<!--QuoteBegin-Align+Mar 8 2004, 08:02 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Align @ Mar 8 2004, 08:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> EDIT: hang on, we're forgetting something here. While marines can take and hold a hive without much fear for retribution except in special hive locations(which are usually avoided in any case), aliens can't do that. Because marines can just put up a siege. Yes, you can prevent the marines from building the siege, but you might as well prevent them from getting anything at all done. It's not that easy. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Without much fear of retribuition? While in your average public game, a silly little turret farm has some effectiveness - against decent alien teams, you'll be facing a reasonable amount of higher lifeforms. So deciding to try and lock down a hive has serious consequences - less time spent holding and recapping the other res, less time spent knocking down hives/rts and valuable res spent on elec/turrets/PG that could all be going into the offense.
And with every minute that progresses, you're increasing the likelihood of facing yet another higher lifeform and seeing less and less income. So sure, marines can lock down 2 spots no problemo - and face a slow and painful loss.
<!--QuoteBegin-Align+Mar 8 2004, 08:02 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Align @ Mar 8 2004, 08:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> 1 node wouldn't be too good, then the marines would just relocate there every time. 2 nodes then? With one, you can get armor 2 and weapons 2 at the arms lab, and upgrade the armory- BUT you can not drop any of the stuff you get from an advanced armory, until you hold the second node as well(which will, obviously, let you get the rest of the tech tree). Upgrading to adv armory should still cost resources, or other costs should be increased.
EDIT: hang on, we're forgetting something here. While marines can take and hold a hive without much fear for retribution except in special hive locations(which are usually avoided in any case), aliens can't do that. Because marines can just put up a siege. Yes, you can prevent the marines from building the siege, but you might as well prevent them from getting anything at all done. It's not that easy. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> 1. Relocations really do not work. They slow down your early game considerably and are risky. Out of the tons of scrims/matches I've played in, never have I seen a single relocation work. Relocating in my eyes is bigger suicide than going sensory in 2.01.
1 node, else the idea would never work and would end up nerfing the rine's into oblivion.
<b>Firewater</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-->the PT model restricts both sides, which is more balanced,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the main difference between these two proposed solutions is that my solution attempts to add an additional element (power nozzles) for the marines to secure to match the aliens need to secure a RTs and a Hive. Firewater's solution chooses to remove the additional element (the hives) from the alien team which causes the strategic imbalance.
After reading a little bit more about Firewater's idea and reflecting on my own I think I have to say that neither of the ideas are bad or really comparable since they attempt to tackle the issue from two fundamentally different approaches.
While the power nozzle idea may be less work in terms of coding and it is definately much closer to the gameplay structure that is presently available I have a feeling it is only a band-aid solution. My solution balances the current gameplay structure by complicating the marine side, the question is will that result in greater strategic options... I'm not sure it will, I'm having thoughts it may just restrict marine strategic options almost in the same way hives restrict alien strategic options. The restriction would not be as harsh as aliens since marines will only need to hold 1 PT for full tech (based on Forlorn's revised 1 PT idea).
<b>Firewater</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-->is it more fun?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I really can't answer that, <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> what do you guys think?
Even though it will require much recoding and reworking of the game I think Firewater's solution is more of a long-term solution that creates balance through simplifying the overall model of the mod. I seem to think removing hive dependency will open up far more strategic options then the PT solution but only if we carefully rework and rebalance the tech trees for both sides in a far more dynamic gameplay model.
If the Dev's want something to try that isn't too much of a departure from the current gameplay model, I wouldn't mind seeing how the 1 PT solution would affect the gameplay. However if they are into something more ambitious I would fully support and push Firewater's solution.
In fact, I think Firewater should do up a "Removing Hive Dependency" discussion thread to explore any potential ideas for moving NS into that gameplay style.
Good posts guys, lets keep the ideas and feedback flowin!
<b>Firewater</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-->See the problem with NS is that its a consistent FPS, I dont even see real tactics used anymore whether it be pub or scrim, which is fine because I am FPS gamer for life, but at the same time, the game is advertised as a RTS/FPS, I feel that everytime that is said its misleading those who came for more a RTS experience. Because the only strategy for aliens get a second hive or rush, that really does not leave much room for tactics. Also choosing which species to tech to leaves a lot more strategy in the game (hrmm lets tech onos early to nail their res, NO LETS USE A FADE/SKULK COMBO TO ATTACK FROM 2 DIFFERENT ANGLES), thats just a simple example of the infinite ammount of strategy and tactics that could be used in the system of getting rid of the hives, and allowing freedom of tech to exist. Now think what this opens up for the marines?
Its the entire hive system that prevents tactics, not marines jumping, not knockback, not bunnyhopping. These were things developed to counter one another. NS is a TDM game with very little strategy, and this guy (comm) who can either make you or break you. I know this is a lot but I feel this can take NS to the next level.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with you fully but for the sake of clarity (because I really like your point and I think others can really benefit from considering what you are saying) I want to just go over your post (especially the really good points) where I think people might accidently confuse "tactics" and "strategy."
I'm just going to define the two words here so we are all on the same page;
1a. (used with a sing. verb) The military science that deals with securing objectives set by strategy, especially the technique of deploying and directing troops, ships, and aircraft in effective maneuvers against an enemy: Tactics is a required course at all military academies.
1b. (used with a pl. verb) Maneuvers used against an enemy: Guerrilla tactics were employed during most of the war.
2. (used with a sing. or pl. verb) <u>A procedure or set of maneuvers engaged in to achieve an end, an aim, or a goal.</u><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1a. The science and art of using all the forces of a nation to execute approved plans as effectively as possible during peace or war.
1b. <u>The science and art of military command as applied to the overall planning and conduct of large-scale combat operations.</u>
2. A plan of action resulting from strategy or intended to accomplish a specific goal. See Synonyms at plan.
3. The art or skill of using stratagems in endeavors such as politics and business.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The underline definitions are most applicable to our discussion.
Please tell me if I'm misinterpreting your point and I apologize in advance if I have.
<b>Firewater</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-->See the problem with NS is that its a consistent FPS, I dont even see real tactics used anymore whether it be pub or scrim<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed. I would add that on the tactical side, a <b>pub player</b> only really needs to be tactically aware on a Deathmatch level (environment and positioning, but not so much squad/team level awareness). <b>Clan players</b> require more awareness on the team level so I would say that clan warfare is more team orientated and strategic (maybe not <i>much</i> more) then pubs. Even though they might not move in big squads* they are still aware of the overall team strategy and is acting according to thei plans, even if they are moving around individually.
*<i>People seem to generalize teamplay as moving around in a big squad. I think there are many degrees of teamplay and moving around in a one big coherent squad may be high on the the teamplay meter (requiring squad </i>as well as<i> team awareness), but what clans do is still considered teamplay although it is admintedly less teamplay intensive squad-wise (still requires team awareness but not much squad-level awareness).</i>
When DM tactics are relied upon I feel that the need for an overall strategy suffers because it becomes more about targets of opportunity then planned manouvers to capture a certain objective.
To me this seems to indicate that NS is much closer to the DM side of a TDM then the Team side.
