Don't buy into the Marines must be able to build.

12346»

Comments

  • zexzex Join Date: 2009-10-07 Member: 68978Posts: 796Members
    QUOTE (Syrin @ Aug 6 2010, 11:03 AM) »
    people are saying that it removes some aspect of gameplay that they liked from NS.


    exactly...

    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 6 2010, 10:16 AM) »
    "I loved NS1, this isn't in from NS1, can we put it in!?"
    *sigh*


    *sigh* indeed
  • HarathanHarathan Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72845Posts: 96Members
    edited August 2010
    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 6 2010, 10:47 AM) »
    All true tbh, but I'm not sure that forcing team work on the marine team is going to make the game successful.


    Absolutely not, it should never be forced. But certainly it could be encouraged by clever use of mechanics.

    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 6 2010, 10:47 AM) »
    Reducing the reliance both ways between Comm and Marines, will mean public play is more separated, but I would argue this might be for the good, a big reason NS1 wasn't bigger was that commanding was too important and communication failed. Now I understand the argument that perhaps this is what made the community that did take it up quite the favour it was / is, and I'm sure we all enjoyed it. However UWE is trying to reach a bigger audience and it has to be fun for all playing.


    You could well have a point regarding the communcation failure there. And bigger audience is always good. But possibly (possibly because nobody can know for sure yet) diluting tried, tested and true mechanics in order to achieve it? I dont know.

    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 6 2010, 10:47 AM) »
    However, not enforcing co-operation doesn't mean that good players and comms won't co-operate and communicate, it will still be to their advantage to do so, and with the new commander abilities it might be that communication required is still high without the need to change the building mechanic.


    But if the communication required between marines and commander is still high, do we not go back to your earlier point about how commanding was too important and communication failed? Also as I said, FPS players who just want to FPS can do so without any contribution to the team at all. If the RTS and FPS elements are seperated more for a wider audience, I worry we'll see a lot of FPS come in and just want to FPS without the hassle of following orders.

    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 6 2010, 10:47 AM) »
    I think we pretty much agree that all this speculation has little worth, essentially we need to playtest the mechanics and move from there. I think the best way to stick with the way it was originally designed and then if when we're getting closer to beta we think we are lacking something that could be helped by changing (back closer to, or further from NS1) the building mechanic then it should be altered.

    (Quick Edit: I know what I think it means, =] )


    Fair enough.



    QUOTE (zex @ Aug 6 2010, 10:48 AM) »
    "What you have to wonder is will the inability to build, combined with the ability to buy your own guns and armor, remove the incentive marines have to follow orders?"

    Actually, you don't "have to wonder" that at all, if you have a modicum of faith in UWE's vision and aren't a concern troll who acts like UWE is a bunch of bumbling hacks that just stumbled on the perfect game design in NS1 and will ruin it if they change anything.


    Be quiet Zex, the grown ups are trying to talk. Throwing around the term "concern troll" (by which I think you mean, someone who legitimately expresses concern about the game on a forum set up for that purpose, among others, which they are entitled to do) doesnt help your arguements.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    in absentis sapientia, vino evalesco
  • TheGivingTreeTheGivingTree Join Date: 2003-01-09 Member: 12070Posts: 511Members
    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 6 2010, 05:47 AM) »
    All true tbh, but I'm not sure that forcing team work on the marine team is going to make the game successful.

    Reducing the reliance both ways between Comm and Marines, will mean public play is more separated, but I would argue this might be for the good, a big reason NS1 wasn't bigger was that commanding was too important and communication failed. Now I understand the argument that perhaps this is what made the community that did take it up quite the favour it was / is, and I'm sure we all enjoyed it. However UWE is trying to reach a bigger audience and it has to be fun for all playing.

    However, not enforcing co-operation doesn't mean that good players and comms won't co-operate and communicate, it will still be to their advantage to do so, and with the new commander abilities it might be that communication required is still high without the need to change the building mechanic.

    I think we pretty much agree that all this speculation has little worth, essentially we need to playtest the mechanics and move from there. I think the best way to stick with the way it was originally designed and then if when we're getting closer to beta we think we are lacking something that could be helped by changing (back closer to, or further from NS1) the building mechanic then it should be altered.

