aeroripperJoin Date: 2005-02-25Member: 42471NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
edited April 2009
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->are exactly why 99.9% of other developers would not post openly about the development process as UW is doing. I'm glad they're taking the negative comments in stride but gladly accepting constructive criticism.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He's got a good point. They've more or less kept us up with multiple daily development updates for quite a while now, along with fairly frequent audio and blog updates. It's good that they have a strong, core set of ideas/concepts to base their game around, but also take into account the feedback of casual and pro NS players into it as well. I don't think you would see this level of <b>daily</b> community engagement in more corporate, large scale games. TBH, I hope this game succeeds and will be as good as we're all hoping for and be a payoff for all the hard work that's gone into it for UWE.
A lot of good points made in this thread so far, but we are still a bit sketchy on the big picture so far.
<!--quoteo(post=1705098:date=Apr 17 2009, 01:38 AM:name=Laggasaurus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Laggasaurus @ Apr 17 2009, 01:38 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705098"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Issue numero tres, am i jumping to conclusions in assuming that with the addition of an alien commander the gorge is now nothing more than a fat mobile med pack <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":D" border="0" alt="biggrin-fix.gif" />? Since i'd always assumed they were the alien commanders just without the domineering title and the need to scream into your mic and SPAM CAPS to get your point across.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I've understood it as gorge doing more tactical building while the acomm does strategical ones, like hive and I guess RTs.
<!--quoteo(post=1705104:date=Apr 17 2009, 03:44 AM:name=juice)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (juice @ Apr 17 2009, 03:44 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705104"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->On the criticisms: IIRC, whenever NS1 new versions didn't turn out fun, the team scrapped them and changed the game until it was fun.
I'm not worried about how things will turn out. If it ends up being a slow, frustrating, or generic game, they'll just scrap the thing and change the gameplay, which will be infinitely easier and fast now with their own engine and tools.
So when I hear an idea, I imagine it with the best possible implementation, because that's the only way they'll let it be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly well said. It's OK to voice your concerns and suggestions, but don't throw your toys out of the pram. If it sucks it'll be changed and unless they are incredibly lucky it probably will suck first go, the only way to get these things right is through iteration and that's what happened with NS1. The team know that and that's why they built in scripting to make the changes quicker.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1705113:date=Apr 17 2009, 05:17 AM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ Apr 17 2009, 05:17 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705113"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've understood it as gorge doing more tactical building while the acomm does strategical ones, like hive and I guess RTs.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> IIRC the gorge will set traps and possibly build temporary barriers, so I think your description of the gorge becoming a tactical comm sounds accurate.
<!--quoteo(post=1705058:date=Apr 16 2009, 04:31 PM:name=CanadianWolverine)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CanadianWolverine @ Apr 16 2009, 04:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705058"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Oh, what if you also tied the Mobile Siege Cannon to butts in Chairs as well? Might help with not having to develop as much AI behavior for your "bots", you know, other than path finding after a Commander gives it directions which I am assuming would be point and click, though you could have a Commander use WASD/Arrow Keys to move it... Hmm...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I definitely support this idea, because the pathing will be controlled by a human and not liable to end up looking like some sucky 70s sci-fi robot.
<!--quoteo(post=1705066:date=Apr 16 2009, 06:01 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Apr 16 2009, 06:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705066"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's actually much smaller than I excepted. I mean the first tech point travel time is roughly half that of the first rt's currently. I like that each team has a "natural" tech point even if I think it is a little close personally. It seems like getting to tech lvl 2 will be almost trivial for both teams, assuming equal skill. Third tier will be significantly easier than it is currently for kharaa, but a little harder for marines in terms of map control.
On that topic, will there be tech levels beyond 3 for each side? It would make sense to me in a "swing of power" way. I'd say the steamroll effect is desirable past a certain point to end the game quickly which something that many complain NS is currently lacking. Mid to late game battles that cause a swing of 3-3 to 4-2 should be huge IMO.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I think this is a valid point. General symmetry is good, but I don't like the idea of absolute symmettry in terms of the res nodes. Certainly the tech nodes should be equal in number or there is little room for comeback, but res nodes should be an odd number in total to promote persistent conflict. The extra res node should be placed somewhere along the middle 'equator' of the map and should be made difficult to hold to promote a constant back and forth style of play in that area. DoW2 has a number of good resource node configurations that are balanced in terms of symettry but make for interesting movements flows around the maps.
---
One layout change that might work for the example map is adding a resource node in the middle of the map and having 4 entrances into that central room from the ring path you already have established. This would create a lot more entropy around the centre, a lot more interesting configurations of 'line of supply' and it would eliminate a lot of the stale 'chokiness' in the middle of the map, while also allowing teams to travel behind enemy lines to knock out key structures. Holding the middle would be advantageous but difficult, and you'd see a lot of intense, almost chaotic battles through the centre.
Right now it's sounding very much like the maps are supposed to only have one main front, very similar to a TF2 style. I have to question this line of thinking if it's true, because this is one of the primary aspects that sets NS apart from other games, it's also one of the biggest reasons the game has such replayability, because movement is never along one general axis, it's always switching up so you will rarely play identical games on the same map. Look to TF2 and you're always fighting in the same places, you always know where enemies are coming from and the only thing that breaks the stalemates that arise from this setup is gimmicky features like the stacked spawntimes in favour of attackers and critical hits.
