I like the idea of "defend area" or "assault area" markers that <b>locallyunscene</b> suggested. But instead of markers why not just make it so that you could assign the orders to defend/attack rooms/halls/vents. Example, a marine is patrolling near their forward base, spots a xenoform and reports it. Com orders to ‘attack engine room’ and all nearby marines rush in to cleanse the area (sorry alien players). Why would the marines follow their coms orders? Because they get a x2 or x3 multiplier to their personal income ($/c whatever). Sure you could get enough cash for a shotgun and mines on your own going Rambo, but you would get that gear much faster and easier, not to mention not spending as much time dead, if you followed the coms order.
An attack marker would give a bonus to any kills made in the room/hall/vent while a defend marker would add a bonus to any kills made while in the room (so killing them before they have a chance to enter the room still gives you the bonus) AND add a bonus to base construction and repair as well.
The areas for the different rooms could be assigned during the map making process, I mean the rooms are already given names, just assign them as different sectors as well.
<!--quoteo(post=1666812:date=Jan 8 2008, 05:42 PM:name=corpsman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(corpsman @ Jan 8 2008, 05:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1666812"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I am all for the idea of the team recieving weapons somehow, other then simple dropping from the commander. The only problem I keep hearing is people who seem to think they are better lpayer because of their kill count. If we all thought that way, noone would ever be a gorge, and welders would never be used.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is no way to prevent players form going Rambo (and generally being morons). Many people have gotten too used to games like Halo where kills is all that matter and that is the only ‘strategery’ that they know. ‘run down empty halls unprotected and shoot anything that moves’. In NS that gets you killed, and fast. We have to find a way to reward players (like ill admit TF2 which is super awesome and much better that the first) instead of trying to punish them. If a com can decide how much personal income is given to his individual troops then what is stopping him/her from just setting it so that one or two (ie their personal friends) get all or the cash while the rest are stuck with the smg?
If you have a system that allows the com to punish solders for not following his/her orders I would hate to have to serve under one!
‘You didn’t rush the hive no HMG for you and ill set your personal income to minimum’ ‘But I was busy defending our forward base for a fade? I was calling for health’ ‘Im not going to waist my recourses on solders who don’t follow orders’ ‘Your resources? I thought they were the teams resources?’ ‘No they are mine. I am the com and you are all my slaves mwahahahaha!’
the system should be set up in a way that even if everyone else on your team is being an a$$ you are still able to have fun.
And what happens if the com gives no orders? I’ve played under many that just said over the mike what they wanted and didn’t give waypoints (probably too busy setting down weapons and health for all the noobs).
<!--quoteo(post=1667135:date=Jan 11 2008, 08:22 PM:name=Deathwish42)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Deathwish42 @ Jan 11 2008, 08:22 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667135"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why would the marines follow their coms orders? Because they get a x2 or x3 multiplier to their personal income ($/c whatever)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
... You didn't notice I suggested it? *sniff* Oh well, as long as you think the gist of it is cool.
Anyways, my moment of narcissism over with, I think the multiplier wouldn't be the right mechanic. If players are already being rewarded for playing the game, I could see the use of a multiplier, rather than addition, causing a team to gain the requirements for weapons exponentially. Its a math thing, but in terms of game play it means that it could be possible that if one team or the other makes a string of victories at a multiplier, they would so out distance the other team in equipment acquired from the personal resources, the chances of the other team making any kind of comeback would be very slim as now the opposing side makes it that much harder for them achieve their victories.
I hope you understand, its a balance thing. Its not like I am hating on my own brainstormed idea.
<!--quoteo(post=1667067:date=Jan 11 2008, 06:01 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Harimau @ Jan 11 2008, 06:01 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667067"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->But.. hmm... Seems to me like, at this point, we've exhausted every fresh and new idea. We're just repeating the same ideas really-- hell, we're even repeating the same arguments.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
OK here goes. Everyone starts out as a fade, with an HMG strapped to their back, and they have xeno too. Yes! And we all play in a big room, like a super dome. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="biggrin-fix.gif" /> <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/fade.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="::fade::" border="0" alt="fade.gif" />
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1667140:date=Jan 11 2008, 09:30 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 11 2008, 09:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667140"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Its a math thing, but in terms of game play it means that it could be possible that if one team or the other makes a string of victories at a multiplier, they would so out distance the other team in equipment acquired from the personal resources, the chances of the other team making any kind of comeback would be very slim as now the opposing side makes it that much harder for them achieve their victories.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--quoteo(post=1667089:date=Jan 11 2008, 10:04 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(locallyunscene @ Jan 11 2008, 10:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667089"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is part of the reason I think marine resources need to be credits, because we don't want to increase real marine res flow for followed orders.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->QUOTE(locallyunscene @ Jan 11 2008, 10:04 AM) * This is part of the reason I think marine resources need to be credits, because we don't want to increase real marine res flow for followed orders.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just curious but how is using the word credits different than resources? They both still help the marine acquire the equipment, yes? Equipment and upgrades are the real currency of the game, a unspent resource (or credit) point is completely valueless to a marine facing the Kharaa in the field.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1667403:date=Jan 14 2008, 01:10 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 14 2008, 01:10 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667403"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Just curious but how is using the word credits different than resources? They both still help the marine acquire the equipment, yes? Equipment and upgrades are the real currency of the game, a unspent resource (or credit) point is completely valueless to a marine facing the Kharaa in the field.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Fair question. The difference probably isn't that great from the marines' point of view, but it is from the comm's point of view. Here are two possible systems: a.) Marines get personal resources generated from following orders b.) Marines get credit for resources for orders followed
In scenario b resources are generated in 2 ways: resource towers and RFK. In scenario a res is generated 3 ways: RTs, RFK, and res for orders completed. That's the difference between the two systems. A marine with enough personal resources will always be able to buy a shotgun. A Marine with credit may or may not be able to buy something depending on the actual resources available. In a credit system, the marines are well equipped because the comm controls enough rts to spend the res to equip them, not because the marines won a few skirmishes.
<!--quoteo(post=1667410:date=Jan 14 2008, 02:33 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(locallyunscene @ Jan 14 2008, 02:33 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667410"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Fair question. The difference probably isn't that great from the marines' point of view, but it is from the comm's point of view. Here are two possible systems: a.) Marines get personal resources generated from following orders b.) Marines get credit for resources for orders followed
In scenario b resources are generated in 2 ways: resource towers and RFK. In scenario a res is generated 3 ways: RTs, RFK, and res for orders completed. That's the difference between the two systems. A marine with enough personal resources will always be able to buy a shotgun. A Marine with credit may or may not be able to buy something depending on the actual resources available. In a credit system, the marines are well equipped because the comm controls enough rts to spend the res to equip them, not because the marines won a few skirmishes.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Er... Lets see if I understand your opinion accurately:
IYHO, (a) Personal Resources means: The marine earns resources only for themselves from Command, Map, Enemy. Its only for themself because it is exclusive to them. Sounds kind of like how Kharaa get resources in NS1. (b) Personal Credit means: The marine earns resources for the whole team from Command, Map, Enemy. The marine is rewarded or allocated from Command a share of the total. Sounds kind of like how Marines get resources in NS1.
IMHO, both (a) and (b) fail to meet the needs of NS2, where we need something both sides can use, given the clues the Devs have given us: Both sides having 1) Same resource model and 2) A Commander position
To that end, I think we need to do away with RFK completely. Its a poor mechanic that weights the resource scale towards a particular play style slant. Instead, go with Resource For Hit (RFH): this encompasses hitting anything over time results in a reward - that is, 'hit' a friend with your welder to help them is as valued and promoted through reward as a 'hit' on an enemy with a weapon. IMHO, RFH promotes teamwork, RFK promotes rambos.
Next, Command pool is the resources all the players pay their dues to and the Commander decides how they are spent for the good of the team's objectives. Personal pool is what a player has from just participating in the team game. This is a 2 pool system I see both teams having, so that the Devs objective of having both teams use the same resource system is satisfied, as well as the Kharaa Commander issue.
I agree the method of resource acquisition should not swing heavily on a single skirmish, to that end there should not be multipliers. The game shouldn't stalemate as the two sides vie for resources but the game does need to make sure it doesn't easily turn a snow ball fight into an avalanche or I am sure games will feel so one sided it will prove to be little fun, about as much fun as it is to be spawn camped as the Kharaa in NS1.