<b>Firewater</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-->but at the same time, the game is advertised as a RTS/FPS, I feel that everytime that is said its misleading those who came for more a RTS experience. Because the only strategy for aliens get a second hive or rush, that really does not leave much room for tactics.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed. When your enemy is only limited to 1 of 2 strategies the opposing team doesn't even need to develop many counter-strategies. They just need to counter with one of a few proven tactics (ie. Slash and Burn / Two-Hive Lockdown) that have been shown to be successful. There aren't many strategic surprises they can pop on you that your tactics can't deal with.
<b>Firewater</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-->Its the entire hive system that prevents tactics,... NS is a TDM game with very little strategy,...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed.
The hive system greatly reduces the number of available strategies for the alien team, which in turn means the marines aren't really challenged to develop any counter-strategies. Now because there is such a small number of available strategies that can be executed or countered, NS is mostly about tactics... and a very limited menu of tactics at that.
Tactics (deployment and directing of troops) are employed to attain the individual objectives of a strategy (the overall plan of action to meet a goal). When you have limited strategies you are also limited to only the tactics those strategies require to meet a goal.
Maybe that explains why a game of NS (pub or scrim) will usually ends up playing out in a few familair ways regardless of the map.
PS: I hope I didn't make any muckups in logic or reasoning on this post, I was continuously interrupted (@ work) and my brain hurts from dealing with my assistant, I have to assist her more then she assists me. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
my defination of strategy and tactics are given in the example
A comm sends two guys out to cap while the others build (strategy)
Strategy because there is no fighting (yet).
Tactics are used when one of the two guys (or the comm) smells an ambush and decides to bait them in.
Strategy involves getting stuff for the team i.e. Teching, capping RTs, dropping weapons etc..
Tactics are combat driven, or what to do when you are about to engage the enemy Flanking, pincer tactics (LOL classic sYn tactic), bait and switch (which is becomming more popular) 3-point strikes (meaning attacking from 3 different sides, if possible).
Strategy gives you the means to apply tactics, tactics give the team the ability to take ground and expand. Its kind of like a marriage, where if these two get along well, the outcome will be very favorable.
Great Strategy, without great tactics, is useless, because no one will be able to execute and do what is required. Great tactics without great strategy is nothing as well, because if your team does not have the firepower, you can outsmart your enemy all you want, but still get your **** kicked.
I am pretty good at NS, and I think knockback should stay but not to the extent it is now. I can time my jump so when Im bit I fly for about 20 feet away from the skulk. Obviously I win that fight, thats plenty of room to make a phonecall, come back, and shoot the skulk...
Knockback should be lessened to a point where the marine and skulk still have an equal chance at winning the duel
<!--QuoteBegin-CommunistWithAGun+Mar 9 2004, 07:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CommunistWithAGun @ Mar 9 2004, 07:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I am pretty good at NS, and I think knockback should stay but not to the extent it is now. I can time my jump so when Im bit I fly for about 20 feet away from the skulk. Obviously I win that fight, thats plenty of room to make a phonecall, come back, and shoot the skulk...
Knockback should be lessened to a point where the marine and skulk still have an equal chance at winning the duel <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> When in close combat, the marine should NOT have the same chance as the alien... He should have about 20% MAX if he's very dodgy...
The trouble is, all of these suggestions seem to be trying to 'symmetrify' both sides. Remember, perfect balance can only come when both sides are exactly the same, anything else will be a tradeoff. And seeing as we definitely <b>don't</b> want both sides to be the same, a tradeoff will have to do.
Does anyone understand my inncoherent ramblings or should I just go back to bed?
<!--QuoteBegin-Diablo_fx+Mar 9 2004, 08:40 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Diablo_fx @ Mar 9 2004, 08:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-CommunistWithAGun+Mar 9 2004, 07:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CommunistWithAGun @ Mar 9 2004, 07:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I am pretty good at NS, and I think knockback should stay but not to the extent it is now. I can time my jump so when Im bit I fly for about 20 feet away from the skulk. Obviously I win that fight, thats plenty of room to make a phonecall, come back, and shoot the skulk...
Knockback should be lessened to a point where the marine and skulk still have an equal chance at winning the duel <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> When in close combat, the marine should NOT have the same chance as the alien... He should have about 20% MAX if he's very dodgy... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> lol. no.
I don't see why we shouldn't reward both types of gameplay. Basically, let's reward marines for doing team-oritented strategies (recon, cover fire, tactical placement of buoldings, etc...) and let's reward aliens for being the "lone hunter" type...
It already takes alot more "skill" (imho) to play an alien than a marine. Any good FPS player with a decent ping can kill a skulk, or a fade, (if he has the correct upgrades, but in NS:C, he can choose his own template to suit his needs...). It requires point-and-shoot skills.
But aliens, it's a different style of play. Skulks will need to use their abilities (xeno for example), lerks will spore and use umbra to protect themselves and ennemies, fade will blink to kill faster and heal themselves... etc... It doesn't require much TEAMPLAY but it requires strategies...
So as it stands, in regular NS: Marines need a good comm, and any group of 3 or 4 decently-skilled marines can take a hive (more if the server is bigger...). Larger rush may mobilise entire teams of marines, requiring some people to guard the back, some to scout ahead, some to weld HAs for instance, some to be tanking... It's strategy-oriented, but you see it alot in public servers, very good players will often find ways to "solo" with a combo of JP/shotty or JP/hmg for example, if availaible to them. Aliens: They rely on gorges for upgrades, but then again, they could gorge themselves if they wished... As far as skulk goes, it's only based on skill. I've seen early game skulks take out 5 marines, just because they had skill. And they'd keep going back and owning the 5 marines over and over, until the comm got smart and dropped shotties or until the aliens won. The skulk is the perfect example of rewarding a solo player. But larger alien assault require team planning. The use of zerg techniques will usually assure a win, because 5 or 6 skulks barging into a poorly defended marine outpost will win, hands down... And then we have alien engame. Usually, if aliens got this far, they've probably won, unless if it's a deadlock between marines and aliens, where each control half the map and no one can win.. until a party raids in a group!
So should we reward the use of tactics? we already do! An onos alone will get beaten fairly easily, but an onos with an umbra-ing lerk and a healing/webbing/bile-ing gorge will be much much harder to take down. The same goes for the marines, a lone HA, even if he's skilled, will not last very long. but a HA with a welder behind him can go a long way, even win a match...
Does it need changing? I think not. NS is already quite original in itself, it is the first FPS mod i know to require strategists to lead! Without a good strategy-player at the command, marines are lost, and without 2 or 3 strong gorges to plan things, the aliens are lost... It sounds fine, and it is fine, at least to me it is <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Adding randomised innacuracy that is exacerbated by running, standing, jumping, or long bursts of fire, would add zero fun, so I'm against it.
I pointed out that NS had elements of RTS, and outlined what those were: map control, build order, tech tree. To be honest, Warcraft 3 pretty much turns into an arcade clickfest at about that point, so I guss it's a question of how strategic the average RTS actually IS. I'm not arguing here for more RTS style, I'm pointing out that it has been and can be done.
