<!--quoteo(post=1977618:date=Sep 14 2012, 05:39 PM:name=MOOtant)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MOOtant @ Sep 14 2012, 05:39 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1977618"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Then how the ###### do you think we are supposed to play public games with 10+ vs 10+? How is that irrelevant?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Anything more than 16 already makes public play a nightmare. It doesnt matter if you change resource models blabla, simply too many damn players. Its the same in any other fps games that run relatively small maps like cs etc. Its even more pronounced when you have melee vs ranged.
Then when you look at matches, the more players the less invidiual skill matters. Then theres stuff like communicating gets harder if you add more people relaying information/calling out battle plans. Of course not everyone has to use their brain during games and stay silent, but what the point then. Imo 5 on the field is pretty damn good number for ns. If you make it smaller i think the maps start to feel quite empty, if you take it higher you just make the game spammy and boring.
Its of course possible to play 10v10 or something like that. I just dont think a lot of players would like to play that, atleast i wouldnt.
ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
I wouldn't mind seeing a 12v12 tournament because I think it would be fantastic chaos, but I don't think any standard tournament should go above 8v8. That seems to be the sweet spot in public play that balances individual skill with enough players to play all the released maps (e.g. 6v6 is a bit too small for docking and veil imo).
If teams start getting popular enough, it would be nice to see a paired teams tournament with pairings voted by the community in a 12v12 format for a laugh :P
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1977695:date=Sep 14 2012, 06:02 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Sep 14 2012, 06:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1977695"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->e.g. 6v6 is a bit too small for docking and veil imo<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Veil is the same size as it was in NS1 and the marines move about the map even faster in NS2, so the logical conclusion should actually be that maps like summit are too small for 6v6 (which is also something some of us have noticed).
<!--quoteo(post=1977247:date=Sep 13 2012, 11:21 PM:name=Locklear)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Locklear @ Sep 13 2012, 11:21 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1977247"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ever tried being polite?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I reserve politeness for people I respect. As for this particular post, I find it hilarious that he can't even practice what he preaches. He can complain about me being rude to him all day long for all I care, but he'd damn well better be mother theresa herself if he doesn't want me to tell him what a gasbag he is.
<!--quoteo(post=1977705:date=Sep 14 2012, 01:25 PM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Sep 14 2012, 01:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1977705"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Veil is the same size as it was in NS1 and the marines move about the map even faster in NS2, so the logical conclusion should actually be that maps like summit are too small for 6v6 (which is also something some of us have noticed).
I reserve politeness for people I respect. As for this particular post, I find it hilarious that he can't even practice what he preaches. He can complain about me being rude to him all day long for all I care, but he'd damn well better be mother theresa herself if he doesn't want me to tell him what a gasbag he is.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Regardless of whether or not you like the fact that I've called out your bad manners on several occasions, I have treated you with greater respect than you have shown me, or many other members of the community you take issue with. I continue to show you respect, because I maintain the assumption that disputes can be settled reasonably. If you feel I have done otherwise, please quote to me the place where I've been rude to you, and I will apologize, on the assumption that I can do the same for you, and you will return that gesture. Feel free to respond to me in PMs, so as not to further derail this conversation.
MouseThe Lighter Side of PessimismJoin Date: 2002-03-02Member: 263Members, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
<!--coloro:#FF8C00--><span style="color:#FF8C00"><!--/coloro-->fanatic, RedDragon, if you feel the need to keep insulting each other, take it to PM or somewhere else entirely. This thread and the forums in general are not the places for it. Play nice.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
When it comes to map size, veil is pretty damn good right now for 6v6. Its big enough for positioning to actually matter, but still not too big to feel empty as you will encounter enemies very frequently. In my opinion its honestly the only map worth playing at the moment.
Before I put my two cents in here, let me give a little bit of back ground about my game play experience. Besides playing a lot of FPS throughout the year, my favorite game and the games that I do best at have always been RTS game types. I am a big stracraft 2 player and I am Master league in 2's, 3's, 4's and Diamond in 1's( I was ranked #1 for a while in Diamond) I say that so you all know most of my perspective is going to be from a macro level and that my favorite thing to do is Comm.
First, in my mind a 6v6 basically allows for two effective team combinations with 5 players, a team of 2 and a team of 3. (granted I find that splitting a single alien off can be devastating to chomp RT's), but as marines its ineffective and generally you die fast.
At this basic level of looking at the game, the comm has two groups to manage, an Alpha and a Beta. out of this we are going to have a lot of generic builds, one groups stays on offense and harasses, while one defends, possibly sending another to kill RT's or whatever. If there is deviation from this it leaves the base wide open for attacks or especially just taking down the power with a single skulk and game over.
This is probably where I feel most restricted as a comm. What makes starcraft so great is the fact that I can have 3 or 4 control groups and can attack multiple locations at once. I can also develop fined tuned build orders and strategies to do rushes etc... I mean I can have dark templar in your base attacking your shiz at around 6:20, and not talking about them being out, but in your base and if with proper scouting and defense it can be fended off.
I have heard people worried about getting base skulk rushed with more players and the game being over so fast, but that NEEDS to be a concern. Frankly, a good marine team should be able to hold something like that off for a reasonable amount of time in a larger game(and the game already has things to deal with a rush, such as mines), such as an 8v8. More importantly it will make scouting that much more vital during game play to try and locate that "all in" rush. Which I don't think people do as much in the game currently, sure they use drifters or scan, which is great. But using a marine team for the sole purpose of scouting and maybe taking a point positions is really costly if the aliens decide to rush your base.
