<!--quoteo(post=1759985:date=Mar 18 2010, 11:05 PM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ Mar 18 2010, 11:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759985"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Forced match-making was a theory. IWnet was a theory. No dedicated servers was a theory. Cel-shading, another theory. Pity the fools who ignored all those theories.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hope you didn't miss my previous rebuttal. It is only a theory until proven correct. Saying "I told you so" is no retort at all, since you weren't right before, only now. And those who agree who previously did not, are just as right as you are, and have ever been.
<!--quoteo(post=1759983:date=Mar 18 2010, 09:44 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 18 2010, 09:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759983"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Another point I'd like to make is something that I've noticed about people in general. That is, they want variety, but only in theory. In reality, given variety, everyone will always disregard that variety and choose one thing. For example, look at the variety of maps NS has to offer. How many of those maps actually get played often?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
that's still more maps than de_nuke, de_dust2, de_train, de_inferno, isn't it ?
Of course I am just talking about the competitively played maps. On pubs you can also find ns_caged, ns_nothing, .... and all those other maps that were "balanced" a bit at "random" and could use a short remake to make them viable ( i.e. look at the remake of ayumi ).
<!--quoteo(post=1759983:date=Mar 18 2010, 09:44 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 18 2010, 09:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759983"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Look at the state of strategy in NS right now. Why should there always be a "correct" thing to do? Why should there always be "that one place we have to take and hold"? That doesn't sound like variety to me. The problem is given time, people will always find the best/quickest/easiest solution and stick with it. I think if there is true variety, the "best" option should never be entirely clear.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Strategies in NS are a bit like in Starcraft. There are the most popular builds ( 2 caps / 3 sgs ; 3 lmgs pressure ; fast pg etc...) and some weirder stuff ( fast jp, fast mt, fast cata, 2 sgs pressure, reloc, ... ). Both work, depending on your team. It's the same for most mechanics of the game. Wanna save rts as marines ? mine 'em, or get a pg on that side, or get mines on the rts. Wanna kill a hive ? Can you sg it ? Or siege it ? Wanna grow up your hive ? Have you got lifeforms to hold it ? Or should you get lifeform instead ? Will you try to save it at all cost or profit the marines will go there to get the aa and the rts ?
Of course some ways are always, on average, a bit safer than others. Straight A1 or fast pgs are quite safe. Going fade/lerk/rt/rt/mc/hive is safe too. But playing safe is sometimes not enough. As have proven NewstyleD Return by scoring a round against the current ENSL favorites thanks to a nice shotgun rush, as have proven Stray Dogs against 2Balls by getting a round thanks to dcs in double, origin. (Jiriki will also add that W2 issue but well... :p). Still, most of those matches which ended 3-1 were predicted 4-0 by like 95% of the community.
By the way, I didn't mention it, but what's also amazing in NS is the possibilites for comeback. Rushing base with the right timing, or going into the main hive can both be VERY profitable. And we've all played that 40-60 min pub game where marines full upgraded were stuck in their base and then slowly pushed out to finally win the game. And most of competitive players have that game where you fail everything early on and then 10 minutes later you win because you've done what had to be done. THAT is great.
So changing the game is obviously OK. But removing all those mechanisms that allow such thrilling games, without replacing them ( or telling us ... ?! ) is REALLY ... disappointing for, I hope they feel like me - at least I'm pretty sure my team does -, most competitive players.
<!--quoteo(post=1759984:date=Mar 18 2010, 10:03 PM:name=noncomposmentis)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (noncomposmentis @ Mar 18 2010, 10:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759984"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read my first sentence like this: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole" target="_blank">"Yo dude you had a totally different experience then me man."</a> Really, I promise I never intend to be insulting =)
I remember thinking that it was a good example of how Euros took things more seriously then Americans how you guys called your competitive games "CLAN WARS" (RARGL) whereas we call them scrims or matches. But maybe this is a counterexample?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Still, do I get it right saying you're doubting of what Jiriki said ? Because he's right. If you play RTS like Starcraft or Starcraft 2, playing commander ( especially on pub, even with 12 marines ) is pretty boring compared to these games. I'd say it's half "demanding". Which is rather logical since NS is not a pure FPS. But not a reason as to remove features from the Commander ( although I'm pretty convinced he'll have enough stuff to deal with eh ).