How about this: we think of 'credits' as what they are - a representative currency system; and 'res' as what they are - "bullion". Of course we'll simplify that so that credits hold a static value of res. eg. 1:1
Credits are thus, representative of real res, but hold no actual value by themselves. Credits can only be spent by marines, and unassigned res can only be spent by the commander. As credits are representative of real res, if there is no res, credits can't really be spent.
Unassigned res in this case means that no credit is 'assigned' to it. Assigned res is the total res that has a corresponding credit value for players - and whether this can be spent by the commander - even VIEWED by the commander - is up to debate. Now that I think about it, if assigned res can't be spent, is this simply the same as an individual resource pool system? Actually, it isn't quite, because the individual player doesn't gain anything from the RTs.
The individual marine would gain credit for CFH/RFK, and the team would gain res for CFH/RFK - probably more res than credit, in my opinion, so that the team is actually gaining something more, and not just the player. (eg. a kill gives you 2 res and 1 credit. that means 1 res goes to the team exclusively, and 1 res of that [since you earned 1 credit] is still yours to spend.)
It should still work if you perform a credit-earning-only task (ie. the team's not earning res for your efforts), since the RTs are still producing res for your team. A problem with this might be (if assigned res is unspendable) that after a good deal of commander-spending which is then combined with a lot of res-less credit-earning tasks, there may arise a situation where there are more credits in total, than there are res. At which point all res, until the levels balance out, would go to assigned res, I guess? On the other hand, if assigned res were spendable, the commander could overspend, and the situation would be the same, but rather than disadvantageous to the team, it's disadvantageous to the individual marines - who can't purchase weapons/equipment because there are no team resources.
Other ideas, part of this 'representative currency system idea' are: Commanders can increase a marine's credit at will (but only increase their credit, they'd assign a value and have a confirmation box; it won't happen in real-time, instead it'd be kinda like 'tribute' in RTS games); And marines can forfeit a share or all of their credit (but only decrease their credit, again they'd assign a value and have a confirmation box) though this latter part might only be relevant if the commander can't spend assigned res. I guess, as an extension to the latter, there might also be an option to turn off your credit-earning (so you wouldn't have to tribute after every kill), which means you'd be relying exclusively on your commander for equipment. Also, I think (mild) CREDIT multipliers, are quite compatible with this system.
This entire idea as a whole is of course based on the assumption that the commander can still drop equipment at will.
Essentially, the marine team is <b>still</b> gaining resources <i>at the same rate</i> as before - it's just that their spending is a little more erratic.
<b>edit:</b> replaced RFH with CFH (credit for hit) since I don't believe that you should gain <b>hard res</b> for what you're doing for your own team, only credits, since that's personal; and otherwise it could easily unbalance the game. a note: RFK (res for kill) in my idea, encompasses CFK/CFH (credit, for the marine) as well as res (for the whole team).
Well, I doubt the system's perfect, but maybe you can build on this idea, and improve it, smooth out the kinks, etc. Please read, and comment.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1667478:date=Jan 15 2008, 04:46 AM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 15 2008, 04:46 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667478"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->IMHO, both (a) and (b) fail to meet the needs of NS2, where we need something both sides can use, given the clues the Devs have given us: Both sides having 1) Same resource model and 2) A Commander position<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's a pretty big if, although RFH isn't a bad idea. I agree with Harimau that the credit for damage done needs to be less than the res received for kills if there are two distinct pools of personal resources and team resources. I'm not ready to give up on different resource models for each team, if the two models aren't that much different. If we keep a marine only perspective there doesn't really need to be two pools. All RFK goes to the team and the commander sets aside a percentage/set number of resources for marines with credit to purchase weapons.
<!--quoteo(post=1667529:date=Jan 15 2008, 11:01 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(locallyunscene @ Jan 15 2008, 11:01 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667529"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->All RFK goes to the team and the commander sets aside a percentage/set number of resources for marines with credit to purchase weapons.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I see griefer Commanders happening in this situation, where a Commander just sets the slider to 0%. Unless the slider only gets a certain range, like 25% to 75%, but even then, it seems to me that it would be more hassle than its worth, players would still bug the Commander to set the rate as high as it can go and feel punished when the rate is set as low as it can go. I would rather any kind of system that allows for as little friction between Commander and other players as possible, to that end I think a system that allows for the transfer of resources as smoothly as possible, by already being incorporated into the game itself. If the game tells you what you get, as a Commander and the rest, you just have to deal with it, rather than dealing with each other, an unfortunate source of a lot of headache in the current NS1 game. A binding arbitration of sorts, a follow the rules set out situation, rather than make the rules up as you go. Hopefully a better resource model for all will mean less for us to ruin each other's game style with. Another way to look at it is to always aim for having it seem like rewards are always given, as opposed to punishment meted out. Positive reinforcement vs negative reinforcement and all that it entails.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1667543:date=Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667543"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I see griefer Commanders happening in this situation, where a Commander just sets the slider to 0%.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Commanding is a position of power. There will always be griefers and an eject feature. Also setting the slider may be necessary sometimes if the comm wants to research HA or something else expensive. <!--quoteo(post=1667543:date=Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667543"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->players would still bug the Commander to set the rate as high as it can go and feel punished when the rate is set as low as it can go.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't agree. As long as the marines feel like they can get weapons on their own, they won't bug the commander. Not everyone will be able to purchase a shotgun, but the top players who need the shotgun will. If the commander sets the slider to 0 then he's asking to be bugged. <!--quoteo(post=1667543:date=Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667543"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->to that end I think a system that allows for the transfer of resources as smoothly as possible, by already being incorporated into the game itself. If the game tells you what you get, as a Commander and the rest, you just have to deal with it, rather than dealing with each other, an unfortunate source of a lot of headache in the current NS1 game. A binding arbitration of sorts, a follow the rules set out situation, rather than make the rules up as you go.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> NS and NS2 are team games, and dealing with each other is a part of the game. With personal resources and RFH you run into the problem of equipment landslide. Also it's much more exploitable since you're generating resources for marines based on these events. <!--quoteo(post=1667543:date=Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667543"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Hopefully a better resource model for all will mean less for us to ruin each other's game style with. Another way to look at it is to always aim for having it seem like rewards are always given, as opposed to punishment meted out. Positive reinforcement vs negative reinforcement and all that it entails.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> As long as the comm has res to spend you get a reward for playing well. There's no punishment involved.
This thread has generated a LOT of discussion. Unfortunately, i stopped tracking it since page 3 (because I put my time into writing transcripts). My original plan was to put post #s of unique and interesting ideas, so new readers can quickly jump to the posts they want to read. However, now it is very outdated, missing 4 pages of very insightful information. I would appreciate it, if you send me a Private Message with ideas that were discussed in the time i was away and post #s that are worth reading. I will then read these posts and add them to the OP so others can quickly find them as well. Eventually Charlie and Max will stumble on this topic and will find a lot of great ideas for the NS2 Marine weapons system. Keep your ideas flowing!
Rewards, if used, instead of "res/credits," could be experience. Experience which = better playing. I want to start out by saying that it works in most other games who utalize the idea, and of course in real life, I would prefer to be next to the seasoned Sgt. vs. the arrogant FNG private [but that's another story]. So!
Example is: The "player" [well call him FNG] starts out of course the same as everyone else. As they progress by following orders [whatever they may be] he earns experience. Every time he earns experience he shoots a bit better [aiming, reloading, whatever], walks a little quieter, and moves a little faster. Other players see Mr. FNG doing better and then they just like real life want these upgrades. So what do they do? They follow orders and get stuff done. Kills, welding, building, moving, whatever is needed by the commander ["what" is irrelavent right now].
Positives: >Rewards players in a way that is honest/fair.
>Completely free from the commander so no worries about griefing [sliders and favorites].
>No commander time/attention needed whatsoever, so the system is <u>100% free from the comm!</u>. Streamlined.
>Realistic [for those who want more realism]. In real life would you fight alongside the guy who has already seen war and shot someone, or they guy who just graduated bootcamp? heh Yeah, me too.
>No other players griefing about the comm playing favorites. "Why you always give him the JP/GL?" Answer: "Go out and earn it." Period.