---
I also don't like the shortened corridors idea. Long and straight corridors usually aid the Marines, true, but in a lot of maps the corridors are where the Aliens get their kills. Lerk Spore is very effective, Marines have reduced movement forcing them to clump together and making them easier to target, Skulks can get in close quickly from around corners, Fades and Oni aren't hit from as many angles while attacking, Webs (although late tech) have dramatically reduced effectiveness in rooms. Corridors are just so instrumental in NS for the Alien side that I'm having trouble seeing if this will work well. Although there are still roughly the same number of corridors, it seems that having them shorter will reduce the overall ratio of 'corridor' to 'open space'. I'm sure if you were able to gather stats on NS the Aliens would have far more kills in corridors than in open spaces.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1705130:date=Apr 17 2009, 10:45 AM:name=Crispy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Crispy @ Apr 17 2009, 10:45 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705130"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Right now it's sounding very much like the maps are supposed to only have one main front, very similar to a TF2 style. I have to question this line of thinking if it's true, because this is one of the primary aspects that sets NS apart from other games, it's also one of the biggest reasons the game has such replayability, because movement is never along one general axis, it's always switching up so you will rarely play identical games on the same map. Look to TF2 and you're always fighting in the same places, you always know where enemies are coming from and the only thing that breaks the stalemates that arise from this setup is gimmicky features like the stacked spawntimes in favour of attackers and critical hits.
---
I also don't like the shortened corridors idea. Long and straight corridors usually aid the Marines, true, but in a lot of maps the corridors are where the Aliens get their kills. Lerk Spore is very effective, Marines have reduced movement forcing them to clump together and making them easier to target, Skulks can get in close quickly from around corners, Fades and Oni aren't hit from as many angles while attacking, Webs (although late tech) have dramatically reduced effectiveness in rooms. Corridors are just so instrumental in NS for the Alien side that I'm having trouble seeing if this will work well. Although there are still roughly the same number of corridors, it seems that having them shorter will reduce the overall ratio of 'corridor' to 'open space'. I'm sure if you were able to gather stats on NS the Aliens would have far more kills in corridors than in open spaces.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I didn't notice that before, but you're right. Looking at the layout the axiom seems to be "tech points have 2 entrances, rts have 3". Given these constraints plus the increased number of tech rooms, you're looking at a map that has a very distinct chokepoint. I'd hope that is avoided in the final version by giving nats three entrances. <a href="http://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=maplayout.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/61/maplayout.th.png" border="0" class="linked-image" /></a>
<!--quoteo(post=1705149:date=Apr 17 2009, 06:46 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Apr 17 2009, 06:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I didn't notice that before, but you're right. Looking at the layout the axiom seems to be "tech points have 2 entrances, rts have 3". Given these constraints plus the increased number of tech rooms, you're looking at a map that has a very distinct chokepoint. I'd hope that is avoided in the final version by giving nats three entrances.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> They might work around the chokepoints in multiple ways. Alien commander, modified onos and siege mobiles all have a lot of potential for breaking chokes concept wise, not to speak of some completely unheard solutions. It might be interesting if the tech room fights worked out different from the rt rooms partitially because of the chokepoints, but still functioned as balanced fights due to the new features.
<!--QuoteBegin-Cripsy+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cripsy)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I also don't like the shortened corridors idea. Long and straight corridors usually aid the Marines, true, but in a lot of maps the corridors are where the Aliens get their kills. Lerk Spore is very effective, Marines have reduced movement forcing them to clump together and making them easier to target, Skulks can get in close quickly from around corners, Fades and Oni aren't hit from as many angles while attacking, Webs (although late tech) have dramatically reduced effectiveness in rooms. Corridors are just so instrumental in NS for the Alien side that I'm having trouble seeing if this will work well. Although there are still roughly the same number of corridors, it seems that having them shorter will reduce the overall ratio of 'corridor' to 'open space'. I'm sure if you were able to gather stats on NS the Aliens would have far more kills in corridors than in open spaces.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" /> And its not just making them clump togethers its reducing the space marines have to dodge and evade bites, if they want an example of corridors being where aliens get all their kills they have to look no further than ns_eclipse.
To be honest I really understand what KFS is trying to communicate though. Just compare tanith with eclipse for example. On tanith, battle takes place in rooms, or in short connecting corridors or corridors that might as well be rooms. On eclipse we have that big marine-land around MS where skulks need not make an effort, and the winding corridors that marines cant walk through without medspam or a HMG nearer the middle of the map. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but eclipse really doesn't work very well as a map in NS and I'd blame it mostly on those corridors. Not to mention how they make the map play much smaller than it is.
I am going to try to remember an idea, so please excuse me if I don't recall it exactly...
On the subject of <i>Open Space (Marine) vs Close Quarters (Kharaa)</i> I would like to offer an idea: <b>- Have the Kharaa Infestation grow their own close quarters in a room.</b>
Basicly, allow Kharaa to transform the wide open spaces to their advantage when that is their territory. We know the light settings are planned to change, why not some other enviromental advantages that make Marines shudder at the thought
Need more twists and turns? Grow it. Need more ambush spots? Hive Mind it. Need more camouflage? Gorge it. Need more atmosphere and new play experiences (and possibly even deep maze strategies)? Dynamically Infest it.
