But if he see's it, he can notify anyone and everyone about the place it could be near, I know my self that if im within 30 meters of the circle, I can get a pretty good idea which door or vent the skulk is hiding behind. I doubt a skulk would sit in the middle of the room or anywhere else but the way a marine would come. If the com needed that marine to reach that desitnation so badly, he would ping it to see whats there. A vet would know the same. As for the average player it depends on how much they have memorize the map, He'll already be on alert since he saw something there, theres almost no reason he wouldnt be unless a marine is already within the area. I think silence should disable motion tracking as motion tracking can lead to cloak units and obs pings can uncloak those units. Aliens dont have a counter to these tools yet. I've always thought it to be silly to waste a point in cloak for combat as it will be useless when that one marine gets the ping skill. Fair or atmospheric for the cloaked player trying to get the drop on the marine? No, especially when that marine flys away with KB-Hop
As for motion tracking, playing defense by waiting halfway across the map from marines and holding still so they don't know you're there will make you LOSE. Defensive playing = marines save up res for HA train and decimate everything in short time.
I think that making a wishy-washy desicion on KB is a very bad thing. In the closed beta (before I was in) they tried removing it, right? And in a group with (generally) more skilled players, it caused serious balance problems. Skilled players should be able to adapt, no? So, now apply the change to a whole lot of pubbers, in an open beta, while leaving the vet's game alone. Now, you have a major problem: any changes you make to balance one will cause inbalance in the other. It will be next to impossible to actually balance both of them. Additionally, because its an open beta right now, some people may not be able to handle the changes, which may end with our forums being spammed with all sorts of senseless balance posts.
If its comming out, take it out completely. If it stays in, it stays in completely.
Personally, I've never had any problems with KB. I don't really care either way, so long as the majority of people can accept that this is a <b>beta</b> any may not be balanced.
<!--QuoteBegin-TheGivingTree+Feb 24 2004, 08:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TheGivingTree @ Feb 24 2004, 08:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Umm how about parasite and scent of fear.. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah getting <i>one</i> Skulk with SoF will cost you 42 res (Gorge, 3 SC, 2 for the upgrade) - in the process you've locked in one hive-chamber to sensory, made it impossible to use Focus or Cloaking, don't have shared team-vision/map dots and will have to pay 2 res each time you die.
As opposed to MT, which costs a total of 45 res for the whole game, for every single 'rine.
Forlorn, I personally DONT like the idea about enabeling w/ tournamentmode on, since that will only be confusing and also make it harder for people who aren't used to play pugs/scrims to adapt to KB.
Either it's in, or out. I think someone should PM Flay the link to this thread (a vet or constie?), since i find the discussion very, very important.
We cannot start comparing costs here. Prices are irrelevant. We all know that marine and alien res comes in at drastically different rates; so taking that route is a lost cause. It is a simple as this. What second chance does an alien get once he has entered a marine's "kill zone"? He can: Run, hope the marine has poor aim or die. What second chance does a marine have once he has entered an alien's "kill zone"? He can run, hope the alien has poor aim, die, or jump like a maniac so that when he does get bitten he is thrown across the room, thereby regaining his range advantage. There is no similar safety net for aliens, nor should there be. Remove knockback and level the playing field.
GrendelAll that is fear...Join Date: 2002-07-19Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
I've played more versions of NS than anyone else on the thread by a long margin. I've played with and without knockback.
Purely going by personal experience, marines get owned with knockback because they still play in the same retarded careless way that they do when knockback is present.
Essentially what some people want here is skill in terms of co-ordinated team maneouvers, covering fire, reconnaissance. Essentially making the game more militaristic and to a degree, more "realistic".
What other people want is a computer game style of play, which rewards players for being good at computer games.
There will be no agreement on this topic, simply because the two sides want different things. Personally I think NS is moving more and more towards the "game" end of the scale and further away from the "realism" end of the scale. I think knockback will stay because suprise, people who rock at computer games want more computer game style features.
