Yeah... we all know that once you've learned how to work all the guns, there's nothing left to learn in NS...
Man, where's a good "rolling eyes" emoticon when i need one?
Seeing as how Q3 has little complicated bits like a resource system, integrated team communications beyond built-in taunts and basic yells, and maps where gameplay can be changed drastically by the construction of buildings with a variety of effects throughout the map, i can see how it's learning curve is so much steeper...
No, wait, i'm getting mixed up. About the only thing i recall learning from Q3 is rocket jumping and "twitch" skills... not exactly higher brain function items there. Learning how to hit things with the guns does not a learning curve make...
simply, it's a game based on a bug. If u don't know how to "use" this bug u can win.
U are strong only if u are "skilled" in bunnyhopping. aim or similar aren't important...u need only to go much faster then your opponent!
it's like a F1 race, and NS will became like that if they don't block that.
It's just my opinion<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So if I understand correctly, you are saying that if everyone knew how to bunnyhop, aim would become unimportant. You would never need to shoot. Who needs those soldiers to fire those rockets, after all. They can just stand infront of the medics at chokes. The medics don't shoot either, so noone needs any defense or offense, since it's always the same thing anway. And in maps with no chokes you can map a 5 man pyrimid on the flag to prevent the medics from gettting to it.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that this doesn't happen very often. People in tfc who bunnyhop don't beat you about the head and shoulders because the bhop. Bhop helps, but in actual combat bhop has no practical application. All its really for is getting in to combat, and then getting the flag out. It's kinda like how concs were used for jumps. Only a few people in the better clans could conc jump (mostly those who ported from qwtf like myself), and even fewer could HH conc. As time passed and people started to be able to aim while conced, thanks to the way the conc worked, people found other applications for it, and concing became alot more common. Any random person on most pubs can do at least basic concs now. Not many can aim conced though, proving that time does indeed reverse. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
My point is that there is alot more to tfc than bunnyhop. In ns too. Yes, bunnyhop can help from time to time, especially since you can do it silently, and most people think it doesn't belong. In ns it can break the game, since at peak speeds a marine can bunnyhop backwards faster than the skulks, and skulk bhop takes longer to speed up thanks to the hieght from the ground. They can't duck to give extra speed. Just bunnyhopping won't save you, you need other skills, but it makes it easier to use them. In tfc it helps, especially with scouts where 170% of 400 = 680, A noticable increase over the max speed of the class. It also belongs. It's accepted by everyone, because a scout going faster than fast is still just as capable of being hit by a rocket from a good soldier. Better yet three shotgun blasts, maybe 4; hitscan weapons don't take into account speed if you are a good shot, especially the perfect accuracy shotguns of tfc. Soldiers and hws have much less use for bunnyhop since they dont move nearly as much. It can prevent a scout rush on maps with poorly placed respawns but usually it doesn't matter.
The arguement that ns has a smaller learning curve is only partly true. First, hitscan weapons are indeed easier to use than say rockets of tfc. There is no doubt about that. The exceptions are bile bomb, acid rocket, and the gl. The gl can be used very powerfully against fades with good aim. Likewise it's fairly hard to hit acid rocket on jpers. Possible, just hard thanks to the air time of the acid rocket. Bile bomb is primarily spam, so aiming is less often needed. Acid is better against marines. Second, the true hard learning part about NS is commanding and gorging. I can sorta gorge but I have no skill at commanding, I'm a fast and furious type of player, which leaves me to wonder what I'm doing playing NS. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> Just must be that interesting.
Otherwise, yes, it's much easier to shoot and bite in most cases, sans when people are hitbox exploiting, knowingly or not, (Crouchers. You have to stand far away from crouchers to hit right. Blarg) than it is to play games like quake, tfc, thanks to the nature of the weapons. Saying quake has no learning curve is not fully understanding the learning curve. If that's what you think, go play against some of the better dmers on overdrivePC/ownage.net, and see how you do. On the other hand that can be viewed in different ways; knowing what all the weapons do and a rudimentary level of how to use them could be all the learning in some peoples eyes. It's farther easier to follow orders and shoot aliens with a hitscan weapon to me, than it is to know exactly which of 9 weapons (8, i guess, since once you have the bfg you don't need another weapon) to use in a situation, to know exactly where to shoot to airshot jump padders, to know the timing to a second and anticipate where people will be with non hitscan weapons by the time the air between you and them is crossed by the weapon, and so forth. Then agian I also found starcraft easier than quake, so maybe I'm just a odd ball out. (If you can airshot me with three weapons in one jump I will retract this statement, though.) I don't care for commanding, everything else in NS I've got down at least decently, from hitscan, to tactical desicion making, to, yes, bunnyhopping.
Anyway this is the second Bhop thread I've posted a long slightly off topic post to, so, I'd better stop before the mods get mad at me.
Learning curve is basically how many successful attempts to be come efficient in that task Time Vs attempts (some thing like that) The learning curve idea came from World War One in the race for better planes found that they could build fast of the same plane over and over than changing the plan of the planes all the time So new plans means have to learn it all over again that how it originated
In gaming it would be Skill Vs experience or some thing along the lines
So in practical sense The steeper the curve the more you need to learn to before it begins to flatten out The less steeper curve the less you need to learn to get to the point where it begins to flatten out Every one usually begin to get a handle of the game fast then you begin to slow down for you got the main basic idea then it basically levels out but not really flat for you are all ways improving slightly but not as mush when you started
OMG! All of you know bunnyhope? How it's that? Who can give the Example? If any doesn't, then all of you are cheaters? A lots of highly specialists here, no one can give any clue about bonnyhope in NS. Strange or lame? Are you afraid that will be used by all others players and you will lose your "skill". If any of you have balls, put here your config.