Watching games I think people anticipate a couple basic strats. We know RT's are going to be attacked individually so everyone anticipates that and compensates. We know marines are going to try and relocate to crossroads early game and move bases and everyone is going to attack the main in the mean time or intercept them. I want to see a little bit more variance to the game, and if nothing else I want to see what happens on the competitive level with 8 players in the game. Pub games can't be measured, we need competitive games to test out what happens.
I do like that at this small of a level the skill of the players really comes out. However, this game is a hybrid between an RTS and a FPS which really needs to be kept in mind. It can't be just about the players individual skill IMO, it needs to be more then just how many aliens can get one shoted with a shotgun. It needs to be about coordination, scouting, expanding and holding RT's. Even at higher player amounts, individual skill will still be show cased, and I feel it will be show cased more in larger scrims. I think that competitive play definitely needs to be increased to 7v7 and I definitely think 8's need to be tested.
My 2 cents for now, might be a little scattered but hopefully some good input. My vote is to increase the number of players to at least 7 and test out 8. If nothing else, its a game and we all have fun playing it, so why not test it out and see how the dynamics work?
A recent larger-than-normal scrim got me thinking. Why do we do 6v6 competitive matches instead of 7v7? I know the original formula of 6v6 has long been an established and effective tradition across a wide range of games for reasons other people already stated in this thread. But i think the commander role is upsetting this, i think 7v7 will be very valid in NS2 and not only that, that sixth person in combat would introduce a wide scale of new strategies and tactics. In a sense it would offer more variety which would never be a bad thing for competitive play.
<!--quoteo(post=1979058:date=Sep 17 2012, 10:55 AM:name=Garmon)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Garmon @ Sep 17 2012, 10:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1979058"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->that sixth person in combat would introduce a wide scale of new strategies and tactics.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like what?
My experience in playing pubs and competitive games seems to be that the more people that are in an area, the less strategy is involved. It becomes more about death matches and rushing with more people added.
Would adding a player cause the game to become a death match rush game? Maybe, maybe not. It would definitely increase the effectiveness of rushing, though. And I'd gander that it the increased effectiveness of an already strong strategy would push it to be more and more common place.
When I was younger, and dumber, I remember supporting the idea of 7v7s for competitive play. I'll never forget Fana calmly and logically explaining to me that it was impossible for logistical reasons. Now that I've seen the heat of livecasts, and the challenge of getting 12 players ready on time, 14 seems like a mirage in a desert! :D
<!--quoteo(post=1978767:date=Sep 16 2012, 08:48 PM:name=Sherem)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sherem @ Sep 16 2012, 08:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1978767"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Before I put my two cents in here, let me give a little bit of back ground about my game play experience. Besides playing a lot of FPS throughout the year, my favorite game and the games that I do best at have always been RTS game types. I am a big stracraft 2 player and I am Master league in 2's, 3's, 4's and Diamond in 1's( I was ranked #1 for a while in Diamond) I say that so you all know most of my perspective is going to be from a macro level and that my favorite thing to do is Comm.
First, in my mind a 6v6 basically allows for two effective team combinations with 5 players, a team of 2 and a team of 3. (granted I find that splitting a single alien off can be devastating to chomp RT's), but as marines its ineffective and generally you die fast.
At this basic level of looking at the game, the comm has two groups to manage, an Alpha and a Beta. out of this we are going to have a lot of generic builds, one groups stays on offense and harasses, while one defends, possibly sending another to kill RT's or whatever. If there is deviation from this it leaves the base wide open for attacks or especially just taking down the power with a single skulk and game over.
This is probably where I feel most restricted as a comm. What makes starcraft so great is the fact that I can have 3 or 4 control groups and can attack multiple locations at once. I can also develop fined tuned build orders and strategies to do rushes etc... I mean I can have dark templar in your base attacking your shiz at around 6:20, and not talking about them being out, but in your base and if with proper scouting and defense it can be fended off.
I have heard people worried about getting base skulk rushed with more players and the game being over so fast, but that NEEDS to be a concern. Frankly, a good marine team should be able to hold something like that off for a reasonable amount of time in a larger game(and the game already has things to deal with a rush, such as mines), such as an 8v8. More importantly it will make scouting that much more vital during game play to try and locate that "all in" rush. Which I don't think people do as much in the game currently, sure they use drifters or scan, which is great. But using a marine team for the sole purpose of scouting and maybe taking a point positions is really costly if the aliens decide to rush your base.
Watching games I think people anticipate a couple basic strats. We know RT's are going to be attacked individually so everyone anticipates that and compensates. We know marines are going to try and relocate to crossroads early game and move bases and everyone is going to attack the main in the mean time or intercept them. I want to see a little bit more variance to the game, and if nothing else I want to see what happens on the competitive level with 8 players in the game. Pub games can't be measured, we need competitive games to test out what happens.
I do like that at this small of a level the skill of the players really comes out. However, this game is a hybrid between an RTS and a FPS which really needs to be kept in mind. It can't be just about the players individual skill IMO, it needs to be more then just how many aliens can get one shoted with a shotgun. It needs to be about coordination, scouting, expanding and holding RT's. Even at higher player amounts, individual skill will still be show cased, and I feel it will be show cased more in larger scrims. I think that competitive play definitely needs to be increased to 7v7 and I definitely think 8's need to be tested.
My 2 cents for now, might be a little scattered but hopefully some good input. My vote is to increase the number of players to at least 7 and test out 8. If nothing else, its a game and we all have fun playing it, so why not test it out and see how the dynamics work?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This was one of the reasons we initially tried 8v8 brackets during the early months of NS1. We saw what went on in a 6v6 and everyone got really excited and thought, "oh man, what if we had two more players on each team?" And we all got really excited about the idea and tried it out.