    (Quick Edit: I know what I think it means, =] )



    If you want to reach a bigger audience then the LAST thing in the world you should ever, ever do in a game is make the focal point well in this case for the marines, an escort mission.
    image

    "8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God" Ephesians 2:8
  • TheGivingTreeTheGivingTree Join Date: 2003-01-09 Member: 12070Posts: 511Members
    QUOTE (zex @ Aug 6 2010, 05:48 AM) »
    "What you have to wonder is will the inability to build, combined with the ability to buy your own guns and armor, remove the incentive marines have to follow orders?"

    Actually, you don't "have to wonder" that at all, if you have a modicum of faith in UWE's vision and aren't a concern troll who acts like UWE is a bunch of bumbling hacks that just stumbled on the perfect game design in NS1 and will ruin it if they change anything.


    You know Zex I would love to hear at least one constructive post from you so how about this, post the reasons why you believe marines not being able to build will improve the game play, strategies, tension, appealing to a wider audience, and core of NS, because all of us who support marine building have, so let's hear you side of it.
    image

    "8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God" Ephesians 2:8
  • DelphicDelphic Join Date: 2006-11-02 Member: 58262Posts: 431Members
    QUOTE (TheGivingTree @ Aug 6 2010, 01:15 PM) »
    If you want to reach a bigger audience then the LAST thing in the world you should ever, ever do in a game is make the focal point well in this case for the marines, an escort mission.


    True, but you don't necessarily have to change the building mechanic to avoid this, making the MACs have enough health it's really not a time useful activity to attack them and/or giving them and drifters the ability to phase / redemp back to nearest taken TP, could negate the problem to a large degree.

    I'm not saying people don't have valid concerns, what I am saying is we should see what we can do with these mechanics first, in real play testing rather than theorycrafting, and then if necessary change them. If we impliment the NS1 solution first, then playtest ofc it'll likely pass because we all love NS1 and will accept the mechanic as familar and working, if we want the game to evolve we have to try new approaches first, making note of concerns and possible issues and if we can't make them work, then we can try the NS1 solution.

    (My vote in the second poll thread was 1 OR 3D).
  • IeptBarakatIeptBarakat The most difficult name to speak ingame. Join Date: 2009-07-10 Member: 68107Posts: 2,022Members, Constellation, NS2 Map Tester
    I loved jumping into a public game, having a moderately well game with a decent commander and decent communication.

    But it sounds like the only way I'll be able to enjoy a decent game is I play some competitive match now because all the public matches will get all the co players to just grab weapons and run out of base.
  • HarathanHarathan Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72845Posts: 96Members
    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 6 2010, 12:29 PM) »
    True, but you don't necessarily have to change the building mechanic to avoid this, making the MACs have enough health it's really not a time useful activity to attack them and/or giving them and drifters the ability to phase / redemp back to nearest taken TP, could negate the problem to a large degree.

    I'm not saying people don't have valid concerns, what I am saying is we should see what we can do with these mechanics first, in real play testing rather than theorycrafting, and then if necessary change them. If we impliment the NS1 solution first, then playtest ofc it'll likely pass because we all love NS1 and will accept the mechanic as familar and working, if we want the game to evolve we have to try new approaches first, making note of concerns and possible issues and if we can't make them work, then we can try the NS1 solution.

    (My vote in the second poll thread was 1 OR 3D).


    +1
    in absentis sapientia, vino evalesco
  • CrispyCrispy Jaded GD Join Date: 2004-08-22 Member: 30793Posts: 3,225Members, Constellation
    QUOTE (Jimyd @ Aug 3 2010, 06:19 PM) »
    Otherwise, Commanding will be just be a Babysitting Research Monkey again.
    Agree with the notion of this statement, but disagree with your reasoning. Allowing the Marines to build creates interesting options.

    QUOTE
    Less Marines fighting, the slower gameplay becomes.
    It may be slower, but it's more interesting to play mind games when building and you know there's an enemy waiting to strike. Without that it's just a matter of camping as Marines, which gives them by far the upper hand.

    QUOTE
    Keep the RTS aspect of NS2 its own non-mixed thing.
    You don't have an argument for this, this is just an opinion.