I'd also argue that getting torn apart by a player who's more tooled-up than you is pretty integral to most FPS games, wether or not it's a good thing. People seem to love to bring up Counterstrike (it's been done, I think to myself; the game is called COUNTERSTRIKE, *sigh* ) so I'll jump on the bandwagon and point out that getting ripped up by better equiped players because your team didn't pull their weight OR you got unlucky OR whatever is central to the gameplay. Why? Because getting rewarded for good play and upgrading to the perfect gun for the situation and reaping great ruin is key to the addictiveness of that style of game - you see the connection.
Anyway, the post above mine makes some excellent points about the present rewards for good tactical play. Tactics am good.
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Mar 10 2004, 12:54 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Mar 10 2004, 12:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Diablo_fx+Mar 9 2004, 08:40 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Diablo_fx @ Mar 9 2004, 08:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->When in close combat, the marine should NOT have the same chance as the alien... He should have about 20% MAX if he's very dodgy... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> lol. no. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why though? The marine can be careful and aim up to where the skulks are likely to be hiding, and he will win. Besides, the alien was smart and skillful, setting up an ambush, rather than rushing head-on. The marine should be equally smart(and aim up, or throw a grenade if available) to have an equal chance.
EDIT: Because otherwise you're removing skill in favor of luck.
<!--QuoteBegin-Align+Mar 10 2004, 10:48 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Align @ Mar 10 2004, 10:48 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Mar 10 2004, 12:54 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Mar 10 2004, 12:54 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Diablo_fx+Mar 9 2004, 08:40 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Diablo_fx @ Mar 9 2004, 08:40 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->When in close combat, the marine should NOT have the same chance as the alien... He should have about 20% MAX if he's very dodgy... <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> lol. no. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why though? The marine can be careful and aim up to where the skulks are likely to be hiding, and he will win. Besides, the alien was smart and skillful, setting up an ambush, rather than rushing head-on. The marine should be equally smart(and aim up, or throw a grenade if available) to have an equal chance.
EDIT: Because otherwise you're removing skill in favor of luck. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Look. If you think that sitting behind a courner or choke point takes skill, you are sadly mistaken.
The game must be so that both sides are constantly focusing to control the sitution, whether it is so the marine is keeping his crosshair on the alien, or so that the alien never looses track of the marine and is charging as fast as possible.
Let me tell you right now, even against some of the top marines if I am given a clean ambush where the marine fails to look at me and I'm right on top of him before he shoots at me once, the marine is practically guarenteed to lose, no matter who he is. Unless he has an HMG with lv. 1 armor, I may lose, but even then the chances are strongly in my favor.
On the contrary... if I am a marine and I know exactly where a skulk is hiding, there is a VERY good chance I'm going to round the courner and kill him. There is also a good chance he will win (if he doesn't miss a bite and approaches very quickly) because skulks at close range are still quite lethal. Remember, a skulk kills faster than a marine kills the skulk. The skulk isn't completely worthless.
<!--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-->Does it need changing? I think not. NS is already quite original in itself, it is the first FPS mod i know to require strategists to lead! Without a good strategy-player at the command, marines are lost, and without 2 or 3 strong gorges to plan things, the aliens are lost... It sounds fine, and it is fine, at least to me it is <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I feel the same way, except gorging isn't quite like commanding, commanding takes a lot of talent, whereas anyone who reads the manual and a quick quide on bhopping can be a good gorge. Gorging could definatly use some improvements.
<!--QuoteBegin-Firewater+Mar 10 2004, 12:29 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Firewater @ Mar 10 2004, 12:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Perhaps its not the skulk that is useless, it is the way that it is used? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> We can take examples of this:
- 2.0 Fade sucked! Even I thought it did at first.
- 1.04 lerks sucked!
- 1.00 marines sucked! (most, if not all, pubs believed this)
There are countless examples of this outside the world of NS as well. Cloaking in StarCraft is useless if you don't know how to properly use it. Hero's in WarCraft3 are extreamlly underpowered if you can't micro.
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Mar 10 2004, 07:26 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Mar 10 2004, 07:26 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Look. If you think that sitting behind a courner or choke point takes skill, you are sadly mistaken. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, but realizing when it's smarter to hang on the ceiling instead of jumping out around the corner takes intelligence, if not skill. <!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+,--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ ,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Let me tell you right now, even against some of the top marines if I am given a clean ambush where the marine fails to look at me and I'm right on top of him before he shoots at me once, the marine is practically guarenteed to lose, no matter who he is.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yeah, same goes for most skulks, thing is you <b>should</b> win, unless... <!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+,--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ ,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I am a marine and I know exactly where a skulk is hiding, there is a VERY good chance I'm going to round the courner and kill him.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> because then you out-smarted, or out-skilled, the skulk. Which is good. That is how it is supposed to be. [EDIT: you seem to agree with me actually. If the marine is SMRT and looks up in every nook and crannie and whatever, he will find the skulk(s) and win the battle-unless the skulk has leap or focus and you dont have armor 1. If the skulk is SMRT-er than the marine, he will hide in an unexpected location, and get a "free" bite, meaning he is very likely to win.]
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+,--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ ,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I feel the same way, except gorging isn't quite like commanding, commanding takes a lot of talent, whereas anyone who reads the manual and a quick quide on bhopping can be a good gorge. Gorging could definatly use some improvements.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Personally I don't think gorges are meant to be as important as commanders, since they cost 10 res, perhaps to make them available to all aliens at the start of the game.
Back on the origionall subject of the topic here. I think, back in 1.0x, NS was a much more strategic than aim/skill based game, and had a much smaller community than NS has today, personally, I love the bug fixes and such of the higher builds of Natural-Selection, but as far as the 'feel' of the game goes, 1.04 was pretty much as good as it could get. Arguably, this is because an extremely large ammount of teamwork *could* almost always beat an extremely skilled, but disorganized team. Now, in 2.0+, that doesn't seem the case so much anymore, as less and less teamwork, tactics, and strategy are necessessary. As Grendel said, the game is shifting to a much more 'please the masses' "game" style than the origionall 'highly demanding' "realistic" style.
Just my 2 cents. Strategy, Teamwork, and Tactics all the way, IMO. -Khaim
And yea, the 1.0x's were a bit more strategic than now. For one thing, I can actually remember fighting for territory, not just 'rt, elec, rt, elec, rt, elec, okay lets get hive!' On the alien side, teamwork is just simply not what it used to be...really. You can argue all you want, alien right now rarely has the teamwork of the days of yore.
<!--QuoteBegin-Khaim+Mar 11 2004, 04:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Khaim @ Mar 11 2004, 04:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Back on the origionall subject of the topic here. I think, back in 1.0x, NS was a much more strategic than aim/skill based game, and had a much smaller community than NS has today, personally, I love the bug fixes and such of the higher builds of Natural-Selection, but as far as the 'feel' of the game goes, 1.04 was pretty much as good as it could get. Arguably, this is because an extremely large ammount of teamwork *could* almost always beat an extremely skilled, but disorganized team. Now, in 2.0+, that doesn't seem the case so much anymore, as less and less teamwork, tactics, and strategy are necessessary. As Grendel said, the game is shifting to a much more 'please the masses' "game" style than the origionall 'highly demanding' "realistic" style.
Just my 2 cents. Strategy, Teamwork, and Tactics all the way, IMO. -Khaim <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> ....whhaaat?