>It is a tangible feeling the players who earn it get. Instead of hoping to be rewarded, they ARE rewarded, and they see/feel it while playing. I shoot a bit better. I see myself moving a tiny bit faster, so I killed a tiny bit less the the rest of the team when attacked. I can sneak in a little bit better.... They SEE the experience at work! Not just on the side of the screen as a number system or whatever...
>Wouldn't have to balance res/credits with the marines
>And my biggest reason for this idea is simple. Other players see them enjoying a better game through a slightly better upgraded play, and they want it! How often did you see the other guy in combat with the movement upgrade, and maybe even a bit better armor and wish you had it? Every time. So now it is something not only the person who earned it gets to enjoy, but other players see it and want to not only earn it too, but stick by the side of the guy who obviously knows what they are doing and play alongside them. I know I would...
Cons: I honestly can't think of any, other then keeping it balanced and not making the upgrades <i>too</i> powerful. The idea is to reward gamers who deserve it, and so they enjoy a tiny bit more. Combat suffered from people who got the first few kills dominating the rest of the game, so I say slow this WAY down. But just enough after __ kills or whatever, so the people who really stuck with the team and the comm would get to enjoy the second half of the average matches a bit more.
Like it? Hate it?
BTW, this isn't meant to be a different thread topic, or to stray the topic on purpose, but instead, offer a side idea to the weapons being upgraded through the team res "system."
Yeah, I knew it. No one was gonna read my suggestion. *sigh*
In my idea there are no separate resource pools, just one pool, coupled with a representative currency system to reward marines. I tried to get this idea across, but think of credits as 'cash' or electronic money; and res as 'bullion' (gold bars, national treasury, you know?) <b>There are no sliders.</b> The closest thing to that I can think of, that was in my idea, is the 'tribute' style system. But with that system you can only GIVE, you can't TAKE, or WITHHOLD. Every action a marine performs has a static res/credit reward. Res is for the team. Credit is for the marine. Only kills would award res, just like the current system. But <b>everything</b> that a marine does (killing, dealing damage, welding, capping, following orders, defending/attacking areas etc. etc.) rewards him with credit. You could even incorporate a minor credit multiplier for 'attack'/'defend' markers, as was discussed. It's just a matter of balancing numbers, at this point. I used the example of (credit:res) 1:1, but it could be 1000:1, and you might gain 10 points for every point of armour you weld. The numbers aren't important to me, that would be for the developers to the think about, the system is.
corpsman: your idea doesn't have a 'con' per se, but it has a <b>key lack</b> - where're the marines buying their own weapons? that was the key idea behind this entire thread, really... also, improving that vastly over a 15 minute game-- that's kinda weird. and becoming faster, quieter, etc. during a game? that's rather reminiscent of the kharaa side. otherwise, i like your "character improvement" idea, but I'm not so sure it's very NS-ish, or if it is, as I just said, it doesn't really address marine autonomy / removing the pressure from the commander (reducing 'give me a sg' spam, dropping weapons for each and everyone every time).
in order to justify the 'buying' weapons thing: special operations units around the world allow their soldiers to choose their own equipment; probably from an approved selection of equipment, but I guess their freedom would depend from unit to unit.
and i've grown tired of the 'griefer commander' argument, if this person's gonna intentionally grief, he <b>will</b> find a way to ###### up your game anyway, no matter which system you put in place. You've still got the comm kick option, so it's irrelevant.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1667605:date=Jan 16 2008, 02:29 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Harimau @ Jan 16 2008, 02:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667605"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's exactly the type of system I'm talking about. The only reason I bring up a separate res pool is so that marines can't buy equipment when the comm needs to save up for an upgrade. There is one overarching res pool the comm controls. He takes res from this pool and puts it in the equipment pool marines buy from. The slider idea is that res can go into this pool automatically without the commanders control if he wishes it. IMO It makes more sense for the comm to manage it based on upgrades and res flow and do it manually but I'm sure the automatic feature would be used by people who "don't really know how to comm" and that's fine.
So no, you don't need a slider or manual additions to a separate pool and could leave it as a set system but it's just an option so the comm can take control of the strategy when he/she needs to control res more tightly.
Everything's automatic in the system I'm talking about. There are no 'field marine equipment pools' or sliders. There's one team pool, and each marine has credit - a 'voucher' if you will, to spend a small portion of the team's resources.
I would, personally, even allow the commander to 'overspend' - that is, spend the team's resources in excess of what is exclusively his to spend. Field marines may complain, but ideally, the Comm would be spending that res for the benefit of the entire team, and that benefit would trickle down to the individual field marines.
I might, also, allow the commander to 'disable' certain expensive weapons and equipment, for the purpose of saving res, as has been discussed in other ideas. I'm not too sure about this one though. But it would be ideal for the higher-tier equipment such as JPs and HAs, as well as managing 'rushes' and such.
This could, after some thought, also be automatic. When the ratio of total team res to 'assigned res' falls below certain levels, certain equipment would also, accordingly, be disabled for field marines to purchase. The commander could of course buy certain equipment for certain marines though, since nothing's barred to him. There's a lot of ifs, though.
Ideally, the team would gain res considerably faster than the (field) marines spend it, so the comm always has something to spend. The only time this wouldn't be happening is if the team were making zero kills, have very few res nodes capped, but welding and building (and doing other res-less support jobs) a whole lot.
I think every marine would begin with zero credit, but there wouldn't be anything to 'buy' from the armouries, anyway, as the comm hasn't researched anything yet.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
edited January 2008
<b>Harimau</b>, I understand your system, please don't explain it again <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" /> . Having the comm "overspend" and "lock out all equipment" is an interesting proposal. The reason I had the secondary equipment fund was so that the comm could save res without marines taking it for equipment, but overspending would work too and be a little simpler overall, if maybe a little less intuitive.
I don't see how it would be less intuitive, being able to spend whatever your team possesses would be more intuitive than allocating a certain amount or portion of team resources to field marines. (As I've said, commander decisions are decisions made for the team as a whole; and the prevailing feeling is that the team is more important than the individual marine.) Locking equipment though, would be less intuitive than both, but the particular feature wouldn't have to be accessed all the time, just in certain situations. It is important to note that 'intuitive' is synonymous with 'instinctive' and 'simple' things are things you can do instinctively or with the least thought/attention required.
A secondary/personal resource pool effectively separates the field troops from their commander. I think it has greater implications apart from gameplay/strategy, like negatively affecting 'team atmosphere' and cooperation.
<!--quoteo(post=1667739:date=Jan 17 2008, 10:41 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Harimau @ Jan 17 2008, 10:41 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667739"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->A secondary/personal resource pool effectively separates the field troops from their commander. I think it has greater implications apart from gameplay/strategy, like negatively affecting 'team atmosphere' and cooperation.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If its a free for all on the armoury a noob or new player would be too greater drain on the teams resourses. Two res pools are required to address this. But your correct in keeping the team atmosphere being important. I have added in italics to my prevous post and simplified it a bit, plus an additonal suggestion at the bottom.
<!--quoteo(post=1666968:date=Jan 10 2008, 12:38 AM:name=Misere)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Misere @ Jan 10 2008, 12:38 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1666968"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Each point of health and armor is worth one damage point, kill point or building point
You earn kill points for dealing damage to aliens 10secs before it dies. You earn damage points for dealing damage to structures 30seconds before it dies ~ This is important to prevent kill stealing. You earn building points for every point built, repaired or welded.
To earn 1 res for your personal pool y: Once you gain enough kill points equivalent to say a solo kill Fade, thus after solo killing four skulks = 1 res, or 1 ONO's = 2res. Deal structure damage equivalent to a solo kill of a RT Gain build points equivalent to a solo build of a RT <i>~ All these are taken form the next bit of RES the com gets from the towers only, not kills. This means that if you want to get rewarded for killing etc you need to get the RT's up and maintained. In addition for the marines to earn any res they must have at least two RT's. This means that if your pushed back to MS the COM has all the res at their disposal</i><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now this will promote team work, addressing Harimau's concern because to get that secon res pool filled you need to have hold of the map, you need to follow the COM's orders. GO TEAM!