    QUOTE
    If you must allow Marines to build Strucutres, then force them to be using their Welder(must buy one). I still say it is a bad idea(because you would have to do that Ghost Structure stuff again).
    Against forcing Welder but not against incentivising it. Not sure what you mean by ghost structure, but if you mean showing a ghost of the building as it gets created, that begins as a template that can be cancelled by an enemy walking into it, that would still be needed in NS2 as feedback to the players on the ground where structures are being placed and how long it will take for them to be completed.

    QUOTE
    Plus this is just another excuse for all the NS1 fanatics who want a carbon copy for NS2, to not learn to do anything new as a Commander. More micro is better for the Commander, since the Commander doesn't have to directly control his Marines.
    It's not an excuse, people are giving valid reasons if you look for them instead of starting dupe threads with the sole objective of pushing one side of the argument.

    QUOTE
    And yes I am saying it like the Commander would not be able to build MACs if they changed this(which won't be the case), but people will just be lazy and start yelling at Players to build the base and stuff because they are lazy at Commanding.
    It's not laziness if you can save for better tech by having players build structures for free.

    QUOTE
    And like I said, it doesn't make sense in NS1 how Marines could build a structure without a Welder, and we have a replacement for that; the MAC.
    As I see it, the MAC is not a replacement, it's an enabler. For me it's a mixture between stabiliser/learning wheels on a bicycle and a contingency for Marines not following orders.

    You have to realise that MACs are going to be worthless in high level games unless they have really high hitpoints, and if they have really high hit points they will be exploited for roles other than what they're intended for (such as blocking lifeforms, tanking, etc.).

    To be successful, MACs need to fulfil the role of a backup worker, not a primary worker. They need to have low hitpoints, a reasonable cost (at least equivalent to a Shotgun or similar powerful-yet-fleeting base tech) and be used to perform tasks in safely held areas, not on the front line. In addition to a fallback, they will also allow commanders to get to grips with the game offline/solo and will also be useful on smaller servers to make up player numbers.
  • RobBRobB TUBES OF THE INTERWEB Join Date: 2003-08-11 Member: 19423Posts: 3,660Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
    QUOTE
    There was some mild outcry at gorge-building being limited, but mostly everyone seemed to handle it OK.
    That is because there was only one builder class to begin with. And it's easier to reason what someones feeling if theres some sort of analogy.
    Unless you slide around your house on your belly and shape your furniture from puke, it's easier to describe for marines.

    Also the fact the alien commander builds now is still not present in most of our heads.
    I sure hope building is coming back to gorges as well. At least RTs and Hives.
    image
  • SentrySteveSentrySteve .txt Join Date: 2002-03-09 Member: 290Posts: 2,817Members, Constellation
    QUOTE (Snazz @ Aug 6 2010, 05:23 AM) »
    Everything added or changed to a game has balance issues to address, I doubt allowing Marines to build would be a particularly 'extreme' one. No idea what would be exploited, but if exploit issues ensue they can also be addressed.


    If you have 'no idea what would be exploited' then you're not thinking like a player who wants to win every time using everything at their disposal. Based off the method Flayra described here's two quick examples of exploits:

    http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1791390
    sentrysteve.txt
  • KwilKwil Join Date: 2003-07-06 Member: 17963Posts: 931Members
    QUOTE (Snazz @ Aug 6 2010, 03:23 AM) »
    Apart from the vast possibilities to balance the two build options, a bot will always follow it's orders to it's death (provided it isn't bugged) giving it a superiority to players and something for commanders to use when players are being uncooperative.


    Seriously? Are you seriously arguing that because some marines don't follow orders, commanders will still use MACs? Or in other words, that because crappy teams will still use MACs, they will retain their value in the game.

    Wow. I mean, even you have to admit that's kind of reaching.

    Why doesn't my Lerk perch?
  • TheGivingTreeTheGivingTree Join Date: 2003-01-09 Member: 12070Posts: 511Members
    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 6 2010, 07:29 AM) »
    True, but you don't necessarily have to change the building mechanic to avoid this, making the MACs have enough health it's really not a time useful activity to attack them and/or giving them and drifters the ability to phase / redemp back to nearest taken TP, could negate the problem to a large degree.