I think the problem is really in the Metagame aspect of NS, rather than the actual game play. Conceptually, competitive NS is about pressure, coordination, and timing. Success is widely dependent upon attacking the right thing, at the right time, with the right amount of players. Doing it correctly gives you control over your opponents movements, and it reasonably informs you where they are, what they're doing, and (more importantly) what they're NOT doing.
Shooting well makes this sort of thing easier, and in application is very useful. But in the metagame its not really something you can account for, so its not really a factor.
Unlike SC2, I don't know how effective my response will be against my opponents aggression. I know, conceptually, how many marines it will take to fend off X number of skulks, but there's always a wild card.
Now in the metagame, you might think that an 8v8 match up would allow you to more effectively execute these sorts of pressure tactics. But the problem lies in the asymmetry, in that the more marines there are, the more skulks it takes to effect a predictable change in their positioning, and the higher the likely hood that they'll be able to fend off said skulks without concern.
As well, with the current inevitability of the "fade explosion," the force multiplier of the alien team begins to increase incredibly fast once Fades begin appearing.
The reality is that the more players there are, the more likely it is that you'll see less aggressive, and more defensive tactics on both sides. Though the aliens now benefit from the new wave spawn system, all it takes is several failed rushes, and now you don't have enough eggs and marines can start pushing you around.
As well, all it takes is one successful rush and the marines can receive a crippling blow from the aliens, at no real risk or cost to the alien team.
I honestly think an 8v8 bracket is worth looking in to. But before we start putting it in tournaments, we need to get some teams together and try it out in scrims, just to see what happens.
I actually think that this is one of the most interesting arguments for 5v5 (6v6) I've seen in this thread:
<!--quoteo(post=1976978:date=Sep 13 2012, 04:18 AM:name=Agiel)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Agiel @ Sep 13 2012, 04:18 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1976978"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The biggest reason 5v5 is more popular than 6v6 in CS is that it makes the game more dynamic and interesting. Most maps have 3 major routes, meaning if you do a 2-2-2 split you have all of them equally covered. With one less player there will always be one route that is less covered than the others, which can be exploited by the opponent.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
However, I also agree with Sherem and others that it can't hurt to play around with this a bit. Maybe some of the 'less-hardcore' teams (i.e. those without "we tried this before 10 years ago in NS1 and suggesting we try it again makes you unworthy of my respect" players) can organize a little 7v7 tournament some weekend.
GORGEous's comments are definitely valid though in regards to scaling issues between aliens and marines, but only testing it out a bunch and gathering stats will allow us to quantify any edge the marines might get. NS2 <> NS1, after all, right?
I don't think there is a single team that wants 7v7 or higher. If the teams don't want it, then it will never happen. Also structure hp doesn't scale. A 9 player gl rush on a hive when all 9 players are skilled and listen to their commander! A 8 player skulk rush on the obs!
<!--quoteo(post=1979236:date=Sep 17 2012, 02:02 PM:name=Dusk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dusk @ Sep 17 2012, 02:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1979236"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't think there is a single team that wants 7v7 or higher.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Then why is this thread still rolling? There are people from at least three different teams on this thread that are not opposed to the idea of experimenting with this. I don't think anyone mentioned 9v9's or 10v10's, as your examples imply. The question seems to be about increasing to 7v7 or 8v8 (I'm personally in favor of trying out the former first).
Edited to add: I saw in the other thread that people complained how larger team ladders were less active for games like TF2. I personally don't think going from 6v6 to 7v7 would make all that much of a difference in this regard. Most active clans have rosters that are larger than 6 players anyway.
6v6 will obviously remain the standard, just like 1v1 is in SC2. However, I think there's definitely room for a 7v7 and possibly even an 8v8 ladder to exist alongside the 6v6 one (and conversely, maybe a 5v5 for those who really like to show off their 'individual skill'). In the long run I feel like it would add tactical richness and longevity to the game since commanders and teams need to play quite differently depending on the format.
<!--quoteo(post=1979246:date=Sep 17 2012, 03:29 PM:name=Gravity Grave)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gravity Grave @ Sep 17 2012, 03:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1979246"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Then why is this thread still rolling? There are people from at least three different teams on this thread that are not opposed to the idea of experimenting with this. I don't think anyone mentioned 9v9's or 10v10's, as your examples imply. The question seems to be about increasing to 7v7 or 8v8 (I'm personally in favor of trying out the former first).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I didn't mean that everyone is opposed the the idea, but I don't see a single competitive player (who i know is a competitive player) asking for 7v7 instead of 6v6. I think 7v7 or 8v8 could be fun but I don't think it would work very well. I have seen this same thread pop up many times and they stay alive because everyone like to explain why it is a bad idea.
My experience in playing pubs and competitive games seems to be that the more people that are in an area, the less strategy is involved. It becomes more about death matches and rushing with more people added.
Would adding a player cause the game to become a death match rush game? Maybe, maybe not. It would definitely increase the effectiveness of rushing, though. And I'd gander that it the increased effectiveness of an already strong strategy would push it to be more and more common place.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You have 6 combatants on the field instead of 5. So for example you can do different opening splits or play more aggressive/defensive minded strategies that 5v5 would not allow. You have an extra pair of eyes. An additional person that can report, defend, attack and so forth. What would change with an additional person on each team? A lot, more than i can probably think of if i had't to sit down and write an essay.