Now in addition to this I would like to see seven things for the marines
1. A donate setting on the pop up menu so that Marines can go for fast tec rather than items. Their personal res pool does not fill up until they deselect this so new players will not be such a drain. 2. A limit to the personal res, enough to outfit one marine with the most expensive combination of items plus 10%. This way a player with a very good kill to death ratio will not end up hording all the res. 3. If a marine leaves the server and does not return within 2 min then their res gets split evening between the COM and their team mates. 4. If a marine upgrades/downgrades items at the AA they get credit. However, of they return a HA for a JP, their lite armour has the same damage% to prevent a zero armour HA from switching back and forth to get full health. 5. Marines being able to preset what they want to get while waiting to spawn (once they get within range of the AA etc). This should be extended to CO as well. My ping is often 200-300 so it pisses me off that I can't spend points earnt due to base camping. 6. If the above is implemented it could be possible to pool all the points into one score like XP in CO but I would prefer sepertate so that you can see how many more repairs etc you need to earn to get a res for that SG. So three XP bars at the bottom of the screen would be a nice tracking system. 7. The COM to have a single button that when "Shift clicked" donates 20% of his res to the enitre team. The COM can still drop items on individual marines by selecting them and hitting the item.
It should be a seperate topic but its linked so Four for the Aliens:
1. Gorges get the first 15 res out of any RT they drop (or maybe every second res for the first 30 etc if it proves to over powered). It drives me crazy dropping RT's, my team mates get the res but don't defend it. It dies and I only get 2-3 rest back and they get the rest. This would make it more important to protect RT's that you did not drop as if you want any res from them you have to save it. 2. Gorges earn res for healing like the above marines do for welding. 3. All aliens earn res for doing damage to marines 10secs before they die 4. Lerks also get res for umbra or primal screaming aliens while they are under attack to encouge the use of these effects.
<!--quoteo(post=1667770:date=Jan 18 2008, 09:00 AM:name=Misere)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Misere @ Jan 18 2008, 09:00 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If its a free for all on the armoury a noob or new player would be too greater drain on the teams resourses. Two res pools are required to address this. But your correct in keeping the team atmosphere being important. I have added in italics to my prevous post and simplified it a bit, plus an additonal suggestion at the bottom.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It is not a free for all. You <b>obviously</b> didn't read my original post Please take the time to go back and read it. I'll link it for you: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=103418&view=findpost&p=1667500" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1667500</a>
I'll keep this simple. Just in case: after reading, if you still don't quite understand, you'll know what I mean that directly addresses the apparent 'issue' you brought up: You can only have equipment -that the commander has given you, -or that you have purchased yourself: --which you have to be able to <b>afford</b>.
Edit: It seems we were both mistaken. (Though it's still evident you haven't read my post <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />) I was proposing a different system. It seems you thought my only input was that I had a concern that separating marine and commander resource pools would water down the teamwork aspect: which I still believe you haven't really addressed, since, to me, it's something deeper, closer to the core. You're no longer a part of one unit, you're just an individual doing his own thing, that happens to be labelled 'marine' like the next guy (who you should probably cooperate with) - which is, in reality, what you are; but it isn't what NS is trying to encourage.
The system I proposed was essentially a marriage of the originally-proposed 'Credit'/money system, and current NS1 resource system (maybe a bit of love on the side for the personal resource pool system); with its roots deep in the original resource system, without many of the problems associated with the Credit system.
<!--quoteo(post=1667811:date=Jan 18 2008, 11:18 AM:name=Harimau)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Harimau @ Jan 18 2008, 11:18 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667811"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It is not a free for all. You <b>obviously</b> didn't read my original post Please take the time to go back and read it. I'll link it for you: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=103418&view=findpost&p=1667500" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1667500</a>
I'll keep this simple. Just in case: after reading, if you still don't quite understand, you'll know what I mean that directly addresses the apparent 'issue' you brought up: You can only have equipment -that the commander has given you, -or that you have purchased yourself: --which you have to be able to <b>afford</b>.
Edit: It seems we were both mistaken. (Though it's still evident you haven't read my post <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />) I was proposing a different system. It seems you thought my only input was that I had a concern that separating marine and commander resource pools would water down the teamwork aspect: which I still believe you haven't really addressed, since, to me, it's something deeper, closer to the core. You're no longer a part of one unit, you're just an individual doing his own thing, that happens to be labelled 'marine' like the next guy (who you should probably cooperate with) - which is, in reality, what you are; but it isn't what NS is trying to encourage.
The system I proposed was essentially a marriage of the originally-proposed 'Credit'/money system, and current NS1 resource system (maybe a bit of love on the side for the personal resource pool system); with its roots deep in the original resource system, without many of the problems associated with the Credit system.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have been reading the posts but find what you have said very confusing. Credit linked to res that the com can spend but then poof it dissipears when a marine buys something if he has the credit? Its seems very complex to get the same goal. Also I feel that it suffers from a core problem: Armoury humping.
e.g. two Marines have enough credits to get a SG and there is 2 res. They both hang out at base humping the armour waiting for it to tick over to purchase their SG before anyone else. In the mean time the COM is dropping ammo and health to the marines actually doing their Job, prolong the wait.
Net result is less team work which is what your main concern is. Basicly what your proposing only differs to me on two points. 1 your calling it credits instead of points, 2. All of the res is held in the COMs pool until spent by the COM or the Marines. I do not see how the later improves team play!
Additional suggestings to my above post.
1. The team member with the most team points gets the res first once the towes tick over, thus reducing his points. This makes certain that when res is low those who are doing the most get the res first.
2. Above I said that the marines only get RES is the Marines hold two res towers. I would like to amend this to RT's 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10's res is diverited to marine RES if there are marines who have earnt it. Other wise it goes to the COM's pool permently. This will ensure that marines will try to hold as many RT's as possible and that the COM has a regular and predicatble supply of RES flowing in.
3. Amend my "20% to the players option" to pressing "Alt + number" to transfer 10, 20 30 ...100% of COM's res to the players.
It's not complex at all. Credit is simply a representation of res - which is held in the team pool. There will, ideally, always be more res than there is total credit, unless you and your marines have gone on a building/welding spree.
I don't think armoury-humping would be a huge problem - and there is a solution to that, however harsh it is: disabling purchases.
Though it would only occur in an excess of credit to res, which shouldn't occur unless the commander's been exceptionally thrifty, and the marines have all only been doing support jobs like welding their teammates. <b>Obviously</b> you'd have to balance it so that the marines do earn a lot less credit than the team is gaining res - though of course there are variables like how many players are on your team/in the server; but that's no different to the spending considerations for the commander in NS, so if that was addressed in NS, it would be addressed in a similar manner in this NS2 system. I don't recall if it was addressed, but if it were I assume it might have been something along the lines of: more players, faster res gain; perhaps higher specific research/building costs, or lower 'assist' (meds, ammo) costs.
As I said earlier, the idea likely isn't perfect, and I'm glad you picked up on something that needs improvement. To steal and twist an idea from you, perhaps the credit-earning 'potential' would be variable, and could be directly affected by the amount of res income (perhaps also res spending, credit-earning and spending) - if the team is earning less res due to a lack of kills and towers, then players earn credit slower than they normally would.
The guidelines (benefits?) behind this 'representative currency system' idea were: > Taking some of the pressure and micromanagement away from the commander (but allowing commanders to still "hot drop" items at will) > Providing autonomy to Marines for selecting their own equipment. > Rewarding individual Marines for performing actions and following orders (credit) > While it doesn't necessarily address the phenomenon of "Rambos" in any way I can think of; it'll make their very playstyle more contributive to the team. They'll still be gaining resources for the team, but only spending the smaller portion of it. > Preventing the phenomenon of 'hoarding' - anyone can spend assigned res if they have credits. <b>Credits only have value if you spend them.</b> > Keeping the game balanced resource-wise (ie. a game wouldn't slide totally to one side, since there would be no res gain for the team if all you did was weld your own teammates and multipliers only increase your credit, not your team's res) > Keeping the resource model unified (credits are not a new or secondary resource, and there aren't separate personal/equipment pools; they are simply 'currency' representing res, to be spent by individual marines) - a big part of the reason that aliens may be gaining a commander. > I believe this system also fits the desire expressed to take elements such as the autonomy from COmbat and bring it to Classic.
Is there any possibility that doesn't involve disabling the buying? I think that is why I like 2 pools of resources, rather than 1 pool and credit to spend that pool individually. I would like NS2 to have as few negative reinforcement tools as possible, other than what the opposing side is dishing out that is.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
I think we all may have gone way too deep into this topic. This thread has many good and workable ideas and has started to dissolve into "my way is better". Let's just let it go before this good thread becomes venomous.