    I'm not saying people don't have valid concerns, what I am saying is we should see what we can do with these mechanics first, in real play testing rather than theorycrafting, and then if necessary change them. If we impliment the NS1 solution first, then playtest ofc it'll likely pass because we all love NS1 and will accept the mechanic as familar and working, if we want the game to evolve we have to try new approaches first, making note of concerns and possible issues and if we can't make them work, then we can try the NS1 solution.

    (My vote in the second poll thread was 1 OR 3D).


    I suppose this is where I get confused because I don't understand how this is seen as devolving, if anything having marines and MAC's build seems like evolving, its the building upon, the addition to NS, which only had one way of doing it, now two. Also it's not entirely theorycrafting because currently in alpha only MAC's can build and we are drawing our conclusions from that as well, which is a small piece of the game.

    I guess the problem is to me, it would almost be the equivalent of removing jumping from Mario, or gun battles from Halo. It's such a intricate part of the game that first and foremost you'd never ever even expect it to be removed, and secondly it worked so well you figure it would have no reason to be removed.
    image

    "8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God" Ephesians 2:8
  • JimydJimyd Join Date: 2003-02-08 Member: 13289Posts: 622Members
    edited August 2010
    Go play NS1 right now, if you can get 90% of your team to listen to you, and not be demanding guns/armor/stuff all the time, and actually build stuff and stick together in groups; I will be amazed.

    Usually the really good Players like Deca/Meb/Etc. will go save that RT that is being attacked while one their way to Spawncamp/Lockdown another Hive.

    It is a constant PITA on some maps to get Players to go to RES Nodes like Laser Drilling, because it is too far to walk and they rather run into DBL RES and feed the Alien team's grinder.

    *****

    At least in NS2 they won't be pestering the Voice Coms anymore for Weapons and Equipment, but I do not want to have to rely on the COMBAT Players to actually be build stuff.

    -+ THIS-

    MACs should always build faster than a Marine Player(by a significant amount), that way a Marine constructing a Building is practically not being useful if there is a MAC around to build. <
    (If you don't do this, it will be very bad.)
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Your sig was nuked as it was larger than the maximum allowed size. In future make your sig images 400x75 pixels (or smaller) and 22kb (or smaller) - Mouse
  • JimydJimyd Join Date: 2003-02-08 Member: 13289Posts: 622Members
    BTW, I don't think you will be able to build anything on Dynamic Infestation.

    So for all those people making arguments about how am I going to Ninja Phasegate(or whatever building), you won't be able to. It is not a bullet point you should be using.
    Your sig was nuked as it was larger than the maximum allowed size. In future make your sig images 400x75 pixels (or smaller) and 22kb (or smaller) - Mouse
  • JimydJimyd Join Date: 2003-02-08 Member: 13289Posts: 622Members
    edited August 2010
    And by how popular Combat is in NS1(right now there are more full Servers of it and Siege Maps), I don't think it holds a good case for NS2.

    The minority here is the people who like staring at HP bars for 30 seconds; most of us don't. It is/was detrimental to NS1 in the long run.

    There is no sense of accomplishment of holding a button while an animation plays for a unit/structure that gives nothing back to the Player in return that he/she can recognize(I.E. Points/Assist Points/Etc.).
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Your sig was nuked as it was larger than the maximum allowed size. In future make your sig images 400x75 pixels (or smaller) and 22kb (or smaller) - Mouse
  • IeptBarakatIeptBarakat The most difficult name to speak ingame. Join Date: 2009-07-10 Member: 68107Posts: 2,022Members, Constellation, NS2 Map Tester
    I don't see the issue with you people being amazed if people follow your orders.

    The servers I regular, the people usually listen quite well.(If you clearly state what you want.)

    You must be playing with foreigners all the time or something.
  • JimydJimyd Join Date: 2003-02-08 Member: 13289Posts: 622Members
    edited August 2010
    QUOTE (IeptBarakat @ Aug 6 2010, 10:47 AM) »
    I don't see the issue with you people being amazed if people follow your orders.

    The servers I regular, the people usually listen quite well.(If you clearly state what you want.)

    You must be playing with foreigners all the time or something.


    And what server is that, because there are really only 3 populated servers.

    *****

    You surely can't mean the BADe server, because that is the one I am forced to play because it is the only one I am the closest(US; California) to ping wise.