Hope that makes some sense, it would be like how in you 'might' use a chamber for cover in NS1 (we all know that they died pretty fast, but WoLs did exist for a reason at some points), but expand upon the idea. Who knows, possibly too resource intensive, but in the right doses it might be just the thing to make larger rooms favourable to the Kharaa too despite melee vs ranged. Hope the idea helps.
<!--quoteo(post=1704758:date=Apr 12 2009, 08:54 AM:name=Zamma)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zamma @ Apr 12 2009, 08:54 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1704758"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->People say NS1 was a hard game to learn but from what I'm seeing NS2 looks extremly complicated. I mean the fact is players are going to come to the game open it up, realise it doesn't work like most RTS games (like NS1 does) and will have to learn/figure out the tech routes ASWELL as the alien counters and the original buildings and upgrades.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I think having this structured map layout where the fighting is over specific tech point is actually much easier to pickup then NS1. And this new power grid idea works very similar to some RTS, and even if it didn't, that doesn't necessarily make it bad.
Anyway, I can't wait to see some more dev posts go into more depth and flesh this out in further detail. Very interesting stuff.
aeroripperJoin Date: 2005-02-25Member: 42471NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
edited April 2009
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->On the subject of Open Space (Marine) vs Close Quarters (Kharaa) I would like to offer an idea: - Have the Kharaa Infestation grow their own close quarters in a room.
Basicly, allow Kharaa to transform the wide open spaces to their advantage when that is their territory. We know the light settings are planned to change, why not some other enviromental advantages that make Marines shudder at the thought
Need more twists and turns? Grow it. Need more ambush spots? Hive Mind it. Need more camouflage? Gorge it. Need more atmosphere and new play experiences (and possibly even deep maze strategies)? Dynamically Infest it.
Hope that makes some sense, it would be like how in you 'might' use a chamber for cover in NS1 (we all know that they died pretty fast, but WoLs did exist for a reason at some points), but expand upon the idea. Who knows, possibly too resource intensive, but in the right doses it might be just the thing to make larger rooms favourable to the Kharaa too despite melee vs ranged. Hope the idea helps.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good idea! I created a separate thread the fleshes out this mechanic in more detail:
I support this idea, mainly because it eliminates the 2 hive system (effectively) but also allows for smaller attacks on each side, which in turns creates more conflicts and closer games (on the average). I fully support this idea, and I think with proper testing will be quite an addition to the NS game dynamic.
Allowing for constant smaller battles I think is much better than the typical tech up and do one final attack that we see in NS1 now. Allowing tiers that can easily be destroyed/replaced will make for a much more interesting game.
Ive been playing video games for over 20 years now And I have more than a few idea's on the matter. I feel like this removes and adds a lot of strategies: I think It should come down tot he individual map designer how they want their map to play
In my opinion NS is already close to the perfect game, how I would like to see this implemented is in a particular game mode. Aka NsClassic, NsCombat, NsPowerGrid, With maybe having NSPowergrid maps mostly (but not entirely) designed to cater for large games 12 players a side for example with NsClassic balanced for smaller games 6-12 players, NsCombat balanced for small - medium games 4-12 players.
I would love to see more game modes added, marines vs marines aliens vs aliens, marines and aliens vs carebears etc etc.
<!--quoteo(post=1705349:date=Apr 21 2009, 12:13 AM:name=Firewater)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Firewater @ Apr 21 2009, 12:13 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705349"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I support this idea, mainly because it eliminates the 2 hive system (effectively) but also allows for smaller attacks on each side, which in turns creates more conflicts and closer games (on the average). I fully support this idea, and I think with proper testing will be quite an addition to the NS game dynamic.
Allowing for constant smaller battles I think is much better than the typical tech up and do one final attack that we see in NS1 now. Allowing tiers that can easily be destroyed/replaced will make for a much more interesting game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->That's one side of it, and it's the hypothetical. The maps have to be designed to allow enough entropy around the key locations for lots of small attacks. The example map definitely doesn't do this, and it has a certain degree of linearity. Someone mentioned Dust, I would say this is Dust and what we actually want is something more like Dust2 in terms of layout, but with more end to end play.
Although the maker of Dust and Dust2 both share <a href="http://www.johnsto.co.uk/design/making_dust2" target="_blank">figure-of-8 layouts</a> around the centre of the map, I would argue that Dust2 has a double-figure-of-8 layout (or 4-leaf-clover). Dust is basically two main routes that join the CTs and the Ts, and the gameplay basically revolves around the tunnel and the underpass as the chokepoints. Dust2 is three main routes with perpendicular routes halfway along each one. This means you can be going along route A and run to the middle of route B, or you can back up and run to the start of route B. In Dust it's usually a case of going forward or backwards, there is little room for sideways movement. In Dust2 you have a lot more options, making it very difficult to defend against all possible directions.
The test map shown in the blog looks like it could give good entropy except for the middle of the map, which you cannot avoid. In the middle of the map, all movement from top to bottom must go along 2 different paths, those are the chokepoints and there's little room for any other strategy: you must hold those chokepoints. When you have 3 fronts in the middle of the map and interlinking routes along the perpendicular, the game becomes more interesting (as well as more complicated, more challenging, and more rewarding).