This happens with a lot of games (CS and DoD), for a variety of reasons. I think it sucks, because their are a billion different computer games with a "computer game" feel. Sadly, it also leads to a convergence of gameplay styles, so that while it is nice that games all follow certain conventions, you can hardly act dissappointed and suprised that all you get is the same generic FPS or RTS formulae appearing in each game.
It gets really frustrating watching all these arguements go round and round. Don't any of you ever look at the problem, rather than the symptoms? <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Knockback, bunnyhopping, recoil etc. are all part of the same debate.
You have a point Grendel, and I agree with you to the extent that I don't think you're going to get agreement from either side. Personally, I see it as a balance issue, and as such I agree with Torak and Breakfast. Marines should for the most part lose a fight once the alien gets in range to chew on him. The marine's job is to keep the alien from getting that close, and not to rely on some cheesy game physics to save his booty.
The only problem is that we're only considering the wants of the 2 types of MARINE players. There's also an alien side in this game and there is SOME reason that the marine doorway is almost always jam packed of players waiting for someone to go alien so they can be marine.
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+Feb 24 2004, 11:32 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Feb 24 2004, 11:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I've played more versions of NS than anyone else on the thread by a long margin. I've played with and without knockback.
Purely going by personal experience, marines get owned with knockback because they still play in the same retarded careless way that they do when knockback is present.
Essentially what some people want here is skill in terms of co-ordinated team maneouvers, covering fire, reconnaissance. Essentially making the game more militaristic and to a degree, more "realistic".
What other people want is a computer game style of play, which rewards players for being good at computer games.
There will be no agreement on this topic, simply because the two sides want different things. Personally I think NS is moving more and more towards the "game" end of the scale and further away from the "realism" end of the scale. I think knockback will stay because suprise, people who rock at computer games want more computer game style features.
This happens with a lot of games (CS and DoD), for a variety of reasons. I think it sucks, because their are a billion different computer games with a "computer game" feel. Sadly, it also leads to a convergence of gameplay styles, so that while it is nice that games all follow certain conventions, you can hardly act dissappointed and suprised that all you get is the same generic FPS or RTS formulae appearing in each game.
It gets really frustrating watching all these arguements go round and round. Don't any of you ever look at the problem, rather than the symptoms? <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Knockback, bunnyhopping, recoil etc. are all part of the same debate.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> So basically, what you are saying is marines are too stupid to change their playing style and every game has "game like" qualities that we should just accept? By that logic, marines should be buying thier weapons individually and aliens should be planting a bomb. NS has broken the mold (and in fantastic fasion) so much that why should it continue to cater to the "same generic FPS or RTS formulae". Aliens had to learn how to play a Lerk with out bite, then learn to play with bite but a whole new flight model, learn how to play Fade more times than I can count, and finally, learn how to NOT be a gorge then learn how to get everyone to gorge. Marines can very simply learn to move out in groups. As it stands now, I am more afraid as a skulk when I am alone than when I am a lone marine because more often than not, once spotted by a marine, the skulk is as good as dead. I do think Knockback has a place, but on higher lifeforms (fade, onos) but not on skulks.
How many more advantages does a marine need against the lowly skulk?
The only problem, as I see it, is marines don't want to lose their crutch. Again I ask, Why should the marines, who already have the range advantage, be given back that advantage when a skulk has successfuly overcome that advantage? I could see it if knockback was the result of a mistake on the skulk's part, but it is not. It is the side effect of a sucessful hit, and only then when the marine is jumping upon being bitten by a skulk. In other words, it is a punishemnt for a successful skulk attack, and a reward for jumping like a maniac when being bitten.
Okay, I am a person who tries to see things from as many sides as possible.
Utilizing KB as an advantage (or skill);
<i>Newbie-to-Moderately</i> - jump backward (or in general) in CQ action so if and when the skulk connects you might be KBed. Sometimes you are literally <i>launched</i> back and across a hallway or room giving you the precious secounds to cap the skulk. If not hopefully the KB will confuse the skulk giving you some time to shoot him.