    G4B2S nobody plays on it anymore, its been dead for weeks.

    EvolveNS has moved on, but that server had too many e-peens going around. They killed their own Playerbase(of good Players too).

    BTW, don't list any bot servers that happen to have Players because, yes, there are a few, but they do not count in my opinion.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Your sig was nuked as it was larger than the maximum allowed size. In future make your sig images 400x75 pixels (or smaller) and 22kb (or smaller) - Mouse
  • RecoupRecoup Join Date: 2004-04-25 Member: 28195Posts: 1,109Members
    edited August 2010
    QUOTE (Jimyd @ Aug 6 2010, 12:39 PM) »
    Go play NS1 right now, if you can get 90% of your team to listen to you, and not be demanding guns/armor/stuff all the time, and actually build stuff and stick together in groups; I will be amazed.

    Usually the really good Players like Deca/Meb/Etc. will go save that RT that is being attacked while one their way to Spawncamp/Lockdown another Hive.

    It is a constant PITA on some maps to get Players to go to RES Nodes like Laser Drilling, because it is too far to walk and they rather run into DBL RES and feed the Alien team's grinder.

    *****

    At least in NS2 they won't be pestering the Voice Coms anymore for Weapons and Equipment, but I do not want to have to rely on the COMBAT Players to actually be build stuff.

    -+ THIS-

    MACs should always build faster than a Marine Player(by a significant amount), that way a Marine constructing a Building is practically not being useful if there is a MAC around to build. <
    (If you don't do this, it will be very bad.)


    So basically, "because I have x experience with NS1, it applies to all games of NS1 I or anyone will play". Great argument. It's just like if I said that 90% of games I played were organized and fun and had marines listening very well. You'd think I was full of crap, just like I think you're full of crap now.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • JimydJimyd Join Date: 2003-02-08 Member: 13289Posts: 622Members
    edited August 2010
    QUOTE (Recoup @ Aug 6 2010, 11:10 AM) »
    So basically, "because I have x experience with NS1, it applies to all games of NS1 I or anyone will play". Great argument. It's just like if I said that 90% of games I played were organized and fun and had marines listening very well. You'd think I was full of crap, just like I think you're full of crap now.


    Most of the arguments for Marine Building is because of how NS1 gameplay plays out right now.

    See my point now?

    The "other side of the argument" is either making stuff up, have a really dillusioned pipe-dream, or do not even play NS1 anymore.

    *****

    Staring at a HP Bar is not fun, you don't do it as a good RTS Commander either. I would give good examples from Starcraft, but nobody seems to want to believe anything.

    You Micro while you Macro, and you Macro while you Micro. That is the shortest I can explain it. Apply this to controlling the MAC.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Your sig was nuked as it was larger than the maximum allowed size. In future make your sig images 400x75 pixels (or smaller) and 22kb (or smaller) - Mouse
  • RecoupRecoup Join Date: 2004-04-25 Member: 28195Posts: 1,109Members
    edited August 2010
    QUOTE (Jimyd @ Aug 6 2010, 01:15 PM) »
    Most of the arguments for Marine Building is because of how NS1 gameplay plays out right now.

    See my point now?

    The "other side of the argument" is either making stuff up, have a really dillusioned pipe-dream, or do not even play NS1 anymore.

    *****

    Staring at a HP Bar is not fun, you don't do it as a good RTS Commander either. I would give good examples from Starcraft, but nobody seems to want to believe anything.

    You Micro while you Macro, and you Macro while you Micro. That is the shortest I can explain it. Apply this to controlling the MAC.


    So then what is wrong with incorporating both elements to the game? Obviously this would enable those who don't find staring at the health bar boring a chance to do something they feel is productive, while the commander still gets his little MAC bots? Seems like a fair deal.

    And the thing is that it is not so much "making stuff up" as it is acknowledging the uses of marine building. We don't say "in x servers we do this" - we say what you CAN do with marine building and what is missing as a result of its removal. That is not making things up - that is acknowledging what is possible with this mode of building. Everything along the realm of "I do this so it must be true" is just poppycock. We call those irrelevant conclusions.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • FilthyLarryFilthyLarry Join Date: 2003-08-31 Member: 20423Posts: 337Members
    QUOTE (Zxaber @ Aug 6 2010, 03:40 AM) »
    On a smart team, with a good comm, you'd usually have the shotguns and HMGs guarding the LMGs while they built.