unbindall bind "TAB" "+showscores" bind "ENTER" "+attack" bind "ESCAPE" "cancelselect" bind "SPACE" "+jump" bind "'" "+moveup" bind "+" "sizeup" bind "," "+moveleft" bind "-" "sizedown" bind "." "+moveright" bind "/" "+movedown" bind "1" "slot1" bind "2" "slot2" bind "3" "slot3" bind "4" "slot4" bind "5" "slot5" bind ";" "+mlook" bind "=" "sizeup" bind "a" "+moveleft" bind "d" "+moveright" bind "e" "+use" bind "f" "impulse 100" bind "q" "Weapon" bind "r" "+reload" bind "s" "+back" bind "t" "impulse 201" bind "u" "messagemode2" bind "v" "+moveup" bind "w" "+forward" bind "y" "messagemode" bind "z" "say_team Commander, I nead health/ammo!(Silent)" bind "]" "invnext" bind "`" "console 1.0; toggleconsole" bind "~" "console 1.0; toggleconsole" bind "UPARROW" "+scrollup" bind "DOWNARROW" "+scrolldown" bind "LEFTARROW" "+scrollleft" bind "RIGHTARROW" "+scrollright" bind "ALT" "+strafe" bind "CTRL" "+duck" bind "SHIFT" "+speed" bind "F1" "say_team I'm defending this area. Stay quiet, I'm listening for motion." bind "F2" "say_team Weld me, my armor is running low." bind "F3" "say_team Commander, I'm at a resource node, It's clear." bind "F4" "readyroom" bind "F5" "say_team I'm at a hive. Give me a course of action, commander." bind "F6" "say_team There's an enemy here, stay quiet." bind "F7" "say_team This area has been cleared, enemies are gone or dead." bind "F8" "say_team I'm dead, expect enemies in my position." bind "F10" "quit prompt" bind "INS" "cswitch" bind "PGDN" "+lookdown" bind "PGUP" "+lookup" bind "END" "centerview" bind "KP_HOME" "impulse 13; say_team Looks like we've got an incomming." bind "KP_UPARROW" "impulse 7; say_team Follow Me, but stay quiet.." bind "KP_PGUP" "impulse 9" bind "KP_LEFTARROW" "impulse 12; say_team I'm in position, watching the area.." bind "KP_5" "impulse 15; say_team Area clear, target has been borked. " bind "KP_RIGHTARROW" "impulse 81; say_team Understood, Responding." bind "KP_END" "impulse 10; say_team Commander, I seem to be mortally bleeding." bind "KP_DOWNARROW" "impulse 11; say_team I'm out of ammo and dug in." bind "KP_PGDN" "impulse 80; say_team On standby." bind "KP_ENTER" "+voicerecord" bind "KP_INS" "commlist01" bind "KP_DEL" "commlist02" bind "MWHEELDOWN" "+jump" bind "MWHEELUP" "+jump" bind "MOUSE1" "+attack" bind "MOUSE2" "+pupupmenu" bind "PAUSE" "pause"
The Cswitch command is part of an alias that goes to more comms for the aliens and marines, and hotkeys for commander. It's a modified version of a communication script someone posted a while back. I have a couple of custom binds, but besides the communication script and a few moved binds I use mostly default. (Mousewheel jump excluded.)
I... don't understand what you were saying to be honest. Not much of it. But if you are looking to learn to bhop, it's easy to find... Here is the tutorial I used.
<!--QuoteBegin--OldMan+Feb 11 2003, 03:34 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (OldMan @ Feb 11 2003, 03:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> OMG! All of you know bunnyhope? How it's that? Who can give the Example? If any doesn't, then all of you are cheaters? A lots of highly specialists here, no one can give any clue about bonnyhope in NS. Strange or lame? Are you afraid that will be used by all others players and you will lose your "skill". If any of you have balls, put here your config. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Where you born incomprehensible, or did you have to practice?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Skill Vs experience or some thing along the lines <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A better wording would be performance versus skill/experience. Which i think is what you meant. Performance in the sense of how succesful you are at the game, games won/lost, who you can beat and by what margin. Or in the plane manufacturing example, how well you can put a plane together versus how much skill/experience you have at the task.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The steeper the curve the more you need to learn to before it begins to flatten out The less steeper curve the less you need to learn to get to the point where it begins to flatten out <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The curve for a competitive game is not quite as simple, and in a game, unlike in plane manufacturing, you don't want the curve to level out. At least, not at a point that is easily attainable by the players. The curve should continue to slope allowing players to continually improve their skills, rather than creating stalemates where luck plays more of a role in the outcome than actual ability, because everyone managed to hit the flat portion of the curve and there is no room to progress.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Seeing as how Q3 has little complicated bits like a resource system, integrated team communications beyond built-in taunts and basic yells, and maps where gameplay can be changed drastically by the construction of buildings with a variety of effects throughout the map, i can see how it's learning curve is so much steeper... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The scope for advancing your ability in a game goes (or should go) far beyond just learning the basic concepts that would be outlined in any manual. Learning NS's resource system, tech tree, interface, meaningless bits and bobs such as taunts..... takes a week, at best. Playing Q3 at a competitive level? Years. The depth of NS isnt defined in the number of silly little addons it has that bring little to the real gameplay, bring NS down to the elements that have any lasting depth and you have:
Fighting skill - Marines versus skulks, fades, whatever. You have alot of different matchups to practice, but each matchup is arguably very basic in comparison to a DM game. Aim and movement ability, and the experience of how to play out each individual battle are elements which you can continually improve on as you play the game.
Field Tactics - Everything worth mentioning about 'teamplay' gets bundled into here, this covers any tactics prior to, or occasionally in a battle. Hitting a res tower then hiding above the doorway to catch an incoming defender, organising a rush through the enemy phase gate to counter their offensive phase, or the organisation of a team of marines covering various points come under field tactics. There's depth here that will make sure this element of the game lasts even though....
NS is weak as a strategy game. It has a weak counter system, and limited scope for dynamic strategies. The alien team in particular, has almost no strategy to it and is entirely tactics based, with some fighting ability. This isnt necessarily a bad thing, just don't overestimate the strategic depth of the game. A new player has to learn alot of things which you might consider to be elements of strategy, gorge build orders for example, but this isnt really strategic depth. They are simply facts of the game that a new player must learn, similar to a deathmatch map hiding lots of secret powerups. A new player must learn the location of these things, and in doing so he increases his performance at the game considerably, but there is no depth there. You learn the secrets and thats it. With a stronger counter system, NS strategy could be much more dynamic and incorporate more depth, but as it stands it is quite simple. Watch top level clan matches and you'll see the 2 most important factors which seperate 1 team from another, tactics and fighting ability.
The term "twitch skills" is a moronic phase that i have only ever heard used by the HL community. It attempts to belittle skills which have a great deal of depth to them, that people would like to downplay due to their inadequacy in that department. What you call "twitch skill" has been the basis for the games that created the first person shooter genre.
I thing having easy learning curve is a good thing.
If I am playing against other people, I want the challenge to be beating those other people, not learning how to use the various guns and basic elements of the game.
If the main challenge is learning how aim well, or how to dodge well, or how to bunny hop, you may as well play against bots.
Quick to learn, hard to master - thats what I want.
I'm sorry I'm still trying to come to terms with the fact that people are saying Q3 has more depth and is harder to learn than NS.
Q3 has no real strategic depth at all. NS has some, not much but some.
As for learning curve - I view the learning curve as being the initial rate of learning necessary to not get owned every game. some games have a short sharp curve where until you have learned certain things you just can't win, but the number of things you need to learn is limited. others have a long shallow curve where you can win but as you pick things up you get better and more efficient.
Most games with depth would in my view have a short sharp curve at the start with a long shallow curve of things that add depth and variety to the game.
NS has the short sharp curve at the start, with a bit of a gradual curve after that in terms of tactics/strategy. I feel one thing that would help the gradual curve to grow is new maps being regularly patched into the game.
Also regular patches andd stuff which tweak things are a help.
Another thing would be a campaign style league thingy <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> Basically where a space map is developed and each sector has a station or stations which need to be taken for that sector to be taken. It could be that say 4 different maps comprise a station and either each map needs to be won by a team before they can claim the whole station or the team that has the majority on the night wins the station - if it is two each then the station gets fought over again the next week/night/month whatever.
It shouldnt be that hard to do - we use to do it for Aliens Online way back when all it takes is a bit of admin and webwork - which I could do easily enough.
What would be phenomenal is if the game had built in a number of approved servers which actually affected the official state of play/backstory etc. I have no clue how do-able that is in terms of game engine etc though.