Huh? Strategy that involved one marine with a JP/HMG was not more strategic... nope. 1.04 had like zero strategy involved IMO.
For aliens, perhaps, but again, not any more than it does now.
You have a point that Jetpacks were unbalanced Forlorn, however, in the games where marines actually did something beside JP/HMG rush, it could be quite a strategical fight. Many people, if I remember correctly, simply wanted 1.04 with a jetpack nerf, and ended up being somewhat dissappointed with the 'style' of gameplay in 2.0x and above versions.
(This is a really relevant thread and I'm gonna add my 2 cents)
<enable flame shield> I am drawn to NS because it is richly imagined -- almost irrespective of game-play! To qualify this statement I should add that for most of us, there are many cultural precendents of the NS genre which reinforce our ideas about it. I think the NS team has done a really incredible job of realizing a game in this genre and, through their skillful execution, has enhanced it in many ways.
I have not played NS for long (2 months ... yup ... newbster) but I have grown to enjoy the game play style as well as the strategic implications of the alien/marine conflict. The tactics of it do feel more like a conventional deathmatch game than I was expecting. It took some getting used to because I don't typically play computer games although I do keep up with some of them.
I would be very interested in playing a more militaristic/realistic version of NS. Having said that I am dying to see what NS would look like on an advanced engine like HL2 where some of the really interesting tactical vision that Flayra and others have suggested could be tried. I'm really looking forward to it. Keep on trucking... <disable flame shield>
<!--QuoteBegin-Khaim+Mar 11 2004, 08:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Khaim @ Mar 11 2004, 08:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You have a point that Jetpacks were unbalanced Forlorn, however, in the games where marines actually did something beside JP/HMG rush, it could be quite a strategical fight. Many people, if I remember correctly, simply wanted 1.04 with a jetpack nerf, and ended up being somewhat dissappointed with the 'style' of gameplay in 2.0x and above versions. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Okay...
Lets say you don't rush JP's...
You still had phases that were cheaper and easier to use
You still had marines with large large combat advantages over skulks
<b>Posted in Firewater's "Abolishing the Hives System" thread:</b>
Been away for awhile and I see there are a few interesting things brewing...
Did someone suggest a the idea of a buildable hive (which allows spawns) at any location on the map? I think that sounds very interesting and it could be a very dynamic gameplay model... this is my first impression of how I think it could work;
[QUOTE]<b>Basic Concept - <u>Hives Model</b></u>
- Aliens are allowed a maximum of 3 hives. - The Main Hive (or Mother Hive) cannot be destroyed (like the CC) - The 2 other hives can be built anywhere on the map (Expandable Hives) - Evolutions and abilities <b><i>are</i></b> linked to hives* - Chambers <b><i>are not</i></b> linked to Hives
*<i>I know this is kind of going back to the 1.04 Hive system but bear with me</i>[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]<b>Concept - <u>Expandable Hives</b></u>
- Aliens can spawn from expandable hives - Expandable hives are weaker then the mother hive (slightly slower heal rate and lesser cost?) - Expandable hives can only be built outside of a min. distance from Mother Hive* - Expandable hives has a min. space requirement (no hives in hallway/small rooms)
*<i>Cannot have 3 hives healing each other :o</i>
<u><b>Impact?</b></u>
- No predefined hive locations (less predictablility, more strategic options) - Expandable Hives can be built as a forward base, a resource base in a resource rich area, or to hold strategic areas[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]<b>Basic Concept - <u>Unlinking Chambers to Hives</u></b>
- Gorges can build any chamber any time - Aliens will only be allowed to get 1-of-3 chamber upgrades per hive (2 hives: 2-of-3 upgrades / 3 hives: 3-of-3 upgrades)
<b><u>Impact?</u></b>
- Aliens can employ mixed upgrade tactics before 2+ hives - No chamber order means greater flexability and adaptability[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]<b>Basic Concept - <u>Linking Evolutions and Abilities to Hives</u></b>
- 1 Hive: Skulks, Gorges, and Lerks / 2 Hives: Fades / 3 Hives: Onos - Abilities linked to hives (same as always)[/QUOTE]
<b><u>Impact?</u></b><i>
- Some people might really be displeased with this suggestion but I think <b>deployable spawn points</b> [i]and</i> <b>chambers unlinked from hives</b> are both significant advances. Evolutions at any hive seems a little overpowered with idea idea (<i>but you tell me, think it would work with evos unlinked to hives?</i>) [/quote]
My initial impression of this system is that it is a compromise between completely doing away a system with a 3 Hive Structure and giving aliens more tactical and strategic flexibility.
I think the main impact of deployable hive system as opposed to the current hive system is that the aliens are now in control of what territory they want to take. In all the other versions the territory aliens [i]required[/b] is predefined by the map. By allowing aliens to pick where they want a 2nd/3rd spawn area (balanced by the marine ability to relocate ips or to build forward bases?), this drastically alters the marine approach to wiping the aliens out. Things change when you don't know the enemy can come from 1-of-3 places.
This suggestion is by no means perfect and as always feel free to open up.
The gameplay I envision is a fight for resources where mini-hives and tfac/sieges/turrets are built, fought over and destroyed in the struggle for terrritory, resources, and ultimately, access to each others MS. (They both know where each others MS is, but where are the PGs and mini-hives?) Major tweaks required? Probably. Costs would have to be adjusted.
Use your imagination if you see something in it, tell me what you think. Whomever suggested it, I don't quite recall, I think it is a fair compromise of ideas with interesting strategic possibilities.
I think it preserves the action in the FPS while expanding strategic depth in the RTS.
<b>Khaim</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 love the bug fixes and such of the higher builds of Natural-Selection, but as far as the 'feel' of the game goes, 1.04 was pretty much as good as it could get.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What is it exactly about 1.04 that people like? There <i>was</i> a certain feeling you got from 1.04 that no other versions since then has reproduced. It was a good feeling. I can't go as far as saying I like 1.04 better then 3.0, COMM was all about the tech rush, the JP/SG rush was obviously imbalanced. I do admit before those things became prevalent on pubs 1.04 had a particular tug-of-war-like conflict to the game.
You 1.04 lovers really need to narrow down what exactly it is (evos linked to hives maybe?) that gave NS that particular "onepointohfourfeeling". <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
If you took that onepointohfourfeeling and combined it with threepointoh polish and technology, I think that is an interesting experiment indeed.
Could you expand on the things you liked in 1.04 and how you would combine it with 3.0? We don't mind people using their imaginations here right people. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
And yea, the 1.0x's were a bit more strategic than now. For one thing, I can actually remember fighting for territory, not just 'rt, elec, rt, elec, rt, elec, okay lets get hive!' On the alien side, teamwork is just simply not what it used to be...really. You can argue all you want, alien right now rarely has the teamwork of the days of yore. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Interesting. Suggestions to give 3.0 the same type of feeling? I direct my comment at you and Khaim the two 1.04 likers in this thread.
I know there are more of you out there so lets here it. What was it you liked and do you think it can be worked into 3.0?
Twitch games: UT2K4, Halflife, Team fortress classic, bucketload as they're cheap to make.
