Let's Talk Pubs...
Savant
Join Date: 2002-11-30 Member: 10289Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
Join Date: 2002-11-30 Member: 10289Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
<div class="IPBDescription">Don't forget where we came from (LONG)</div> OK, I was going to post this in 'Beta Information', but I thought it might get better coverage from the community at large. As noted, Flayra has a build planned to drop later today. That is NOT what this topic is about. That build will hopefully address the issue where marines have been able to stroll around the map solo because of the bite problem. When this happens, I think we'll find that initially marines will get owned BADLY. (since they are used to supremacy on their own)
Now, what I want to look at is AFTER this happens. Once marines learn that moving in groups = win and playing solo = lose, they will likely adapt. With VETs making up the lion's share of testers, I expect they will adapt quickly since they are intelligent players who are used to playing in groups as a team. That's not the problem.
The issue I want to look at is PUBLIC servers. With the majority of servers running as public servers, I think it would be prudent of us to examine if there are any concepts that could be applied that would encourage public players (playing as marine) to work together more.
Please note, I'm NOT looking for specific gameplay modification <i>suggestions</i>, but moreso gameplay <b>CONCEPTS</b> that we can think about and discuss. (Preferably simple concepts that could be implemented easily) Flayra has more than enough suggestions on his plate, I just want to look at concepts since that allows him to make his own decisions on implementation.
OK, with that all said and done, my thoughts...
As the game stands at present, while marines are rewarded for teamwork in PRINCIPLE (with a win if they pull it off) there is nothing to encourage teamwork in practice. In looking at other mods like TFC, the same principle applies. Quite often if you have one team that has good teamwork, then they will prevail. No secret there. However, you can play solo in TFC and still have fun while not really affecting the team's performance to any great extent. The same applies for most other mods.
NS is different though.
With this in mind, my first thought is scores. (Stay with me folks and do not jump to conclusions here please) Let's be honest. Scores drive almost every game. While the scores don't show in NS, and experienced gamer knows they can type 'status' in the console for a quick rundown. Scores are not shown for marines in order to discourage lone individuals from playing only for kills and not for the team. While this is a reasonable idea in principle, I don't think it is too much of a discouragement for most players.
<b>Concept: Adapt the scoring system to reward marine teamwork.</b>
By using the scoreboard, we can appeal to the egos of the marine players. I would rather do this instead of providing an 'in game' benefit. (The following would NOT affect the current 'res for kills' structure - this is only a visual suggestion)
Possible scoreboard concept example: (pub servers only)
Give kill credits for: (positive)
-Team hive kills: A group of 3+ marines that kill a hive with GUNS each get +5 kills and those beside a siege when it kills a hive each get +10 (including the commander)
-Teamwork kills: Marines in a group all get a +2 credit for a kill if they are in a group of 3 or more (so no worry about kill stealing - everyone gets equal credit)
-Base defence kills: Marines get a +1 credit for a kill if they are in range of the active CC (even if alone)
Give NO credit for: (neutral)
-Kills in groups of 2 or when alone
-Kills by mines
-Kills by welder
-Kills by knife
-Kills by turrets
Give negative credit for: (negative)
-punish incompetence: Should a marine with a 'good' weapon (HMG etc) die WITHOUT a kill, they get a -2 kill credit
-punish rambos: For each death when ALONE give the marine a -1 kill credit
As a potential option, you could even 'punish' those with really bad scores by increasing their spawn time. If a player with a -5 or -10 score dies, they are LAST to spawn when others are in the spawn queue. All other players with a positive score would spawn ahead of him, even if they died afterwards.
To further make sure there is no punishment for working in a group, if players are in a group and they make ONE kill, then they would not suffer a negative credit for dying alone if their squad-mates are killed before they are.
All of the above would normally appeal to the marine's ego, and as such, MOST players on public servers would want to TRY to get a positive score. As it would be IMPOSSIBLE to get a positive score playing solo, 'rambos' and 'aimboters' wouldn't bother attempting to exploit the scoreboard.
Since the scoreboard is a POWERFUL motivator, then many players on pubs would try to increase their score by working as a TEAM. This would only serve to make pub play that much more enjoyable for players, not to mention the server ops.
Remember, when a person joins a game in progress they are not 'emotionally attached' to the game as those who have been playing all game long. So they may be less likely to want to work as a team. However, the above concept would allow a person just joining to se 'instant results' by working as a team and then their score will rise.