You cannot really label a learning curve as 'easy'. Unless what you mean is a game that literally has near-zero depth. Like... snakes and ladders. If you mean a game that has no major pitfalls that new players must overcome, ie. hard facts that you need to know before you can compete (Secret areas, pre-defined best build orders, etc.) But still has a large amount of scope for improving your ability. Then it wouldn't be accurate to call that an 'easy' learning curve.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Quick to learn, hard to master - thats what I want. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That description fits Q3 much better than it fits NS.
Deathmatching ability in Q3 has a great deal of depth to it, you can continually improve your ability at the game. There is almost limitless potential to improve yourself, in other words it is hard (impossible?) to master. It also has very few pitfalls for a new player, you pick up the game and you are immediately working on the skills that differentiate the best from the not-quite-as-good-as-the-best.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If I am playing against other people, I want the challenge to be beating those other people, not learning how to use the various guns and basic elements of the game.
If the main challenge is learning how aim well, or how to dodge well, or how to bunny hop, you may as well play against bots. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, you don't understand, you're misinterpreting the word 'learning'. The learning in learning curve is not refering to some initial training period you have to get through before you start playing the game. It is referring to the process of learning to become a master of the game. We assume if the game is well written, that you never will master it, so the learning is ongoing and never stops. The degree to which you have learnt the game determines how well you perform at the game, and how well you do against other people. Learning to play the game *IS* learning to beat other people. Learning to use the weapons, how to aim and dodge is happening all the time as you play. You continually improve as you play with other people. What we are talking about, is how well you, having so much experience at a game do against a person with less experience, and a person with more experience. With a steep learning curve which does not quickly level off, there will always be someone significantly better than you, and you will always be significantly better than someone else. <b>And this should be reflected in your game performance</b>.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> people are saying Q3 has more depth
Q3 has no real strategic depth at all <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--TeoH+Feb 11 2003, 01:04 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TeoH @ Feb 11 2003, 01:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Who says depth is limited to strategy? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Hmm, I suppose I did. Overall I suppose depth is something that gives a game a curve that still goes up after the initial short sharp learning curve.
In terms of whether Q3 has more depth than NS I would still say no. Q3 is in effect just doom deathmatch writ pretty - no real depth at all. I would say that Q3 like any sport/skill is one where you can constantly improve over time by playing/practicing loads - however I would argue that this was depth?
I think basically that I feel NS has more depth overall than Q3 - be it strategic, tactical, point of game or whatever.
1) This argument is pointless, the game is Flay et alls and they hath spoken, B-hopping <b>IS</b> being taken out!
2) B-hopping does not require extra skill, silent traveling accross the map which is technically b-hopping because it works by exploiting the same bug is not 'extra skill' it mealy requires you to learn some different button presses, there's nothing particularly difficult, you CAN script it.
All this means is you've learnt some extra little quirk of the game and know how to exploit it.
This is REALLY NOT DIFFERENT to the 'special move' example I put in last time this thread came around.
You press x y z wait 1 second and then press q and Lo! you've fired a tactical nuke from your pistol thus killing a hive in one shot... congratulations!
The only difference is the level of extremity of the situation.
3) B-hopping does not add to the atmosphere of the game.
B-hopping(silently) makes ramboing stupidly easy.
In closing b-hopping is only in the game because the engine is HL, People only whinge cos the are used to TFC and as such are good at it and the SOLE REASON you're moaning is you don't want YOUR advantage taken away.
Similarly see the people all moaning about R_drawview.
Incedently when I go all out 'borderline hax' and use r_draw and b-hopping I'm comparable to all the best players I've seen.. funny that.
<!--QuoteBegin--TeoH+Feb 11 2003, 05:58 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TeoH @ Feb 11 2003, 05:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> NS is weak as a strategy game. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Maybe you should play more, eventually NS. If you think to know a map and have some skill that all in NS, you must remain to make <b>Theo</b>ry. Stay behind words...
The ability to gain speed by "bunnyhopping" will be removed. The ability to move quickly and silently by "crouch-bunnyhopping" will also be removed.
There are currently no plans to implement a CS-style slowdown, stamina system, or anything to prevent repeated *normal* jumping. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And Q3 whats that? I went straight from Q1 TF, CTF straight to HL TFC, then came across that CS mod, I own Q3 but never got into it, all that flying across space stuff was too weird. Seemed to be to colorful and closer to unreal tournament than the original Q1 and Q2, Q2 weapons factory was good. Wheres Duke Nukem Forever dang it, I loved Duke 2d on the TEN network, and should I delete the link to the TF2 site? Keep checking but nothings there, hehe.
Fencing is a game of skill, what's your opinion on its depth?
Or football? (Soccer for you wierdos)
If it's the team aspect that is swaying you, consider tdm. Played by a clan it is actually very similar to NS at a tactical level, teams cover each other and work to gain control of, and secure the key points of the map (Dictated by powerful items or terrain advantage). In duels, you see a similar thing, players who control the map have the advantage. Of course if you join a 24 player q3dm17 free for all you'll just see a bunch of kids spamming rockets at each other, but public NS play isnt exactly refined either.
Q3's fighting element has much more to it than NS's. While NS may have much more to initially learn about the workings of the game and overall strategy, i am focusing on what differentiates players at the highest levels and what parts of the game remain significant a long way down the road, not in a game between 2 clueless teams.
Blueghost... Do you mind? We're discussing learning curves here if you hadn't noticed.
Oldman, the forum is in english, its not your fault if it isnt your native language, but you can't expect to get a serious reply if no one can tell what you're trying to say.
<!--QuoteBegin--TeoH+Feb 11 2003, 01:46 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TeoH @ Feb 11 2003, 01:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Fencing is a game of skill, what's your opinion on its depth?
Or football? (Soccer for you wierdos)
If it's the team aspect that is swaying you, consider tdm. Played by a clan it is actually very similar to NS at a tactical level, teams cover each other and work to gain control of, and secure the key points of the map (Dictated by powerful items or terrain advantage). In duels, you see a similar thing, players who control the map have the advantage. Of course if you join a 24 player q3dm17 free for all you'll just see a bunch of kids spamming rockets at each other, but public NS play isnt exactly refined either.
Q3's fighting element has much more to it than NS's. While NS may have much more to initially learn about the workings of the game and overall strategy, i am focusing on what differentiates players at the highest levels and what parts of the game remain significant a long way down the road, not in a game between 2 clueless teams. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> On the fencing front - I don't think it has much depth - loads of skill at the top levels, just not much depth.
As for football, well it has more depth than that american knockoff of rugby <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> Which isn't saying much.
I think NS and Q3 are pretty similar when you get right down to it. However I have to disagree with the assertion that Q3's fighting element has more to it than NS. I think it is the other way round, we will probably have to agree to disagree over that point.