<i>l337 skill</i> - snipe them while you are being KBed. And don't tell me people can't because KB is a feature vets value as a skill asset. The ability to snap their crosshairs with quickness and accuracy (aka "reaqcuiring the enemy") and kill the enemy, <i>all within the distance and time the KB affords you</i>.*
<i>*Holy <b>BLeeP!</b> some of you must be thinking. It can be done and is being done. Is it a skill? Absolutely. I know I can't purposely (It can happen with luck) pull it off but I and many of you must have been the victim of such l337 skillz.</i>
Even thouigh some people <b>label it</b> as a skill feature, the fact is <i><b>anyone</b></i> can utilize it. From a vets point-of-view KB is gives them a way to demonstrate their deadly skillz (which I have no problem with), however for a less skilled player on pubs KB increases their chances at surviving solo encounters just enough to make DMing (Ramboing) a viable option (which I have a problem with).
Upon further reflection I think the difference in opinion on KB is a matter of perspective;
<b>Forlorn</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I have played in almost 100 scrims/matches combined<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Savant</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm looking at this from a strictly public perspective.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Forlorn's perspective was conditioned mostly by tourny mode. Savant's perspective was conditioned mostly by pub play (as with mine).
(6v6) vs (8v8+) = <i>strategically a different game</i> (FF on) vs (FF off) = <i>tactically a different game</i>
I think the main reason for our disagreement is:
<b>We are trying to impose our respective experiences and expectations into evaulating a gameplay feature for a version of NS that might not be our background/interest.</b>
<i>In tourny mode</i>, due to the small size of the marine team which alters the strategic nature of NS, KB is required to allow marines a chance to expand and control the map with as little as 1-2 marines in each area.*
<b>*Forlorn</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Unless marines spread themselves out so that they can keep a hold on the RT game, they will lose, almost guarenteed.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think we have to agree that trying to balance 6v6 tourny mode and 8v8+ pub play at the same time is just not workable... the little differences from one mode to the other end up being big difference in gameplay style (ie. KB) and what is fine for one mode (ie. resource model for 6v6) is virtually busted in another (ie. resource model for 10v10+ games).
<b>Forlorn</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->So I was thinking... you know there is a varible called mp_tournamentmode, right? Make it so KB is only on when the varible is turned on.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In the spirit of compromise I agree with you. I can't see how it would hurt for a version of the beta to have this feature.
Now it's far more clear to me why Forlorn is so heavily against this, which didn't make sense from my pub-play, 10v10 perspective. No, I'm not sarcastic or joking in the least.
How bout this, keep-knock back, but have the skulk lurch forward with the marine, like the comment about seeing a dog send a person flying backwards, the dog doesent stay in place when he hits the person, he flys with him, bowling him over. I also agree with the fact that doing the same thing over and over(Jumping) is more of people who like standard game elements instead of a different style of play.
Would anyone care if this would result in many pub servers switching to tournament mode after the marine horde realizes that life just got harder? That seems rather likely.
Well maybe marines having knockback while friendly fire is on would balance out FF somewhat. IMO, ff is in favor of aliens. I mean, think about it. Aliens are melee, marines are range. Skulks have to get close to marines to bite them, and that marines buddies want to help him, so they open up on the skulk at his feet. They either, help kill the marine quicker, help kill the skulk, damaging the marine enough to get him killed next time, or kill the marine themselves and die to the skulk or kill it. It gets even worse for fades. I mean sure, you can spout gun control BS all you want, but when it comes down to it, everyone hits eachother alot in the long run. They may never actually tk somebody but they are helping the aliens kill their team. This little situation really knocked this one home for me, I was with another HMG heavy on ns_eclipse and he got eaten by an onos. Frantically chasing the onos down I managed to kill the onos, but guess what. The HA I saved comes out right in the onos body, and I cut him down with HMG fire. There was NOTHING that I could do about it.
While it is true that I may look at the game from a pub perspective, it is out of design. If you look at the server counts at any given time, 90% of players are 'pubbers' and only 10% are clan based games. I'm not saying we should ignore the clans, but I don't think we should tailor the game to only suit their needs and screw the rest of the community in the process.
I feel public needs should be addressed foremost. If we go to the trouble of recognising all the public support for NS (via the consie program) then it would be a disservice to pubbers if we were to ignore their gameplay needs.