This same concept could be applied to the alien team, with bonuses given to aliens that score kills in range of the hive and in groups, and punishment to aliens that die when evolved to fade/onos and not getting a single kill. However I was more thinking about the marines when I was considering this concept. More thought can be given to this concept if Flayra so desires.
Regards,
Savant
Now, what I want to look at is AFTER this happens. Once marines learn that moving in groups = win and playing solo = lose, they will likely adapt. With VETs making up the lion's share of testers, I expect they will adapt quickly since they are intelligent players who are used to playing in groups as a team. That's not the problem.
The issue I want to look at is PUBLIC servers. With the majority of servers running as public servers, I think it would be prudent of us to examine if there are any concepts that could be applied that would encourage public players (playing as marine) to work together more.
Please note, I'm NOT looking for specific gameplay modification <i>suggestions</i>, but moreso gameplay <b>CONCEPTS</b> that we can think about and discuss. (Preferably simple concepts that could be implemented easily) Flayra has more than enough suggestions on his plate, I just want to look at concepts since that allows him to make his own decisions on implementation.
OK, with that all said and done, my thoughts...
As the game stands at present, while marines are rewarded for teamwork in PRINCIPLE (with a win if they pull it off) there is nothing to encourage teamwork in practice. In looking at other mods like TFC, the same principle applies. Quite often if you have one team that has good teamwork, then they will prevail. No secret there. However, you can play solo in TFC and still have fun while not really affecting the team's performance to any great extent. The same applies for most other mods.
NS is different though.
With this in mind, my first thought is scores. (Stay with me folks and do not jump to conclusions here please) Let's be honest. Scores drive almost every game. While the scores don't show in NS, and experienced gamer knows they can type 'status' in the console for a quick rundown. Scores are not shown for marines in order to discourage lone individuals from playing only for kills and not for the team. While this is a reasonable idea in principle, I don't think it is too much of a discouragement for most players.
<b>Concept: Adapt the scoring system to reward marine teamwork.</b>
By using the scoreboard, we can appeal to the egos of the marine players. I would rather do this instead of providing an 'in game' benefit. (The following would NOT affect the current 'res for kills' structure - this is only a visual suggestion)
Possible scoreboard concept example: (pub servers only)
Give kill credits for: (positive)
-Team hive kills: A group of 3+ marines that kill a hive with GUNS each get +5 kills and those beside a siege when it kills a hive each get +10 (including the commander)
-Teamwork kills: Marines in a group all get a +2 credit for a kill if they are in a group of 3 or more (so no worry about kill stealing - everyone gets equal credit)
-Base defence kills: Marines get a +1 credit for a kill if they are in range of the active CC (even if alone)
Give NO credit for: (neutral)
-Kills in groups of 2 or when alone
-Kills by mines
-Kills by welder
-Kills by knife
-Kills by turrets
Give negative credit for: (negative)
-punish incompetence: Should a marine with a 'good' weapon (HMG etc) die WITHOUT a kill, they get a -2 kill credit
-punish rambos: For each death when ALONE give the marine a -1 kill credit
As a potential option, you could even 'punish' those with really bad scores by increasing their spawn time. If a player with a -5 or -10 score dies, they are LAST to spawn when others are in the spawn queue. All other players with a positive score would spawn ahead of him, even if they died afterwards.
To further make sure there is no punishment for working in a group, if players are in a group and they make ONE kill, then they would not suffer a negative credit for dying alone if their squad-mates are killed before they are.
All of the above would normally appeal to the marine's ego, and as such, MOST players on public servers would want to TRY to get a positive score. As it would be IMPOSSIBLE to get a positive score playing solo, 'rambos' and 'aimboters' wouldn't bother attempting to exploit the scoreboard.
Since the scoreboard is a POWERFUL motivator, then many players on pubs would try to increase their score by working as a TEAM. This would only serve to make pub play that much more enjoyable for players, not to mention the server ops.
Remember, when a person joins a game in progress they are not 'emotionally attached' to the game as those who have been playing all game long. So they may be less likely to want to work as a team. However, the above concept would allow a person just joining to se 'instant results' by working as a team and then their score will rise.