To my mind there is very little in Q3 that remains significant beyond the initial curve, it all just comes down to how practiced you are with the weapons - like a lot of sports, you are in essence just doing the same thing but better (hopefully) as you practice/train/play more and more.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What you call "twitch skill" has been the basis for the games that created the first person shooter genre.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ever thought about getting a microsoft employment? Even they are not nearly as skilled as you in praising a bug as a feature (and they invented this strategy!). <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
QUOTE The curve for a competitive game is not quite as simple, and in a game, unlike in plane manufacturing, you don't want the curve to level out. At least, not at a point that is easily attainable by the players. The curve should continue to slope allowing players to continually improve their skills, rather than creating stalemates where luck plays more of a role in the outcome than actual ability, because everyone managed to hit the flat portion of the curve and there is no room to progress.
opps I should of clarified a bit more in that point about flatting out it doesn’t really Say for example you draw the graph it would seam like it in the end but it isn’t really you are always improving in skill but a lot more slower rate over experience
The curve looks a lot like an experiential curve if you know what I mean
That game is the greatest, far better than quake3 or NS. I play it every day with my homies.
As far as depth, NS does have more 'Depth'. It's easier to fight, by far. Tactical desicion making, on the personal level becomes less important in NS than it is in quake. Trust me. Play quake and you learn some things about tactical desicion making, but then you'll never be able to play another game the same way. (If you make it to the big leagues.) On the other hand, alot of games do that to you. Play resident evil much? If you play all the resident evil games, including survivor, code X, and so on, you'll start checking your ammo all the time when you have like, 500 bullets left. With quake you'll learn weapon switching alot more effectivly, and how to use/abuse terrain better than any other game besides tribes, but tribes gives you jet packs, so it doesn't count. DoD teaches you camping and sniping. The list goes on.
Defining depth is hard. Normally it's used in context of RPGs/Books, for story, plot, stuff like that. In the context of action games it probably defines the same thing. If, however, by more depth you mean, much deeper and more complicated combat, then, quake gets the award. NS's combat is fairly basic: steath is good, there's strength in numbers, and staying at a range is a marines best idea. Most fights are over really fast, save the lower level species vs jpers, or 6 vs 6 skirmishes. Quake involves fights that can be strung out over the whole map.
<!--QuoteBegin--Beetlejuice+Feb 11 2003, 08:04 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Beetlejuice @ Feb 11 2003, 08:04 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Ever thought about getting a microsoft employment? Even they are not nearly as skilled as you in praising a bug as a feature (and they invented this strategy!). :D <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You're funny son.... but ultimately tiring.
BHop is removed, but something is added that increases the learning curve required, but doesn't turn the game into a series of ridiculous, crazy jumping marines. The new 'thing' is a legitimate change (possibly new equipment that is extremely powerful but hard to use. I'm sure someone can easily think of something <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->), and people that can do it won't be exploiting what is a bug in the game, and does imo lower the atmosphere rather.
Hopefully, changes to increase the skill required while removing exploits would make everyone happy. The 'pro gamers' who bhop will have a skill based game, and the 'anti exploiters' will feel free to use a legitimate feature of the game.
If people who want bhop in have a problem with this, maybe you aren't arguing for a skill based game, but one that caters to _your personal skills_. In which case, you don't have a leg to stand on.
I've played plenty of games without anyone bunnyhopping, and the games turn out fine. Why then, do we need bunny hopping at all? Sorry, but I think skill is more in being able to hit crap with your gun rather then being able to press 2 buttons simultaniously every few seconds.
If these so called "pro/hardcore/ubza/ihavetoomuchtime gamers" are really so good, then lets see them get the same kill ratio without bunnyhopping as they do WITH bunnyhopping. I mean after all, they live for the challenge right?
"there's nothing particularly difficult [about bhop], you CAN script it. "
Sorry, but you're not quite sure what you are talking about, and capitalizing "CAN" doesn't enforce your point any. There is a jump script that makes it easier to time your jumps bind mwheelup "+jump;wait;-jump;wait;+jump;wait;-jump;wait;+jump;wait;-jump;" But timing your jumps is the easiet part to grasp when learning to bhop. There is not a script out there, nor is it possible to do air control for you, and all the mouse movements and timing that goes with it, and the strafe pressing. Accepted exploit or not, it is a skill that you obviously can't do.
coilAmateur pirate. Professional monkey. All pance.Join Date: 2002-04-12Member: 424Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
Regarding learning curves, depth, etc - I believe that some games' learning curves can be too long. Gore, by KFS's description (he was on the design team for it), was one of those; I can't speak to Q3 because I do not own it. The definition of a curve that is "too long" is one in which new players are hopelessly outclassed by veterans, to the point where the game lacks appeal. The new players do not have the opportunity to gain the skills needed to compete at higher levels; they're too busy getting their butts handed to them. It's frustrating, and it often results in player bases fading out.
NS tries to shorten the curve, so that the depth of the game is evident at the higher organizational levels. The heart of the game isn't the FPS element - it's the strategic element. This is where the true opportunity for depth and a real learning curve emerges. But by slightly simplifying the FPS element, NS is much more palatable even to relatively inexperienced players.
I agree that NS's strategy element still needs work; that's why 1.0 is not the final version. Flayra is not just balancing; he's adding, as well. As NS grows - in age, map selection, and features - we will see more and more depth to gameplay.
One example of a long learning curve that I *am* familiar is that of Soul Calibur for the Dreamcast. It's a simple fighting game with no depth, right? Not really... the ability for counters, moves thrown on the fly, strategic placement within the ring (for a ringout or similar), and more offers a RIDICULOUS amount to learn. And that's ignoring the ~20 characters, each one capable of 50-100 moves (or so; I'm estimating). I'm pretty good at Soul Calibur; I can consistantly beat most people I've played against, anyway. And playing against people who don't know the game well is... well, I feel bad for them, because I can pick any of a half-dozen characters and remove half of their health bar 3 seconds into the round. I can beat them in ways they can't even figure out after it happens.
That's not the kind of experience I want for anyone in NS... but at the same time, I'm torn. I relish the nuances of Soul Calibur - at the moment, I'm learning to effectively use the amazing counter system it has. Having that kind of complexity is fun, if you're "in" on it. If you're not, though... it's hard to get in. *shrug* I'm not sure what the answer is. One idea I came up with a little while ago is that NS may have to have two different systems in place. Currently there is Casual and Tournament... what if that were changed to Casual and Vet? The Vet mode could have additional complexities to it to allow a greater depth of individual gameplay, while the Casual could be for those who just want to hop in and have a good, fun game, but might not have the finesse skill to play with very experienced players. *shrug* It's an idea.
However, bunnyhopping should not be a part of either mode. (:
Nice thing about NS is that most of the skills for a frontline marine grunt can be learnt in a weekend.
1) follow orders 2) look around 3) mines on floors 4) shoot skulks 5) report facts (not fictions, not suggestions, never orders) 6) suggest things once even if you think its the best idea ever. 7) if you have no order, guard next to base. If there's phase gates, cycle round em.
The complexity comes into working as a team and using stratagy ect.
Had an interesting game today where we were losing horribly, we'd failed to hold down hives propperly but due to the aliens getting too frantic in defence of their new hive 2 guys snuck into their current hive and stuck a phase right under it, mine the phase 7 marines into the hive room game over.
How did the marines manage this? Well by use of MT from the com chair and seeing the 7 odd red dots pour to sewer hive it was possible to pick the right time for their lill stealy march. By close watch of the MT they could both build without fear of being interupted.