<!--QuoteBegin-Savant+Feb 25 2004, 12:22 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Savant @ Feb 25 2004, 12:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> While it is true that I may look at the game from a pub perspective, it is out of design. If you look at the server counts at any given time, 90% of players are 'pubbers' and only 10% are clan based games. I'm not saying we should ignore the clans, but I don't think we should tailor the game to only suit their needs and screw the rest of the community in the process.
I feel public needs should be addressed foremost. If we go to the trouble of recognising all the public support for NS (via the consie program) then it would be a disservice to pubbers if we were to ignore their gameplay needs.
Regards,
Savant <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> At the risk of sounding repetitive, well said Savant.
<!--QuoteBegin-Norml E. High+Feb 25 2004, 12:14 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Norml E. High @ Feb 25 2004, 12:14 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Well maybe marines having knockback while friendly fire is on would balance out FF somewhat. IMO, ff is in favor of aliens. I mean, think about it. Aliens are melee, marines are range. Skulks have to get close to marines to bite them, and that marines buddies want to help him, so they open up on the skulk at his feet. They either, help kill the marine quicker, help kill the skulk, damaging the marine enough to get him killed next time, or kill the marine themselves and die to the skulk or kill it. It gets even worse for fades. I mean sure, you can spout gun control BS all you want, but when it comes down to it, everyone hits eachother alot in the long run. They may never actually tk somebody but they are helping the aliens kill their team. This little situation really knocked this one home for me, I was with another HMG heavy on ns_eclipse and he got eaten by an onos. Frantically chasing the onos down I managed to kill the onos, but guess what. The HA I saved comes out right in the onos body, and I cut him down with HMG fire. There was NOTHING that I could do about it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> While yes, FF does disadvantage marines more than aliens, but remember some basic numbers:
5 bites to kill another skulk with a skulk
Like an entire LMG clip to kill a marine
It's not all peaches and creame...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I feel public needs should be addressed foremost. If we go to the trouble of recognising all the public support for NS (via the consie program) then it would be a disservice to pubbers if we were to ignore their gameplay needs.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sometimes I feel you make too big of a distinction between pubbers and clanners. The biggest difference is the skill and teamwork between the two, but other than that I wouldn't say the games are suddenly 100% different. It is still the same game, and unless you've actually played NS, some bum of the street could never tell the difference between pub play and clan play.
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Feb 25 2004, 02:03 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Feb 25 2004, 02:03 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Sometimes I feel you make too big of a distinction between pubbers and clanners. The biggest difference is the skill and teamwork between the two, but other than that I wouldn't say the games are suddenly 100% different. It is still the same game, and unless you've actually played NS, some bum of the street could never tell the difference between pub play and clan play. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> So I ask you this: Why should tha game be balanced for the upper 10% +/- rather than the rest of the playing population. If knockback is only a detriment to the "unwashed masses" then isn't it a problem for most people that play the game?
<!--QuoteBegin-OG17+Feb 25 2004, 02:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (OG17 @ Feb 25 2004, 02:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You need to decide who's more important, as has been the general theme of this page. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> That is a chicken and egg arguement. Without a viable pub game, there will be no user base to make a clan from.
A game balanced for clan-level play would not be unplayable in pubs (though it would probably be less enjoyable), but one balanced perfectly for pubs would most likely be unplayable at the clan level.
The decision, I assume, is less clear when one looks at the size of the two communities.
*<i>Munches on Cookie and rudey leaves crumbs all over the Forums</i>* <!--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 thanks guys, just trying to help move the discussion along, lots of people are making great points and I'm just summing up what they said in my own way.
Now to the interesting twist occuring on this topic.
<b>Forlorn</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Sometimes I feel you make too big of a distinction between pubbers and clanners. The biggest difference is the skill and teamwork between the two, but other than that I wouldn't say the games are suddenly 100% different.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>MMZ>Torak</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->So I ask you this: Why should tha game be balanced for the upper 10% +/- rather than the rest of the playing population.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My observation here is if Flayra ever has to sacrifice the gameplay of one version to enhance or make another version workable something is very, very wrong.