This same concept could be applied to the alien team, with bonuses given to aliens that score kills in range of the hive and in groups, and punishment to aliens that die when evolved to fade/onos and not getting a single kill. However I was more thinking about the marines when I was considering this concept. More thought can be given to this concept if Flayra so desires.
Regards,
Savant
Comments
but i just don`t wanna see most of NS working around kills, but since the decision to do that has already been made <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif'><!--endemo-->
then i would really like to see
<!--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-->Give NO credit for: (neutral)
-Kills in groups of 2 or when alone
-Kills by mines
-Kills by welder
-Kills by knife
-Kills by turrets
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
rewarding this is in my opinion seems like getting res by no-brainers.
As a potential option, you could even 'punish' those with really bad scores by increasing their spawn time. If a player with a -5 or -10 score dies, they are LAST to spawn when others are in the spawn queue. All other players with a positive score would spawn ahead of him, even if they died afterwards.
To further make sure there is no punishment for working in a group, if players are in a group and they make ONE kill, then they would not suffer a negative credit for dying alone if their squad-mates are killed before they are.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes but that would be punishing people who cant aim or are new to the game or a FPS. A lone HMGer dies without getting a kill so he has to wait longer?
What about scouting missions? A scout goes off under orders from the com to find the hive and he is killed. Now that he died off alone with out a kill he is rewarded with a longer respawn time, even though he was following orders and helpinh his team?
As previously said by others, I respect your ideas but I think that there are too many variables that play into these concepts that would have negative consequences. And not all pub players are motivated simply by skill or the scorebard. Yesterday in the Roobs server a guy with a 6-27 score single handedly took out the TF, 4 STs, and a PG in the engine hive. He went off alone to do this b/c his team mates had dided rushing it. He fought on alone and he won a major victory for the team as a lerk. This may be the aliens but it can go for the marines as well under many circumstances.
That scoring system looks artificial and unintuitive to begin with, and once implemented, a myriad of "unfair" loopholes will show up, resulting in more rules and exceptions until it becomes completely opaque.
I don't see why any such thing is necessary. If you say solo marines die a quick and unfun death, that will get the message across even to the thickest rambo. As you said, there's soloing in TFC only because it's fun. If it truly is pointless in NS, players will notice quickly enough.
-Kills in groups of 2 or when alone
-Kills by mines
-Kills by welder
-Kills by knife
-Kills by turrets
Give negative credit for: (negative)
-punish incompetence: Should a marine with a 'good' weapon (HMG etc) die WITHOUT a kill, they get a -2 kill credit
-punish rambos: For each death when ALONE give the marine a -1 kill credit <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hmmm, first of all, I <i>do</i> agree with the "No Credit for mines, welder, knife, turret kills", I must say that the "No credit for kills in groups of 2 or when alone" part kind of bothers me, seems newbies would be at a disadvantage, groups of two are not necessarily bad for the team, and sometimes it is even necessary for a marine whos squadmates die, to get back to base safely. Are you going to not reward him for his bravery and skill for returning to base?
The "Give negative credit for..."
The first part here I agree with, people pestering you for good guns and then dying are not being a productive use of res, but the "punish rambos" thing could also be seen discouraging newbies.
Situation: A team of marines walks into Viaduct hive and neglects to check the ceiling, some skulks fall upon them and all humans are killed.
Is the last one of that marine team to die any more punishable than the rest? I don't think so, however, he is getting -1 points!
And again, if he manages to survive, he gets no points for taking out the horde of skulks, even after his team is dead (it is likely.) And if he dies later on, he gets -1 point!!!
So wait: We've got a marine that killed 3 or four skulks and got nothing, tried to return to base or fulfill orders and then -1 point! That's hardly fair.
<b>What I'd rather see is:</b>
Kills for structures, come on, how many times have you not been rewarded for taking out a well guarded marine installment on your own?
/me raises hand.
It's a rather simple idea, but I believe it to be important.
For more information on my (old) idea for this, check out <a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=32798&st=45' target='_blank'>my post</a> that I made earlier (scroll down for my post/solution.)
Thanks.
Remember this is just a concept. I'm looking to discuss ideas to address this issue not really debate a single idea. My concept is just that, a concept. It's not a suggestion but moreso something to encourage discussion on the issue I want to address, that being encouraging marine team work on public servers.
Regards,
Savant
That little sycophantic wafle aside, I don't really see how that kind of a change would work. I'd love to see rewards for objectives instead of frags, but I don't really see that this way of doing thins would be much good. You'll end up with people being reluctant to go on solo missions no matter how important they are, for example.