    I can't speak for everyone, but the reason I liked the building aspect was the added depth it brought with it. You'd start the game with little more than a weapon, a comm chair, and a few res, and it was up to you and your team to sculpt out a base. By spending time building up our defenses, I'd gain a sort of connection with my base, my team, and the match in general. It was this effort that made it feel great when marine start withstood a wave of aliens, or sting hard when our forward base was demolished due to a bad placement of the factory. I realize that net everyone liked constructing the base, and I know there were times when the building became tedious. But without that link to the team, the comm, and the base, I worry that the game will feel like a smaller version of Battlefield 2, with a bunch of players battling in the middle of the map and the commanders off in their own little world.


    I do understand where you are coming from. I must admit there were times where I didn't mind building so much as a marine and felt some sense of accomplishment from having being "personally" involved with a successful construction project certainly.

    So I'm not against the idea of marines being able to repair structures for example, or weld key locations... possibly have some sort of structure they can build as long as long as its very limited in scope (still dont like the idea of dual marine/mac construction - MAC should be responsible for all critical base structures) ... all of these are ok in my book and would go some ways to appeasing builders.

    I don't like the idea of marines building an entire base though - as others admittedly have explained better - because amongst other things I feel it draws people too far away from the idea that there's a war going on and that they need to get out there and finish it. I understand the concerns about "escorting" not appealing to all but really if people don't want to defend then they should be attacking right ? I mean there are still options for players in that regard.

    The thing is I too am worried. I am worried that NS2 will end up being sort of a luke-warm exercise with action that is mediocre because its tried to be everything to everyone. I am _very_ concerned about how combat will play out. I truly believe intense/fun combat is by far going to be the deciding factor in how successful NS2 will be out there in the world of gaming.

    Things like team communication... MACs being too easy to kill leading to frustration... these kinds of things can be fixed. If the combat though is fundamentally boring...I don't see myself playing and I don't think I'll be the only one. I basically quit NS1 as I was tired of running around as a marine with standard gear for the entire match; just not interesting enough which is why I applaud the decision to allow marines to - at least to some degree - equip themselves.

  • SnazzSnazz Join Date: 2007-09-30 Member: 62482Posts: 66Members
    edited August 2010
    QUOTE (Kwil @ Aug 7 2010, 03:08 AM) »
    Seriously? Are you seriously arguing that because some marines don't follow orders, commanders will still use MACs? Or in other words, that because crappy teams will still use MACs, they will retain their value in the game.

    Wow. I mean, even you have to admit that's kind of reaching.

    It's a fundamental distinction and purpose. Bots will be a useful backup and support tool due to the unpredictable nature of commander-player coordination.

    QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Aug 7 2010, 01:17 AM) »
    If you have 'no idea what would be exploited' then you're not thinking like a player who wants to win every time using everything at their disposal.

    I think like a player who wants to have fun, not win by exploiting the system. I recognize that there's opportunities to exploit many aspects of games, I just don't buy into allowing players to build as being a particularly vulnerable one.
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • SwampRatSwampRat Join Date: 2003-02-10 Member: 13369Posts: 147Members
    QUOTE (Crispy @ Aug 6 2010, 09:30 AM) »
    ...
    As I see it, the MAC is not a replacement, it's an enabler. For me it's a mixture between stabiliser/learning wheels on a bicycle and a contingency for Marines not following orders.

    You have to realise that MACs are going to be worthless in high level games unless they have really high hitpoints, and if they have really high hit points they will be exploited for roles other than what they're intended for (such as blocking lifeforms, tanking, etc.).

    To be successful, MACs need to fulfil the role of a backup worker, not a primary worker. They need to have low hitpoints, a reasonable cost (at least equivalent to a Shotgun or similar powerful-yet-fleeting base tech) and be used to perform tasks in safely held areas, not on the front line. In addition to a fallback, they will also allow commanders to get to grips with the game offline/solo and will also be useful on smaller servers to make up player numbers.