Though i relate to your concerns in regard to the level of strategical play being deluded if you toss more people into a area, but going from 5 combatants to 6 is not so much of an issue in my opinion seeing 6 people pewing is mainstream in most games already and has proven to work just fine.
In regards to rushes i do agree this will need to be looked at. But then again a rush is always a possibility, even with the current meta. But this partly comes down to good scouting and on the commanders side some good player prediction and spatial awareness to prevent it. Would it become more potent with more players? maybe, even more so when the commander jumps out to join, but the other team can compensate the same way.
Though keep in mind this is partly theory crafting on my side too though. There are so many factors and situations that need to be kept into account. Thus all i can say is that in the end we would have to test it in order to get more definite answers.
<i>"*More teams and easier to organize pcw/scrims. *Indvituals have more chance to shine. *Easier for spectators to focus on most of the action. *Easier to organize tournaments. This is very important if the game wants to get to any bigger tournaments later, 6v6 already requires space for 12 players to play a single game. Going higher than that is not a good idea. *Less rewards for players if they win a tournament, if its evenly split. *Less chance of spnsorship because the company has to invest in more players, if the game ever goes that far."</i>
I could go through them individually, but none of these points have any relevance in regard to competitive gameplay and strategy. NS2 is focused heavily on team play and IMO individual players should have less of a chance to get sponsored as opposed to whole teams getting sponsored for their combined skills and tactics. Adding one or two more people won't hinder people from shining.
I really liked RedDragon's response and how he broke it down and how some of the gameplay would be effected. Jameson also posted a link that had a great break down. Either way, there was still a feeling that more people in a competitive game should be tried.
<i>"Strayan (NS2HD) Posted Today, 01:43 PM When I was younger, and dumber, I remember supporting the idea of 7v7s for competitive play. I'll never forget Fana calmly and logically explaining to me that it was impossible for logistical reasons. Now that I've seen the heat of livecasts, and the challenge of getting 12 players ready on time, 14 seems like a mirage in a desert! :D" </i> @ Strayan - You know its a little discouraging, especially being an administrator, to imply that everyone here is 13 and plays out of their mom's basement for suggesting ways to possibly improve the game and wanting to try a different approach of competitive play. A lot of folks on here have been playing for quite some time and are seasoned gamers and have a lot of experience. We are all beta testing and contributing money to unknown worlds because we love the game and thats what brings us together. We are all trying to make suggestions to possibly improve and better the game. NS2 is extremely different from NS1 and I think warrants at least testing out a 7v7 bracket or 8v8. You could even have two separate tournaments, some clans might do better in different brackets depending on how they have practiced, etc... i am not suggesting that we all of the sudden rush towards a different bracket but that it needs to be tested out to see what happens and to do that we would need support.
I hate to bring SC2 into again but i relate to it a lot. During the beta testing of the game it felt like where NS2 is in some regards where there was a rock paper scissors feel to it. For example, if I had warp gates before a certain time period, you could pylon push and there was no counter. Or if zerg made something like Muta's the hard counter was Phoenix's and it was game over. This was during the beta before things were balanced more and now you are able to have a small window to shift your focus on other units, but ground would be lost. A comparable NS2 example would be skulks waiting to cut the power while all of the marines have left the base. What I would want to test is, not if it could happen, but what frequency at which it does. Are people going to be more tactful and lure players away to strike, are aliens going to play more like aliens and scaring the shiz out of people while hiding in the rafters?
i am merely suggesting testing it out. We all want to improve the game and I feel that testing this out wouldn't harm anything and worst case scenario everyone goes back to 6v6 play, no harm no foul. I personally like the idea of having multiple brackets for competitive play where it would allow clans to practice a variety of styles and have more game days, casting, etc...
<i>"*More teams and easier to organize pcw/scrims. *Indvituals have more chance to shine. *Easier for spectators to focus on most of the action. *Easier to organize tournaments. This is very important if the game wants to get to any bigger tournaments later, 6v6 already requires space for 12 players to play a single game. Going higher than that is not a good idea. *Less rewards for players if they win a tournament, if its evenly split. *Less chance of spnsorship because the company has to invest in more players, if the game ever goes that far."</i>
I could go through them individually, but none of these points have any relevance in regard to competitive gameplay and strategy. NS2 is focused heavily on team play and IMO individual players should have less of a chance to get sponsored as opposed to whole teams getting sponsored for their combined skills and tactics. Adding one or two more people won't hinder people from shining.
I really liked RedDragon's response and how he broke it down and how some of the gameplay would be effected. Jameson also posted a link that had a great break down. Either way, there was still a feeling that more people in a competitive game should be tried.
<i>"Strayan (NS2HD) Posted Today, 01:43 PM When I was younger, and dumber, I remember supporting the idea of 7v7s for competitive play. I'll never forget Fana calmly and logically explaining to me that it was impossible for logistical reasons. Now that I've seen the heat of livecasts, and the challenge of getting 12 players ready on time, 14 seems like a mirage in a desert! :D" </i> @ Strayan - You know its a little discouraging, especially being an administrator, to imply that everyone here is 13 and plays out of their mom's basement for suggesting ways to possibly improve the game and wanting to try a different approach of competitive play. A lot of folks on here have been playing for quite some time and are seasoned gamers and have a lot of experience. We are all beta testing and contributing money to unknown worlds because we love the game and thats what brings us together. We are all trying to make suggestions to possibly improve and better the game. NS2 is extremely different from NS1 and I think warrants at least testing out a 7v7 bracket or 8v8. You could even have two separate tournaments, some clans might do better in different brackets depending on how they have practiced, etc... i am not suggesting that we all of the sudden rush towards a different bracket but that it needs to be tested out to see what happens and to do that we would need support.
