Hrm. I was hoping for more of a "tactical" combat mode, with a larger influence on attacking and advancing and not defensive (and where the commander takes more of a "battle commander" role). Like an "infiltration" mode where you do away with buildings and have to achieve a certain objective using the squad-tactics that we know and love in regular NS, but see rarely. That is, advancing in groups, checking vents, leapfrogging, holding areas, ambushes, etc. Think of when the colonial marines first enter the terraformer in Aliens, and they are constantly being given orders by the commander in the APC.
Instead it seems more like a mindless DM. I'm not really dissing DM, but I just can't see it in NS... mainly because I have no idea how it would tie in to the storyline. It's just way too unrealistic.
CplDavisI hunt the arctic SnonosJoin Date: 2003-01-09Member: 12097Members
Flayra I see you in here lol.
Please give us some tasty feedback <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
The UT dominiation idea seems to be pretty popular, what are your opinions on that and some of the other ideas?
<b><u><i>Quick Disclaimer: This is not completly hashed out. That said...</i></u></b>
Here is how I think it could work.
<b>Kahraa</b> You start as a basic skulk. As you kill each marine, you gain 4 points. Each level costs 10, 20, and then 30 points. Every time you die, you lose 2 points. This will act as an incentive to play the game and keep it moving, while still keeping the game so that Kahraa can act independantly.
When you upgrade, you can choose 1 chamber to upgrade. You automatically get the next level of weapon. Optionally, you can maintain the 3 hive system, only now it's a "MotherHive" with 3 segments. Only a gorge at level 2 can build a second hive, and a gorge at level 3 can build the thrid hive. This will keep players switching to gorge. It will also force new players to adapt, which is what NS is all about.
Under this system, you start at level 0. The maximum level is 7. Each alien would start with 25 resources, and can choose to go gorge (who can build offence chambers, but no DC, MC, or SC). Gorging, due to the regional conditions (a crashed planet, coupled with a weak hive (that hovars) or something) cost 20 res.
<b>Marines</b> Marines work as a group, as always, And it is important to emphisize this. Marines get a pooled resource system, and start with 50 resrouces. The levels are done for the entire team, however every move is voted on. Non-votes are not counted, and even votes are in favour for whatever move happens. This refers to a few "team" upgrades, such as technology (do we get Jetpacks? Heavy armour? Should we concentrait on shotguns?). This vote is initialized by any player, and will only start if a) it's not researched yet and b) if the team has the resources. 2 votes cannot happen within 1 minute of each other, and everyone gets a status meter on the upgrade, which sits at the bottom of their HUD.
When a marine kills an alien, they are awarded 4 resources, and every 25 seconds, the team gets 4 resources, Personal Resources are used to purchase personal upgrades. If they throw their weapon, the weapon is emptied (optionally, it could self destruct - we don't want to risk civillians obtaining this technology, nor risk pirates stealing it from the field). Personal upgrades are guns, mines, and armour. They are not respawned, and so it requires a player to develop skill in using those items to their fullest. Marines are not docked resources for dying (they lost their tools already).
<b>The NS Universe</b> Why do the marine's weapons blow up? Why does it cost so much to change? Previously, we only played on ships that were under attack by the mysterious alien menace, however now we find ourselves crash landed on a planetoid, because that moron Henderson (sorry sir!) tripped on the wrong navigation instrument, sending it reeling into the planetary surface. The Command Chair was damaged, leaving us with Damaged Infintry portals. Luckily, we got a dropship on the way, and we managed to juryrig Cargo Portals (Infintry portals are the compact, experimental version).
With a damaged craft, the Kahraa are left with a weakened hive, so we are less likely to see the same groups of aliens. Unfortunatly, we bailed before we hit the ground, as we thought that the Hive would go down as a result of the crash. Even upclose, the damn things are pretty sturdy, that's for sure.
Hopefully a dropship arrives in the next 15 minutes. Otherwise, we are going to get overwhelmed. Even now, I get this odd feeling that I'm being watc.....
Well, that's my idea. Take what you will, and recycle the rest <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--farcry+Sep 17 2003, 04:45 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (farcry @ Sep 17 2003, 04:45 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin---Driftwood-+Sep 17 2003, 04:26 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (-Driftwood- @ Sep 17 2003, 04:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I like it. It doesn't step on normal NS's turf too much and provides an alternative gameplay for different players and different moods. There are times when the normal NS feels like too much and you would just prefer doing some quick fighting. Naturally, the hardcore fans detest the idea, but that's to be expected - too much change and too much like CS. However, I don't think they are the ones this new gameplay mode is targeted at so I don't see a problem with them not liking it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You are essentialy agreeing that this will divide the NS community into 2...
What i would like to see, is if this <b>must</b> happen, then please make it another mod... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I've just woken up (New record: 5:47pm) and can't really think of anything useful to say.
But you're right here FarCry, and the 95%/5% <b>will</b> become a reality, and NS classic, just like CS assault will die, slowly until it's played on nothing more than 2 or 3 servers.
This could be somewhere back there(18 pages of replys), but still: A simple "deathmatch" like this could have a serverside option to use the same teams(marines vs marine, aliens vs aliens). Testing it with the combat mode would be some sort of public beta testing.