Strategic games: Ns, counterstrike, planetside. Not many.
Inbetween: Tribes series. Even rarer because they're so hard to play and make.
Conclusion: Most people want to play twitch games, but twitch games are boring and moreso, they're often energy consuming and common. Fewer players play strategic games, because strategic games require strategy and thinking, 2 things most people don't want to do as it takes an investment of time to learn strategic thinking.
Most strategic games are based on reality, as reality is the ultamate chess board most of these games look to emulate. Twitch games emulate tetris.
So NS should stay a strategic game and get more strategic.
Fantasmo, you ideas are great but there is a problem...
Wouldn't the maps all have to be redesigned? That would simply not be feasible.
To add on to Firewater's suggestion (i.e. removing alien tech dependency on hives), what about starting the game with all three hives? Each hive serves as a spawn point, much like the spawn points of BF1942 or ET. You may select your spawn point, but there still will be a spawn queue (may be improved with alien tech). Each hive is weaker but still provides healing. This ensures that the aliens get better map control earlier on. To win the marines have to take down all the hives. Everything else is similar to Firewater's suggestion.
<!--QuoteBegin-Fantasmo+Mar 14 2004, 09:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Fantasmo @ Mar 14 2004, 09:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> What is it exactly about 1.04 that people like? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The game was new, and people played the game as implemented.
Let me clarify.
Within any game, there are sort of two subgames. There is the overt game, as presented in the instruction manual/rules/whatever. Then there is the game as played, which consists of all the unwritten rules, standards of behavior, accepted strategies, and exploits (or unexpected uses of the rules or world physics, if you want to be more charitable).
As a game matures, the first aspect is slowly subsumed by the second. Successive play erodes our suspension of disbelief. The maps cease to be moody and immersive and become simply an abstract arena to fight in. The environmental noises cease to be creepy and become an annoyance as we try to hear enemy troop movement. When we get jumped by a skulk, we no longer think "oh god, what was that?" We think "okay, armor 1, no focus, I've got two more bites before I die. He's coming back around, if I jump now, I should get some knockback air time, and be able to take him out before he gets a third bite in."
In short, all games gravitate toward Quake 3, where the environment is largely a pretty backdrop to highly abstract gameplay.
The two things which slow that down are:
1. Significant rule changes, which render existing knowledge of the game world useless (and invoke whinging from experienced players, who are now back to square one)
2. Oblique world mechanics, which are so deeply hidden from players as to make gaming the system futile. For example, games in which there is no health bar, or where weapons do variable damage.
Comments
EDIT: hang on, we're forgetting something here. While marines can take and hold a hive without much fear for retribution except in special hive locations(which are usually avoided in any case), aliens can't do that. Because marines can just put up a siege. Yes, you can prevent the marines from building the siege, but you might as well prevent them from getting anything at all done. It's not that easy. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Without much fear of retribuition? While in your average public game, a silly little turret farm has some effectiveness - against decent alien teams, you'll be facing a reasonable amount of higher lifeforms. So deciding to try and lock down a hive has serious consequences - less time spent holding and recapping the other res, less time spent knocking down hives/rts and valuable res spent on elec/turrets/PG that could all be going into the offense.
And with every minute that progresses, you're increasing the likelihood of facing yet another higher lifeform and seeing less and less income. So sure, marines can lock down 2 spots no problemo - and face a slow and painful loss.
2 nodes then? With one, you can get armor 2 and weapons 2 at the arms lab, and upgrade the armory- BUT you can not drop any of the stuff you get from an advanced armory, until you hold the second node as well(which will, obviously, let you get the rest of the tech tree). Upgrading to adv armory should still cost resources, or other costs should be increased.
EDIT: hang on, we're forgetting something here. While marines can take and hold a hive without much fear for retribution except in special hive locations(which are usually avoided in any case), aliens can't do that. Because marines can just put up a siege. Yes, you can prevent the marines from building the siege, but you might as well prevent them from getting anything at all done. It's not that easy. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Relocations really do not work. They slow down your early game considerably and are risky. Out of the tons of scrims/matches I've played in, never have I seen a single relocation work. Relocating in my eyes is bigger suicide than going sensory in 2.01.
1 node, else the idea would never work and would end up nerfing the rine's into oblivion.
A)See if its possible
B)Find out what kind of new structures and alien implematations can take place
It would be pointless for me to draw a "blueprint" for something that wouldn't even be put in the game.
<b>Firewater</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-->the PT model restricts both sides, which is more balanced,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the main difference between these two proposed solutions is that my solution attempts to add an additional element (power nozzles) for the marines to secure to match the aliens need to secure a RTs and a Hive. Firewater's solution chooses to remove the additional element (the hives) from the alien team which causes the strategic imbalance.
After reading a little bit more about Firewater's idea and reflecting on my own I think I have to say that neither of the ideas are bad or really comparable since they attempt to tackle the issue from two fundamentally different approaches.
While the power nozzle idea may be less work in terms of coding and it is definately much closer to the gameplay structure that is presently available I have a feeling it is only a band-aid solution. My solution balances the current gameplay structure by complicating the marine side, the question is will that result in greater strategic options... I'm not sure it will, I'm having thoughts it may just restrict marine strategic options almost in the same way hives restrict alien strategic options. The restriction would not be as harsh as aliens since marines will only need to hold 1 PT for full tech (based on Forlorn's revised 1 PT idea).
<b>Firewater</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-->is it more fun?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I really can't answer that, <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> what do you guys think?
Even though it will require much recoding and reworking of the game I think Firewater's solution is more of a long-term solution that creates balance through simplifying the overall model of the mod. I seem to think removing hive dependency will open up far more strategic options then the PT solution but only if we carefully rework and rebalance the tech trees for both sides in a far more dynamic gameplay model.
If the Dev's want something to try that isn't too much of a departure from the current gameplay model, I wouldn't mind seeing how the 1 PT solution would affect the gameplay. However if they are into something more ambitious I would fully support and push Firewater's solution.
In fact, I think Firewater should do up a "Removing Hive Dependency" discussion thread to explore any potential ideas for moving NS into that gameplay style.
Good posts guys, lets keep the ideas and feedback flowin!
<!--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-->See the problem with NS is that its a consistent FPS, I dont even see real tactics used anymore whether it be pub or scrim, which is fine because I am FPS gamer for life, but at the same time, the game is advertised as a RTS/FPS, I feel that everytime that is said its misleading those who came for more a RTS experience. Because the only strategy for aliens get a second hive or rush, that really does not leave much room for tactics. Also choosing which species to tech to leaves a lot more strategy in the game (hrmm lets tech onos early to nail their res, NO LETS USE A FADE/SKULK COMBO TO ATTACK FROM 2 DIFFERENT ANGLES), thats just a simple example of the infinite ammount of strategy and tactics that could be used in the system of getting rid of the hives, and allowing freedom of tech to exist. Now think what this opens up for the marines?
Its the entire hive system that prevents tactics, not marines jumping, not knockback, not bunnyhopping. These were things developed to counter one another. NS is a TDM game with very little strategy, and this guy (comm) who can either make you or break you. I know this is a lot but I feel this can take NS to the next level.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with you fully but for the sake of clarity (because I really like your point and I think others can really benefit from considering what you are saying) I want to just go over your post (especially the really good points) where I think people might accidently confuse "tactics" and "strategy."