However, I don't really see how you can get a fair way of awarding people for completion of objectives. If you give points to someone for building a structure, what about the people who were covering him while he did that? If you get points for taking out an enemy RT, what about the person who shot the skulk that would have killed him if he was alone? One way to get around it would be for the commander to give points to his squad as he sees fit, but that's (a) so abusable it's pointless and (b) one more thing for the comm to worry about and for his squad to whine about - "WTH COMM I SHOT 2 SKULKS THEN AND A GORGE!! GIVE MORE POINTS!1" "OMG COMM I DID MORE THAN HIM - WHY DOES HE GET THE POINTS?"
Any way you try to do it people will be left out.
If the marine consistantly runs off and is useless, allow the comm to do something mildly unpleasant to him.
Examples:
That marine takes longer to spawn
or cant pick up good guns, equipment
or has to wear a hat that sais "Look at me, I am a n00b"
or has in big red flashing letters on his screen "Listen to the comm, teamwork is good"
or maby if we REALLY want them to listen a lightning bolt the comm can shoot at people to kill them (Marines only)
i do not really check my score often or care for it so what if i get minus or plus for doing stuff? i try to help my team out to the best of my skill.Although i ain't for it, your plan can be adjusted for the lone marine get punishment situation, it isn't a fix for all but it fixes some things.
-let killed marines count as team(but wont get score) for as long as their corpse remains
here are some other suggestions from me for teamwork(iam not saying i know better or so, i just thought of these things when typing this)
- perhaps you can give the comm option to mark the 'rine as a certain class(but no profile changes such as weapons or HP/AP) for instance, a 'rine can be maked as scout(and in tandem with your idea he won't get penalized for being alone) handyman('rine has the duty of welding things) support(duty of cover) and assault(must charge in) or builder maybe(builder can see al unbuild structures maybe as a waypoint) other marines will be able to see which job he is assigned too by just looking at them(maybe helmet change or small markings or majke it appear under their name).
-in order to prevent marines from nabbing weapons from the 'rine you actually wanted to give it too or peeps who don't listen to comm, you can disallow a 'rine to pick up a kind of weapon/hardware(this can also be used with the assigment thing i suggested earlyer) or perhaps even abandon a 'rine and leave him to his fate, they will not benefit from waypoints or any equipment the comm gives(there can be done a poll by a other marine to allow him back and the comm can undo this action immediatly if he thinks he has redeemed himself).
-?parky
Right now, absolute trust of the commander is a marine requirement. While this is well and good for clans and vets, this is inherently problematic for public servers:
1. If the commander doesn't actively group people, people will not reliably group.
2. If the commander doesn't establish rally and strike points, people will try their best to rambo their way to victory.
3. If the commander doesn't actively task people, people will start to wander off, on, uh, "scouting missions."
4. If people do not trust the commander, it's really pretty much the same as the commander doing nothing.
To use an analogy, we all know, statistically, it's safer to fly than to drive. But subjectively, driving feels safer, because at least we're in control. Likewise, while players know it's best to trust the comm, that's hard to do when the comm does not communicate, does not take control of the game, or makes decisions that seem nonsensical or arbitrary.
To correct this, I'd suggest the following general changes:
1. Allow the commander to delegate some elements of plan implementation (waypointing, group membership, timing) to people who are actually on the ground, playing the game.
2. Give players some visual cue to indicate what group they are in, where their group leaders/goals are, which other players are in the group, and how many group members are in the immediate vicinity.
3. Allow players to start their own groups, and join other groups.
These three things accomplish the following goals:
1. Players are more likely to implicitly trust the group leader, since the leader will be right there fighting with them. This approach has been core to military morale-boosting since antiquity.
2. Instead of one player (the comm) keeping track of everyone, each group will keep track of their own members. Ramboing will be harder when the other three members of your group are asking you to quit forking around and come help them.
3. Since pub players are mostly strangers, the best structure for organizing them may not be immediately apparent. If you give them the tools, they will self-organize. This process needs to be dynamic, and cannot be constrained by manual intervention on the part of the commander.
