Marine base recycling...

12346»

Comments

  • RippsyRippsy Join Date: 2013-01-16 Member: 179921Members
    Roobubba wrote: »
    Oh, and the main thing I'd like to see added is the ability to vote concede when dead, or perhaps while 'waiting to spawn'; when aliens are egglocked, they can't often even vote to concede before they're killed. In this case, their only option is to F4 (assuming the marines aren't making an attempt to kill the hive, which I have seen several times), and F4 is one of the things that vote concede is designed to avoid!!

    Absolutely!
  • current1ycurrent1y Join Date: 2003-12-08 Member: 24150Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, Subnautica Playtester
    edited March 2013
    Rig wrote: »
    No one here is presenting any compelling reason why changes shouldn't be made to prevent this behavior. All I see is elitism along the lines of, "I am the commander and I have decided that it's time for us to lose, and if my team is too stupid to know that I'll make the call for them." If that was the design intent, you'd have a button to concede immediately, not an option to vote. Those last few minutes of a game can get really hectic and silly, and I have fun playing them, win or lose. The number of failed votes to concede I've seen leads me to believe I'm not alone.

    If it turns into an e-peen stroking camping trip, I'm free to leave and find a new server, or vote to concede, just like you. If you've already decided that the game is over, you don't lose anything by leaving. Why would you want to stay in a game you believe you've lost already, just to impose your will on the other players on your team?

    Its often quicker then vote conceding when you have trolls, stacked teams or just clueless people on it. I very rarely command but when I do and a recycle situation comes up (aka 1 we couldn't even take control of a 2nd techpoint / maybe even a 2nd-3rd rt, or 2 the classic end game turtle takes shape and are stuck in our own base). I'll first ask if any one wants to recycle and I explain that recycling means give up. I then I always ask if any one does NOT want to give up. If I get some one who says no then I wont but if no one says they don't want to give up Ill go ahead and recycle.

    I see nothing wrong with doing this. Why note vote concede? well...

    for (1) above we can't use that option inside 10 mins, which is a bad change in my opinion. It should go back down to 5 minutes. For option (2) above if people say/type nothing when i ask if they don't want to give up (the more important question since its not my place to end their game if they dont) and vote conceded hasn't happened yet then they aren't smart enough to press vote concede so I'll end the game when no one objects.

    For the record I absolutely hate commanders who recycle w/o asking. It is not their place to choose when to end the game. If they want the game to end when others don't you either step out of the chair or continue to try and win. Ironically pretty much the only 2 times I think vote concede should be used is when i also think recycling is on the table as an option as well. This "1 or the other" idea people have is a bit silly, both work and both are usefull. One can be abused buy derp commands but I'm not sure its fair to remove it. The system works fine the way it is. Let admins admin their servers if they think recycling is an issue.
  • Flash8798Flash8798 Join Date: 2013-02-04 Member: 182814Members
    Recycling should have limits regardless, and powered down areas should remove the ability to recycle since essentially that area's connection to the main comm chair has been cut off. Therefore it would create a situation where protecting a power node is a viable strategy to prevent losing a lot of Res. It's much the same way an Alien Forward Crag/Shift/Shade base is when cut off with a cyst chain, you can't recycle at all as aliens, only hope that your commander has a Shift that can Echo away one or two structures and potentially save them from being destroyed, but by no means ever regain the resources placed into making those structures, and if using the Echo example, actually COSTS resources to move those structures away, rather than gaining anything back.

    Losing a forward base is much more a punishing aspect to Aliens than it is for Marines, as of the current Build (245), all marines have to do is have a commander that recycles everything all at once, get a MASSIVE Res Dump, and drop his team three or four exo suits at base before the Comm Chair goes down, or dump it into research. This is unheard of in Alien play, as is the concept of regaining resources at all. This may be a concept function, but it's also a horrid balance issue that at the very least needs to be addressed.

    While I agree that recycling should not be removed completely, it should be nerfed in order to create a more fair experience for the Aliens to be able to deliver as much a crippling blow as the Marines give already from a successful kill on a Hive, rather than a successful hit on a base only resulting in another Hive Location, rather than a devastating blow in taking out a built up Marine stronghold without the possibility of recouping most of those structures. Much in the same way a Marine Beacon stops if an Observatory is destroyed or powered down, Recycling structures should stop or at least have the time to recycle them be increased by a large percentage so that Aliens who have successfully taken down that base get to revel in their victory through actually removing resources from Marine Play, instead of a massive rush to attempt to take at least ONE structure before the Commander successfully trolls the victory from all the structures disappearing, and all those Nanobots take the form of a massive, disembodied hand flipping the bird before fading away.

    I'd recommend a cool down be added to recycling, a limit to recycling final/essential structures such as IPs or the last Adv. Armory, and removing the option of recycling powered down structures so that Aliens have a much more fulfilling experience in destroying a Marine Stronghold, or at the very least increase the time it takes for those powered down structures to be recycled so that if the Aliens aren't taking advantage of that extra time, the Marines still have the ability to gain from the Aliens' lack of seizing the opportunity.