I've been following every update you guys have and you're doing GREAT I can say, but this power grid stuff sounds a little off from the NS traditional gameplay style. This will probably ruin "non-linear" maps and will make the game something like UT3 Warfare game style. Of course I'm judging without seeing the final product, but in my opinion, you can't fully enjoy all the map corners with strategic point capture based game. I've been playing since v1.04 and since then, the things that changed a lot were equipment and tactics, which sounds great. Please consider at least having more game modes if you intend to change game style from classic and combat. This way you can satisfy both old school fans and people that like innovations. That's my suggestion :}
However, I wanted to let you know I love the idea of the power grid structure, it would add a new strategic element to the game rich feature set.
Will the power grid offer more power to a zone if more than a single link leads to it? Like any electronic connection, the larger the pipe (pipes), the more it can transfer or the faster it can do it.
Very interestin idea indeed. But I'm a little confused. I thought that commanders role was supposed to be reduced in ns2 and now there are multiple commanders. And giving them all full authority sound just like giving full admin rights for forum to everyone who posted here. I have already seen how people on field and commander can have so very different opinion about how some stuff should do and conflicts from that.
For another point personally I think that the best point in NS1 was that there are 2 so different sides with very different abilities that can compete equally against each other. Having both sides have 3 special buildpoint would break that harmony unless they have extremely different motives to capture those.
Since the chain system would stop marines spreading their notes and trying to build notes between bases, it sound like there would be less running around map capping nodes. On the other hand keeping two bases with spawn points is like hell in NS1. you should consider somehow making it easier maintaining multiple bases.
Also, it would be wise to choose commander <u>before</u> the actual game begins and something like no one but the lucky one could go to command chair first. If no one is interested anyone could go to the chair. Same should be done to NS1.
Sounds much like the way BattleField and some game modes of UnrealTournament operate. You have a chain of power, and if the enemy breaks that chain, then you lose the frontlines.
I don't know whether to say "this has been done to death", or applaud you for coming up with a concept which actually makes sense in the NS universe. Either which way, I will miss the old Ninja Phase Gate.
The fear however with the concept is, that the defences at the front line, will be too weak. To have strong defences makes this concept work. Enemies are forced to throw themselves at the other's defences to try and bring it down, whilst a few try to find weaker "supply lines" that they can break and shift the balances. Both teams should in essence be doing this simultaneously, and having both front lines suddenly break, forces them both to try and recapture what they lost.
slayer20Killed a man once.Join Date: 2007-12-13Member: 63157Members, Reinforced - Shadow
Well, if I'm right, and I hope I am, then if this Power Grid doesn't work out when NS2 is released then maybe UWE will update NS2 with the classic NS styled gameplay?
<!--quoteo(post=1706826:date=May 13 2009, 07:12 PM:name=slayer20)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (slayer20 @ May 13 2009, 07:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1706826"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Well, if I'm right, and I hope I am, then if this Power Grid doesn't work out when NS2 is released then maybe UWE will update NS2 with the classic NS styled gameplay?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's probably more likely for them to look at why it's not working and create a fix rather than ditch the whole system and introduce a 'new' one, even if the 'new' one was from NS1.
I already have read the posts of the great star characters on the current NS and some interesting ideas / rants and complaints of the old players-for-reals that still around; actually I'm pretty sure your caremeter is setting really low at this point after all the great and awesome things you and your team did guys, and I'm glad you are almost about to release this fall.
Now I have the feeling of a great disappointed (almost as big at the raising expectation) in the middle of the old NS community with this new whole game with that bunch of radical changes... I really really want to be wrong about it, but... I feel the spirit of the ancient NS legends betrayed. The only hope for us is get the "knowhow" about the development tools (LUA) for be able to reprogramming the whole thing in a NS1 game mode and get rid of most of your new features... So, please keep open that possibility, it could be all the difference in the life time of the game, we know you did it already, a million of thanks.
If you didn't noticed it before, we were stuck playing NS1 several years because what we love in that game is still there... And you are losing that key point even with your early formula about percents of change in the game a couple of years or so, when Frayra said something like "it will be 50% classic NS, 30% improvements and 20% new things" or something in that line if I remember correctly. At the end I bet those descriptive percentages are inverted. This improvement aka the powergrid is like 100% another thing, another absolutely different game with its own possibilities and exploits, so, we, the old player base, are pretty much screwed. Best of luck selling your new game guys, I'm ready for get a copy of NS2, at least for the lulz. GG.
That's kinda the nature of progress - Warcraft 3 is significantly different from Warcraft 2, Starcraft 2 is significantly different from Starcraft 1 and so forth. Most companies aren't in the habit of releasing the same, identical game with upgraded graphics every few years for the simple reason that it's not a new game, it's the same thing. NS2 isn't going to make NS1 disappear, but yes - it'll be a new game.
I think you're kinda throwing the baby out with the bathwater here. Speculation is great and all but let's keep an open mind ehhhhhh?
I couldn't agree with you more, and as a group we should be looking forward to new abilities, new tactics, new everything. I'm excited about the idea of a new NS game, not just an old game with a new package.
IMHO, if NS2 were just going to be a polished NS1 I wouldn't even consider purchasing it. Why would I want to spend money on a copy of a game that's available for free?