NS:C would be much more like firearms than CS (both HL mods). In firearms you get 1 skill for every 10 kills (improve accuracy, unlock gun functions like GL launcher on M-16, etc.) and a set (unchanging) number of points to select your equipment. Now, with all these insentives for team work in firearms, unless a clan has stacked one team, its always rambo vs. rambo and really borring after you learn the game. I used to love CS, but I hate it now because anyone who still plays it is either a noob or a cheater, I really don't think those are the people the NS community wants 2 attract. That being said, although on paper NS:C looks very appealing, in practice I think it would just make ballancing impossible (without ballancing it seperate from regular NS, making it useless to train noobies). I read the 1st 2 pages of this topic and so far nobody has said they are really excited about this mod. I would put it on the back burner and refine NS 2.1 as much as possible, and then revisit the DM consept.
Side note: Marines should keep upgrades to their armour and gun damage, and motion tracking (like 2.0), but loose guns (like shotties) when they die, this will give aleins a chance and is more like NS 2.0.
I like the idea of team wide upgrades, there could be a vote for what upgrade to choose once the team has enough points.
Since the maps would have no objectives, skulks could just sit on the floor cloaked and wait for hepless marines to walk into biting range.
<!--QuoteBegin--Sgt_Astro+Sep 17 2003, 11:01 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sgt_Astro @ Sep 17 2003, 11:01 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I like the idea of team wide upgrades, there could be a vote for what upgrade to choose once the team has enough points. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It would be a great way to learn the basics of commanding and would keep NS NS if the commander mode was still there.
Unless there is 100 very good co_maps. Classic will never die. A lot of you have said n00bs are lazy. Why do you assume that they will move servers each time it get to a classic map. TFC has different modes and you don't see 2fort not being played anymore.
Custom maps are a break in normal play. co will be like that ... a fun diversion. PLZ PLZ read the mapping guidelines the tell you a lot about the play. <a href='http://www.natural-selection.org/Mapping_Guidelines.html#Appendix_C__Natural_Selection__Combat' target='_blank'>GUIDELINES HERE</a>
<!--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 it turns out that Combat does indeed get more popular than Classic, then so be it. Classic dies and Combat takes over. Combat was obviously better than Classic in that case, and everything went exactly like it should. There's evolution at its finest for you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To an extent I agree; however, easier isn't always better. Complexity, and varying strats/tatics are what gives a game staying power. Making an NS "dm" mode will only make the game more appealing to the type of person that doesn't want to learn about the depth of the game. Since we all know that morons outweigh serious gamers of all types, NS:C will appear to be more popular because all the morons (not calling anyone that likes the idea a moron here) will flock to it to "sh0tzorz teh aleeuns". The complexity is what makes NS and keeps the idiots away. Do you really want to play with people that can't even be bothered to understand the game they are playing and only want to see different weapons and gibs?
If you want the absolute best deathmatch style play go to the source of it. Where team deathmatch first debut'ed. Quake 1.
Quake 1 is by far the fastest paced game you can play. And if you think it is just "mindless" shooting and pointing and clicking you have most likely never gone 100-0 on maps. Newer deathmatches are completely dumbed down because the person that runs the game is a completely dumbed down player. Go to any UT 2003 server, I guarentee you 95% of them have weapons stay. Just like Quake3. Keeping weaposn always spawned is the #1 way to make DM a shootfest.
Quake 1 has a thing called "practice mode". Everyone spawns with 200 health 200 red armor, all weapons and unlimited ammo. That is mindless shooting to improve your aim. But when it gets right down to it that will only help you in one fight, not in 100 consecutive fights. That is where *LEVEL CONTROL* comes into play.
DM 2, 3, 4, 6 are the most played quake1 maps, and I can go 100-0 on all of them. It's called level control. You think of level control as camping the rocket launcher. I guarentee if you try that you wont stand a chance of winning a DM match. Level control is about controlling the armor, weapons, ammo, quad, pent, invis, 100 health, all at the same time. 1v1 play is exactly the same as DM. If you don't control the level you'l lose. And if you think controlling the level is mindless....Try controlling DM6. Its probably the easiest level to get "control" on. But you still have to time the weapons (30 secconds), red armor (20 secconds), 100 health (30 secconds after the person goes below 100), Ammo (20 secconds). Luckily the Pent ( 5 minutes ), Quad (1 minute), and invis (5 minutes) aren't in that level.
When I play I constantly am counting up to 30. You gotta keep running a loop thats about 25 secconds long and you get 5 secconds to dix around with the other guy and chase him out of your path. As long as you keep up the control and timings you will win the match. I don't have to count in NS, or keep tabs on 7 or 8 item spawns at once. All I have to do in NS is be aware of where the opponent is...You have to do that in Quake too.
Anyways, time to talk to my GF.
DM isn't mindless, if you think it is then you most likely would lose against any DM player with a mind.
