill aspect was removed from aiming a weapon and all the bullets marines shot were heatseeking. The average skill level of players is definitely one of the things that is accounted for when balancing the damage on the ranged weapons.
When I was first learning the game I left hive sight on all the time. Then I quickly learned that doing so can directly cause my death, so I started toggling it on and off situationally (in a given minute I probably switch back and forth 10-30 times, depending on what is going on, and I am consistently rewarded for doing so). The fact that there are supposedly veteran players who leave it constantly on was very surprising to me.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->In any case, alien vision on vs alien vision off is not a meaningful decision. It rewards "smart" players to a minor extent (use alien vision the right 90% of the time instead of 100% of the time, and you get 2% better performance), but it is not as if people are severely penalised for always using a feature given to them - nor should they be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
People should and are penalized for always using features that are given to them. Again, the logic behind your statement that they aren’t and shouldn’t be penalized for always using a feature boggles me. Walking is a feature given to skulks that has its own set of advantages and disadvantages just like hive sight. If a skulk were to walk all the time, is he penalized? Of course! Should he be? Of course! Substitute any feature you want and you’ll see how full of holes your statement that people shouldn’t be and aren’t penalized for always using features that are given to them is.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you want to talk about balance, then some of the sentiment in this thread is that alien vision is too good (<b>overpowered, unbalanced in favour of the aliens)</b>.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just because someone has an opinion that something is overpowered doesn’t make it so. Throughout this thread the disadvantages that hivesight confers were being vastly understated, which is strong evidence that people somehow don’t understand just how important it is to be able to see the effects which hive sight blocks. If UWE implemented some of the suggestions in this thread (have it be always on with increased opacity so that you can better see textures, lighting, particles, etc), then hive sight would be even more powerful of a tool than it currently is.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Harimau)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The only thing that you have managed to establish is that alien vision can be even better in the right hands.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, alien vision can be even better in the right hands, but so can walking, jumping, blinking, shooting, etc., so what is your point? What I also established is that alien vision can be a detriment to the player who employs the feature poorly, which is an inconvenient truth that you seem to be glossing over because you’d rather not be bothered with valuation decisions.
The only criticism I have regarding hive sight is how frequently one needs to toggle it in order to achieve optimal play. I wouldn’t complain if some of the suggestions in this thread were implemented, but this entire discussion up to my original post has been selling the hive sight mechanic short. Hive sight is currently a balanced feature with a high skill cap. Dumbing it down by eliminating the disadvantages (by implementing the suggestion to make it always on with increased opacity for example) would need to be a carefully thought out decision.
I'm sure, given time, that I could find evidence for my supposedly extraordinary claims. But before I bother with that... What evidence do you have that they are not accidental?
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Clearly you see exactly what I mean by the term balance from your latter statement above, the bolded part in particular. <b>I don’t think</b> that alien vision is too good, and <b>I</b> clearly laid out <b>my reasons why</b>. Hivesight is balanced because it has advantages and disadvantages, and combined with several other features helps to equalize the range advantage that marines enjoy over aliens.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is your opinion, and from the sentiment in this thread, it is not the most common opinion. As I said before, the only thing you have managed to establish is that alien vision can be <b>even better</b> in the right hands than for people who use alien vision 100% of the time.
Personally I don't agree with either of you. I think that alien vision is not overpowered especially when considered in the range vs melee context, and that it should be used all the time (i.e. permanent, but with much improved visuals).
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Hivesight is very clearly a trade-off, how are you not seeing this? Are you being intentionally obtuse? I can’t think of any other explanation, especially when you contradict yourself from one sentence to the next. If there are sacrifices you are making when you turn hive sight on, then it is a tradeoff. You are trading the ability to see particle and lighting effects (which provide important information to the alien player) for the ability to more easily identify marines and to eliminate some of the confusion that the highly textured terrain can cause, as well as the ability to see in the dark. You are trading one set of advantages and disadvantages for another. You as a player are required to use your valuation skills to determine what the right situations for hive sight are so that you get the most out of the advantages while mitigating the disadvantages. This is good game design.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't consider it a trade-off because the options are not of equal value. I'm sorry if my words may be too ambiguous for you to follow.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Information is power. Your use of the word “only†in the above statement leads me to believe that you don’t fully grasp some of the finer points of NS2. Alien vision being on is not objectively the best option in all cases (or even 90% of situations as you hyperbolically state). It is a meaningful decision to turn it on or off. You can repeat that hive sight being on is objectively better as much as you want, and you can cite made-up statistics all you want, but that does not make it true. The fact that there is a thread about it doesn’t make it true either, the “logic†behind that statement is staggering. If I make a thread that power nodes are indestructible and aliens have poor mobility, does that mean those statements are true? Of course not, that is absurd.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And "power" is relative. The "power" of different types of information is relative. Perhaps I should have made myself more clear: the information obtained without alien vision on has less "power" than the "power" gained from using alien vision all the time.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Reacting before the marine turns the corner is far more advantageous than reacting after he turns the corner, whether you are still reacting before the marine fires his weapon or not. This is the advantage that seeing a flashlight gives you which is mitigated by hivesight. Skill has quite a bit to do with balance; I’m not sure from where you are getting that misconception. For example, it would be quite imbalanced if the skill aspect was removed from aiming a weapon and all the bullets marines shot were heatseeking. The average skill level of players is definitely one of the things that is accounted for when balancing the damage on the ranged weapons.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Absolutely. But since alien vision is advantageous enough that you don't need to turn it off, then it doesn't matter much. Reacting before the marine turns the corner is more advantageous, but not <b>much</b> more advantageous.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->When I was first learning the game I left hive sight on all the time. Then I quickly learned that doing so can directly cause my death, so I started toggling it on and off situationally (in a given minute I probably switch back and forth 10-30 times, depending on what is going on, and I am consistently rewarded for doing so). The fact that there are supposedly veteran players who leave it constantly on was very surprising to me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're a very good player.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->People should and are penalized for always using features that are given to them. Again, the logic behind your statement that they aren’t and shouldn’t be penalized for always using a feature boggles me. Walking is a feature given to skulks that has its own set of advantages and disadvantages just like hive sight. If a skulk were to walk all the time, is he penalized? Of course! Should he be? Of course! Substitute any feature you want and you’ll see how full of holes your statement that people shouldn’t be and aren’t penalized for always using features that are given to them is.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What is the <b>arbitrary</b> penalty of walking?