<!--quoteo(post=1706911:date=May 14 2009, 08:19 PM:name=Wither)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wither @ May 14 2009, 08:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1706911"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's kinda the nature of progress... Starcraft 2 is significantly different from Starcraft 1... NS2 isn't going to make NS1 disappear, but yes - it'll be a new game... Speculation is great and all but let's keep an open mind ehhhhhh?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The nature of the progress. Awesome. Thanks, for the update Wither, have you been watching a lot of TV philosophy shows lately isn't? No, is much more simplistic. NS is a wonderful game. We all know, hence here we are. NS2 seems like a crazy mixture between several crappy games. I don't like that and want to share my disappointment. Also your examples stinks since Starcraft has never change the main "economic" background of the game, for example. This is not the case in NS2 as I hope you can see as playtester. /facepalm
<!--quoteo(post=1706934:date=May 15 2009, 05:00 AM:name=zimzum)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (zimzum @ May 15 2009, 05:00 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1706934"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why would I want to spend money on a copy of a game that's available for free?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dunno, maybe because is a good game? Ask someone in the constie group or read something about it.
Again, I know the caremeter is low or inexistent at this point. Like when years ago Window$ gave you an error. Something has failed. If you don't know where is the fail, we aren't going to tell you. Have fun.
<!--quoteo(post=1706999:date=May 15 2009, 11:46 PM:name=C4K3)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C4K3 @ May 15 2009, 11:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1706999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The nature of the progress. Awesome. Thanks, for the update Wither, have you been watching a lot of TV philosophy shows lately isn't? No, is much more simplistic. NS is a wonderful game. We all know, hence here we are. NS2 seems like a crazy mixture between several crappy games. I don't like that and want to share my disappointment. Also your examples stinks since Starcraft has never change the main "economic" background of the game, for example. This is not the case in NS2 as I hope you can see as playtester. /facepalm<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While it is true in WC and SC and their sequels the resource model has not changed, however the first resource model in NS needs to be readdressed to allow for deeper play for both sides. I think the new resource model is a tremendous addition to the game, and if tested correctly could make up for the flaws of the previous game.
<!--quoteo(post=1707016:date=May 16 2009, 01:18 PM:name=Firewater)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Firewater @ May 16 2009, 01:18 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1707016"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->While it is true in WC and SC and their sequels the resource model has not changed, however the first resource model in NS needs to be readdressed to allow for deeper play for both sides. I think the new resource model is a tremendous addition to the game, and if tested correctly could make up for the flaws of the previous game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The system needs a plenty of changes indeed. I'm not still completely convinced that the new system is going to take the game forward in every way, but it certainly adresses a lot of the problems found in original NS.
<!--quoteo(post=1706999:date=May 15 2009, 10:46 PM:name=C4K3)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C4K3 @ May 15 2009, 10:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1706999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The nature of the progress. Awesome. Thanks, for the update Wither, have you been watching a lot of TV philosophy shows lately isn't? No, is much more simplistic. NS is a wonderful game. We all know, hence here we are. NS2 seems like a crazy mixture between several crappy games. I don't like that and want to share my disappointment. Also your examples stinks since Starcraft has never change the main "economic" background of the game, for example. This is not the case in NS2 as I hope you can see as playtester. /facepalm<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I have no clue what constitutes a "TV philosophy show" but uhh.. yes, I must be watching them. Thanks for that stellar comment.
You're actually right that Warcraft and Starcraft are crappy examples, they're both pure RTS games while NS is, and NS2 will be, an RTS/FPS combo. However, I fail to see how the new marine power grid changes the main "economic" background of the game - resource currency? Identical. Way of gathering it? Identical. Concept of resource nodes? Pretty much.. identical. The only thing that's different is maps are now condensed and resource towers are linked to the adjacent command chair. It's like adding a turret factory for resource towers, which I think makes the resource system much more important in NS2 - in NS, resource towers were important but also dispensable and rarely actually guarded with structures. It was a temporary setback if you lost one and they could be thrown back up at little cost.
<!--quoteo(post=1706999:date=May 15 2009, 10:46 PM:name=C4K3)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C4K3 @ May 15 2009, 10:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1706999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, I know the caremeter is low or inexistent at this point. Like when years ago Window$ gave you an error. Something has failed. If you don't know where is the fail, we aren't going to tell you. Have fun.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Great attitude to have when discussing a new idea. I'm glad you commented on my playtester status -- which I might add means absolutely zilch for NS2 -- since one thing I do see as a playtester is the need for rational discussion rather than hissy fits. The only thing I've seen you say is that this fundamentally changes the game and this will ruin all that is NS. Care to elaborate?
And yes, like everyone else has been saying for the past 11 pages.. whenever something didn't work in previous NS versions, it was altered or removed. I don't think "this isn't NS1" is the same thing as "this doesn't work," but you're entitled to your own opinion.
Comments
He's got a good point. They've more or less kept us up with multiple daily development updates for quite a while now, along with fairly frequent audio and blog updates. It's good that they have a strong, core set of ideas/concepts to base their game around, but also take into account the feedback of casual and pro NS players into it as well. I don't think you would see this level of <b>daily</b> community engagement in more corporate, large scale games. TBH, I hope this game succeeds and will be as good as we're all hoping for and be a payoff for all the hard work that's gone into it for UWE.
A lot of good points made in this thread so far, but we are still a bit sketchy on the big picture so far.