There are many methods that could be used to promote teamwork on pubs. However, these rewards should not be substantial, meaning that a group of 5 marines would not be impossible to kill. The rewards would have to be something small, something like reducing the spread of the team's weapons, maybe boosting the armor for the entire group, granting a small boost of health, or health regeneration. There are many more ways i could think of doing this, however, the hard part is finding something that doesn't PENALIZE other players from not hanging around in groups all the time, and of course, not making a squad of marines invincible just because they hang around in a group.
While a scoring system based on teamwork would be a nice addition, i don't think the hardcore fraggers would pay too much attention to it, the way i think it would turn out, would be that the players who usually care about their individual scores would just find other ways of measuring individual skill, leading us back into the problem.
As i said, there are a lot of ways this could be solved, i am merely stating a couple of them. However, if you want to see a real playable example of this kind of system, look at other mods, look at some of the newer games on the market. While i'm not saying their specific ways of promoting teamwork should be implemented, they do get the job done, and do it well, so a system similar to theirs would be a surefire way of promoting the team spirit.
Some of the games (and mods) i think promote teamwork:
<b>Enemy Territory</b> - (The new RTCW standalone free game) -
Promotes teamwork through a class/experience system. Medics who heal their teammates get experience for doing so, the exp points they get go towards the particular skill they used. If a medic just goes around healing teammates, he gets exp. points in 1st aid, with each level giving him different new skills/traits. for example, one of the levels just makes him recharge his "power" bar faster, allowing him to give out more health to his team. Another level allows him to revive his teammates with full health, and yet another one allows him to carry more ammo(they start out with minimal ammo, barely enough to kill 1 person, then they have to ask for more ammo from a "Field ops" a class that can hand out ammo). Each class can then use their skills to help the team, each of them making the player want to help their team by using them, but each skill not being so incredibly good that the other players don't stand a chance against them.
<b>Frontline Force</b> - HL mod -
Players moving in groups get a small bonus in accuracy, the more people around you, the more "morale" you have. Encourages players to move in groups in order to be more effective.
I can't remember any more games right now, but i promise that if i recall any other games that promote good teamplay without penalties, i will post them here.
Comments, ideas?
if it wasnt for the comedy recoil i would say FLF is the best team game in existence. if only we could nick some of that coding for NS ...
If the game does not adjust to fit a bad community, then the community leaves. No community = no game.
Some people blatently don't listen. That's when you do this:
<!--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-->Or...give a 'defend target' waypoint on to the marine...the target being himself! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now all we would need is an 8 armed multitasking comm to be able to pull all of it off.
Good player would "reasearch" this aura and they might teamup with "newbies" to help them fight a stronger horde of alien. You just have to cleary explain that when you have the icon of the aura showing on HUD you gain benefit from it so "newbies" would help good players build structures etc...
BTW thanks for posting this in general forum so we can reply and also not ALL pubs server aren't organised. Voicecom is a strong "weapon" and I mean it the ability to yell at your team when your Comm or to tell a team to follow you... I think NS is the game with the best teamplay ive seen in ages for pubs followed by TFC with the map Hunted.
Perhaps a system where each marine has a rank, instead of a tally of kills and deaths, where a player can be 'promoted' by a combination of personal merit, votes by other marines, or by the commander.
That way you could establish a form of 'chain of command' where experienced players, or players with leadership skills can be promoted, and used to co-ordinate the team effort. This could be used to help the comm with deciding who to hand weapons to etc.
I like NS's rankless system for Marines.
If the marine consistantly runs off and is useless, allow the comm to do something mildly unpleasant to him.
Examples:
That marine takes longer to spawn
or cant pick up good guns, equipment
or has to wear a hat that sais "Look at me, I am a n00b"
or has in big red flashing letters on his screen "Listen to the comm, teamwork is good"
or maby if we REALLY want them to listen a lightning bolt the comm can shoot at people to kill them (Marines only) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That sounds like S&I's (The mod) solution to people that don't play the way they want. I freaking hated that. Where if you kept killing the enemies scientists, kept blowing yourself up, tried to use banned words like LAG or LPB, you got punished. Thats only going to drive players away.
There will always be rambos. Thats why I play aliens. I automatically assume everyone else on my team is a drooling moron and would like to stand some chance on my own rather than be slaughted b/c no one understands ONE BUILDS THE RT THE OTHERS COVER HIM etc.