I hate to bring SC2 into again but i relate to it a lot. During the beta testing of the game it felt like where NS2 is in some regards where there was a rock paper scissors feel to it. For example, if I had warp gates before a certain time period, you could pylon push and there was no counter. Or if zerg made something like Muta's the hard counter was Phoenix's and it was game over. This was during the beta before things were balanced more and now you are able to have a small window to shift your focus on other units, but ground would be lost. A comparable NS2 example would be skulks waiting to cut the power while all of the marines have left the base. What I would want to test is, not if it could happen, but what frequency at which it does. Are people going to be more tactful and lure players away to strike, are aliens going to play more like aliens and scaring the shiz out of people while hiding in the rafters?
i am merely suggesting testing it out. We all want to improve the game and I feel that testing this out wouldn't harm anything and worst case scenario everyone goes back to 6v6 play, no harm no foul. I personally like the idea of having multiple brackets for competitive play where it would allow clans to practice a variety of styles and have more game days, casting, etc...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the biggest challenge to actually testing this sort of thing right now is simply the fact we're still in a closed beta. If, after release, the game is popular enough competitively, we'll very likely see some folks testing the water with larger brackets.
I'm honestly not sure how such tests will turn out. I know they ultimately floundered for NS1, but as you've pointed out, NS2 is in many ways very different.
I would probably bet on it not working out in the end, but I don't think we can really just rule it out without giving it a try.
<!--quoteo(post=1979204:date=Sep 17 2012, 10:43 PM:name=Strayan (NS2HD))--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Strayan (NS2HD) @ Sep 17 2012, 10:43 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1979204"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'll never forget Fana calmly and logically explaining to me that it was <b>harder</b> for logistical reasons.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Harder that got blown out of proportions to "impossible".
We all now know why 6v6 is the right number. No reason to go over that again. It would not hurt to hurt to have a few practice scrims with 7v7, or maybe even 8v8. If two teams wanted to try it out they can. I personally think it would be fun every once in awhile. No need for a an experimental 7v7 cup, not that it would hurt anything. If any team thinks this even sounds half way reasonable, why not try it at least once? Kicks and giggles etc
<!--quoteo(post=1981715:date=Sep 22 2012, 06:39 AM:name=Tweadle)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tweadle @ Sep 22 2012, 06:39 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1981715"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->RedDragon, are you going to disappear after NS2 is released to come back for NS3 eight years later and pretend like you're a hardened veteran? ;)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Donno if it was ever illegal. But it was frowned up in tournaments early on. I do recall people being banned on some public servers for using it though. Times change though. I think it was just a big deal until more people figured out how it worked and could do it themselves, then it was just a moot point really.
Comments
Anything more than 16 already makes public play a nightmare. It doesnt matter if you change resource models blabla, simply too many damn players. Its the same in any other fps games that run relatively small maps like cs etc. Its even more pronounced when you have melee vs ranged.
Then when you look at matches, the more players the less invidiual skill matters. Then theres stuff like communicating gets harder if you add more people relaying information/calling out battle plans. Of course not everyone has to use their brain during games and stay silent, but what the point then. Imo 5 on the field is pretty damn good number for ns. If you make it smaller i think the maps start to feel quite empty, if you take it higher you just make the game spammy and boring.
Its of course possible to play 10v10 or something like that. I just dont think a lot of players would like to play that, atleast i wouldnt.
Veil is the same size as it was in NS1 and the marines move about the map even faster in NS2, so the logical conclusion should actually be that maps like summit are too small for 6v6 (which is also something some of us have noticed).
<!--quoteo(post=1977247:date=Sep 13 2012, 11:21 PM:name=Locklear)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Locklear @ Sep 13 2012, 11:21 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1977247"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ever tried being polite?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I reserve politeness for people I respect. As for this particular post, I find it hilarious that he can't even practice what he preaches. He can complain about me being rude to him all day long for all I care, but he'd damn well better be mother theresa herself if he doesn't want me to tell him what a gasbag he is.
I reserve politeness for people I respect. As for this particular post, I find it hilarious that he can't even practice what he preaches. He can complain about me being rude to him all day long for all I care, but he'd damn well better be mother theresa herself if he doesn't want me to tell him what a gasbag he is.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Regardless of whether or not you like the fact that I've called out your bad manners on several occasions, I have treated you with greater respect than you have shown me, or many other members of the community you take issue with. I continue to show you respect, because I maintain the assumption that disputes can be settled reasonably. If you feel I have done otherwise, please quote to me the place where I've been rude to you, and I will apologize, on the assumption that I can do the same for you, and you will return that gesture. Feel free to respond to me in PMs, so as not to further derail this conversation.
This thread and the forums in general are not the places for it. Play nice.<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Stay on topic. Play nice.
-- Mouse<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
First, in my mind a 6v6 basically allows for two effective team combinations with 5 players, a team of 2 and a team of 3. (granted I find that splitting a single alien off can be devastating to chomp RT's), but as marines its ineffective and generally you die fast.
At this basic level of looking at the game, the comm has two groups to manage, an Alpha and a Beta. out of this we are going to have a lot of generic builds, one groups stays on offense and harasses, while one defends, possibly sending another to kill RT's or whatever. If there is deviation from this it leaves the base wide open for attacks or especially just taking down the power with a single skulk and game over.
This is probably where I feel most restricted as a comm. What makes starcraft so great is the fact that I can have 3 or 4 control groups and can attack multiple locations at once. I can also develop fined tuned build orders and strategies to do rushes etc... I mean I can have dark templar in your base attacking your shiz at around 6:20, and not talking about them being out, but in your base and if with proper scouting and defense it can be fended off.