I've understood it as gorge doing more tactical building while the acomm does strategical ones, like hive and I guess RTs.
I'm not worried about how things will turn out. If it ends up being a slow, frustrating, or generic game, they'll just scrap the thing and change the gameplay, which will be infinitely easier and fast now with their own engine and tools.
So when I hear an idea, I imagine it with the best possible implementation, because that's the only way they'll let it be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly well said. It's OK to voice your concerns and suggestions, but don't throw your toys out of the pram. If it sucks it'll be changed and unless they are incredibly lucky it probably will suck first go, the only way to get these things right is through iteration and that's what happened with NS1. The team know that and that's why they built in scripting to make the changes quicker.
IIRC the gorge will set traps and possibly build temporary barriers, so I think your description of the gorge becoming a tactical comm sounds accurate.
<!--quoteo(post=1705066:date=Apr 16 2009, 06:01 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ Apr 16 2009, 06:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1705066"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->That's actually much smaller than I excepted. I mean the first tech point travel time is roughly half that of the first rt's currently. I like that each team has a "natural" tech point even if I think it is a little close personally. It seems like getting to tech lvl 2 will be almost trivial for both teams, assuming equal skill. Third tier will be significantly easier than it is currently for kharaa, but a little harder for marines in terms of map control.
On that topic, will there be tech levels beyond 3 for each side? It would make sense to me in a "swing of power" way. I'd say the steamroll effect is desirable past a certain point to end the game quickly which something that many complain NS is currently lacking. Mid to late game battles that cause a swing of 3-3 to 4-2 should be huge IMO.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I think this is a valid point. General symmetry is good, but I don't like the idea of absolute symmettry in terms of the res nodes. Certainly the tech nodes should be equal in number or there is little room for comeback, but res nodes should be an odd number in total to promote persistent conflict. The extra res node should be placed somewhere along the middle 'equator' of the map and should be made difficult to hold to promote a constant back and forth style of play in that area. DoW2 has a number of good resource node configurations that are balanced in terms of symettry but make for interesting movements flows around the maps.
---
One layout change that might work for the example map is adding a resource node in the middle of the map and having 4 entrances into that central room from the ring path you already have established. This would create a lot more entropy around the centre, a lot more interesting configurations of 'line of supply' and it would eliminate a lot of the stale 'chokiness' in the middle of the map, while also allowing teams to travel behind enemy lines to knock out key structures. Holding the middle would be advantageous but difficult, and you'd see a lot of intense, almost chaotic battles through the centre.
Right now it's sounding very much like the maps are supposed to only have one main front, very similar to a TF2 style. I have to question this line of thinking if it's true, because this is one of the primary aspects that sets NS apart from other games, it's also one of the biggest reasons the game has such replayability, because movement is never along one general axis, it's always switching up so you will rarely play identical games on the same map. Look to TF2 and you're always fighting in the same places, you always know where enemies are coming from and the only thing that breaks the stalemates that arise from this setup is gimmicky features like the stacked spawntimes in favour of attackers and critical hits.
---
I also don't like the shortened corridors idea. Long and straight corridors usually aid the Marines, true, but in a lot of maps the corridors are where the Aliens get their kills. Lerk Spore is very effective, Marines have reduced movement forcing them to clump together and making them easier to target, Skulks can get in close quickly from around corners, Fades and Oni aren't hit from as many angles while attacking, Webs (although late tech) have dramatically reduced effectiveness in rooms. Corridors are just so instrumental in NS for the Alien side that I'm having trouble seeing if this will work well. Although there are still roughly the same number of corridors, it seems that having them shorter will reduce the overall ratio of 'corridor' to 'open space'. I'm sure if you were able to gather stats on NS the Aliens would have far more kills in corridors than in open spaces.
---
I also don't like the shortened corridors idea. Long and straight corridors usually aid the Marines, true, but in a lot of maps the corridors are where the Aliens get their kills. Lerk Spore is very effective, Marines have reduced movement forcing them to clump together and making them easier to target, Skulks can get in close quickly from around corners, Fades and Oni aren't hit from as many angles while attacking, Webs (although late tech) have dramatically reduced effectiveness in rooms. Corridors are just so instrumental in NS for the Alien side that I'm having trouble seeing if this will work well. Although there are still roughly the same number of corridors, it seems that having them shorter will reduce the overall ratio of 'corridor' to 'open space'. I'm sure if you were able to gather stats on NS the Aliens would have far more kills in corridors than in open spaces.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I didn't notice that before, but you're right. Looking at the layout the axiom seems to be "tech points have 2 entrances, rts have 3". Given these constraints plus the increased number of tech rooms, you're looking at a map that has a very distinct chokepoint. I'd hope that is avoided in the final version by giving nats three entrances.
<a href="http://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=maplayout.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/61/maplayout.th.png" border="0" class="linked-image" /></a>
They might work around the chokepoints in multiple ways. Alien commander, modified onos and siege mobiles all have a lot of potential for breaking chokes concept wise, not to speak of some completely unheard solutions. It might be interesting if the tech room fights worked out different from the rt rooms partitially because of the chokepoints, but still functioned as balanced fights due to the new features.
Exactly <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" /> And its not just making them clump togethers its reducing the space marines have to dodge and evade bites, if they want an example of corridors being where aliens get all their kills they have to look no further than ns_eclipse.