The level of stratigic and tactical deapth in NS is huge, don't think anyone can truly say they've 'masterd' what is currently in and Flays still adding more. (I know my HA utalization is poor, my 'tunnle vision' is also sometimes a problem, and there's definatly stuff I cant even imagine, I also have an irrational fear of turrets eating all my res <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> )
If you just wana be a grunt not even leading a squad of marines (and hence never really experiancing the depth of NS) then perhaps you'd enjoy TFC more?
I personally want NS as a team game which really really revolves around teamwork over indevidual skill. While this is just my personal feeling fortunatly the devs seem to agree.
I mean its bad enough when a newb comes along and you have to explain stuff. If, due to them not knowing b-hopping, r_draw and not having the 'l33t bindz' they're also completly useless at engaging skulks then who's going to want to be a newb or play with a newb.
Comments
Man, where's a good "rolling eyes" emoticon when i need one?
Seeing as how Q3 has little complicated bits like a resource system, integrated team communications beyond built-in taunts and basic yells, and maps where gameplay can be changed drastically by the construction of buildings with a variety of effects throughout the map, i can see how it's learning curve is so much steeper...
No, wait, i'm getting mixed up. About the only thing i recall learning from Q3 is rocket jumping and "twitch" skills... not exactly higher brain function items there. Learning how to hit things with the guns does not a learning curve make...
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
simply, it's a game based on a bug. If u don't know how to "use" this bug u can win.
U are strong only if u are "skilled" in bunnyhopping. aim or similar aren't important...u need only to go much faster then your opponent!
it's like a F1 race, and NS will became like that if they don't block that.
It's just my opinion<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So if I understand correctly, you are saying that if everyone knew how to bunnyhop, aim would become unimportant. You would never need to shoot. Who needs those soldiers to fire those rockets, after all. They can just stand infront of the medics at chokes. The medics don't shoot either, so noone needs any defense or offense, since it's always the same thing anway. And in maps with no chokes you can map a 5 man pyrimid on the flag to prevent the medics from gettting to it.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that this doesn't happen very often. People in tfc who bunnyhop don't beat you about the head and shoulders because the bhop. Bhop helps, but in actual combat bhop has no practical application. All its really for is getting in to combat, and then getting the flag out. It's kinda like how concs were used for jumps. Only a few people in the better clans could conc jump (mostly those who ported from qwtf like myself), and even fewer could HH conc. As time passed and people started to be able to aim while conced, thanks to the way the conc worked, people found other applications for it, and concing became alot more common. Any random person on most pubs can do at least basic concs now. Not many can aim conced though, proving that time does indeed reverse. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
My point is that there is alot more to tfc than bunnyhop. In ns too. Yes, bunnyhop can help from time to time, especially since you can do it silently, and most people think it doesn't belong. In ns it can break the game, since at peak speeds a marine can bunnyhop backwards faster than the skulks, and skulk bhop takes longer to speed up thanks to the hieght from the ground. They can't duck to give extra speed. Just bunnyhopping won't save you, you need other skills, but it makes it easier to use them. In tfc it helps, especially with scouts where 170% of 400 = 680, A noticable increase over the max speed of the class. It also belongs. It's accepted by everyone, because a scout going faster than fast is still just as capable of being hit by a rocket from a good soldier. Better yet three shotgun blasts, maybe 4; hitscan weapons don't take into account speed if you are a good shot, especially the perfect accuracy shotguns of tfc. Soldiers and hws have much less use for bunnyhop since they dont move nearly as much. It can prevent a scout rush on maps with poorly placed respawns but usually it doesn't matter.
The arguement that ns has a smaller learning curve is only partly true. First, hitscan weapons are indeed easier to use than say rockets of tfc. There is no doubt about that. The exceptions are bile bomb, acid rocket, and the gl. The gl can be used very powerfully against fades with good aim. Likewise it's fairly hard to hit acid rocket on jpers. Possible, just hard thanks to the air time of the acid rocket. Bile bomb is primarily spam, so aiming is less often needed. Acid is better against marines. Second, the true hard learning part about NS is commanding and gorging. I can sorta gorge but I have no skill at commanding, I'm a fast and furious type of player, which leaves me to wonder what I'm doing playing NS. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> Just must be that interesting.
Otherwise, yes, it's much easier to shoot and bite in most cases, sans when people are hitbox exploiting, knowingly or not, (Crouchers. You have to stand far away from crouchers to hit right. Blarg) than it is to play games like quake, tfc, thanks to the nature of the weapons. Saying quake has no learning curve is not fully understanding the learning curve. If that's what you think, go play against some of the better dmers on overdrivePC/ownage.net, and see how you do. On the other hand that can be viewed in different ways; knowing what all the weapons do and a rudimentary level of how to use them could be all the learning in some peoples eyes. It's farther easier to follow orders and shoot aliens with a hitscan weapon to me, than it is to know exactly which of 9 weapons (8, i guess, since once you have the bfg you don't need another weapon) to use in a situation, to know exactly where to shoot to airshot jump padders, to know the timing to a second and anticipate where people will be with non hitscan weapons by the time the air between you and them is crossed by the weapon, and so forth. Then agian I also found starcraft easier than quake, so maybe I'm just a odd ball out. (If you can airshot me with three weapons in one jump I will retract this statement, though.) I don't care for commanding, everything else in NS I've got down at least decently, from hitscan, to tactical desicion making, to, yes, bunnyhopping.
Anyway this is the second Bhop thread I've posted a long slightly off topic post to, so, I'd better stop before the mods get mad at me.
Time Vs attempts (some thing like that)
The learning curve idea came from World War One in the race for better planes found that they could build fast of the same plane over and over than changing the plan of the planes all the time
So new plans means have to learn it all over again that how it originated
In gaming it would be
Skill Vs experience or some thing along the lines
So in practical sense
The steeper the curve the more you need to learn to before it begins to flatten out
The less steeper curve the less you need to learn to get to the point where it begins to flatten out
Every one usually begin to get a handle of the game fast then you begin to slow down for you got the main basic idea then it basically levels out but not really flat for you are all ways improving slightly but not as mush when you started
All of you know bunnyhope? How it's that? Who can give the Example? If any doesn't, then all of you are cheaters?