I'm just going to define the two words here so we are all on the same page;
<!--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--><b>tac·tics</b>
1a. (used with a sing. verb) The military science that deals with securing objectives set by strategy, especially the technique of deploying and directing troops, ships, and aircraft in effective maneuvers against an enemy: Tactics is a required course at all military academies.
1b. (used with a pl. verb) Maneuvers used against an enemy: Guerrilla tactics were employed during most of the war.
2. (used with a sing. or pl. verb) <u>A procedure or set of maneuvers engaged in to achieve an end, an aim, or a goal.</u><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--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--><b>strat·e·gy</b>
1a. The science and art of using all the forces of a nation to execute approved plans as effectively as possible during peace or war.
1b. <u>The science and art of military command as applied to the overall planning and conduct of large-scale combat operations.</u>
2. A plan of action resulting from strategy or intended to accomplish a specific goal. See Synonyms at plan.
3. The art or skill of using stratagems in endeavors such as politics and business.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The underline definitions are most applicable to our discussion.
Please tell me if I'm misinterpreting your point and I apologize in advance if I have.
<b>Firewater</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-->See the problem with NS is that its a consistent FPS, I dont even see real tactics used anymore whether it be pub or scrim<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed. I would add that on the tactical side, a <b>pub player</b> only really needs to be tactically aware on a Deathmatch level (environment and positioning, but not so much squad/team level awareness). <b>Clan players</b> require more awareness on the team level so I would say that clan warfare is more team orientated and strategic (maybe not <i>much</i> more) then pubs. Even though they might not move in big squads* they are still aware of the overall team strategy and is acting according to thei plans, even if they are moving around individually.
*<i>People seem to generalize teamplay as moving around in a big squad. I think there are many degrees of teamplay and moving around in a one big coherent squad may be high on the the teamplay meter (requiring squad </i>as well as<i> team awareness), but what clans do is still considered teamplay although it is admintedly less teamplay intensive squad-wise (still requires team awareness but not much squad-level awareness).</i>
When DM tactics are relied upon I feel that the need for an overall strategy suffers because it becomes more about targets of opportunity then planned manouvers to capture a certain objective.
To me this seems to indicate that NS is much closer to the DM side of a TDM then the Team side.
<b>Firewater</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-->but at the same time, the game is advertised as a RTS/FPS, I feel that everytime that is said its misleading those who came for more a RTS experience. Because the only strategy for aliens get a second hive or rush, that really does not leave much room for tactics.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed. When your enemy is only limited to 1 of 2 strategies the opposing team doesn't even need to develop many counter-strategies. They just need to counter with one of a few proven tactics (ie. Slash and Burn / Two-Hive Lockdown) that have been shown to be successful. There aren't many strategic surprises they can pop on you that your tactics can't deal with.
<b>Firewater</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-->Its the entire hive system that prevents tactics,... NS is a TDM game with very little strategy,...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed.
The hive system greatly reduces the number of available strategies for the alien team, which in turn means the marines aren't really challenged to develop any counter-strategies. Now because there is such a small number of available strategies that can be executed or countered, NS is mostly about tactics... and a very limited menu of tactics at that.
Tactics (deployment and directing of troops) are employed to attain the individual objectives of a strategy (the overall plan of action to meet a goal). When you have limited strategies you are also limited to only the tactics those strategies require to meet a goal.
Maybe that explains why a game of NS (pub or scrim) will usually ends up playing out in a few familair ways regardless of the map.
PS: I hope I didn't make any muckups in logic or reasoning on this post, I was continuously interrupted (@ work) and my brain hurts from dealing with my assistant, I have to assist her more then she assists me. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
A comm sends two guys out to cap while the others build (strategy)
Strategy because there is no fighting (yet).
Tactics are used when one of the two guys (or the comm) smells an ambush and decides to bait them in.
Strategy involves getting stuff for the team i.e. Teching, capping RTs, dropping weapons etc..
Tactics are combat driven, or what to do when you are about to engage the enemy
Flanking, pincer tactics (LOL classic sYn tactic), bait and switch (which is becomming more popular) 3-point strikes (meaning attacking from 3 different sides, if possible).
Strategy gives you the means to apply tactics, tactics give the team the ability to take ground and expand. Its kind of like a marriage, where if these two get along well, the outcome will be very favorable.
Great Strategy, without great tactics, is useless, because no one will be able to execute and do what is required. Great tactics without great strategy is nothing as well, because if your team does not have the firepower, you can outsmart your enemy all you want, but still get your **** kicked.
Knockback should be lessened to a point where the marine and skulk still have an equal chance at winning the duel
Knockback should be lessened to a point where the marine and skulk still have an equal chance at winning the duel <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
When in close combat, the marine should NOT have the same chance as the alien... He should have about 20% MAX if he's very dodgy...
Does anyone understand my inncoherent ramblings or should I just go back to bed?
Knockback should be lessened to a point where the marine and skulk still have an equal chance at winning the duel <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
When in close combat, the marine should NOT have the same chance as the alien... He should have about 20% MAX if he's very dodgy... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
lol. no.
It already takes alot more "skill" (imho) to play an alien than a marine. Any good FPS player with a decent ping can kill a skulk, or a fade, (if he has the correct upgrades, but in NS:C, he can choose his own template to suit his needs...). It requires point-and-shoot skills.
But aliens, it's a different style of play. Skulks will need to use their abilities (xeno for example), lerks will spore and use umbra to protect themselves and ennemies, fade will blink to kill faster and heal themselves... etc... It doesn't require much TEAMPLAY but it requires strategies...
So as it stands, in regular NS: Marines need a good comm, and any group of 3 or 4 decently-skilled marines can take a hive (more if the server is bigger...). Larger rush may mobilise entire teams of marines, requiring some people to guard the back, some to scout ahead, some to weld HAs for instance, some to be tanking... It's strategy-oriented, but you see it alot in public servers, very good players will often find ways to "solo" with a combo of JP/shotty or JP/hmg for example, if availaible to them.
Aliens: They rely on gorges for upgrades, but then again, they could gorge themselves if they wished... As far as skulk goes, it's only based on skill. I've seen early game skulks take out 5 marines, just because they had skill. And they'd keep going back and owning the 5 marines over and over, until the comm got smart and dropped shotties or until the aliens won. The skulk is the perfect example of rewarding a solo player. But larger alien assault require team planning. The use of zerg techniques will usually assure a win, because 5 or 6 skulks barging into a poorly defended marine outpost will win, hands down... And then we have alien engame. Usually, if aliens got this far, they've probably won, unless if it's a deadlock between marines and aliens, where each control half the map and no one can win.. until a party raids in a group!
So should we reward the use of tactics? we already do! An onos alone will get beaten fairly easily, but an onos with an umbra-ing lerk and a healing/webbing/bile-ing gorge will be much much harder to take down. The same goes for the marines, a lone HA, even if he's skilled, will not last very long. but a HA with a welder behind him can go a long way, even win a match...