On the subject of <i>Open Space (Marine) vs Close Quarters (Kharaa)</i> I would like to offer an idea:
<b>- Have the Kharaa Infestation grow their own close quarters in a room.</b>
Basicly, allow Kharaa to transform the wide open spaces to their advantage when that is their territory. We know the light settings are planned to change, why not some other enviromental advantages that make Marines shudder at the thought
Need more twists and turns? Grow it. Need more ambush spots? Hive Mind it. Need more camouflage? Gorge it. Need more atmosphere and new play experiences (and possibly even deep maze strategies)? Dynamically Infest it.
Hope that makes some sense, it would be like how in you 'might' use a chamber for cover in NS1 (we all know that they died pretty fast, but WoLs did exist for a reason at some points), but expand upon the idea. Who knows, possibly too resource intensive, but in the right doses it might be just the thing to make larger rooms favourable to the Kharaa too despite melee vs ranged. Hope the idea helps.
I think having this structured map layout where the fighting is over specific tech point is actually much easier to pickup then NS1. And this new power grid idea works very similar to some RTS, and even if it didn't, that doesn't necessarily make it bad.
Anyway, I can't wait to see some more dev posts go into more depth and flesh this out in further detail. Very interesting stuff.
- Have the Kharaa Infestation grow their own close quarters in a room.
Basicly, allow Kharaa to transform the wide open spaces to their advantage when that is their territory. We know the light settings are planned to change, why not some other enviromental advantages that make Marines shudder at the thought
Need more twists and turns? Grow it. Need more ambush spots? Hive Mind it. Need more camouflage? Gorge it. Need more atmosphere and new play experiences (and possibly even deep maze strategies)? Dynamically Infest it.
Hope that makes some sense, it would be like how in you 'might' use a chamber for cover in NS1 (we all know that they died pretty fast, but WoLs did exist for a reason at some points), but expand upon the idea. Who knows, possibly too resource intensive, but in the right doses it might be just the thing to make larger rooms favourable to the Kharaa too despite melee vs ranged. Hope the idea helps.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good idea! I created a separate thread the fleshes out this mechanic in more detail:
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=106210" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...howtopic=106210</a>
Allowing for constant smaller battles I think is much better than the typical tech up and do one final attack that we see in NS1 now. Allowing tiers that can easily be destroyed/replaced will make for a much more interesting game.
I feel like this removes and adds a lot of strategies:
I think It should come down tot he individual map designer how they want their map to play
In my opinion NS is already close to the perfect game, how I would like to see this implemented is in a particular game mode.
Aka NsClassic, NsCombat, NsPowerGrid, With maybe having NSPowergrid maps mostly (but not entirely) designed to cater for large games 12 players a side for example with NsClassic balanced for smaller games 6-12 players, NsCombat balanced for small - medium games 4-12 players.
I would love to see more game modes added, marines vs marines aliens vs aliens, marines and aliens vs carebears etc etc.
Allowing for constant smaller battles I think is much better than the typical tech up and do one final attack that we see in NS1 now. Allowing tiers that can easily be destroyed/replaced will make for a much more interesting game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->That's one side of it, and it's the hypothetical. The maps have to be designed to allow enough entropy around the key locations for lots of small attacks. The example map definitely doesn't do this, and it has a certain degree of linearity. Someone mentioned Dust, I would say this is Dust and what we actually want is something more like Dust2 in terms of layout, but with more end to end play.
Although the maker of Dust and Dust2 both share <a href="http://www.johnsto.co.uk/design/making_dust2" target="_blank">figure-of-8 layouts</a> around the centre of the map, I would argue that Dust2 has a double-figure-of-8 layout (or 4-leaf-clover). Dust is basically two main routes that join the CTs and the Ts, and the gameplay basically revolves around the tunnel and the underpass as the chokepoints. Dust2 is three main routes with perpendicular routes halfway along each one. This means you can be going along route A and run to the middle of route B, or you can back up and run to the start of route B. In Dust it's usually a case of going forward or backwards, there is little room for sideways movement. In Dust2 you have a lot more options, making it very difficult to defend against all possible directions.
The test map shown in the blog looks like it could give good entropy except for the middle of the map, which you cannot avoid. In the middle of the map, all movement from top to bottom must go along 2 different paths, those are the chokepoints and there's little room for any other strategy: you must hold those chokepoints. When you have 3 fronts in the middle of the map and interlinking routes along the perpendicular, the game becomes more interesting (as well as more complicated, more challenging, and more rewarding).
This makes me very happy to see this as part of the core game design.
I'm sorry I haven't been around more to keep track of all this fantastic progress.
Good work team!
<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
/me disappears back into my busy life
However, I wanted to let you know I love the idea of the power grid structure, it would add a new strategic element to the game rich feature set.
Will the power grid offer more power to a zone if more than a single link leads to it? Like any electronic connection, the larger the pipe (pipes), the more it can transfer or the faster it can do it.
For another point personally I think that the best point in NS1 was that there are 2 so different sides with very different abilities that can compete equally against each other. Having both sides have 3 special buildpoint would break that harmony unless they have extremely different motives to capture those.