Anyways, time to talk to my GF. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Does anyone else see anything wrong with this? <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
Do it, sometimes you just feel like playing some good old deathmatch without all that strategy <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Just throwing my thoughts into the mix going on here but, NS: C will probably fix the one thing that many people arnt satisfied with about NS atm, the speed. Flay origionaly tried to get the NS 2.0 time per round down to 11 minutes, which ended up making NS far to fast, it almost felt like CS with different weapons pretty much(at least IMO). Now with NS: C flay can give the CS and DM style players a more action based game, and the regular NS players a good LONG NS game, in other words, normal NS wouldn't have to be 11 minutes long then, and could stretch back out to being long and epic.
Ok, I've seen several arguments saying that DM is not mindless, and therefore NSC will not be mindless. The person then gives an example of DM at the very very top level of gameplay: pro clan vs pro clan, or top 10 player vs top 10 player. At that level of play, <b>no</b>, DM is not mindless and it requires skill, strategy, and tactics. However, for every one DMer like that, there are untold thousands of mindless fraggers who use none of those skills.
Regarding objective discussion, good luck. These forums are populated *only* by people who play NS, and care enough about it to post in the forums. You are not going to have any unbiased opinions here. So what shall we fall back on? Well, probably the reason we're all here wringing eachother's necks: what is best for NS?
I never said "don't make it" or "it will suck". I was commenting on the dumbing down of things to make them more appealing. Something I am vehemently against. I really don't think a majority of people play NS soley to kill the other team. NS:C, IMHO, might look like it will be "more popular" because people that can't wrap their brains around an FPS game where one's ability to kill isn't the central factor, will flock to it as a "new skinned DM". I am all for more play modes, just not simple DM, never liked it, never will. Seraphy's idea or a domination mode or something similar with a TEAM objective would be awesome, like the trigger maps in Starcraft.
I have no problem with NS Combat. It will make NS bigger than ever. The NS community will become more diversified and everyone will get what they want. As long as the NS team is able to develop NS and NSC at a time its just going to be beautiful. People that need target practice will have NSC, everyone else can continue playing NS. Also NSC will be more likely to teach new people about NS, how to play as a team, and get some skill. Afterwards they can experience the complexity of NS and not be a pain in the ****.
Okay. Everyone on these forums has proven surprisingly mature and inventive. I've taken ideas from everyone's posts and combined them with my own idea of how NS:C could work out and used them to create this mini-design document. This covers how I think experience, points, and the like should work for the Marine side (roughly)...Please feel free to comment as harshly as you wish! Build on my ideas, as well. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
First of all, think of each 'point' as a level gained by earning experience. One gains experience according to how much damage he has caused to enemies with an attack. If friendly fire is on, and a player detonates an explosive, the experience gained by that explosive attack is equal to (damage caused to enemies) - 1/2(damage caused to friendlies), never dropping below zero or rising above than the max HP of the enemie(s) killed. Whether or not armor will count for damage caused is an issue to be decided.
Here's an example: UberNoob has mines and places them all over the Marine spawn area. A skulk rushes in later and sets off 3 mines, killing himself and two other marines. While the mine did 75 damage to a skulk, it also did a total of 200 damage to Marines, therefor UberNoob gets no experience for that kill.
Here's another example: Marine A and Marine B open up on a skulk with their LMGs, both hitting at least once. Marine B gets credit for the kill, even though he only hit the skulk with 2 rounds. Fortunately, Marine A got most of the points for that kill, since he did 62 or so health damage to the skulk.
Also, I think it's important not to neglect medics and team-players. If someone spends the points to get a welder and risks their life using it to heal their teammates, reward them. (Armor points healed)/4 = Experience gained for welding teammates.
Additionally, although I don't know how well the HL engine would handle it, I'd love to see players rewarded additionally for killing an enemy that was attacking his teammate. e.g. If the enemy to which a player dealt damage has previously caused damage to a teammate within the last 10 seconds, multiply experience gains by 5%...or something like that. Encourages players to stick together for even more reasons.
Now that scoring has been established, let's establish how the experience leads to spendable points.
..and so on. In this way, Marines are required to earn more experience for each successive level, making higher-end upgrades harder to obtain than low-level ones. If the marine dies, we won't remove his points, but rather, only whatever experience he has earned between level A and level B. So if you have 475 experience and die, you'll drop to 460 (4 points in reserve)
Now, rather than allowing a marine to buy a shotgun and thereafter continually spawn with it, we'll treat equipment as a bit more of a delicacy. If you die with equipment, you lose it. However, we'll allow the Marines to acquire upgrades of a personal nature which remain with them after death. Here's a possible set of equipment and upgrades for marines:
Human Upgrades--These Remain after Death (1st Level 1pt, 2nd Level 3pts, 3rd Level 5pts)
Improved Accuracy (3 Levels) Improved Reload Speed (3 Levels) Increased Ammo Reserve (3 Levels) Increased Move Speed (3 Levels) Increased Max Health (3 Levels)
Human Purchases--These are LOST at death
LMG, Pistol, Knife (0) Full Load of Ammo (1) 2 Health Kits (1) Welder (2) Mines (3) Shotgun (5) Grenade Launcher (7) Heavy MG (9) Jetpack (10) Heavy Armor (12) Some New Weap? (15)
Also, since Aliens can cloak and we won't have an observatory, allow marines for some small number of points (1-3) to deploy a 1-time sensor ping from their present location.