I have heard people worried about getting base skulk rushed with more players and the game being over so fast, but that NEEDS to be a concern.
Frankly, a good marine team should be able to hold something like that off for a reasonable amount of time in a larger game(and the game already has things to deal with a rush, such as mines), such as an 8v8. More importantly it will make scouting that much more vital during game play to try and locate that "all in" rush. Which I don't think people do as much in the game currently, sure they use drifters or scan, which is great. But using a marine team for the sole purpose of scouting and maybe taking a point positions is really costly if the aliens decide to rush your base.
Watching games I think people anticipate a couple basic strats. We know RT's are going to be attacked individually so everyone anticipates that and compensates. We know marines are going to try and relocate to crossroads early game and move bases and everyone is going to attack the main in the mean time or intercept them. I want to see a little bit more variance to the game, and if nothing else I want to see what happens on the competitive level with 8 players in the game. Pub games can't be measured, we need competitive games to test out what happens.
I do like that at this small of a level the skill of the players really comes out. However, this game is a hybrid between an RTS and a FPS which really needs to be kept in mind. It can't be just about the players individual skill IMO, it needs to be more then just how many aliens can get one shoted with a shotgun. It needs to be about coordination, scouting, expanding and holding RT's. Even at higher player amounts, individual skill will still be show cased, and I feel it will be show cased more in larger scrims. I think that competitive play definitely needs to be increased to 7v7 and I definitely think 8's need to be tested.
My 2 cents for now, might be a little scattered but hopefully some good input. My vote is to increase the number of players to at least 7 and test out 8. If nothing else, its a game and we all have fun playing it, so why not test it out and see how the dynamics work?
6v6 is here to stay, get used to it. No point even talking about it
Like what?
My experience in playing pubs and competitive games seems to be that the more people that are in an area, the less strategy is involved. It becomes more about death matches and rushing with more people added.
Would adding a player cause the game to become a death match rush game? Maybe, maybe not. It would definitely increase the effectiveness of rushing, though. And I'd gander that it the increased effectiveness of an already strong strategy would push it to be more and more common place.
First, in my mind a 6v6 basically allows for two effective team combinations with 5 players, a team of 2 and a team of 3. (granted I find that splitting a single alien off can be devastating to chomp RT's), but as marines its ineffective and generally you die fast.
At this basic level of looking at the game, the comm has two groups to manage, an Alpha and a Beta. out of this we are going to have a lot of generic builds, one groups stays on offense and harasses, while one defends, possibly sending another to kill RT's or whatever. If there is deviation from this it leaves the base wide open for attacks or especially just taking down the power with a single skulk and game over.
This is probably where I feel most restricted as a comm. What makes starcraft so great is the fact that I can have 3 or 4 control groups and can attack multiple locations at once. I can also develop fined tuned build orders and strategies to do rushes etc... I mean I can have dark templar in your base attacking your shiz at around 6:20, and not talking about them being out, but in your base and if with proper scouting and defense it can be fended off.
I have heard people worried about getting base skulk rushed with more players and the game being over so fast, but that NEEDS to be a concern.
Frankly, a good marine team should be able to hold something like that off for a reasonable amount of time in a larger game(and the game already has things to deal with a rush, such as mines), such as an 8v8. More importantly it will make scouting that much more vital during game play to try and locate that "all in" rush. Which I don't think people do as much in the game currently, sure they use drifters or scan, which is great. But using a marine team for the sole purpose of scouting and maybe taking a point positions is really costly if the aliens decide to rush your base.
Watching games I think people anticipate a couple basic strats. We know RT's are going to be attacked individually so everyone anticipates that and compensates. We know marines are going to try and relocate to crossroads early game and move bases and everyone is going to attack the main in the mean time or intercept them. I want to see a little bit more variance to the game, and if nothing else I want to see what happens on the competitive level with 8 players in the game. Pub games can't be measured, we need competitive games to test out what happens.
I do like that at this small of a level the skill of the players really comes out. However, this game is a hybrid between an RTS and a FPS which really needs to be kept in mind. It can't be just about the players individual skill IMO, it needs to be more then just how many aliens can get one shoted with a shotgun. It needs to be about coordination, scouting, expanding and holding RT's. Even at higher player amounts, individual skill will still be show cased, and I feel it will be show cased more in larger scrims. I think that competitive play definitely needs to be increased to 7v7 and I definitely think 8's need to be tested.
My 2 cents for now, might be a little scattered but hopefully some good input. My vote is to increase the number of players to at least 7 and test out 8. If nothing else, its a game and we all have fun playing it, so why not test it out and see how the dynamics work?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This was one of the reasons we initially tried 8v8 brackets during the early months of NS1. We saw what went on in a 6v6 and everyone got really excited and thought, "oh man, what if we had two more players on each team?" And we all got really excited about the idea and tried it out.
I think the problem is really in the Metagame aspect of NS, rather than the actual game play. Conceptually, competitive NS is about pressure, coordination, and timing. Success is widely dependent upon attacking the right thing, at the right time, with the right amount of players. Doing it correctly gives you control over your opponents movements, and it reasonably informs you where they are, what they're doing, and (more importantly) what they're NOT doing.
Shooting well makes this sort of thing easier, and in application is very useful. But in the metagame its not really something you can account for, so its not really a factor.
Unlike SC2, I don't know how effective my response will be against my opponents aggression. I know, conceptually, how many marines it will take to fend off X number of skulks, but there's always a wild card.