Does it need changing? I think not. NS is already quite original in itself, it is the first FPS mod i know to require strategists to lead! Without a good strategy-player at the command, marines are lost, and without 2 or 3 strong gorges to plan things, the aliens are lost... It sounds fine, and it is fine, at least to me it is <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I pointed out that NS had elements of RTS, and outlined what those were: map control, build order, tech tree. To be honest, Warcraft 3 pretty much turns into an arcade clickfest at about that point, so I guss it's a question of how strategic the average RTS actually IS. I'm not arguing here for more RTS style, I'm pointing out that it has been and can be done.
I'd also argue that getting torn apart by a player who's more tooled-up than you is pretty integral to most FPS games, wether or not it's a good thing. People seem to love to bring up Counterstrike (it's been done, I think to myself; the game is called COUNTERSTRIKE, *sigh* ) so I'll jump on the bandwagon and point out that getting ripped up by better equiped players because your team didn't pull their weight OR you got unlucky OR whatever is central to the gameplay. Why? Because getting rewarded for good play and upgrading to the perfect gun for the situation and reaping great ruin is key to the addictiveness of that style of game - you see the connection.
Anyway, the post above mine makes some excellent points about the present rewards for good tactical play. Tactics am good.
lol. no. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why though? The marine can be careful and aim up to where the skulks are likely to be hiding, and he will win. Besides, the alien was smart and skillful, setting up an ambush, rather than rushing head-on. The marine should be equally smart(and aim up, or throw a grenade if available) to have an equal chance.
EDIT: Because otherwise you're removing skill in favor of luck.
lol. no. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why though? The marine can be careful and aim up to where the skulks are likely to be hiding, and he will win. Besides, the alien was smart and skillful, setting up an ambush, rather than rushing head-on. The marine should be equally smart(and aim up, or throw a grenade if available) to have an equal chance.
EDIT: Because otherwise you're removing skill in favor of luck. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Look. If you think that sitting behind a courner or choke point takes skill, you are sadly mistaken.
The game must be so that both sides are constantly focusing to control the sitution, whether it is so the marine is keeping his crosshair on the alien, or so that the alien never looses track of the marine and is charging as fast as possible.
Let me tell you right now, even against some of the top marines if I am given a clean ambush where the marine fails to look at me and I'm right on top of him before he shoots at me once, the marine is practically guarenteed to lose, no matter who he is. Unless he has an HMG with lv. 1 armor, I may lose, but even then the chances are strongly in my favor.
On the contrary... if I am a marine and I know exactly where a skulk is hiding, there is a VERY good chance I'm going to round the courner and kill him. There is also a good chance he will win (if he doesn't miss a bite and approaches very quickly) because skulks at close range are still quite lethal. Remember, a skulk kills faster than a marine kills the skulk. The skulk isn't completely worthless.
<!--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-->Does it need changing? I think not. NS is already quite original in itself, it is the first FPS mod i know to require strategists to lead! Without a good strategy-player at the command, marines are lost, and without 2 or 3 strong gorges to plan things, the aliens are lost... It sounds fine, and it is fine, at least to me it is
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I feel the same way, except gorging isn't quite like commanding, commanding takes a lot of talent, whereas anyone who reads the manual and a quick quide on bhopping can be a good gorge. Gorging could definatly use some improvements.
We can take examples of this:
- 2.0 Fade sucked! Even I thought it did at first.
- 1.04 lerks sucked!
- 1.00 marines sucked! (most, if not all, pubs believed this)
There are countless examples of this outside the world of NS as well. Cloaking in StarCraft is useless if you don't know how to properly use it. Hero's in WarCraft3 are extreamlly underpowered if you can't micro.
Just tons and tons of examples.
No, but realizing when it's smarter to hang on the ceiling instead of jumping out around the corner takes intelligence, if not skill.
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+,--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ ,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Let me tell you right now, even against some of the top marines if I am given a clean ambush where the marine fails to look at me and I'm right on top of him before he shoots at me once, the marine is practically guarenteed to lose, no matter who he is.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Yeah, same goes for most skulks, thing is you <b>should</b> win, unless...
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+,--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ ,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I am a marine and I know exactly where a skulk is hiding, there is a VERY good chance I'm going to round the courner and kill him.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> because then you out-smarted, or out-skilled, the skulk. Which is good. That is how it is supposed to be.
[EDIT: you seem to agree with me actually. If the marine is SMRT and looks up in every nook and crannie and whatever, he will find the skulk(s) and win the battle-unless the skulk has leap or focus and you dont have armor 1. If the skulk is SMRT-er than the marine, he will hide in an unexpected location, and get a "free" bite, meaning he is very likely to win.]
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+,--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ ,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I feel the same way, except gorging isn't quite like commanding, commanding takes a lot of talent, whereas anyone who reads the manual and a quick quide on bhopping can be a good gorge. Gorging could definatly use some improvements.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->Personally I don't think gorges are meant to be as important as commanders, since they cost 10 res, perhaps to make them available to all aliens at the start of the game.
Just my 2 cents. Strategy, Teamwork, and Tactics all the way, IMO.
-Khaim
And yea, the 1.0x's were a bit more strategic than now. For one thing, I can actually remember fighting for territory, not just 'rt, elec, rt, elec, rt, elec, okay lets get hive!' On the alien side, teamwork is just simply not what it used to be...really. You can argue all you want, alien right now rarely has the teamwork of the days of yore.
Just my 2 cents. Strategy, Teamwork, and Tactics all the way, IMO.
-Khaim <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
....whhaaat?
Huh? Strategy that involved one marine with a JP/HMG was not more strategic... nope. 1.04 had like zero strategy involved IMO.
For aliens, perhaps, but again, not any more than it does now.
<enable flame shield>
I am drawn to NS because it is richly imagined -- almost irrespective of game-play!
To qualify this statement I should add that for most of us, there are many cultural precendents of the NS genre which reinforce our ideas about it. I think the NS team has done a really incredible job of realizing a game in this genre and, through their skillful execution, has enhanced it in many ways.
I have not played NS for long (2 months ... yup ... newbster) but I have grown to enjoy the game play style as well as the strategic implications of the alien/marine conflict. The tactics of it do feel more like a conventional deathmatch game than I was expecting. It took some getting used to because I don't typically play computer games although I do keep up with some of them.
I would be very interested in playing a more militaristic/realistic version of NS. Having said that I am dying to see what NS would look like on an advanced engine like HL2 where some of the really interesting tactical vision that Flayra and others have suggested could be tried. I'm really looking forward to it. Keep on trucking...
<disable flame shield>
<!--emo&::siege::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/siege.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='siege.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Okay...
Lets say you don't rush JP's...
You still had phases that were cheaper and easier to use
You still had marines with large large combat advantages over skulks
You still had the HMG
Aliens still had a super slow res system
Hive limitations
One gorge only
DC's only
The list, it goes on
Been away for awhile and I see there are a few interesting things brewing...
Did someone suggest a the idea of a buildable hive (which allows spawns) at any location on the map? I think that sounds very interesting and it could be a very dynamic gameplay model... this is my first impression of how I think it could work;
[QUOTE]<b>Basic Concept - <u>Hives Model</b></u>
- Aliens are allowed a maximum of 3 hives.