And, since I've decided to give health kits 2 at a time, make it so that any health kits a player deploys but doesn't use can be picked up by other friendlies, and any health restored by those kits is fed to the player as experience (to help recoup the wasted experience)
This has been my lengthy marine-side pre-alpha design doc. I hope everyone enjoys it and benefits from the potential ideas contained herein ;P
<3 the <!--emo&::gorge::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/pudgy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pudgy.gif'><!--endemo-->
I do believe every single one of the 'ideas' on how to make NS:C have a working scoreboard is worthless, simply because I'm sure Flay already has one. He wouldn't have told us about a new concept had he not made it in the first place.
Having read through the inital post by flayra and the subsequent flames, ideas, counter flames and occasional flashes of genius I have no problems running this on one of my servers. Indeed, NS server admins have been modding the gameplay for months and there was no outcry on the forums. I see no reason against this paticular game mode (It reminds me of Warcraft/Superhero mods for Cstrike actually). In the end its up to the players if this is sucessful, if you don't use the servers they will be taken down. (DoD v1's para mode for example... how many servers run para maps only now? not many <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->)
Hopefully NS:C will bring a much need boost to the amount of players playing this game. It will help introduce the new players into the game, by gradually introducing them to the new lifeforms and to familiarize them with the weapons of both sides. NS is a difficult game to learn, and needs something like this to help people get into the game. It's difficult to jump into a game with as much depth as this and learn, especially when there are people on every server that'll say "SUYF NOOB READ THE MANUAL!!1".
you know, this could actually reduce ramboing in ns by giving it a deathmatch mode, you place a distinction between ns and cs then a cs'r comes along and says "i like this ns thing, but i like cs too, im going to play ns:c" then "ns:c is a lot of fun, let's see what this ns:classic is about" and hopefully "since ns:c was a deathmatch this probably isn't, so i won't try to play it like one"
thats the theory, anyways.
Murphy's Law of Idiot-Proofing: Once something is completely, fully, utterly, undeniably idiot-proofed ... a moron comes along
<!--QuoteBegin--NoImagination+Sep 17 2003, 10:58 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NoImagination @ Sep 17 2003, 10:58 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Torak, I specifically said that I didn't want to see that kind of arguments... :/<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Too bad. It's a valid argument, and one you can't dismiss simply by saying you don't want to see it.
<!--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-->Here is the deal: more players playing a game = better (more fun) game or better PR. Since NS Combat/Classic is one game, the publicity is the same, and can therefore be neglected. So, the only factor left is how much fun the game is (and since a game is designed to be fun, more fun = better game).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Going by this logic, McDonald's is better than the Olive Garden, which is better than Rocco's of New York. The sunday funnies are better than Spider-man which is better than Shakespeare.
Here's what's being said that you do not seem to understand: More Popular != Better. More Popular == More Popular. That's it. Were we to run with your populist viewpoint in everything we would lose significant opportunities for truly creative endeavours, as our time would be better spent making something for the lowest common denominator. Unfortunately, the things that the lowest common denominator enjoy often stem from things that were created for niche markets.
<!--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-->Now, you may or may not have a point about "morons" and "serious gamers" and all that, but fact still remains: if a game is played more than another, the game serve its purpose better than the other (once again, ignoring publicity), and more people are able to enjoy the game. You can't possibly disagree with that (unless of course you believe that a game should be educational in some way).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you're saying Pac-man is a better game than Half Life? That Tetris is a better game than Half-Life 2 will be? Well hell, we should stop bothering putting forward all this effort for these games that aren't as good and just keep pumping out more pac-man clones. You can't simply ignore qualitative differences for quantitative ones.
<!--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-->So it's just a matter of simple math. 2 happy players > 1 happy player. Being a utilitarian, I'd say that happiness * 2 is better than happiness* 1 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're assuming that 1. All the NS:C players will be happy. There are a range of emotions that are somewhat positive. These range from okay to ambivalent. 2. None of the NS vanilla players will be made unhappy because they no longer can find decently full vanilla.
Are a bunch of new NS:C players who come from counterstrike and who think that NS:C is just okay better than the ones who feel that they've lost out because they can't find full servers to play NS:vanilla?
<!--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-->Now, you have to ask yourself: would a new game mode be good/bad, and would it be good/bad for me? If it's bad, then you're safe. Classic will survive and it will be all good for you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, good except for the wasted time and effort put forth in creating a "bad" game mode.
<!--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 it's good, you have a problem because Classic will suffer. But, does the new mode not grant more players more happiness (due to the fact that it would have to be more popular to be good, and thus more players would play it compared to Classic)? So your only argument against it really is "but *I* don't want to have a new mode because *I* will have less fun". I'm sure loads of valid arguments can be used to prove this, but fact remains that whatever your arguments are, it all boils down to egoism. Egoism is subjective, and therefore, has no place in an objective discussion (which I assume this is). Hence, the arguments are irrelevant. Q.E.D.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, it has nothing to do with egoism, because I figure I'll enjoy either one. Since this therefore has nothing to do with what *I* want, my concerns are not egoism, and are therefore valid. My concerns are for the number of NS:vanilla players who may be made unhappy by the changes NS:C might bring.