Currently the fact is, <i>in all its' glorious obviousness</i>, tourny mode and pub mode (especially 8v8+ games) are very different.
<b>Savant</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If you look at the server counts at any given time, 90% of players are 'pubbers' and only 10% are clan based games. I'm not saying we should ignore the clans, but I don't think we should tailor the game to only suit their needs<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>OG17</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You need to decide who's more important, as has been the general theme of this page.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>MMZ>Torak</b> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->That is a chicken and egg arguement. Without a viable pub game, there will be no user base to make a clan from.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think there is a dynamic here we can't ignore.
In the developmental stages of the life of a Mod you must build a foundation (pub community) and hopefully a certain precentage of these pubber will want to be more competitive thereby creating a clan community.*
*<i>Without no chickens (pubbers) there would be no eggs (clanners).</i>
However in the later stages of development, the popularity of the competitive community (number of fans), actually helps increase the player base of the mod. Its' popularity overall helps extend life of a mod ensuring there is a large number of players and good servers.*
*<i>Without no eggs (clanners) there would no longer be any chickens (puppers)</i>
Nobody said it was gonna be easy...
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif' /><!--endemo--> I feel like having a chicken omelet.
Comments
Though this is why I've never liked MT.
So, now apply the change to a whole lot of pubbers, in an open beta, while leaving the vet's game alone. Now, you have a major problem: any changes you make to balance one will cause inbalance in the other. It will be next to impossible to actually balance both of them. Additionally, because its an open beta right now, some people may not be able to handle the changes, which may end with our forums being spammed with all sorts of senseless balance posts.
If its comming out, take it out completely. If it stays in, it stays in completely.
Personally, I've never had any problems with KB. I don't really care either way, so long as the majority of people can accept that this is a <b>beta</b> any may not be balanced.
Yeah getting <i>one</i> Skulk with SoF will cost you 42 res (Gorge, 3 SC, 2 for the upgrade) - in the process you've locked in one hive-chamber to sensory, made it impossible to use Focus or Cloaking, don't have shared team-vision/map dots and will have to pay 2 res each time you die.
As opposed to MT, which costs a total of 45 res for the whole game, for every single 'rine.
Either it's in, or out.
I think someone should PM Flay the link to this thread (a vet or constie?), since i find the discussion very, very important.
Purely going by personal experience, marines get owned with knockback because they still play in the same retarded careless way that they do when knockback is present.
Essentially what some people want here is skill in terms of co-ordinated team maneouvers, covering fire, reconnaissance. Essentially making the game more militaristic and to a degree, more "realistic".
What other people want is a computer game style of play, which rewards players for being good at computer games.
There will be no agreement on this topic, simply because the two sides want different things. Personally I think NS is moving more and more towards the "game" end of the scale and further away from the "realism" end of the scale. I think knockback will stay because suprise, people who rock at computer games want more computer game style features.
This happens with a lot of games (CS and DoD), for a variety of reasons. I think it sucks, because their are a billion different computer games with a "computer game" feel. Sadly, it also leads to a convergence of gameplay styles, so that while it is nice that games all follow certain conventions, you can hardly act dissappointed and suprised that all you get is the same generic FPS or RTS formulae appearing in each game.
It gets really frustrating watching all these arguements go round and round. Don't any of you ever look at the problem, rather than the symptoms? <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Knockback, bunnyhopping, recoil etc. are all part of the same debate.
- Zues
Purely going by personal experience, marines get owned with knockback because they still play in the same retarded careless way that they do when knockback is present.
Essentially what some people want here is skill in terms of co-ordinated team maneouvers, covering fire, reconnaissance. Essentially making the game more militaristic and to a degree, more "realistic".
What other people want is a computer game style of play, which rewards players for being good at computer games.
There will be no agreement on this topic, simply because the two sides want different things. Personally I think NS is moving more and more towards the "game" end of the scale and further away from the "realism" end of the scale. I think knockback will stay because suprise, people who rock at computer games want more computer game style features.