Sounds agreeable to me. Much love to my fellow gamers! <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
In the last podcast Max and Charlie revealed new information on the Marine Weapons System. Now we can restart the discussion. He did mention that the commander will research and marines will buy equipment. They did not say whether the comm would be able to drop weapons or what exactly marines spend to get their weapons - so it's still up for speculation. Also, I have sent Charlie a PM making him aware of this topic and asking him what he thinks of our 'little' discussion here.
<!--quoteo(post=1666839:date=Jan 9 2008, 01:57 AM:name=naggy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(naggy @ Jan 9 2008, 01:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1666839"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Marines should have a resource system like that of the Kharaa: <b>Everyone has their own personal resource pool and buys their own upgrades.</b>
With that said, there would still be a commander, but he would get a significantly larger amount of resources than everyone else in the team. His job would be exactly the same (unlocking weapons/armour, building turrets/advanced structures/etc.), but he wouldn't have to worry about placing the equipment at spawn, instantly making his job much easier to monitor.
Also, this would eliminate the frustration of having a ###### commander who doesn't know when to drop weapons/armour upgrades/etc. at certain times, and leads to more customization for the players. Numerous times have I played with a retard commander who wouldn't drop a GL when the surrounding corridors are littered with chambers, or have players on my team not efficiently skilled in using certain types of weapons.
This could easily be accomplished by using the current NS classic resource system. <b>Each player gets res for killing enemies, and the commander gets the same amount of res put into his pool. Everyone would get res from the RT's like usual</b>, so there is a constant flow.<!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><b>*</b><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->
This would make commanding a lot easier to pick up and enjoy IMO, as the stress that a scrub commander gets from having to zip around placing equipment here and there usually leads to avoidance of the comm chair in future games. The game would also keep its high teamwork orientated status as communication between team members would be needed to check what is needed/wanted (like specific weapon mixes, or ha/jp rushes, etc.)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><b>*</b><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->: By using this method (with a few tweaks) it negates what Charlie was talking about in the podcast.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=charlie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(charlie)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->... If it costs 10 resources to build something and you have 10 among the whole team, but not among any one person, then you can’t buy that thing, whereas on the marine side, you could buy that thing. And if that’s a resources tower, then the aliens can no longer get resources. ...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All that has to be done is have the commander get something like 1 res per player kill as apposed to how it worked in NS1 where it was 2 res per kill for the Kharaa/Commander (either that or increase the number of resources that the Kharaa obtain per kill). That, accompanied by the res flow from the RT's allows both teams to have similar res incomes with the only variants being a) <b>the number of RT's each team owns</b> and b) <b>the number of kills each player obtains.</b>
I know people want difference (in the res structures) between the two teams, but I don't think its possible for it to work unless something like this was implemented..
Comments
An attack marker would give a bonus to any kills made in the room/hall/vent while a defend marker would add a bonus to any kills made while in the room (so killing them before they have a chance to enter the room still gives you the bonus) AND add a bonus to base construction and repair as well.
The areas for the different rooms could be assigned during the map making process, I mean the rooms are already given names, just assign them as different sectors as well.
<!--quoteo(post=1666812:date=Jan 8 2008, 05:42 PM:name=corpsman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(corpsman @ Jan 8 2008, 05:42 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1666812"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I am all for the idea of the team recieving weapons somehow, other then simple dropping from the commander. The only problem I keep hearing is people who seem to think they are better lpayer because of their kill count. If we all thought that way, noone would ever be a gorge, and welders would never be used.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is no way to prevent players form going Rambo (and generally being morons). Many people have gotten too used to games like Halo where kills is all that matter and that is the only ‘strategery’ that they know. ‘run down empty halls unprotected and shoot anything that moves’. In NS that gets you killed, and fast. We have to find a way to reward players (like ill admit TF2 which is super awesome and much better that the first) instead of trying to punish them. If a com can decide how much personal income is given to his individual troops then what is stopping him/her from just setting it so that one or two (ie their personal friends) get all or the cash while the rest are stuck with the smg?
If you have a system that allows the com to punish solders for not following his/her orders I would hate to have to serve under one!
‘You didn’t rush the hive no HMG for you and ill set your personal income to minimum’
‘But I was busy defending our forward base for a fade? I was calling for health’
‘Im not going to waist my recourses on solders who don’t follow orders’
‘Your resources? I thought they were the teams resources?’
‘No they are mine. I am the com and you are all my slaves mwahahahaha!’
the system should be set up in a way that even if everyone else on your team is being an a$$ you are still able to have fun.
And what happens if the com gives no orders? I’ve played under many that just said over the mike what they wanted and didn’t give waypoints (probably too busy setting down weapons and health for all the noobs).
... You didn't notice I suggested it? *sniff* Oh well, as long as you think the gist of it is cool.
Anyways, my moment of narcissism over with, I think the multiplier wouldn't be the right mechanic. If players are already being rewarded for playing the game, I could see the use of a multiplier, rather than addition, causing a team to gain the requirements for weapons exponentially. Its a math thing, but in terms of game play it means that it could be possible that if one team or the other makes a string of victories at a multiplier, they would so out distance the other team in equipment acquired from the personal resources, the chances of the other team making any kind of comeback would be very slim as now the opposing side makes it that much harder for them achieve their victories.
I hope you understand, its a balance thing. Its not like I am hating on my own brainstormed idea.
OK here goes. Everyone starts out as a fade, with an HMG strapped to their back, and they have xeno too. Yes! And we all play in a big room, like a super dome. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="biggrin-fix.gif" /> <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/fade.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="::fade::" border="0" alt="fade.gif" />
...... for a mod.
<!--quoteo(post=1667089:date=Jan 11 2008, 10:04 AM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(locallyunscene @ Jan 11 2008, 10:04 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667089"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is part of the reason I think marine resources need to be credits, because we don't want to increase real marine res flow for followed orders.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is part of the reason I think marine resources need to be credits, because we don't want to increase real marine res flow for followed orders.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Just curious but how is using the word credits different than resources? They both still help the marine acquire the equipment, yes? Equipment and upgrades are the real currency of the game, a unspent resource (or credit) point is completely valueless to a marine facing the Kharaa in the field.
Fair question. The difference probably isn't that great from the marines' point of view, but it is from the comm's point of view. Here are two possible systems:
a.) Marines get personal resources generated from following orders
b.) Marines get credit for resources for orders followed
In scenario b resources are generated in 2 ways: resource towers and RFK. In scenario a res is generated 3 ways: RTs, RFK, and res for orders completed. That's the difference between the two systems. A marine with enough personal resources will always be able to buy a shotgun. A Marine with credit may or may not be able to buy something depending on the actual resources available. In a credit system, the marines are well equipped because the comm controls enough rts to spend the res to equip them, not because the marines won a few skirmishes.
a.) Marines get personal resources generated from following orders
b.) Marines get credit for resources for orders followed
In scenario b resources are generated in 2 ways: resource towers and RFK. In scenario a res is generated 3 ways: RTs, RFK, and res for orders completed. That's the difference between the two systems. A marine with enough personal resources will always be able to buy a shotgun. A Marine with credit may or may not be able to buy something depending on the actual resources available. In a credit system, the marines are well equipped because the comm controls enough rts to spend the res to equip them, not because the marines won a few skirmishes.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Er... Lets see if I understand your opinion accurately:
IYHO,
(a) Personal Resources means: The marine earns resources only for themselves from Command, Map, Enemy. Its only for themself because it is exclusive to them. Sounds kind of like how Kharaa get resources in NS1.
(b) Personal Credit means: The marine earns resources for the whole team from Command, Map, Enemy. The marine is rewarded or allocated from Command a share of the total. Sounds kind of like how Marines get resources in NS1.
IMHO, both (a) and (b) fail to meet the needs of NS2, where we need something both sides can use, given the clues the Devs have given us: Both sides having 1) Same resource model and 2) A Commander position
Here is the thing, perhaps there is some confusion on this point, when I was saying Personal Resources before, I was already operating under my personal impression that resources are already ideally in two separate pools, an option ©: Command & Personal.