<!--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-->That being said, I doubt Classic would die with Combat implemented. Weakened, yes, but the playerbase is large enough for both. Online gaming is a *huge* community, and another gamemode will not make that much of a difference to be honest. But you might want to think of it this way: if Combat attract the "morons" who enjoy that kind of game, would NS Classic not get less "morons"? Considering the "morons" are a rather big factor in the game and capable of creating imbalance, stalemates and general boredom (they have plenty of help from the game however, have no doubt about that), how can you claim with 100% certainty that NS Classic would be die or even get worse. It might even *improve*...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I actually agree with this. But it still does not give you the right to classify an entire set of arguments as invalid simply because you see them as stemming from egoism. That's simply arrogance.
<!--QuoteBegin--Kwil+Sep 17 2003, 05:30 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Kwil @ Sep 17 2003, 05:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> So you're saying Pac-man is a better game than Half Life? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> No, but Ms. Pac Man is.
<!--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-->I do believe every single one of the 'ideas' on how to make NS:C have a working scoreboard is worthless, simply because I'm sure Flay already has one. He wouldn't have told us about a new concept had he not made it in the first place.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No doubt he's already created parts of NS:C to varying degrees. However he's obviously using the forum as a way to generate additional ideas for the game and generate some hype for it. I'm not exactly sure what your point is - that people's ideas aren't helpful? It's pretty obvious to me that even if Flay doesn't take any of the individually suggested ideas, he'll at least see his problems from more than one angle when designing the game.
And even if he doesn't intend to use anybody's ideas, that doesn't stop people from stating their opinion on what would be the best way for NS:C to be made. Besides, this provides people a way to say "I told you so" a few months down the line if NS:C turns into a huge Shotgun orgy. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> If holes in game design are found and plugged early in development, the end result will be much better.
Smart designers always welcome feedback, even if they have to sift through some feedback that's made by somewhat dense players. Throwing a huge mass of ideas at a good designer is a good thing - they'll be able to pick out the ones which are golden and discard the poor ideas.
<!--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--> I believe that it is the current community members that will dislike the mod, as it is the opposite of everything they (or most of us) play ns for. This will create a severe partion of the NS community: "Deathmatch" and "Classic". I think that very few people will come for classic ns if they are join NS community solely because of NS: C.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The key is that alot of current community members will like it, because it's an alternative means of entertainment when servers have only 6 players.
I think this is a great idea, sometimes you're in a quick rush to work or whatever, and just want to squeeze in some quick action, and not disappoint people by leaving suddenly.
If there are too many, though, there will be problems with none being played. "Dude, who wants nsc_pj2? It's Natural Selection: Combat, so boring, let's play nsctf_pj2!" I suppose one or two wouldn't be a problem, though.
Comments
Instead it seems more like a mindless DM. I'm not really dissing DM, but I just can't see it in NS... mainly because I have no idea how it would tie in to the storyline. It's just way too unrealistic.
Please give us some tasty feedback <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
The UT dominiation idea seems to be pretty popular, what are your opinions on that and some of the other ideas?
Here is how I think it could work.
<b>Kahraa</b>
You start as a basic skulk. As you kill each marine, you gain 4 points. Each level costs 10, 20, and then 30 points. Every time you die, you lose 2 points. This will act as an incentive to play the game and keep it moving, while still keeping the game so that Kahraa can act independantly.
When you upgrade, you can choose 1 chamber to upgrade. You automatically get the next level of weapon. Optionally, you can maintain the 3 hive system, only now it's a "MotherHive" with 3 segments. Only a gorge at level 2 can build a second hive, and a gorge at level 3 can build the thrid hive. This will keep players switching to gorge. It will also force new players to adapt, which is what NS is all about.
Under this system, you start at level 0. The maximum level is 7. Each alien would start with 25 resources, and can choose to go gorge (who can build offence chambers, but no DC, MC, or SC). Gorging, due to the regional conditions (a crashed planet, coupled with a weak hive (that hovars) or something) cost 20 res.
<b>Marines</b>
Marines work as a group, as always, And it is important to emphisize this. Marines get a pooled resource system, and start with 50 resrouces. The levels are done for the entire team, however every move is voted on. Non-votes are not counted, and even votes are in favour for whatever move happens. This refers to a few "team" upgrades, such as technology (do we get Jetpacks? Heavy armour? Should we concentrait on shotguns?). This vote is initialized by any player, and will only start if a) it's not researched yet and b) if the team has the resources. 2 votes cannot happen within 1 minute of each other, and everyone gets a status meter on the upgrade, which sits at the bottom of their HUD.
When a marine kills an alien, they are awarded 4 resources, and every 25 seconds, the team gets 4 resources, Personal Resources are used to purchase personal upgrades. If they throw their weapon, the weapon is emptied (optionally, it could self destruct - we don't want to risk civillians obtaining this technology, nor risk pirates stealing it from the field). Personal upgrades are guns, mines, and armour. They are not respawned, and so it requires a player to develop skill in using those items to their fullest. Marines are not docked resources for dying (they lost their tools already).