    TL;DR:
    Nerf Recycling by:
    -Create overall cooldown.
    -Remove RCing essential IPs/Armories based on Team Size. (ie. +8 players = Can't remove 2nd to last IP, etc.)
    -Increase time it takes for powered down structures to recycle by a large margin to allow Aliens a more satisfying and deeply felt blow on Marines as much as a lost Hive is currently to Aliens, or remove recycling of powered down structures entirely.

    -Slightly justified because Aliens have no equal ability to recycling that allows the recouping of resources like Marines do, thus a slight balance issue.
  • amoralamoral Join Date: 2013-01-03 Member: 177250Members
    asymmetry. aliens don't need to players to build structures, and marines can drop.med packs. no issue with recycling.
  • MMZ_TorakMMZ_Torak Join Date: 2002-11-02 Member: 3770Members
    amoral wrote: »
    asymmetry. aliens don't need to players to build structures, and marines can drop.med packs. no issue with recycling.

    Except that recycling is just like conceding, except only one person gets to vote. And only one team gets to recycle.

    I'd like to see some data on how may people are anti concede but pro recycling.
  • amoralamoral Join Date: 2013-01-03 Member: 177250Members
    MMZ_Torak wrote: »
    amoral wrote: »
    asymmetry. aliens don't need to players to build structures, and marines can drop.med packs. no issue with recycling.

    Except that recycling is just like conceding, except only one person gets to vote. And only one team gets to recycle.

    I'd like to see some data on how may people are anti concede but pro recycling.

    responding to the dude above me
  • VayVay Join Date: 2013-03-14 Member: 183959Members
    The marine commander will always be the king of the match. You cannot change that. If you remove recycling of IPs, they will just recycle everything else and blow the res on scans and beacons so you are res locked. If you limit recycling, they will just recycle a phase gate and beacon to give aliens full control of the map. If you remove recycling completely, he will trap marines inside the base with armory walls; the new comm wouldn't even be able to recycle them to let them out.

    I don't see how there is even 6 pages of discussion here. Its the marine commanders match, he decides when it is over.
  • RoobubbaRoobubba Who you gonna call? Join Date: 2003-01-06 Member: 11930Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    edited April 2013
    Vay wrote: »
    The marine commander will always be the king of the match. You cannot change that. If you remove recycling of IPs, they will just recycle everything else and blow the res on scans and beacons so you are res locked. If you limit recycling, they will just recycle a phase gate and beacon to give aliens full control of the map. If you remove recycling completely, he will trap marines inside the base with armory walls; the new comm wouldn't even be able to recycle them to let them out.

    I don't see how there is even 6 pages of discussion here. Its the marine commanders match, he decides when it is over.

    I agree that recycling doesn't need to be touched, because now that concede is in, there's really very little need for recycling IPs or F4, and the benefits of being able to recycle in certain situations should not be lost.

    However, I do NOT agree that the comm has the right to recycle IPs to finish the game without consent from the other players. It's still a team game, and the democratic method I feel is a far better way to avoid irritating everyone. Some people concede at ridiculous moments, so if that person is comming and thinks the game is lost when no-one else on the team thinks it is, what you're saying is that person should be able to finish the game on their own. If they jump out and someone else takes over, the game might be won (I've been in this situation on several occasions...). The commander is another player, not the overlord and master of all the others on the server.

    Mutual respect and communication go a long way in this game.
  • VayVay Join Date: 2013-03-14 Member: 183959Members
    I do not think at all that he should have that power. But the core design of the game gives him that power. His position gives him complete control of the marine teams resources and his actions can put the marine team into an unrecoverable position with little effort on his part. [Ignoring stacked teams letting the marines come back. Who cares about those.] Recycling is only one tool in his arsenal of trolling.
  • RoobubbaRoobubba Who you gonna call? Join Date: 2003-01-06 Member: 11930Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    True, but the abillity of the marine commander to lose the game either through ineptitude (which we all start out with and can overcome by learning to play!) or deliberately (thankfully very far from the norm) is nothing new to Natural Selection. There needs to be this element of trust for the game to work, and on the whole, it does, just as NS1 did.
  • LústLúst Join Date: 2013-01-08 Member: 178186Members
    edited April 2013
    All in favor of putting a phase gate in hub say I.
    Well I guess half the team did not vote on it. I need 2/3 majority to do it. So I guess lets do another vote.
    All in favor of conceding the game say I.

    As the commander you have to make choices for you'r team. Surrendering is just one of them. They are still playing, we just get a fresh start.

    Currently the problem with NS2 is that we don't have a passive resource gain system. For just being in the game you would get resources, this means if you have no RTs you still get resources.
    Whats happening now is that alot of times the games are not even close because one team falls too far behind in technology or resources. If I have 3 RTs and you have 6 it means that you are making double what I am. If the difference was smaller then the game would be closer, you would still be ahead but I can afford a shotgun or weapons 2. Currently 80% of the games are one sided with only about 15% being a good back and forth fight.

    The 5% is troll com.

    Also takes less people to hit f4 then vote concede. YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN THAT.
Sign In or Register to comment.