To that end, I think we need to do away with RFK completely. Its a poor mechanic that weights the resource scale towards a particular play style slant. Instead, go with Resource For Hit (RFH): this encompasses hitting anything over time results in a reward - that is, 'hit' a friend with your welder to help them is as valued and promoted through reward as a 'hit' on an enemy with a weapon. IMHO, RFH promotes teamwork, RFK promotes rambos.
Next, Command pool is the resources all the players pay their dues to and the Commander decides how they are spent for the good of the team's objectives. Personal pool is what a player has from just participating in the team game. This is a 2 pool system I see both teams having, so that the Devs objective of having both teams use the same resource system is satisfied, as well as the Kharaa Commander issue.
I agree the method of resource acquisition should not swing heavily on a single skirmish, to that end there should not be multipliers. The game shouldn't stalemate as the two sides vie for resources but the game does need to make sure it doesn't easily turn a snow ball fight into an avalanche or I am sure games will feel so one sided it will prove to be little fun, about as much fun as it is to be spawn camped as the Kharaa in NS1.
Credits are thus, representative of real res, but hold no actual value by themselves. Credits can only be spent by marines, and unassigned res can only be spent by the commander. As credits are representative of real res, if there is no res, credits can't really be spent.
Unassigned res in this case means that no credit is 'assigned' to it. Assigned res is the total res that has a corresponding credit value for players - and whether this can be spent by the commander - even VIEWED by the commander - is up to debate. Now that I think about it, if assigned res can't be spent, is this simply the same as an individual resource pool system? Actually, it isn't quite, because the individual player doesn't gain anything from the RTs.
The individual marine would gain credit for CFH/RFK, and the team would gain res for CFH/RFK - probably more res than credit, in my opinion, so that the team is actually gaining something more, and not just the player. (eg. a kill gives you 2 res and 1 credit. that means 1 res goes to the team exclusively, and 1 res of that [since you earned 1 credit] is still yours to spend.)
It should still work if you perform a credit-earning-only task (ie. the team's not earning res for your efforts), since the RTs are still producing res for your team.
A problem with this might be (if assigned res is unspendable) that after a good deal of commander-spending which is then combined with a lot of res-less credit-earning tasks, there may arise a situation where there are more credits in total, than there are res. At which point all res, until the levels balance out, would go to assigned res, I guess?
On the other hand, if assigned res were spendable, the commander could overspend, and the situation would be the same, but rather than disadvantageous to the team, it's disadvantageous to the individual marines - who can't purchase weapons/equipment because there are no team resources.
Other ideas, part of this 'representative currency system idea' are:
Commanders can increase a marine's credit at will (but only increase their credit, they'd assign a value and have a confirmation box; it won't happen in real-time, instead it'd be kinda like 'tribute' in RTS games);
And marines can forfeit a share or all of their credit (but only decrease their credit, again they'd assign a value and have a confirmation box) though this latter part might only be relevant if the commander can't spend assigned res.
I guess, as an extension to the latter, there might also be an option to turn off your credit-earning (so you wouldn't have to tribute after every kill), which means you'd be relying exclusively on your commander for equipment.
Also, I think (mild) CREDIT multipliers, are quite compatible with this system.
This entire idea as a whole is of course based on the assumption that the commander can still drop equipment at will.
Essentially, the marine team is <b>still</b> gaining resources <i>at the same rate</i> as before - it's just that their spending is a little more erratic.
<b>edit:</b> replaced RFH with CFH (credit for hit) since I don't believe that you should gain <b>hard res</b> for what you're doing for your own team, only credits, since that's personal; and otherwise it could easily unbalance the game.
a note: RFK (res for kill) in my idea, encompasses CFK/CFH (credit, for the marine) as well as res (for the whole team).
Well, I doubt the system's perfect, but maybe you can build on this idea, and improve it, smooth out the kinks, etc.
Please read, and comment.
That's a pretty big if, although RFH isn't a bad idea. I agree with Harimau that the credit for damage done needs to be less than the res received for kills if there are two distinct pools of personal resources and team resources. I'm not ready to give up on different resource models for each team, if the two models aren't that much different. If we keep a marine only perspective there doesn't really need to be two pools. All RFK goes to the team and the commander sets aside a percentage/set number of resources for marines with credit to purchase weapons.
I see griefer Commanders happening in this situation, where a Commander just sets the slider to 0%. Unless the slider only gets a certain range, like 25% to 75%, but even then, it seems to me that it would be more hassle than its worth, players would still bug the Commander to set the rate as high as it can go and feel punished when the rate is set as low as it can go. I would rather any kind of system that allows for as little friction between Commander and other players as possible, to that end I think a system that allows for the transfer of resources as smoothly as possible, by already being incorporated into the game itself. If the game tells you what you get, as a Commander and the rest, you just have to deal with it, rather than dealing with each other, an unfortunate source of a lot of headache in the current NS1 game. A binding arbitration of sorts, a follow the rules set out situation, rather than make the rules up as you go. Hopefully a better resource model for all will mean less for us to ruin each other's game style with. Another way to look at it is to always aim for having it seem like rewards are always given, as opposed to punishment meted out. Positive reinforcement vs negative reinforcement and all that it entails.
Commanding is a position of power. There will always be griefers and an eject feature. Also setting the slider may be necessary sometimes if the comm wants to research HA or something else expensive.
<!--quoteo(post=1667543:date=Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667543"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->players would still bug the Commander to set the rate as high as it can go and feel punished when the rate is set as low as it can go.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't agree. As long as the marines feel like they can get weapons on their own, they won't bug the commander. Not everyone will be able to purchase a shotgun, but the top players who need the shotgun will. If the commander sets the slider to 0 then he's asking to be bugged.
<!--quoteo(post=1667543:date=Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667543"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->to that end I think a system that allows for the transfer of resources as smoothly as possible, by already being incorporated into the game itself. If the game tells you what you get, as a Commander and the rest, you just have to deal with it, rather than dealing with each other, an unfortunate source of a lot of headache in the current NS1 game. A binding arbitration of sorts, a follow the rules set out situation, rather than make the rules up as you go.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS and NS2 are team games, and dealing with each other is a part of the game. With personal resources and RFH you run into the problem of equipment landslide. Also it's much more exploitable since you're generating resources for marines based on these events.
<!--quoteo(post=1667543:date=Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CanadianWolverine @ Jan 15 2008, 02:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1667543"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Hopefully a better resource model for all will mean less for us to ruin each other's game style with. Another way to look at it is to always aim for having it seem like rewards are always given, as opposed to punishment meted out. Positive reinforcement vs negative reinforcement and all that it entails.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As long as the comm has res to spend you get a reward for playing well. There's no punishment involved.
I would appreciate it, if you send me a Private Message with ideas that were discussed in the time i was away and post #s that are worth reading. I will then read these posts and add them to the OP so others can quickly find them as well.
Eventually Charlie and Max will stumble on this topic and will find a lot of great ideas for the NS2 Marine weapons system. Keep your ideas flowing!
Rewards, if used, instead of "res/credits," could be experience. Experience which = better playing. I want to start out by saying that it works in most other games who utalize the idea, and of course in real life, I would prefer to be next to the seasoned Sgt. vs. the arrogant FNG private [but that's another story]. So!
Example is: The "player" [well call him FNG] starts out of course the same as everyone else. As they progress by following orders [whatever they may be] he earns experience. Every time he earns experience he shoots a bit better [aiming, reloading, whatever], walks a little quieter, and moves a little faster. Other players see Mr. FNG doing better and then they just like real life want these upgrades. So what do they do? They follow orders and get stuff done. Kills, welding, building, moving, whatever is needed by the commander ["what" is irrelavent right now].
Positives:
>Rewards players in a way that is honest/fair.
>Completely free from the commander so no worries about griefing [sliders and favorites].
>No commander time/attention needed whatsoever, so the system is <u>100% free from the comm!</u>. Streamlined.
>Realistic [for those who want more realism]. In real life would you fight alongside the guy who has already seen war and shot someone, or they guy who just graduated bootcamp? heh Yeah, me too.
>No other players griefing about the comm playing favorites. "Why you always give him the JP/GL?" Answer: "Go out and earn it." Period.
>It is a tangible feeling the players who earn it get. Instead of hoping to be rewarded, they ARE rewarded, and they see/feel it while playing. I shoot a bit better. I see myself moving a tiny bit faster, so I killed a tiny bit less the the rest of the team when attacked. I can sneak in a little bit better.... They SEE the experience at work! Not just on the side of the screen as a number system or whatever...