<b>The NS Universe</b>
Why do the marine's weapons blow up? Why does it cost so much to change? Previously, we only played on ships that were under attack by the mysterious alien menace, however now we find ourselves crash landed on a planetoid, because that moron Henderson (sorry sir!) tripped on the wrong navigation instrument, sending it reeling into the planetary surface. The Command Chair was damaged, leaving us with Damaged Infintry portals. Luckily, we got a dropship on the way, and we managed to juryrig Cargo Portals (Infintry portals are the compact, experimental version).
With a damaged craft, the Kahraa are left with a weakened hive, so we are less likely to see the same groups of aliens. Unfortunatly, we bailed before we hit the ground, as we thought that the Hive would go down as a result of the crash. Even upclose, the damn things are pretty sturdy, that's for sure.
Hopefully a dropship arrives in the next 15 minutes. Otherwise, we are going to get overwhelmed. Even now, I get this odd feeling that I'm being watc.....
Well, that's my idea. Take what you will, and recycle the rest <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
You are essentialy agreeing that this will divide the NS community into 2...
What i would like to see, is if this <b>must</b> happen, then please make it another mod... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've just woken up (New record: 5:47pm) and can't really think of anything useful to say.
But you're right here FarCry, and the 95%/5% <b>will</b> become a reality, and NS classic, just like CS assault will die, slowly until it's played on nothing more than 2 or 3 servers.
Although Seraphy's idea sounds more acceptable.
A simple "deathmatch" like this could have a serverside option to use the same teams(marines vs marine, aliens vs aliens). Testing it with the combat mode would be some sort of public beta testing.
edit: typo
Side note: Marines should keep upgrades to their armour and gun damage, and motion tracking (like 2.0), but loose guns (like shotties) when they die, this will give aleins a chance and is more like NS 2.0.
I like the idea of team wide upgrades, there could be a vote for what upgrade to choose once the team has enough points.
Since the maps would have no objectives, skulks could just sit on the floor cloaked and wait for hepless marines to walk into biting range.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
It would be a great way to learn the basics of commanding and would keep NS NS if the commander mode was still there.
Custom maps are a break in normal play. co will be like that ... a fun diversion. PLZ PLZ read the mapping guidelines the tell you a lot about the play. <a href='http://www.natural-selection.org/Mapping_Guidelines.html#Appendix_C__Natural_Selection__Combat' target='_blank'>GUIDELINES HERE</a>
There's evolution at its finest for you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To an extent I agree; however, easier isn't always better. Complexity, and varying strats/tatics are what gives a game staying power. Making an NS "dm" mode will only make the game more appealing to the type of person that doesn't want to learn about the depth of the game. Since we all know that morons outweigh serious gamers of all types, NS:C will appear to be more popular because all the morons (not calling anyone that likes the idea a moron here) will flock to it to "sh0tzorz teh aleeuns". The complexity is what makes NS and keeps the idiots away. Do you really want to play with people that can't even be bothered to understand the game they are playing and only want to see different weapons and gibs?
If you want the absolute best deathmatch style play go to the source of it. Where team deathmatch first debut'ed. Quake 1.
Quake 1 is by far the fastest paced game you can play. And if you think it is just "mindless" shooting and pointing and clicking you have most likely never gone 100-0 on maps. Newer deathmatches are completely dumbed down because the person that runs the game is a completely dumbed down player. Go to any UT 2003 server, I guarentee you 95% of them have weapons stay. Just like Quake3. Keeping weaposn always spawned is the #1 way to make DM a shootfest.
Quake 1 has a thing called "practice mode". Everyone spawns with 200 health 200 red armor, all weapons and unlimited ammo. That is mindless shooting to improve your aim. But when it gets right down to it that will only help you in one fight, not in 100 consecutive fights. That is where *LEVEL CONTROL* comes into play.
DM 2, 3, 4, 6 are the most played quake1 maps, and I can go 100-0 on all of them. It's called level control. You think of level control as camping the rocket launcher. I guarentee if you try that you wont stand a chance of winning a DM match. Level control is about controlling the armor, weapons, ammo, quad, pent, invis, 100 health, all at the same time. 1v1 play is exactly the same as DM. If you don't control the level you'l lose. And if you think controlling the level is mindless....Try controlling DM6. Its probably the easiest level to get "control" on. But you still have to time the weapons (30 secconds), red armor (20 secconds), 100 health (30 secconds after the person goes below 100), Ammo (20 secconds). Luckily the Pent ( 5 minutes ), Quad (1 minute), and invis (5 minutes) aren't in that level.
When I play I constantly am counting up to 30. You gotta keep running a loop thats about 25 secconds long and you get 5 secconds to dix around with the other guy and chase him out of your path. As long as you keep up the control and timings you will win the match. I don't have to count in NS, or keep tabs on 7 or 8 item spawns at once. All I have to do in NS is be aware of where the opponent is...You have to do that in Quake too.
Anyways, time to talk to my GF.
DM isn't mindless, if you think it is then you most likely would lose against any DM player with a mind.