Now in the metagame, you might think that an 8v8 match up would allow you to more effectively execute these sorts of pressure tactics. But the problem lies in the asymmetry, in that the more marines there are, the more skulks it takes to effect a predictable change in their positioning, and the higher the likely hood that they'll be able to fend off said skulks without concern.
As well, with the current inevitability of the "fade explosion," the force multiplier of the alien team begins to increase incredibly fast once Fades begin appearing.
The reality is that the more players there are, the more likely it is that you'll see less aggressive, and more defensive tactics on both sides. Though the aliens now benefit from the new wave spawn system, all it takes is several failed rushes, and now you don't have enough eggs and marines can start pushing you around.
As well, all it takes is one successful rush and the marines can receive a crippling blow from the aliens, at no real risk or cost to the alien team.
I honestly think an 8v8 bracket is worth looking in to. But before we start putting it in tournaments, we need to get some teams together and try it out in scrims, just to see what happens.
<!--quoteo(post=1976978:date=Sep 13 2012, 04:18 AM:name=Agiel)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Agiel @ Sep 13 2012, 04:18 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1976978"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The biggest reason 5v5 is more popular than 6v6 in CS is that it makes the game more dynamic and interesting. Most maps have 3 major routes, meaning if you do a 2-2-2 split you have all of them equally covered. With one less player there will always be one route that is less covered than the others, which can be exploited by the opponent.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
However, I also agree with Sherem and others that it can't hurt to play around with this a bit. Maybe some of the 'less-hardcore' teams (i.e. those without "we tried this before 10 years ago in NS1 and suggesting we try it again makes you unworthy of my respect" players) can organize a little 7v7 tournament some weekend.
GORGEous's comments are definitely valid though in regards to scaling issues between aliens and marines, but only testing it out a bunch and gathering stats will allow us to quantify any edge the marines might get. NS2 <> NS1, after all, right?
Then why is this thread still rolling? There are people from at least three different teams on this thread that are not opposed to the idea of experimenting with this. I don't think anyone mentioned 9v9's or 10v10's, as your examples imply. The question seems to be about increasing to 7v7 or 8v8 (I'm personally in favor of trying out the former first).
Edited to add: I saw in the other thread that people complained how larger team ladders were less active for games like TF2. I personally don't think going from 6v6 to 7v7 would make all that much of a difference in this regard. Most active clans have rosters that are larger than 6 players anyway.
6v6 will obviously remain the standard, just like 1v1 is in SC2. However, I think there's definitely room for a 7v7 and possibly even an 8v8 ladder to exist alongside the 6v6 one (and conversely, maybe a 5v5 for those who really like to show off their 'individual skill'). In the long run I feel like it would add tactical richness and longevity to the game since commanders and teams need to play quite differently depending on the format.
I didn't mean that everyone is opposed the the idea, but I don't see a single competitive player (who i know is a competitive player) asking for 7v7 instead of 6v6. I think 7v7 or 8v8 could be fun but I don't think it would work very well. I have seen this same thread pop up many times and they stay alive because everyone like to explain why it is a bad idea.
My experience in playing pubs and competitive games seems to be that the more people that are in an area, the less strategy is involved. It becomes more about death matches and rushing with more people added.
Would adding a player cause the game to become a death match rush game? Maybe, maybe not. It would definitely increase the effectiveness of rushing, though. And I'd gander that it the increased effectiveness of an already strong strategy would push it to be more and more common place.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You have 6 combatants on the field instead of 5. So for example you can do different opening splits or play more aggressive/defensive minded strategies that 5v5 would not allow. You have an extra pair of eyes. An additional person that can report, defend, attack and so forth. What would change with an additional person on each team? A lot, more than i can probably think of if i had't to sit down and write an essay.
Though i relate to your concerns in regard to the level of strategical play being deluded if you toss more people into a area, but going from 5 combatants to 6 is not so much of an issue in my opinion seeing 6 people pewing is mainstream in most games already and has proven to work just fine.
In regards to rushes i do agree this will need to be looked at. But then again a rush is always a possibility, even with the current meta. But this partly comes down to good scouting and on the commanders side some good player prediction and spatial awareness to prevent it. Would it become more potent with more players? maybe, even more so when the commander jumps out to join, but the other team can compensate the same way.
Though keep in mind this is partly theory crafting on my side too though. There are so many factors and situations that need to be kept into account. Thus all i can say is that in the end we would have to test it in order to get more definite answers.
<i>"*More teams and easier to organize pcw/scrims.
*Indvituals have more chance to shine.
*Easier for spectators to focus on most of the action.
*Easier to organize tournaments. This is very important if the game wants to get to any bigger tournaments later, 6v6 already requires space for 12 players to play a single game. Going higher than that is not a good idea.
*Less rewards for players if they win a tournament, if its evenly split.
*Less chance of spnsorship because the company has to invest in more players, if the game ever goes that far."</i>
I could go through them individually, but none of these points have any relevance in regard to competitive gameplay and strategy. NS2 is focused heavily on team play and IMO individual players should have less of a chance to get sponsored as opposed to whole teams getting sponsored for their combined skills and tactics. Adding one or two more people won't hinder people from shining.
I really liked RedDragon's response and how he broke it down and how some of the gameplay would be effected. Jameson also posted a link that had a great break down. Either way, there was still a feeling that more people in a competitive game should be tried.