A lots of highly specialists here, no one can give any clue about bonnyhope in NS. Strange or lame? Are you afraid that will be used by all others players and you will lose your "skill". If any of you have balls, put here your config.
bind "TAB" "+showscores"
bind "ENTER" "+attack"
bind "ESCAPE" "cancelselect"
bind "SPACE" "+jump"
bind "'" "+moveup"
bind "+" "sizeup"
bind "," "+moveleft"
bind "-" "sizedown"
bind "." "+moveright"
bind "/" "+movedown"
bind "1" "slot1"
bind "2" "slot2"
bind "3" "slot3"
bind "4" "slot4"
bind "5" "slot5"
bind ";" "+mlook"
bind "=" "sizeup"
bind "a" "+moveleft"
bind "d" "+moveright"
bind "e" "+use"
bind "f" "impulse 100"
bind "q" "Weapon"
bind "r" "+reload"
bind "s" "+back"
bind "t" "impulse 201"
bind "u" "messagemode2"
bind "v" "+moveup"
bind "w" "+forward"
bind "y" "messagemode"
bind "z" "say_team Commander, I nead health/ammo!(Silent)"
bind "]" "invnext"
bind "`" "console 1.0; toggleconsole"
bind "~" "console 1.0; toggleconsole"
bind "UPARROW" "+scrollup"
bind "DOWNARROW" "+scrolldown"
bind "LEFTARROW" "+scrollleft"
bind "RIGHTARROW" "+scrollright"
bind "ALT" "+strafe"
bind "CTRL" "+duck"
bind "SHIFT" "+speed"
bind "F1" "say_team I'm defending this area. Stay quiet, I'm listening for motion."
bind "F2" "say_team Weld me, my armor is running low."
bind "F3" "say_team Commander, I'm at a resource node, It's clear."
bind "F4" "readyroom"
bind "F5" "say_team I'm at a hive. Give me a course of action, commander."
bind "F6" "say_team There's an enemy here, stay quiet."
bind "F7" "say_team This area has been cleared, enemies are gone or dead."
bind "F8" "say_team I'm dead, expect enemies in my position."
bind "F10" "quit prompt"
bind "INS" "cswitch"
bind "PGDN" "+lookdown"
bind "PGUP" "+lookup"
bind "END" "centerview"
bind "KP_HOME" "impulse 13; say_team Looks like we've got an incomming."
bind "KP_UPARROW" "impulse 7; say_team Follow Me, but stay quiet.."
bind "KP_PGUP" "impulse 9"
bind "KP_LEFTARROW" "impulse 12; say_team I'm in position, watching the area.."
bind "KP_5" "impulse 15; say_team Area clear, target has been borked. "
bind "KP_RIGHTARROW" "impulse 81; say_team Understood, Responding."
bind "KP_END" "impulse 10; say_team Commander, I seem to be mortally bleeding."
bind "KP_DOWNARROW" "impulse 11; say_team I'm out of ammo and dug in."
bind "KP_PGDN" "impulse 80; say_team On standby."
bind "KP_ENTER" "+voicerecord"
bind "KP_INS" "commlist01"
bind "KP_DEL" "commlist02"
bind "MWHEELDOWN" "+jump"
bind "MWHEELUP" "+jump"
bind "MOUSE1" "+attack"
bind "MOUSE2" "+pupupmenu"
bind "PAUSE" "pause"
The Cswitch command is part of an alias that goes to more comms for the aliens and marines, and hotkeys for commander. It's a modified version of a communication script someone posted a while back. I have a couple of custom binds, but besides the communication script and a few moved binds I use mostly default. (Mousewheel jump excluded.)
I... don't understand what you were saying to be honest. Not much of it. But if you are looking to learn to bhop, it's easy to find... Here is the tutorial I used.
<a href='http://fidosrevenge.com/bhop/' target='_blank'>http://fidosrevenge.com/bhop/</a>
All of you know bunnyhope? How it's that? Who can give the Example? If any doesn't, then all of you are cheaters?
A lots of highly specialists here, no one can give any clue about bonnyhope in NS. Strange or lame? Are you afraid that will be used by all others players and you will lose your "skill". If any of you have balls, put here your config. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Where you born incomprehensible, or did you have to practice?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Skill Vs experience or some thing along the lines
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A better wording would be performance versus skill/experience. Which i think is what you meant. Performance in the sense of how succesful you are at the game, games won/lost, who you can beat and by what margin. Or in the plane manufacturing example, how well you can put a plane together versus how much skill/experience you have at the task.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
The steeper the curve the more you need to learn to before it begins to flatten out
The less steeper curve the less you need to learn to get to the point where it begins to flatten out
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The curve for a competitive game is not quite as simple, and in a game, unlike in plane manufacturing, you don't want the curve to level out. At least, not at a point that is easily attainable by the players. The curve should continue to slope allowing players to continually improve their skills, rather than creating stalemates where luck plays more of a role in the outcome than actual ability, because everyone managed to hit the flat portion of the curve and there is no room to progress.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Seeing as how Q3 has little complicated bits like a resource system, integrated team communications beyond built-in taunts and basic yells, and maps where gameplay can be changed drastically by the construction of buildings with a variety of effects throughout the map, i can see how it's learning curve is so much steeper...
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The scope for advancing your ability in a game goes (or should go) far beyond just learning the basic concepts that would be outlined in any manual. Learning NS's resource system, tech tree, interface, meaningless bits and bobs such as taunts..... takes a week, at best. Playing Q3 at a competitive level? Years. The depth of NS isnt defined in the number of silly little addons it has that bring little to the real gameplay, bring NS down to the elements that have any lasting depth and you have:
Fighting skill - Marines versus skulks, fades, whatever. You have alot of different matchups to practice, but each matchup is arguably very basic in comparison to a DM game. Aim and movement ability, and the experience of how to play out each individual battle are elements which you can continually improve on as you play the game.
Field Tactics - Everything worth mentioning about 'teamplay' gets bundled into here, this covers any tactics prior to, or occasionally in a battle. Hitting a res tower then hiding above the doorway to catch an incoming defender, organising a rush through the enemy phase gate to counter their offensive phase, or the organisation of a team of marines covering various points come under field tactics. There's depth here that will make sure this element of the game lasts even though....
NS is weak as a strategy game. It has a weak counter system, and limited scope for dynamic strategies. The alien team in particular, has almost no strategy to it and is entirely tactics based, with some fighting ability. This isnt necessarily a bad thing, just don't overestimate the strategic depth of the game. A new player has to learn alot of things which you might consider to be elements of strategy, gorge build orders for example, but this isnt really strategic depth. They are simply facts of the game that a new player must learn, similar to a deathmatch map hiding lots of secret powerups. A new player must learn the location of these things, and in doing so he increases his performance at the game considerably, but there is no depth there. You learn the secrets and thats it. With a stronger counter system, NS strategy could be much more dynamic and incorporate more depth, but as it stands it is quite simple. Watch top level clan matches and you'll see the 2 most important factors which seperate 1 team from another, tactics and fighting ability.
The term "twitch skills" is a moronic phase that i have only ever heard used by the HL community. It attempts to belittle skills which have a great deal of depth to them, that people would like to downplay due to their inadequacy in that department. What you call "twitch skill" has been the basis for the games that created the first person shooter genre.
I thing having easy learning curve is a good thing.
If I am playing against other people, I want the challenge to be beating those other people, not learning how to use the various guns and basic elements of the game.
If the main challenge is learning how aim well, or how to dodge well, or how to bunny hop, you may as well play against bots.
Quick to learn, hard to master - thats what I want.
I'm sorry I'm still trying to come to terms with the fact that people are saying Q3 has more depth and is harder to learn than NS.
Q3 has no real strategic depth at all. NS has some, not much but some.
As for learning curve - I view the learning curve as being the initial rate of learning necessary to not get owned every game. some games have a short sharp curve where until you have learned certain things you just can't win, but the number of things you need to learn is limited. others have a long shallow curve where you can win but as you pick things up you get better and more efficient.
Most games with depth would in my view have a short sharp curve at the start with a long shallow curve of things that add depth and variety to the game.