    I'm not sure if it's the way around that you're meaning it - but if MACs are required to build then they couldn't be worthless. Having marines able to build themselves, albeit slowly, could leave the MACs being an advantage, but there's also a risk that you leave more situations where a marine playing for the benefit of the team spends far longer than is fun building things after his teammates all run off (assuming the MAC didn't get escorted nicely and/or the com didn't think they're worth using).

    The whole game does seem to be moving towards a faster pace thing of throwing yourself at the enemy, we'll have to see if it comes out as a good thing. As long as the options are there, I'm sure it'll be tested each way (even if it's a mod afterwards) - the downside is that the new player base might be put off if only a couple of servers run the actual main game and all the others are running unique attempts at a classic NS with marine and gorge building etc.

    The alien side does need to be considered too of course. My personal favourite for giving the gorge back some building role would be to have it able to spawn a drifter, spit it up, build it to full size and then watch the alien com ignore it for 5 min until a marine comes and shoots it. Maybe the last bit would go better than that sometimes.
  • Donner & BlitzenDonner &amp; Blitzen Join Date: 2010-03-08 Member: 70879Posts: 182Members
    QUOTE (Jimyd @ Aug 6 2010, 02:15 PM) »
    Most of the arguments for Marine Building is because of how NS1 gameplay plays out right now.

    See my point now?

    The "other side of the argument" is either making stuff up, have a really dillusioned pipe-dream, or do not even play NS1 anymore.


    I play on the BAD Classic server regularly.

    I usually experience the opposite of what you describe.

    QUOTE (Jimyd @ Aug 6 2010, 01:46 PM) »
    And by how popular Combat is in NS1(right now there are more full Servers of it and Siege Maps), I don't think it holds a good case for NS2.


    Counterstrike is also more popular than classic NS. What's your point?


    QUOTE
    The minority here is the people who like staring at HP bars for 30 seconds; most of us don't. It is/was detrimental to NS1 in the long run.


    Who is "most of us"? Where are you getting your statistics from?

    Hey, I thought having to wait 30 seconds to evolve was pretty boring as well. We should just make it instant. And I never really liked dying and waiting to respawn. So we should get rid of that too.

    QUOTE
    There is no sense of accomplishment of holding a button while an animation plays for a unit/structure that gives nothing back to the Player in return that he/she can recognize(I.E. Points/Assist Points/Etc.).


    The sense of accomplishment is knowing that the structure you just built will help you win the game. E.g. I build an armoury, and now I can get ammo and weapons for it. I build a siege cannon, and now we can take down the hive.

  • DelphicDelphic Join Date: 2006-11-02 Member: 58262Posts: 431Members
    You can all stop arguing,

    http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/progress

    Marines can build again... not what I would have wanted (I'd have wanted to further test this mechanic and see where it was going and how it could be improved before just going with the NS1 solution, but hey-hoo).
  • RecoupRecoup Join Date: 2004-04-25 Member: 28195Posts: 1,109Members
  • WheeeeWheeee Join Date: 2003-02-18 Member: 13713Posts: 4,160Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    you guys are silly. it's not like the gameplay mechanic is set in stone now. i'm sure if marine building doesn't work out, it'll be taken out or rebalanced again.
    QUOTE (EEK)
    Don't assume that because I said something it means I actually was thinking that the core of the sun was going to be replaced with hot dogs.
  • spellman23spellman23 NS1 Theorycraft Expert Join Date: 2007-05-17 Member: 60920Posts: 3,365Members
    QUOTE (Delphic @ Aug 7 2010, 02:59 AM) »
    Marines can build again... not what I would have wanted (I'd have wanted to further test this mechanic and see where it was going and how it could be improved before just going with the NS1 solution, but hey-hoo).


    Not necessarily. They've added in the functionality, but after testing they could easily remove/disable it. Plus, we have no idea what form it will be in.

    I'm still skeptical on all fronts and eager to get some serious testing going once the latency issues are ironed out.
    helping bring perspective and learning since the olde days

    QUOTE
    <jenny> What's the plural of 'Onos'?
    <Mexican> For a while, I thought it was 'Oh ######'!


    Vote on your Ideas/Suggestions!
    http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....howtopic=125347
12346»
Sign In or Register to comment.