<i>"Strayan (NS2HD) Posted Today, 01:43 PM
When I was younger, and dumber, I remember supporting the idea of 7v7s for competitive play. I'll never forget Fana calmly and logically explaining to me that it was impossible for logistical reasons. Now that I've seen the heat of livecasts, and the challenge of getting 12 players ready on time, 14 seems like a mirage in a desert! :D"
</i>
@ Strayan - You know its a little discouraging, especially being an administrator, to imply that everyone here is 13 and plays out of their mom's basement for suggesting ways to possibly improve the game and wanting to try a different approach of competitive play. A lot of folks on here have been playing for quite some time and are seasoned gamers and have a lot of experience. We are all beta testing and contributing money to unknown worlds because we love the game and thats what brings us together. We are all trying to make suggestions to possibly improve and better the game. NS2 is extremely different from NS1 and I think warrants at least testing out a 7v7 bracket or 8v8. You could even have two separate tournaments, some clans might do better in different brackets depending on how they have practiced, etc... i am not suggesting that we all of the sudden rush towards a different bracket but that it needs to be tested out to see what happens and to do that we would need support.
I hate to bring SC2 into again but i relate to it a lot. During the beta testing of the game it felt like where NS2 is in some regards where there was a rock paper scissors feel to it. For example, if I had warp gates before a certain time period, you could pylon push and there was no counter. Or if zerg made something like Muta's the hard counter was Phoenix's and it was game over. This was during the beta before things were balanced more and now you are able to have a small window to shift your focus on other units, but ground would be lost. A comparable NS2 example would be skulks waiting to cut the power while all of the marines have left the base. What I would want to test is, not if it could happen, but what frequency at which it does. Are people going to be more tactful and lure players away to strike, are aliens going to play more like aliens and scaring the shiz out of people while hiding in the rafters?
i am merely suggesting testing it out. We all want to improve the game and I feel that testing this out wouldn't harm anything and worst case scenario everyone goes back to 6v6 play, no harm no foul. I personally like the idea of having multiple brackets for competitive play where it would allow clans to practice a variety of styles and have more game days, casting, etc...
<i>"*More teams and easier to organize pcw/scrims.
*Indvituals have more chance to shine.
*Easier for spectators to focus on most of the action.
*Easier to organize tournaments. This is very important if the game wants to get to any bigger tournaments later, 6v6 already requires space for 12 players to play a single game. Going higher than that is not a good idea.
*Less rewards for players if they win a tournament, if its evenly split.
*Less chance of spnsorship because the company has to invest in more players, if the game ever goes that far."</i>
I could go through them individually, but none of these points have any relevance in regard to competitive gameplay and strategy. NS2 is focused heavily on team play and IMO individual players should have less of a chance to get sponsored as opposed to whole teams getting sponsored for their combined skills and tactics. Adding one or two more people won't hinder people from shining.
I really liked RedDragon's response and how he broke it down and how some of the gameplay would be effected. Jameson also posted a link that had a great break down. Either way, there was still a feeling that more people in a competitive game should be tried.
<i>"Strayan (NS2HD) Posted Today, 01:43 PM
When I was younger, and dumber, I remember supporting the idea of 7v7s for competitive play. I'll never forget Fana calmly and logically explaining to me that it was impossible for logistical reasons. Now that I've seen the heat of livecasts, and the challenge of getting 12 players ready on time, 14 seems like a mirage in a desert! :D"
</i>
@ Strayan - You know its a little discouraging, especially being an administrator, to imply that everyone here is 13 and plays out of their mom's basement for suggesting ways to possibly improve the game and wanting to try a different approach of competitive play. A lot of folks on here have been playing for quite some time and are seasoned gamers and have a lot of experience. We are all beta testing and contributing money to unknown worlds because we love the game and thats what brings us together. We are all trying to make suggestions to possibly improve and better the game. NS2 is extremely different from NS1 and I think warrants at least testing out a 7v7 bracket or 8v8. You could even have two separate tournaments, some clans might do better in different brackets depending on how they have practiced, etc... i am not suggesting that we all of the sudden rush towards a different bracket but that it needs to be tested out to see what happens and to do that we would need support.
I hate to bring SC2 into again but i relate to it a lot. During the beta testing of the game it felt like where NS2 is in some regards where there was a rock paper scissors feel to it. For example, if I had warp gates before a certain time period, you could pylon push and there was no counter. Or if zerg made something like Muta's the hard counter was Phoenix's and it was game over. This was during the beta before things were balanced more and now you are able to have a small window to shift your focus on other units, but ground would be lost. A comparable NS2 example would be skulks waiting to cut the power while all of the marines have left the base. What I would want to test is, not if it could happen, but what frequency at which it does. Are people going to be more tactful and lure players away to strike, are aliens going to play more like aliens and scaring the shiz out of people while hiding in the rafters?
i am merely suggesting testing it out. We all want to improve the game and I feel that testing this out wouldn't harm anything and worst case scenario everyone goes back to 6v6 play, no harm no foul. I personally like the idea of having multiple brackets for competitive play where it would allow clans to practice a variety of styles and have more game days, casting, etc...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the biggest challenge to actually testing this sort of thing right now is simply the fact we're still in a closed beta. If, after release, the game is popular enough competitively, we'll very likely see some folks testing the water with larger brackets.
I'm honestly not sure how such tests will turn out. I know they ultimately floundered for NS1, but as you've pointed out, NS2 is in many ways very different.
I would probably bet on it not working out in the end, but I don't think we can really just rule it out without giving it a try.
Harder that got blown out of proportions to "impossible".
I've never stopped loving the 7v7 format. I hope to get some 7v7 matches going once the competitive scene stabilizes a bit post-release.
<a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad%20hominem" target="_blank">http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ad%20hominem</a>
Enjoy! ^_^