Anyways, time to talk to my GF.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Does anyone else see anything wrong with this? <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
Regarding objective discussion, good luck. These forums are populated *only* by people who play NS, and care enough about it to post in the forums. You are not going to have any unbiased opinions here. So what shall we fall back on? Well, probably the reason we're all here wringing eachother's necks: what is best for NS?
I never said "don't make it" or "it will suck". I was commenting on the dumbing down of things to make them more appealing. Something I am vehemently against. I really don't think a majority of people play NS soley to kill the other team. NS:C, IMHO, might look like it will be "more popular" because people that can't wrap their brains around an FPS game where one's ability to kill isn't the central factor, will flock to it as a "new skinned DM". I am all for more play modes, just not simple DM, never liked it, never will. Seraphy's idea or a domination mode or something similar with a TEAM objective would be awesome, like the trigger maps in Starcraft.
Rock on NS !
Remeber to have faith in Flayra!
First of all, think of each 'point' as a level gained by earning experience. One gains experience according to how much damage he has caused to enemies with an attack. If friendly fire is on, and a player detonates an explosive, the experience gained by that explosive attack is equal to (damage caused to enemies) - 1/2(damage caused to friendlies), never dropping below zero or rising above than the max HP of the enemie(s) killed. Whether or not armor will count for damage caused is an issue to be decided.
Here's an example: UberNoob has mines and places them all over the Marine spawn area. A skulk rushes in later and sets off 3 mines, killing himself and two other marines. While the mine did 75 damage to a skulk, it also did a total of 200 damage to Marines, therefor UberNoob gets no experience for that kill.
Here's another example: Marine A and Marine B open up on a skulk with their LMGs, both hitting at least once. Marine B gets credit for the kill, even though he only hit the skulk with 2 rounds. Fortunately, Marine A got most of the points for that kill, since he did 62 or so health damage to the skulk.
Also, I think it's important not to neglect medics and team-players. If someone spends the points to get a welder and risks their life using it to heal their teammates, reward them. (Armor points healed)/4 = Experience gained for welding teammates.
Additionally, although I don't know how well the HL engine would handle it, I'd love to see players rewarded additionally for killing an enemy that was attacking his teammate. e.g. If the enemy to which a player dealt damage has previously caused damage to a teammate within the last 10 seconds, multiply experience gains by 5%...or something like that. Encourages players to stick together for even more reasons.
Now that scoring has been established, let's establish how the experience leads to spendable points.
Level 1: 100 points
Level 2: 220 points
Level 3: 340 points
Level 4: 460 points
Level 5: 580 points
Level 6: 700 points
..and so on. In this way, Marines are required to earn more experience for each successive level, making higher-end upgrades harder to obtain than low-level ones. If the marine dies, we won't remove his points, but rather, only whatever experience he has earned between level A and level B. So if you have 475 experience and die, you'll drop to 460 (4 points in reserve)
Now, rather than allowing a marine to buy a shotgun and thereafter continually spawn with it, we'll treat equipment as a bit more of a delicacy. If you die with equipment, you lose it. However, we'll allow the Marines to acquire upgrades of a personal nature which remain with them after death. Here's a possible set of equipment and upgrades for marines:
Human Upgrades--These Remain after Death
(1st Level 1pt, 2nd Level 3pts, 3rd Level 5pts)
Improved Accuracy (3 Levels)
Improved Reload Speed (3 Levels)
Increased Ammo Reserve (3 Levels)
Increased Move Speed (3 Levels)
Increased Max Health (3 Levels)
Human Purchases--These are LOST at death
LMG, Pistol, Knife (0)
Full Load of Ammo (1)
2 Health Kits (1)
Welder (2)
Mines (3)
Shotgun (5)
Grenade Launcher (7)
Heavy MG (9)
Jetpack (10)
Heavy Armor (12)
Some New Weap? (15)
Also, since Aliens can cloak and we won't have an observatory, allow marines for some small number of points (1-3) to deploy a 1-time sensor ping from their present location.
And, since I've decided to give health kits 2 at a time, make it so that any health kits a player deploys but doesn't use can be picked up by other friendlies, and any health restored by those kits is fed to the player as experience (to help recoup the wasted experience)
This has been my lengthy marine-side pre-alpha design doc. I hope everyone enjoys it and benefits from the potential ideas contained herein ;P
<3 the <!--emo&::gorge::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/pudgy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pudgy.gif'><!--endemo-->
by giving it a deathmatch mode, you place a distinction between ns and cs
then a cs'r comes along and says "i like this ns thing, but i like cs too, im going to play ns:c"
then "ns:c is a lot of fun, let's see what this ns:classic is about"
and hopefully "since ns:c was a deathmatch this probably isn't, so i won't try to play it like one"
thats the theory, anyways.
Murphy's Law of Idiot-Proofing:
Once something is completely, fully, utterly, undeniably idiot-proofed ... a moron comes along
Too bad. It's a valid argument, and one you can't dismiss simply by saying you don't want to see it.