This happens with a lot of games (CS and DoD), for a variety of reasons. I think it sucks, because their are a billion different computer games with a "computer game" feel. Sadly, it also leads to a convergence of gameplay styles, so that while it is nice that games all follow certain conventions, you can hardly act dissappointed and suprised that all you get is the same generic FPS or RTS formulae appearing in each game.
It gets really frustrating watching all these arguements go round and round. Don't any of you ever look at the problem, rather than the symptoms? <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Knockback, bunnyhopping, recoil etc. are all part of the same debate.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So basically, what you are saying is marines are too stupid to change their playing style and every game has "game like" qualities that we should just accept? By that logic, marines should be buying thier weapons individually and aliens should be planting a bomb. NS has broken the mold (and in fantastic fasion) so much that why should it continue to cater to the "same generic FPS or RTS formulae". Aliens had to learn how to play a Lerk with out bite, then learn to play with bite but a whole new flight model, learn how to play Fade more times than I can count, and finally, learn how to NOT be a gorge then learn how to get everyone to gorge. Marines can very simply learn to move out in groups. As it stands now, I am more afraid as a skulk when I am alone than when I am a lone marine because more often than not, once spotted by a marine, the skulk is as good as dead. I do think Knockback has a place, but on higher lifeforms (fade, onos) but not on skulks.
How many more advantages does a marine need against the lowly skulk?
The only problem, as I see it, is marines don't want to lose their crutch. Again I ask, Why should the marines, who already have the range advantage, be given back that advantage when a skulk has successfuly overcome that advantage? I could see it if knockback was the result of a mistake on the skulk's part, but it is not. It is the side effect of a sucessful hit, and only then when the marine is jumping upon being bitten by a skulk. In other words, it is a punishemnt for a successful skulk attack, and a reward for jumping like a maniac when being bitten.
Utilizing KB as an advantage (or skill);
<i>Newbie-to-Moderately</i> - jump backward (or in general) in CQ action so if and when the skulk connects you might be KBed. Sometimes you are literally <i>launched</i> back and across a hallway or room giving you the precious secounds to cap the skulk. If not hopefully the KB will confuse the skulk giving you some time to shoot him.
<i>l337 skill</i> - snipe them while you are being KBed. And don't tell me people can't because KB is a feature vets value as a skill asset. The ability to snap their crosshairs with quickness and accuracy (aka "reaqcuiring the enemy") and kill the enemy, <i>all within the distance and time the KB affords you</i>.*
<i>*Holy <b>BLeeP!</b> some of you must be thinking. It can be done and is being done. Is it a skill? Absolutely. I know I can't purposely (It can happen with luck) pull it off but I and many of you must have been the victim of such l337 skillz.</i>
Even thouigh some people <b>label it</b> as a skill feature, the fact is <i><b>anyone</b></i> can utilize it. From a vets point-of-view KB is gives them a way to demonstrate their deadly skillz (which I have no problem with), however for a less skilled player on pubs KB increases their chances at surviving solo encounters just enough to make DMing (Ramboing) a viable option (which I have a problem with).
Upon further reflection I think the difference in opinion on KB is a matter of perspective;
<b>Forlorn</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I have played in almost 100 scrims/matches combined<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Savant</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm looking at this from a strictly public perspective.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Forlorn's perspective was conditioned mostly by tourny mode. Savant's perspective was conditioned mostly by pub play (as with mine).
(6v6) vs (8v8+) = <i>strategically a different game</i>
(FF on) vs (FF off) = <i>tactically a different game</i>
I think the main reason for our disagreement is:
<b>We are trying to impose our respective experiences and expectations into evaulating a gameplay feature for a version of NS that might not be our background/interest.</b>
<i>In tourny mode</i>, due to the small size of the marine team which alters the strategic nature of NS, KB is required to allow marines a chance to expand and control the map with as little as 1-2 marines in each area.*
<b>*Forlorn</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Unless marines spread themselves out so that they can keep a hold on the RT game, they will lose, almost guarenteed.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think we have to agree that trying to balance 6v6 tourny mode and 8v8+ pub play at the same time is just not workable... the little differences from one mode to the other end up being big difference in gameplay style (ie. KB) and what is fine for one mode (ie. resource model for 6v6) is virtually busted in another (ie. resource model for 10v10+ games).