NS has the short sharp curve at the start, with a bit of a gradual curve after that in terms of tactics/strategy. I feel one thing that would help the gradual curve to grow is new maps being regularly patched into the game.
Also regular patches andd stuff which tweak things are a help.
Another thing would be a campaign style league thingy <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> Basically where a space map is developed and each sector has a station or stations which need to be taken for that sector to be taken. It could be that say 4 different maps comprise a station and either each map needs to be won by a team before they can claim the whole station or the team that has the majority on the night wins the station - if it is two each then the station gets fought over again the next week/night/month whatever.
It shouldnt be that hard to do - we use to do it for Aliens Online way back when all it takes is a bit of admin and webwork - which I could do easily enough.
What would be phenomenal is if the game had built in a number of approved servers which actually affected the official state of play/backstory etc. I have no clue how do-able that is in terms of game engine etc though.
Just my tuppence worth
You cannot really label a learning curve as 'easy'. Unless what you mean is a game that literally has near-zero depth. Like... snakes and ladders. If you mean a game that has no major pitfalls that new players must overcome, ie. hard facts that you need to know before you can compete (Secret areas, pre-defined best build orders, etc.) But still has a large amount of scope for improving your ability. Then it wouldn't be accurate to call that an 'easy' learning curve.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Quick to learn, hard to master - thats what I want.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That description fits Q3 much better than it fits NS.
Deathmatching ability in Q3 has a great deal of depth to it, you can continually improve your ability at the game. There is almost limitless potential to improve yourself, in other words it is hard (impossible?) to master. It also has very few pitfalls for a new player, you pick up the game and you are immediately working on the skills that differentiate the best from the not-quite-as-good-as-the-best.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
If I am playing against other people, I want the challenge to be beating those other people, not learning how to use the various guns and basic elements of the game.
If the main challenge is learning how aim well, or how to dodge well, or how to bunny hop, you may as well play against bots.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, you don't understand, you're misinterpreting the word 'learning'. The learning in learning curve is not refering to some initial training period you have to get through before you start playing the game. It is referring to the process of learning to become a master of the game. We assume if the game is well written, that you never will master it, so the learning is ongoing and never stops. The degree to which you have learnt the game determines how well you perform at the game, and how well you do against other people. Learning to play the game *IS* learning to beat other people. Learning to use the weapons, how to aim and dodge is happening all the time as you play. You continually improve as you play with other people. What we are talking about, is how well you, having so much experience at a game do against a person with less experience, and a person with more experience. With a steep learning curve which does not quickly level off, there will always be someone significantly better than you, and you will always be significantly better than someone else. <b>And this should be reflected in your game performance</b>.
people are saying Q3 has more depth
Q3 has no real strategic depth at all
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who says depth is limited to strategy?
Who says depth is limited to strategy? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hmm, I suppose I did. Overall I suppose depth is something that gives a game a curve that still goes up after the initial short sharp learning curve.
In terms of whether Q3 has more depth than NS I would still say no. Q3 is in effect just doom deathmatch writ pretty - no real depth at all. I would say that Q3 like any sport/skill is one where you can constantly improve over time by playing/practicing loads - however I would argue that this was depth?
I think basically that I feel NS has more depth overall than Q3 - be it strategic, tactical, point of game or whatever.
ONCE AGAIN.
1)
This argument is pointless, the game is Flay et alls and they hath spoken, B-hopping <b>IS</b> being taken out!
2)
B-hopping does not require extra skill, silent traveling accross the map which is technically b-hopping because it works by exploiting the same bug is not 'extra skill' it mealy requires you to learn some different button presses, there's nothing particularly difficult, you CAN script it.
All this means is you've learnt some extra little quirk of the game and know how to exploit it.
This is REALLY NOT DIFFERENT to the 'special move' example I put in last time this thread came around.
You press x y z wait 1 second and then press q and Lo! you've fired a tactical nuke from your pistol thus killing a hive in one shot... congratulations!
The only difference is the level of extremity of the situation.
3)
B-hopping does not add to the atmosphere of the game.
B-hopping(silently) makes ramboing stupidly easy.
In closing b-hopping is only in the game because the engine is HL, People only whinge cos the are used to TFC and as such are good at it and the SOLE REASON you're moaning is you don't want YOUR advantage taken away.
Similarly see the people all moaning about R_drawview.
Incedently when I go all out 'borderline hax' and use r_draw and b-hopping I'm comparable to all the best players I've seen.. funny that.
BlueGhost
Maybe you should play more, eventually NS. If you think to know a map and have some skill that all in NS, you must remain to make <b>Theo</b>ry. Stay behind words...
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Simple answer:
The ability to gain speed by "bunnyhopping" will be removed. The ability to move quickly and silently by "crouch-bunnyhopping" will also be removed.
There are currently no plans to implement a CS-style slowdown, stamina system, or anything to prevent repeated *normal* jumping. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And Q3 whats that? I went straight from Q1 TF, CTF straight to HL TFC, then came across that CS mod, I own Q3 but never got into it, all that flying across space stuff was too weird. Seemed to be to colorful and closer to unreal tournament than the original Q1 and Q2, Q2 weapons factory was good. Wheres Duke Nukem Forever dang it, I loved Duke 2d on the TEN network, and should I delete the link to the TF2 site? Keep checking but nothings there, hehe.
Or football? (Soccer for you wierdos)
If it's the team aspect that is swaying you, consider tdm. Played by a clan it is actually very similar to NS at a tactical level, teams cover each other and work to gain control of, and secure the key points of the map (Dictated by powerful items or terrain advantage). In duels, you see a similar thing, players who control the map have the advantage. Of course if you join a 24 player q3dm17 free for all you'll just see a bunch of kids spamming rockets at each other, but public NS play isnt exactly refined either.
Q3's fighting element has much more to it than NS's. While NS may have much more to initially learn about the workings of the game and overall strategy, i am focusing on what differentiates players at the highest levels and what parts of the game remain significant a long way down the road, not in a game between 2 clueless teams.
Oldman, the forum is in english, its not your fault if it isnt your native language, but you can't expect to get a serious reply if no one can tell what you're trying to say.
Or football? (Soccer for you wierdos)
If it's the team aspect that is swaying you, consider tdm. Played by a clan it is actually very similar to NS at a tactical level, teams cover each other and work to gain control of, and secure the key points of the map (Dictated by powerful items or terrain advantage). In duels, you see a similar thing, players who control the map have the advantage. Of course if you join a 24 player q3dm17 free for all you'll just see a bunch of kids spamming rockets at each other, but public NS play isnt exactly refined either.
Q3's fighting element has much more to it than NS's. While NS may have much more to initially learn about the workings of the game and overall strategy, i am focusing on what differentiates players at the highest levels and what parts of the game remain significant a long way down the road, not in a game between 2 clueless teams. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
On the fencing front - I don't think it has much depth - loads of skill at the top levels, just not much depth.
As for football, well it has more depth than that american knockoff of rugby <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> Which isn't saying much.
I think NS and Q3 are pretty similar when you get right down to it. However I have to disagree with the assertion that Q3's fighting element has more to it than NS. I think it is the other way round, we will probably have to agree to disagree over that point.