>Wouldn't have to balance res/credits with the marines
>And my biggest reason for this idea is simple. Other players see them enjoying a better game through a slightly better upgraded play, and they want it! How often did you see the other guy in combat with the movement upgrade, and maybe even a bit better armor and wish you had it? Every time. So now it is something not only the person who earned it gets to enjoy, but other players see it and want to not only earn it too, but stick by the side of the guy who obviously knows what they are doing and play alongside them. I know I would...
Cons: I honestly can't think of any, other then keeping it balanced and not making the upgrades <i>too</i> powerful. The idea is to reward gamers who deserve it, and so they enjoy a tiny bit more. Combat suffered from people who got the first few kills dominating the rest of the game, so I say slow this WAY down. But just enough after __ kills or whatever, so the people who really stuck with the team and the comm would get to enjoy the second half of the average matches a bit more.
Like it? Hate it?
BTW, this isn't meant to be a different thread topic, or to stray the topic on purpose, but instead, offer a side idea to the weapons being upgraded through the team res "system."
*sigh*
In my idea there are no separate resource pools, just one pool, coupled with a representative currency system to reward marines.
I tried to get this idea across, but think of credits as 'cash' or electronic money; and res as 'bullion' (gold bars, national treasury, you know?)
<b>There are no sliders.</b> The closest thing to that I can think of, that was in my idea, is the 'tribute' style system. But with that system you can only GIVE, you can't TAKE, or WITHHOLD.
Every action a marine performs has a static res/credit reward. Res is for the team. Credit is for the marine. Only kills would award res, just like the current system. But <b>everything</b> that a marine does (killing, dealing damage, welding, capping, following orders, defending/attacking areas etc. etc.) rewards him with credit. You could even incorporate a minor credit multiplier for 'attack'/'defend' markers, as was discussed.
It's just a matter of balancing numbers, at this point. I used the example of (credit:res) 1:1, but it could be 1000:1, and you might gain 10 points for every point of armour you weld. The numbers aren't important to me, that would be for the developers to the think about, the system is.
corpsman: your idea doesn't have a 'con' per se, but it has a <b>key lack</b> - where're the marines buying their own weapons? that was the key idea behind this entire thread, really...
also, improving that vastly over a 15 minute game-- that's kinda weird. and becoming faster, quieter, etc. during a game? that's rather reminiscent of the kharaa side.
otherwise, i like your "character improvement" idea, but I'm not so sure it's very NS-ish, or if it is, as I just said, it doesn't really address marine autonomy / removing the pressure from the commander (reducing 'give me a sg' spam, dropping weapons for each and everyone every time).
in order to justify the 'buying' weapons thing: special operations units around the world allow their soldiers to choose their own equipment; probably from an approved selection of equipment, but I guess their freedom would depend from unit to unit.
and i've grown tired of the 'griefer commander' argument, if this person's gonna intentionally grief, he <b>will</b> find a way to ###### up your game anyway, no matter which system you put in place. You've still got the comm kick option, so it's irrelevant.
That's exactly the type of system I'm talking about. The only reason I bring up a separate res pool is so that marines can't buy equipment when the comm needs to save up for an upgrade. There is one overarching res pool the comm controls. He takes res from this pool and puts it in the equipment pool marines buy from. The slider idea is that res can go into this pool automatically without the commanders control if he wishes it. IMO It makes more sense for the comm to manage it based on upgrades and res flow and do it manually but I'm sure the automatic feature would be used by people who "don't really know how to comm" and that's fine.
So no, you don't need a slider or manual additions to a separate pool and could leave it as a set system but it's just an option so the comm can take control of the strategy when he/she needs to control res more tightly.
I would, personally, even allow the commander to 'overspend' - that is, spend the team's resources in excess of what is exclusively his to spend. Field marines may complain, but ideally, the Comm would be spending that res for the benefit of the entire team, and that benefit would trickle down to the individual field marines.
I might, also, allow the commander to 'disable' certain expensive weapons and equipment, for the purpose of saving res, as has been discussed in other ideas. I'm not too sure about this one though. But it would be ideal for the higher-tier equipment such as JPs and HAs, as well as managing 'rushes' and such.
This could, after some thought, also be automatic. When the ratio of total team res to 'assigned res' falls below certain levels, certain equipment would also, accordingly, be disabled for field marines to purchase. The commander could of course buy certain equipment for certain marines though, since nothing's barred to him. There's a lot of ifs, though.
Ideally, the team would gain res considerably faster than the (field) marines spend it, so the comm always has something to spend. The only time this wouldn't be happening is if the team were making zero kills, have very few res nodes capped, but welding and building (and doing other res-less support jobs) a whole lot.
I think every marine would begin with zero credit, but there wouldn't be anything to 'buy' from the armouries, anyway, as the comm hasn't researched anything yet.
It is important to note that 'intuitive' is synonymous with 'instinctive' and 'simple' things are things you can do instinctively or with the least thought/attention required.
A secondary/personal resource pool effectively separates the field troops from their commander. I think it has greater implications apart from gameplay/strategy, like negatively affecting 'team atmosphere' and cooperation.
If its a free for all on the armoury a noob or new player would be too greater drain on the teams resourses. Two res pools are required to address this. But your correct in keeping the team atmosphere being important. I have added in italics to my prevous post and simplified it a bit, plus an additonal suggestion at the bottom.
<!--quoteo(post=1666968:date=Jan 10 2008, 12:38 AM:name=Misere)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Misere @ Jan 10 2008, 12:38 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1666968"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Each point of health and armor is worth one damage point, kill point or building point
You earn kill points for dealing damage to aliens 10secs before it dies.
You earn damage points for dealing damage to structures 30seconds before it dies
~ This is important to prevent kill stealing.
You earn building points for every point built, repaired or welded.
To earn 1 res for your personal pool y:
Once you gain enough kill points equivalent to say a solo kill Fade, thus after solo killing four skulks = 1 res, or 1 ONO's = 2res.
Deal structure damage equivalent to a solo kill of a RT
Gain build points equivalent to a solo build of a RT
<i>~ All these are taken form the next bit of RES the com gets from the towers only, not kills. This means that if you want to get rewarded for killing etc you need to get the RT's up and maintained. In addition for the marines to earn any res they must have at least two RT's. This means that if your pushed back to MS the COM has all the res at their disposal</i><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now this will promote team work, addressing Harimau's concern because to get that secon res pool filled you need to have hold of the map, you need to follow the COM's orders. GO TEAM!
Now in addition to this I would like to see seven things for the marines
1. A donate setting on the pop up menu so that Marines can go for fast tec rather than items. Their personal res pool does not fill up until they deselect this so new players will not be such a drain.
2. A limit to the personal res, enough to outfit one marine with the most expensive combination of items plus 10%. This way a player with a very good kill to death ratio will not end up hording all the res.
3. If a marine leaves the server and does not return within 2 min then their res gets split evening between the COM and their team mates.
4. If a marine upgrades/downgrades items at the AA they get credit. However, of they return a HA for a JP, their lite armour has the same damage% to prevent a zero armour HA from switching back and forth to get full health.
5. Marines being able to preset what they want to get while waiting to spawn (once they get within range of the AA etc). This should be extended to CO as well. My ping is often 200-300 so it pisses me off that I can't spend points earnt due to base camping.
6. If the above is implemented it could be possible to pool all the points into one score like XP in CO but I would prefer sepertate so that you can see how many more repairs etc you need to earn to get a res for that SG. So three XP bars at the bottom of the screen would be a nice tracking system.
7. The COM to have a single button that when "Shift clicked" donates 20% of his res to the enitre team. The COM can still drop items on individual marines by selecting them and hitting the item.
It should be a seperate topic but its linked so
Four for the Aliens:
1. Gorges get the first 15 res out of any RT they drop (or maybe every second res for the first 30 etc if it proves to over powered). It drives me crazy dropping RT's, my team mates get the res but don't defend it. It dies and I only get 2-3 rest back and they get the rest. This would make it more important to protect RT's that you did not drop as if you want any res from them you have to save it.
2. Gorges earn res for healing like the above marines do for welding.
3. All aliens earn res for doing damage to marines 10secs before they die
4. Lerks also get res for umbra or primal screaming aliens while they are under attack to encouge the use of these effects.