<b>Forlorn</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->So I was thinking... you know there is a varible called mp_tournamentmode, right? Make it so KB is only on when the varible is turned on.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In the spirit of compromise I agree with you. I can't see how it would hurt for a version of the beta to have this feature.
Now it's far more clear to me why Forlorn is so heavily against this, which didn't make sense from my pub-play, 10v10 perspective.
No, I'm not sarcastic or joking in the least.
Yes, very well put.
No-one needs to read any other post than Fantasmo's last one. He summed up both sides of the argument and stated the best compromise between the two.
Well done to him.
* hands Fantasmo a cookie.
I feel public needs should be addressed foremost. If we go to the trouble of recognising all the public support for NS (via the consie program) then it would be a disservice to pubbers if we were to ignore their gameplay needs.
Regards,
Savant
I feel public needs should be addressed foremost. If we go to the trouble of recognising all the public support for NS (via the consie program) then it would be a disservice to pubbers if we were to ignore their gameplay needs.
Regards,
Savant <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
At the risk of sounding repetitive, well said Savant.
While yes, FF does disadvantage marines more than aliens, but remember some basic numbers:
5 bites to kill another skulk with a skulk
Like an entire LMG clip to kill a marine
It's not all peaches and creame...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I feel public needs should be addressed foremost. If we go to the trouble of recognising all the public support for NS (via the consie program) then it would be a disservice to pubbers if we were to ignore their gameplay needs.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sometimes I feel you make too big of a distinction between pubbers and clanners. The biggest difference is the skill and teamwork between the two, but other than that I wouldn't say the games are suddenly 100% different. It is still the same game, and unless you've actually played NS, some bum of the street could never tell the difference between pub play and clan play.
being the god of english and crap
20% - 80% respectivly
So I ask you this: Why should tha game be balanced for the upper 10% +/- rather than the rest of the playing population. If knockback is only a detriment to the "unwashed masses" then isn't it a problem for most people that play the game?
That is a chicken and egg arguement. Without a viable pub game, there will be no user base to make a clan from.
The decision, I assume, is less clear when one looks at the size of the two communities.
First of all thanks guys, just trying to help move the discussion along, lots of people are making great points and I'm just summing up what they said in my own way.
Now to the interesting twist occuring on this topic.
<b>Forlorn</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Sometimes I feel you make too big of a distinction between pubbers and clanners. The biggest difference is the skill and teamwork between the two, but other than that I wouldn't say the games are suddenly 100% different.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>MMZ>Torak</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->So I ask you this: Why should tha game be balanced for the upper 10% +/- rather than the rest of the playing population.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My observation here is if Flayra ever has to sacrifice the gameplay of one version to enhance or make another version workable something is very, very wrong.
Currently the fact is, <i>in all its' glorious obviousness</i>, tourny mode and pub mode (especially 8v8+ games) are very different.
<b>Savant</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If you look at the server counts at any given time, 90% of players are 'pubbers' and only 10% are clan based games. I'm not saying we should ignore the clans, but I don't think we should tailor the game to only suit their needs<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>OG17</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You need to decide who's more important, as has been the general theme of this page.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>MMZ>Torak</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->That is a chicken and egg arguement. Without a viable pub game, there will be no user base to make a clan from.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think there is a dynamic here we can't ignore.
In the developmental stages of the life of a Mod you must build a foundation (pub community) and hopefully a certain precentage of these pubber will want to be more competitive thereby creating a clan community.*
*<i>Without no chickens (pubbers) there would be no eggs (clanners).</i>
However in the later stages of development, the popularity of the competitive community (number of fans), actually helps increase the player base of the mod. Its' popularity overall helps extend life of a mod ensuring there is a large number of players and good servers.*
*<i>Without no eggs (clanners) there would no longer be any chickens (puppers)</i>
Nobody said it was gonna be easy...
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif' /><!--endemo--> I feel like having a chicken omelet.