To my mind there is very little in Q3 that remains significant beyond the initial curve, it all just comes down to how practiced you are with the weapons - like a lot of sports, you are in essence just doing the same thing but better (hopefully) as you practice/train/play more and more.
Ever thought about getting a microsoft employment? Even they are not nearly as skilled as you in praising a bug as a feature (and they invented this strategy!). <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
The curve for a competitive game is not quite as simple, and in a game, unlike in plane manufacturing, you don't want the curve to level out. At least, not at a point that is easily attainable by the players. The curve should continue to slope allowing players to continually improve their skills, rather than creating stalemates where luck plays more of a role in the outcome than actual ability, because everyone managed to hit the flat portion of the curve and there is no room to progress.
opps I should of clarified a bit more in that point about flatting out it doesn’t really
Say for example you draw the graph it would seam like it in the end but it isn’t really you are always improving in skill but a lot more slower rate over experience
The curve looks a lot like an experiential curve if you know what I mean
That game is the greatest, far better than quake3 or NS. I play it every day with my homies.
As far as depth, NS does have more 'Depth'. It's easier to fight, by far. Tactical desicion making, on the personal level becomes less important in NS than it is in quake. Trust me. Play quake and you learn some things about tactical desicion making, but then you'll never be able to play another game the same way. (If you make it to the big leagues.) On the other hand, alot of games do that to you. Play resident evil much? If you play all the resident evil games, including survivor, code X, and so on, you'll start checking your ammo all the time when you have like, 500 bullets left. With quake you'll learn weapon switching alot more effectivly, and how to use/abuse terrain better than any other game besides tribes, but tribes gives you jet packs, so it doesn't count. DoD teaches you camping and sniping. The list goes on.
Defining depth is hard. Normally it's used in context of RPGs/Books, for story, plot, stuff like that. In the context of action games it probably defines the same thing. If, however, by more depth you mean, much deeper and more complicated combat, then, quake gets the award. NS's combat is fairly basic: steath is good, there's strength in numbers, and staying at a range is a marines best idea. Most fights are over really fast, save the lower level species vs jpers, or 6 vs 6 skirmishes. Quake involves fights that can be strung out over the whole map.
It's all in the eye of the beholder.
Its like saying LOTR has more action then The Matrix. Different stories, characters, settings, motives, etc, etc, etc, etc.
You're funny son.... but ultimately tiring.
BHop is removed, but something is added that increases the learning curve required, but doesn't turn the game into a series of ridiculous, crazy jumping marines. The new 'thing' is a legitimate change (possibly new equipment that is extremely powerful but hard to use. I'm sure someone can easily think of something <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->), and people that can do it won't be exploiting what is a bug in the game, and does imo lower the atmosphere rather.
Hopefully, changes to increase the skill required while removing exploits would make everyone happy. The 'pro gamers' who bhop will have a skill based game, and the 'anti exploiters' will feel free to use a legitimate feature of the game.
If people who want bhop in have a problem with this, maybe you aren't arguing for a skill based game, but one that caters to _your personal skills_. In which case, you don't have a leg to stand on.
Just need to define 'thing' now...
If these so called "pro/hardcore/ubza/ihavetoomuchtime gamers" are really so good, then lets see them get the same kill ratio without bunnyhopping as they do WITH bunnyhopping. I mean after all, they live for the challenge right?
Sorry, but you're not quite sure what you are talking about, and capitalizing "CAN" doesn't enforce your point any. There is a jump script that makes it easier to time your jumps
bind mwheelup "+jump;wait;-jump;wait;+jump;wait;-jump;wait;+jump;wait;-jump;"
But timing your jumps is the easiet part to grasp when learning to bhop. There is not a script out there, nor is it possible to do air control for you, and all the mouse movements and timing that goes with it, and the strafe pressing. Accepted exploit or not, it is a skill that you obviously can't do.
NS tries to shorten the curve, so that the depth of the game is evident at the higher organizational levels. The heart of the game isn't the FPS element - it's the strategic element. This is where the true opportunity for depth and a real learning curve emerges. But by slightly simplifying the FPS element, NS is much more palatable even to relatively inexperienced players.
I agree that NS's strategy element still needs work; that's why 1.0 is not the final version. Flayra is not just balancing; he's adding, as well. As NS grows - in age, map selection, and features - we will see more and more depth to gameplay.
One example of a long learning curve that I *am* familiar is that of Soul Calibur for the Dreamcast. It's a simple fighting game with no depth, right? Not really... the ability for counters, moves thrown on the fly, strategic placement within the ring (for a ringout or similar), and more offers a RIDICULOUS amount to learn. And that's ignoring the ~20 characters, each one capable of 50-100 moves (or so; I'm estimating). I'm pretty good at Soul Calibur; I can consistantly beat most people I've played against, anyway. And playing against people who don't know the game well is... well, I feel bad for them, because I can pick any of a half-dozen characters and remove half of their health bar 3 seconds into the round. I can beat them in ways they can't even figure out after it happens.
That's not the kind of experience I want for anyone in NS... but at the same time, I'm torn. I relish the nuances of Soul Calibur - at the moment, I'm learning to effectively use the amazing counter system it has. Having that kind of complexity is fun, if you're "in" on it. If you're not, though... it's hard to get in. *shrug* I'm not sure what the answer is. One idea I came up with a little while ago is that NS may have to have two different systems in place. Currently there is Casual and Tournament... what if that were changed to Casual and Vet? The Vet mode could have additional complexities to it to allow a greater depth of individual gameplay, while the Casual could be for those who just want to hop in and have a good, fun game, but might not have the finesse skill to play with very experienced players. *shrug* It's an idea.
However, bunnyhopping should not be a part of either mode. (:
1) follow orders
2) look around
3) mines on floors
4) shoot skulks
5) report facts (not fictions, not suggestions, never orders)
6) suggest things once even if you think its the best idea ever.
7) if you have no order, guard next to base. If there's phase gates, cycle round em.
The complexity comes into working as a team and using stratagy ect.
Had an interesting game today where we were losing horribly, we'd failed to hold down hives propperly but due to the aliens getting too frantic in defence of their new hive 2 guys snuck into their current hive and stuck a phase right under it, mine the phase 7 marines into the hive room game over.
How did the marines manage this? Well by use of MT from the com chair and seeing the 7 odd red dots pour to sewer hive it was possible to pick the right time for their lill stealy march.
By close watch of the MT they could both build without fear of being interupted.
The level of stratigic and tactical deapth in NS is huge, don't think anyone can truly say they've 'masterd' what is currently in and Flays still adding more. (I know my HA utalization is poor, my 'tunnle vision' is also sometimes a problem, and there's definatly stuff I cant even imagine, I also have an irrational fear of turrets eating all my res <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> )
If you just wana be a grunt not even leading a squad of marines (and hence never really experiancing the depth of NS) then perhaps you'd enjoy TFC more?
I personally want NS as a team game which really really revolves around teamwork over indevidual skill. While this is just my personal feeling fortunatly the devs seem to agree.
I mean its bad enough when a newb comes along and you have to explain stuff. If, due to them not knowing b-hopping, r_draw and not having the 'l33t bindz' they're also completly useless at engaging skulks then who's going to want to be a newb or play with a newb.
BlueGhost