Since the chain system would stop marines spreading their notes and trying to build notes between bases, it sound like there would be less running around map capping nodes. On the other hand keeping two bases with spawn points is like hell in NS1. you should consider somehow making it easier maintaining multiple bases.
Also, it would be wise to choose commander <u>before</u> the actual game begins and something like no one but the lucky one could go to command chair first. If no one is interested anyone could go to the chair. Same should be done to NS1.
You have a chain of power, and if the enemy breaks that chain, then you lose the frontlines.
I don't know whether to say "this has been done to death", or applaud you for coming up with a concept which actually makes sense in the NS universe.
Either which way, I will miss the old Ninja Phase Gate.
The fear however with the concept is, that the defences at the front line, will be too weak. To have strong defences makes this concept work. Enemies are forced to throw themselves at the other's defences to try and bring it down, whilst a few try to find weaker "supply lines" that they can break and shift the balances.
Both teams should in essence be doing this simultaneously, and having both front lines suddenly break, forces them both to try and recapture what they lost.
It's probably more likely for them to look at why it's not working and create a fix rather than ditch the whole system and introduce a 'new' one, even if the 'new' one was from NS1.
Now I have the feeling of a great disappointed (almost as big at the raising expectation) in the middle of the old NS community with this new whole game with that bunch of radical changes... I really really want to be wrong about it, but... I feel the spirit of the ancient NS legends betrayed. The only hope for us is get the "knowhow" about the development tools (LUA) for be able to reprogramming the whole thing in a NS1 game mode and get rid of most of your new features... So, please keep open that possibility, it could be all the difference in the life time of the game, we know you did it already, a million of thanks.
If you didn't noticed it before, we were stuck playing NS1 several years because what we love in that game is still there... And you are losing that key point even with your early formula about percents of change in the game a couple of years or so, when Frayra said something like "it will be 50% classic NS, 30% improvements and 20% new things" or something in that line if I remember correctly. At the end I bet those descriptive percentages are inverted. This improvement aka the powergrid is like 100% another thing, another absolutely different game with its own possibilities and exploits, so, we, the old player base, are pretty much screwed. Best of luck selling your new game guys, I'm ready for get a copy of NS2, at least for the lulz. GG.
I think you're kinda throwing the baby out with the bathwater here. Speculation is great and all but let's keep an open mind ehhhhhh?
IMHO, if NS2 were just going to be a polished NS1 I wouldn't even consider purchasing it. Why would I want to spend money on a copy of a game that's available for free?
The nature of the progress. Awesome. Thanks, for the update Wither, have you been watching a lot of TV philosophy shows lately isn't? No, is much more simplistic. NS is a wonderful game. We all know, hence here we are. NS2 seems like a crazy mixture between several crappy games. I don't like that and want to share my disappointment. Also your examples stinks since Starcraft has never change the main "economic" background of the game, for example. This is not the case in NS2 as I hope you can see as playtester. /facepalm
<!--quoteo(post=1706934:date=May 15 2009, 05:00 AM:name=zimzum)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (zimzum @ May 15 2009, 05:00 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1706934"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why would I want to spend money on a copy of a game that's available for free?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dunno, maybe because is a good game? Ask someone in the constie group or read something about it.
Again, I know the caremeter is low or inexistent at this point. Like when years ago Window$ gave you an error. Something has failed. If you don't know where is the fail, we aren't going to tell you. Have fun.
While it is true in WC and SC and their sequels the resource model has not changed, however the first resource model in NS needs to be readdressed to allow for deeper play for both sides. I think the new resource model is a tremendous addition to the game, and if tested correctly could make up for the flaws of the previous game.
The system needs a plenty of changes indeed. I'm not still completely convinced that the new system is going to take the game forward in every way, but it certainly adresses a lot of the problems found in original NS.
I have no clue what constitutes a "TV philosophy show" but uhh.. yes, I must be watching them. Thanks for that stellar comment.
You're actually right that Warcraft and Starcraft are crappy examples, they're both pure RTS games while NS is, and NS2 will be, an RTS/FPS combo. However, I fail to see how the new marine power grid changes the main "economic" background of the game - resource currency? Identical. Way of gathering it? Identical. Concept of resource nodes? Pretty much.. identical. The only thing that's different is maps are now condensed and resource towers are linked to the adjacent command chair. It's like adding a turret factory for resource towers, which I think makes the resource system much more important in NS2 - in NS, resource towers were important but also dispensable and rarely actually guarded with structures. It was a temporary setback if you lost one and they could be thrown back up at little cost.
<!--quoteo(post=1706999:date=May 15 2009, 10:46 PM:name=C4K3)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (C4K3 @ May 15 2009, 10:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1706999"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Again, I know the caremeter is low or inexistent at this point. Like when years ago Window$ gave you an error. Something has failed. If you don't know where is the fail, we aren't going to tell you. Have fun.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Great attitude to have when discussing a new idea. I'm glad you commented on my playtester status -- which I might add means absolutely zilch for NS2 -- since one thing I do see as a playtester is the need for rational discussion rather than hissy fits. The only thing I've seen you say is that this fundamentally changes the game and this will ruin all that is NS. Care to elaborate?
And yes, like everyone else has been saying for the past 11 pages.. whenever something didn't work in previous NS versions, it was altered or removed. I don't think "this isn't NS1" is the same thing as "this doesn't work," but you're entitled to your own opinion.