In your proposed system, however, the 10 points could mean a lot of things, and thus, comparison among other teammates would become useless. People would then stop paying attention to the whole thing, which means that the demotivators (ie. lose points for rambo etc..) would no longer work. People wouldn't care if they had -100, because to them, it really doesn't mean anything anymore.
First of all, <b>make marines more specialized</b>. Right now, marines all play, for most of the game, with LMG's, which are efficient alien killers in their own right. Because the LMG is so powerful, and doesn't require much help to use efficiently, marines really don't feel the need to move in groups. In fact, all of the guns in the marine armory, save the grenade launcher, really gives you a sense of confidence in your ability to defend yourself. I really think this confidence should be taken away almost completely by giving each gun more distinct strengths and weaknesses.
Let's look at the aliens, for example. As a fade, you feel powerful. But when you come across a turret farm and a phase gate with HA defenders ready to jump through, you know there isn't a whole lot you can do by yourself. But if you coordinate an attack with a lerk, and other fades, you can wipe out the entire minibase with marines knowing none the wiser. Same thing goes for a lerk. Mr. Lerk sits in a doorway, sniping people as they try to come out of a marine minibase. Suddenly, grenade spam starts filling the doorway. The lerk knows he can't survive the blast alone and stil be able to kill the grenade spammer, but if a fade pops in with blink, the grenade launcher will die and Mr. Lerk can continue spiking to his heart's content. That's why, in most servers, whenever you see a fade, a lerk's not to far behind. The two just gravitate toward each other. Marines, on the other hand, don't need this kind of teamwork. In fact, you can have one lone marine sneak up a phase, then have the entire team jump into the fray, get a siege up, and win.
My suggestion involves a few things from both sides: one, make lerks cheap. Seriously, these guys should never really be unavailable to any alien player in any game, ever. Second, make shotguns cheap. Like, 4 res cheap.
Now, here's what you do. You take the LMG, and you reduce it's clip size - maybe to 30 bullets. The shotgun, meanwhile, you leave the same - EXCEPT it's spread is even larger than it is now (it could be weakened a tad as well), so unless you have an alien in your face you aren't hurting anything. Meanwhile, the skulk remains as effective a melee character as ever, and lerks become the ultimate sniping machines with their spikes. What you'll end up with is this: LMG's deal with aliens at long range, shotguns deal with aliens at short range.
Now, the standard issue marine LMG'er has two options. Because of his now VERY easily exhausted clip, he can either a) stick with other LMG'ers - more guns equals more dead aliens before a reload, or b) stick with a shotgunner, who can deal with the standard skulk quite easily. If the LMG'er doesn't do either of these things and goes it alone, he's going to die to a skulk. Meanwhile, the shotgunner has to stick with an LMG'er to have a decent shot at survival. If he doesn't, chances are he's going to run into a lerk that stays out of his gun's range and snipes him from the end of a long tunnel. If the aliens have too many skulks on their team, the marines will own them with a squad of shotgunners. If the aliens have too many lerks on their team, the marines will own them with LMG's. If the marines have too many LMG's on their team, or rambo too much, they'll get owned by packs of skulks. If the marines have too many shotguns on their team, they'll get owned by lerks. Whichever team has the best combination of specialized units, and who works together the best, will probably win.
That should help promote teamwork in the beginning of the game - though the HMG is still a tad bit too powerful in the late game. <i>Maybe</i>, to make grenade launchers useful, offense towers can have a random chance of emitting umbra (like the hive). So HMG marines can still aliens to their heart's content, but when they come across a WOL, they'll either need a siege or a grenade launcher to take it down. Because right now, with the HMG's clip size and damage, structures can go down at the snap of a finger and grenades aren't really necessary.
TheoryCraft : trying to find a solution that is too complicated to implement or isn't really related to subject...
Actually, it would be a lot easier than you are suggesting. Especially if you compare alien hives to tiers, and then various marine weapons as various 'tiers' as well. Then you have certain marine weapons being the counter to increasing alien evolutions.
<!--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-->And remember that the goal is to make the marine work in squad/team and pubs, not give the marines more weaps to whipe aliens.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They don't need new weapons, just make the existing weapons more useful and have a more definite niche.
<!--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 only thing that would help squad play would be to give a bonus to grouped marines that hold togheter other than that its just TheoryCraft...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, because psychology plays there. If you HAVE to be with mixed units to win (like aliens) then they will stay together more. A score is a carrot, winning if you don't is a much more powerful motivation.