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Just because someone has an opinion that something is overpowered doesn’t make it so. Throughout this thread the disadvantages that hivesight confers were being vastly understated, which is strong evidence that people somehow don’t understand just how important it is to be able to see the effects which hive sight blocks. If UWE implemented some of the suggestions in this thread (have it be always on with increased opacity so that you can better see textures, lighting, particles, etc), then hive sight would be even more powerful of a tool than it currently is.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, that is my point. See above: Personally I don't agree with either of you. I think that alien vision is not overpowered especially when considered in the range vs melee context, and that it should be used all the time (i.e. permanent, but with much improved visuals).
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yes, alien vision can be even better in the right hands, but so can walking, jumping, blinking, shooting, etc., so what is your point? What I also established is that alien vision can be a detriment to the player who employs the feature poorly, which is an inconvenient truth that you seem to be glossing over because you’d rather not be bothered with valuation decisions.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The point that was lost on you was that, the people who created this thread believe that alien vision is too powerful (hence it is used all the time, to the detriment of the visuals) i.e. it is imbalanced; so all you have managed to do is say that no, it is even more powerful if you use it a bit less, i.e. it <b>can be</b> even more imbalanced. Thanks for the tip, coach.
<!--quoteo(post=1903858:date=Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM:name=Deity)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Deity @ Feb 17 2012, 04:20 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1903858"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The only criticism I have regarding hive sight is how frequently one needs to toggle it in order to achieve optimal play. I wouldn’t complain if some of the suggestions in this thread were implemented, but this entire discussion up to my original post has been selling the hive sight mechanic short. Hive sight is currently a balanced feature with a high skill cap. Dumbing it down by eliminating the disadvantages (by implementing the suggestion to make it always on with increased opacity for example) would need to be a carefully thought out decision.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is irrelevant, but: decreased opacity actually. You meant increased transparency.
Again, this use of the word "balanced". You need to define what you mean by "balanced", because it certainly doesn't mean the same as team balance.
"Dumbing it down" is just a bad label used to push your point. Someone else would call the same thing "making it more accessible". The former is subjective, the latter could be subjective or objective depending on intent.
<b>The fact is:</b> Alien vision is too advantageous compared to without that people use it all the time. This is reflected in the fact that many people use alien vision the vast majority of the time.
<b>My belief is:</b> However, even if it were a little more powerful, alien vision is not too advantageous on a <b>team-balance</b> level, when you consider such factors as the melee vs range aspect.
<b>So my conclusion is:</b> Do not gimp alien vision further, in fact, "solve" the issue (crappy visuals) of people using it all the time by forcing a use all the time and improving the visuals.
Regardless of all this, I don't think that darkness is a good game mechanic in the first place, for reasons I've already stated many times before.
Naturally, I agree that the effect should be very subtle, because we don't want to detract from the visuals.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I totally get what you mean, but have you ever played any of the call of duty games or battlefield games? being able to identify the enemy is the single largest contributor to your brain telling your hand to move the mouse and click. :-P<i> and it aint always easy in those games!!</i>
In fact, *ahem* despite me being able to wreck whole teams in these FPS games, my friends and loved ones who also sometimes play games always ask me "how the hell did you see them?" or "how can you possibly tell the difference? theres so much going on?" and i believe its relating to a term i heard 8 years ago while i was in the Marines:<u> Image Acquisition.</u> i have a really great knack for it. i've won bets with "wheres waldo" books. :) perhaps this is why i almost <b>never </b>use alien vision? its a non issue for me to see giant, green/black human figures walking down a hallway with flashlights beaming everywhere. but i understand that not all are at this skill level.... <b>but why cap it so low? </b> why not leave this skill ceiling high by <b>not </b>making advantageous alien vision permanent?? better skulks will not be as apparent when everyone sees bright glowing enemies 24/7.
NS2 is a lot busier, visually, than NS1 but this is mainly due to the technology. think i'm wrong here? go visit any game engine circa 1998 and compare it to a game released this year... there's a lot more content than can fit on screen these days. NS2 did not go the way of cartoony TF2 and so this is one of the differences. its not a bad thing. plenty of modern games are visually busy as i mentioned above. it is my humble opinion that a busier environment creates a better player in regards to image acquisition.
I am completely on board with a permanent alien vision<u> which outlines edges </u>etc, however. This definitely fits into place with better balancing between navigating the environment since they are melee bound.
as for "tracking" marines. i believe its the single largest contributor to the issue of "chaos of battle". those damn legs vanish from my screen everytime. and i'll be honest.. as a marine i make skulks work for their meal.. i jump more than a jack rabbit on a trampoline. something must be done! *puts fist back down*...
"the information obtained without alien vision on has less "power" than the "power" gained from using alien vision all the time."
i respectfully disagree. this is a team game, supposedly requiring teamwork to win, and knowing who and what is under attack so that i may contribute is the largest cause for me keeping this vision OFF. Simpler terms: One individual's ability to kill an enemy in front of him should not be as important as the teamwork he is willing to provide, even if this means helping kill. :)