It is not a free for all.
You <b>obviously</b> didn't read my original post
Please take the time to go back and read it. I'll link it for you: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=103418&view=findpost&p=1667500" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1667500</a>
I'll keep this simple. Just in case: after reading, if you still don't quite understand, you'll know what I mean that directly addresses the apparent 'issue' you brought up:
You can only have equipment
-that the commander has given you,
-or that you have purchased yourself:
--which you have to be able to <b>afford</b>.
Edit: It seems we were both mistaken. (Though it's still evident you haven't read my post <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />) I was proposing a different system. It seems you thought my only input was that I had a concern that separating marine and commander resource pools would water down the teamwork aspect: which I still believe you haven't really addressed, since, to me, it's something deeper, closer to the core. You're no longer a part of one unit, you're just an individual doing his own thing, that happens to be labelled 'marine' like the next guy (who you should probably cooperate with) - which is, in reality, what you are; but it isn't what NS is trying to encourage.
The system I proposed was essentially a marriage of the originally-proposed 'Credit'/money system, and current NS1 resource system (maybe a bit of love on the side for the personal resource pool system); with its roots deep in the original resource system, without many of the problems associated with the Credit system.
You <b>obviously</b> didn't read my original post
Please take the time to go back and read it. I'll link it for you: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=103418&view=findpost&p=1667500" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1667500</a>
I'll keep this simple. Just in case: after reading, if you still don't quite understand, you'll know what I mean that directly addresses the apparent 'issue' you brought up:
You can only have equipment
-that the commander has given you,
-or that you have purchased yourself:
--which you have to be able to <b>afford</b>.
Edit: It seems we were both mistaken. (Though it's still evident you haven't read my post <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />) I was proposing a different system. It seems you thought my only input was that I had a concern that separating marine and commander resource pools would water down the teamwork aspect: which I still believe you haven't really addressed, since, to me, it's something deeper, closer to the core. You're no longer a part of one unit, you're just an individual doing his own thing, that happens to be labelled 'marine' like the next guy (who you should probably cooperate with) - which is, in reality, what you are; but it isn't what NS is trying to encourage.
The system I proposed was essentially a marriage of the originally-proposed 'Credit'/money system, and current NS1 resource system (maybe a bit of love on the side for the personal resource pool system); with its roots deep in the original resource system, without many of the problems associated with the Credit system.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have been reading the posts but find what you have said very confusing. Credit linked to res that the com can spend but then poof it dissipears when a marine buys something if he has the credit? Its seems very complex to get the same goal. Also I feel that it suffers from a core problem: Armoury humping.
e.g. two Marines have enough credits to get a SG and there is 2 res. They both hang out at base humping the armour waiting for it to tick over to purchase their SG before anyone else. In the mean time the COM is dropping ammo and health to the marines actually doing their Job, prolong the wait.
Net result is less team work which is what your main concern is. Basicly what your proposing only differs to me on two points. 1 your calling it credits instead of points, 2. All of the res is held in the COMs pool until spent by the COM or the Marines. I do not see how the later improves team play!
Additional suggestings to my above post.
1. The team member with the most team points gets the res first once the towes tick over, thus reducing his points. This makes certain that when res is low those who are doing the most get the res first.
2. Above I said that the marines only get RES is the Marines hold two res towers. I would like to amend this to RT's 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10's res is diverited to marine RES if there are marines who have earnt it. Other wise it goes to the COM's pool permently. This will ensure that marines will try to hold as many RT's as possible and that the COM has a regular and predicatble supply of RES flowing in.
3. Amend my "20% to the players option" to pressing "Alt + number" to transfer 10, 20 30 ...100% of COM's res to the players.
I don't think armoury-humping would be a huge problem - and there is a solution to that, however harsh it is: disabling purchases.
Though it would only occur in an excess of credit to res, which shouldn't occur unless the commander's been exceptionally thrifty, and the marines have all only been doing support jobs like welding their teammates. <b>Obviously</b> you'd have to balance it so that the marines do earn a lot less credit than the team is gaining res - though of course there are variables like how many players are on your team/in the server; but that's no different to the spending considerations for the commander in NS, so if that was addressed in NS, it would be addressed in a similar manner in this NS2 system. I don't recall if it was addressed, but if it were I assume it might have been something along the lines of: more players, faster res gain; perhaps higher specific research/building costs, or lower 'assist' (meds, ammo) costs.
As I said earlier, the idea likely isn't perfect, and I'm glad you picked up on something that needs improvement. To steal and twist an idea from you, perhaps the credit-earning 'potential' would be variable, and could be directly affected by the amount of res income (perhaps also res spending, credit-earning and spending) - if the team is earning less res due to a lack of kills and towers, then players earn credit slower than they normally would.
The guidelines (benefits?) behind this 'representative currency system' idea were:
> Taking some of the pressure and micromanagement away from the commander (but allowing commanders to still "hot drop" items at will)
> Providing autonomy to Marines for selecting their own equipment.
> Rewarding individual Marines for performing actions and following orders (credit)
> While it doesn't necessarily address the phenomenon of "Rambos" in any way I can think of; it'll make their very playstyle more contributive to the team. They'll still be gaining resources for the team, but only spending the smaller portion of it.
> Preventing the phenomenon of 'hoarding' - anyone can spend assigned res if they have credits. <b>Credits only have value if you spend them.</b>
> Keeping the game balanced resource-wise (ie. a game wouldn't slide totally to one side, since there would be no res gain for the team if all you did was weld your own teammates and multipliers only increase your credit, not your team's res)
> Keeping the resource model unified (credits are not a new or secondary resource, and there aren't separate personal/equipment pools; they are simply 'currency' representing res, to be spent by individual marines) - a big part of the reason that aliens may be gaining a commander.
> I believe this system also fits the desire expressed to take elements such as the autonomy from COmbat and bring it to Classic.
Also, I have sent Charlie a PM making him aware of this topic and asking him what he thinks of our 'little' discussion here.
<!--quoteo(post=1666839:date=Jan 9 2008, 01:57 AM:name=naggy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(naggy @ Jan 9 2008, 01:57 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1666839"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Marines should have a resource system like that of the Kharaa: <b>Everyone has their own personal resource pool and buys their own upgrades.</b>
With that said, there would still be a commander, but he would get a significantly larger amount of resources than everyone else in the team. His job would be exactly the same (unlocking weapons/armour, building turrets/advanced structures/etc.), but he wouldn't have to worry about placing the equipment at spawn, instantly making his job much easier to monitor.
Also, this would eliminate the frustration of having a ###### commander who doesn't know when to drop weapons/armour upgrades/etc. at certain times, and leads to more customization for the players. Numerous times have I played with a retard commander who wouldn't drop a GL when the surrounding corridors are littered with chambers, or have players on my team not efficiently skilled in using certain types of weapons.
This could easily be accomplished by using the current NS classic resource system. <b>Each player gets res for killing enemies, and the commander gets the same amount of res put into his pool. Everyone would get res from the RT's like usual</b>, so there is a constant flow.<!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><b>*</b><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->
This would make commanding a lot easier to pick up and enjoy IMO, as the stress that a scrub commander gets from having to zip around placing equipment here and there usually leads to avoidance of the comm chair in future games. The game would also keep its high teamwork orientated status as communication between team members would be needed to check what is needed/wanted (like specific weapon mixes, or ha/jp rushes, etc.)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><b>*</b><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->: By using this method (with a few tweaks) it negates what Charlie was talking about in the podcast.
<!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=charlie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(charlie)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->... If it costs 10 resources to build something and you have 10 among the whole team, but not among any one person, then you can’t buy that thing, whereas on the marine side, you could buy that thing. And if that’s a resources tower, then the aliens can no longer get resources. ...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All that has to be done is have the commander get something like 1 res per player kill as apposed to how it worked in NS1 where it was 2 res per kill for the Kharaa/Commander (either that or increase the number of resources that the Kharaa obtain per kill). That, accompanied by the res flow from the RT's allows both teams to have similar res incomes with the only variants being a) <b>the number of RT's each team owns</b> and b) <b>the number of kills each player obtains.</b>
I know people want difference (in the res structures) between the two teams, but I don't think its possible for it to work unless something like this was implemented..
Ideas?