<!--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-->Here is the deal: more players playing a game = better (more fun) game or better PR. Since NS Combat/Classic is one game, the publicity is the same, and can therefore be neglected. So, the only factor left is how much fun the game is (and since a game is designed to be fun, more fun = better game).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Going by this logic, McDonald's is better than the Olive Garden, which is better than Rocco's of New York. The sunday funnies are better than Spider-man which is better than Shakespeare.
Here's what's being said that you do not seem to understand: More Popular != Better. More Popular == More Popular. That's it. Were we to run with your populist viewpoint in everything we would lose significant opportunities for truly creative endeavours, as our time would be better spent making something for the lowest common denominator. Unfortunately, the things that the lowest common denominator enjoy often stem from things that were created for niche markets.
<!--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-->Now, you may or may not have a point about "morons" and "serious gamers" and all that, but fact still remains: if a game is played more than another, the game serve its purpose better than the other (once again, ignoring publicity), and more people are able to enjoy the game. You can't possibly disagree with that (unless of course you believe that a game should be educational in some way).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So you're saying Pac-man is a better game than Half Life? That Tetris is a better game than Half-Life 2 will be? Well hell, we should stop bothering putting forward all this effort for these games that aren't as good and just keep pumping out more pac-man clones.
You can't simply ignore qualitative differences for quantitative ones.
<!--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-->So it's just a matter of simple math. 2 happy players > 1 happy player. Being a utilitarian, I'd say that happiness * 2 is better than happiness* 1 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're assuming that
1. All the NS:C players will be happy. There are a range of emotions that are somewhat positive. These range from okay to ambivalent.
2. None of the NS vanilla players will be made unhappy because they no longer can find decently full vanilla.
Are a bunch of new NS:C players who come from counterstrike and who think that NS:C is just okay better than the ones who feel that they've lost out because they can't find full servers to play NS:vanilla?
<!--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-->Now, you have to ask yourself: would a new game mode be good/bad, and would it be good/bad for me? If it's bad, then you're safe. Classic will survive and it will be all good for you.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, good except for the wasted time and effort put forth in creating a "bad" game mode.
<!--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 it's good, you have a problem because Classic will suffer. But, does the new mode not grant more players more happiness (due to the fact that it would have to be more popular to be good, and thus more players would play it compared to Classic)? So your only argument against it really is "but *I* don't want to have a new mode because *I* will have less fun". I'm sure loads of valid arguments can be used to prove this, but fact remains that whatever your arguments are, it all boils down to egoism. Egoism is subjective, and therefore, has no place in an objective discussion (which I assume this is). Hence, the arguments are irrelevant. Q.E.D.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, it has nothing to do with egoism, because I figure I'll enjoy either one. Since this therefore has nothing to do with what *I* want, my concerns are not egoism, and are therefore valid. My concerns are for the number of NS:vanilla players who may be made unhappy by the changes NS:C might bring.
<!--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-->That being said, I doubt Classic would die with Combat implemented. Weakened, yes, but the playerbase is large enough for both. Online gaming is a *huge* community, and another gamemode will not make that much of a difference to be honest.
But you might want to think of it this way: if Combat attract the "morons" who enjoy that kind of game, would NS Classic not get less "morons"? Considering the "morons" are a rather big factor in the game and capable of creating imbalance, stalemates and general boredom (they have plenty of help from the game however, have no doubt about that), how can you claim with 100% certainty that NS Classic would be die or even get worse. It might even *improve*...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I actually agree with this. But it still does not give you the right to classify an entire set of arguments as invalid simply because you see them as stemming from egoism. That's simply arrogance.
Once something is completely, fully, utterly, undeniably idiot-proofed ... a moron comes along <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
its actually: Once something is completely, fully, utterly, undeniably idiot-proofed ... nature produces a better idiot <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, but Ms. Pac Man is.
No doubt he's already created parts of NS:C to varying degrees. However he's obviously using the forum as a way to generate additional ideas for the game and generate some hype for it. I'm not exactly sure what your point is - that people's ideas aren't helpful? It's pretty obvious to me that even if Flay doesn't take any of the individually suggested ideas, he'll at least see his problems from more than one angle when designing the game.
And even if he doesn't intend to use anybody's ideas, that doesn't stop people from stating their opinion on what would be the best way for NS:C to be made. Besides, this provides people a way to say "I told you so" a few months down the line if NS:C turns into a huge Shotgun orgy. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> If holes in game design are found and plugged early in development, the end result will be much better.
Smart designers always welcome feedback, even if they have to sift through some feedback that's made by somewhat dense players. Throwing a huge mass of ideas at a good designer is a good thing - they'll be able to pick out the ones which are golden and discard the poor ideas.
I believe that it is the current community members that will dislike the mod, as it is the opposite of everything they (or most of us) play ns for. This will create a severe partion of the NS community: "Deathmatch" and "Classic". I think that very few people will come for classic ns if they are join NS community solely because of NS: C.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The key is that alot of current community members will like it, because it's an alternative means of entertainment when servers have only 6 players.
If there are too many, though, there will be problems with none being played. "Dude, who wants nsc_pj2? It's Natural Selection: Combat, so boring, let's play nsctf_pj2!"
I suppose one or two wouldn't be a problem, though.