- The Main Hive (or Mother Hive) cannot be destroyed (like the CC)
- The 2 other hives can be built anywhere on the map (Expandable Hives)
- Evolutions and abilities <b><i>are</i></b> linked to hives*
- Chambers <b><i>are not</i></b> linked to Hives
*<i>I know this is kind of going back to the 1.04 Hive system but bear with me</i>[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]<b>Concept - <u>Expandable Hives</b></u>
- Aliens can spawn from expandable hives
- Expandable hives are weaker then the mother hive (slightly slower heal rate and lesser cost?)
- Expandable hives can only be built outside of a min. distance from Mother Hive*
- Expandable hives has a min. space requirement (no hives in hallway/small rooms)
*<i>Cannot have 3 hives healing each other :o</i>
<u><b>Impact?</b></u>
- No predefined hive locations (less predictablility, more strategic options)
- Expandable Hives can be built as a forward base, a resource base in a resource rich area, or to hold strategic areas[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]<b>Basic Concept - <u>Unlinking Chambers to Hives</u></b>
- Gorges can build any chamber any time
- Aliens will only be allowed to get 1-of-3 chamber upgrades per hive (2 hives: 2-of-3 upgrades / 3 hives: 3-of-3 upgrades)
<b><u>Impact?</u></b>
- Aliens can employ mixed upgrade tactics before 2+ hives
- No chamber order means greater flexability and adaptability[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]<b>Basic Concept - <u>Linking Evolutions and Abilities to Hives</u></b>
- 1 Hive: Skulks, Gorges, and Lerks / 2 Hives: Fades / 3 Hives: Onos
- Abilities linked to hives (same as always)[/QUOTE]
<b><u>Impact?</u></b><i>
- Some people might really be displeased with this suggestion but I think <b>deployable spawn points</b> [i]and</i> <b>chambers unlinked from hives</b> are both significant advances. Evolutions at any hive seems a little overpowered with idea idea (<i>but you tell me, think it would work with evos unlinked to hives?</i>) [/quote]
My initial impression of this system is that it is a compromise between completely doing away a system with a 3 Hive Structure and giving aliens more tactical and strategic flexibility.
I think the main impact of deployable hive system as opposed to the current hive system is that the aliens are now in control of what territory they want to take. In all the other versions the territory aliens [i]required[/b] is predefined by the map. By allowing aliens to pick where they want a 2nd/3rd spawn area (balanced by the marine ability to relocate ips or to build forward bases?), this drastically alters the marine approach to wiping the aliens out. Things change when you don't know the enemy can come from 1-of-3 places.
This suggestion is by no means perfect and as always feel free to open up.
The gameplay I envision is a fight for resources where mini-hives and tfac/sieges/turrets are built, fought over and destroyed in the struggle for terrritory, resources, and ultimately, access to each others MS. (They both know where each others MS is, but where are the PGs and mini-hives?) Major tweaks required? Probably. Costs would have to be adjusted.
Use your imagination if you see something in it, tell me what you think. Whomever suggested it, I don't quite recall, I think it is a fair compromise of ideas with interesting strategic possibilities.
I think it preserves the action in the FPS while expanding strategic depth in the RTS.
Discussibate. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
EDiT
<!--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 love the bug fixes and such of the higher builds of Natural-Selection, but as far as the 'feel' of the game goes, 1.04 was pretty much as good as it could get.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What is it exactly about 1.04 that people like? There <i>was</i> a certain feeling you got from 1.04 that no other versions since then has reproduced. It was a good feeling. I can't go as far as saying I like 1.04 better then 3.0, COMM was all about the tech rush, the JP/SG rush was obviously imbalanced. I do admit before those things became prevalent on pubs 1.04 had a particular tug-of-war-like conflict to the game.
You 1.04 lovers really need to narrow down what exactly it is (evos linked to hives maybe?) that gave NS that particular "onepointohfourfeeling". <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
If you took that onepointohfourfeeling and combined it with threepointoh polish and technology, I think that is an interesting experiment indeed.
Could you expand on the things you liked in 1.04 and how you would combine it with 3.0? We don't mind people using their imaginations here right people. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>Khaim</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-->Just my 2 cents. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And as always, your 2 cents is always valued.
<b>Khaim</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-->Strategy, Teamwork, and Tactics all the way, IMO.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed 100%.
Now the vexing question is; how much of each bakes the perfect NS cake? ;P
I like cake.
<!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
And yea, the 1.0x's were a bit more strategic than now. For one thing, I can actually remember fighting for territory, not just 'rt, elec, rt, elec, rt, elec, okay lets get hive!' On the alien side, teamwork is just simply not what it used to be...really. You can argue all you want, alien right now rarely has the teamwork of the days of yore. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Interesting. Suggestions to give 3.0 the same type of feeling? I direct my comment at you and Khaim the two 1.04 likers in this thread.
I know there are more of you out there so lets here it. What was it you liked and do you think it can be worked into 3.0?
Twitch games: UT2K4, Halflife, Team fortress classic, bucketload as they're cheap to make.
Strategic games: Ns, counterstrike, planetside. Not many.
Inbetween: Tribes series. Even rarer because they're so hard to play and make.
Conclusion: Most people want to play twitch games, but twitch games are boring and moreso, they're often energy consuming and common. Fewer players play strategic games, because strategic games require strategy and thinking, 2 things most people don't want to do as it takes an investment of time to learn strategic thinking.
Most strategic games are based on reality, as reality is the ultamate chess board most of these games look to emulate. Twitch games emulate tetris.
So NS should stay a strategic game and get more strategic.
Wouldn't the maps all have to be redesigned? That would simply not be feasible.
To add on to Firewater's suggestion (i.e. removing alien tech dependency on hives), what about starting the game with all three hives? Each hive serves as a spawn point, much like the spawn points of BF1942 or ET. You may select your spawn point, but there still will be a spawn queue (may be improved with alien tech). Each hive is weaker but still provides healing. This ensures that the aliens get better map control earlier on. To win the marines have to take down all the hives. Everything else is similar to Firewater's suggestion.
The game was new, and people played the game as implemented.
Let me clarify.
Within any game, there are sort of two subgames. There is the overt game, as presented in the instruction manual/rules/whatever. Then there is the game as played, which consists of all the unwritten rules, standards of behavior, accepted strategies, and exploits (or unexpected uses of the rules or world physics, if you want to be more charitable).
As a game matures, the first aspect is slowly subsumed by the second. Successive play erodes our suspension of disbelief. The maps cease to be moody and immersive and become simply an abstract arena to fight in. The environmental noises cease to be creepy and become an annoyance as we try to hear enemy troop movement. When we get jumped by a skulk, we no longer think "oh god, what was that?" We think "okay, armor 1, no focus, I've got two more bites before I die. He's coming back around, if I jump now, I should get some knockback air time, and be able to take him out before he gets a third bite in."
In short, all games gravitate toward Quake 3, where the environment is largely a pretty backdrop to highly abstract gameplay.
The two things which slow that down are:
1. Significant rule changes, which render existing knowledge of the game world useless (and invoke whinging from experienced players, who are now back to square one)
2. Oblique world mechanics, which are so deeply hidden from players as to make gaming the system futile. For example, games in which there is no health bar, or where weapons do variable damage.