<!--quoteo(post=1759987:date=Mar 18 2010, 10:13 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 18 2010, 10:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759987"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It is only a theory until proven correct.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This may be a bit out of context, but this sentence alone is pretty wrong. Many things in science are still at a state of "theory" but are still used everyday and they work good. Even if we can't prove it.
Good <i>lord</i>, do you know how silly this all looks? You're bickering over stuff you haven't experienced yet, based on hints and ideas, some of which are actually almost a year old. Between then and now, they almost planned to nix dynamic infestation, which was supposed to be a huge part of the game! Do you really think all those old tidbits are reliable enough to provide accurate speculation?
None of you have played the game, thus none of you know how it will play. Expressing your concerns is fine, but all of this bickering is nothing short of ridiculous. 'Stupid' would probably be a good term with which to describe it.
UWE said that they aren't "pandering to casual players" or whatever people accused them of. They said they're simply trying to make the best game they can. They're obviously not done, a TON of stuff could still change, so to whine and argue amongst each other is a complete waste of your time.
Calm down, wait for the alpha (or beta), play it, tell UWE about your ideas and concerns, and voila, you've just accomplished more than all this kvetching ever will.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Man, I can't believe you commanded a match if that's what you think. The commander on my team, and the few other competitive commanders I knew, all turned from normal people into high-strung primadonnas the instant they logged into the chair because of how much stress the position placed on them. Its easy to understand if you think about it. They're basically simultaneously playing scout, medic and engineer classes from TF2, and expected to support everyone on the team at once. That's the main reason I think multiple commanders might work.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I've played thousands of rounds as a commander in NS1 so let me rephrase myself. I think marine commanding is boring, because FPS is much more fun than RTS, esp. when you don't have much options unlike real RTS'es. I've to command like 80-90% of the games I play. This doesn't mean the commander doesn't have much to do. Indeed, commanding requires reflexes and microing like Starcraft and with the players I play with, I'll get super rage for late meds. I'm not saying its objectively boring, but I can tell you that CC is not the most wanted job in NS, and that's not only because of the huge learning curve. Its just so much more fun to pwn as marines.
About multiple commanders. I don't mind it as an extra feature for 16vs16 pubfests but I don't see 2 commanders necessary for 6vs6 games (competitive games are not anything above because its already hard to get 6 players online at the same time) As long as its extra, its okay, but if multiple commanders become a necessity I'm worried.
And my remark to TrC was that there're some stuff that we can more easily comment (like the lerk spikes) and some that's hard to judge before seen in action (DI, power grid). So while there're lots of negative responses, saying that competitive scene sees NS2 completely negatively is a bit harsh simplifcation. Of course there're lots of competitive players who have very negative expectations of NS2, but I'm pretty sure there're equally as many people waiting for the release to make a real judgement.
<!--quoteo(post=1759987:date=Mar 18 2010, 10:13 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 18 2010, 10:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759987"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I hope you didn't miss my previous rebuttal. It is only a theory until proven correct. Saying "I told you so" is no retort at all, since you weren't right before, only now. And those who agree who previously did not, are just as right as you are, and have ever been.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I did, but thanks for pointing it out. As a man of science, yea a theory must be proven to be correct. As a man of reason, I hope you do not miss my rebuttal wherein I present you "theories" that were unproven at the time when savvy gamers used them to pass judgment on the quality of MW2 and TF2. It is naive to think we must prove every theory before we reach a conclusion. There is the concept of <i>sufficing</i>; and for myself, many in this thread, and an as-yet-to-be-determined number of NS vets and comps, there are already enough "theories" for us to draw a preliminary conclusion about the gameplay of NS2. And thus we discuss them here.
Of course, and you would have the right to draw a preliminary conclusion. To give up isn't helping anyone though, and is in fact harmful since one's input is no longer being considered.
But I digress. It's a minor point about one sentence that's irrelevant. Carry on. :)
<!--quoteo(post=1759983:date=Mar 18 2010, 07:44 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 18 2010, 07:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759983"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Look at the state of strategy in NS right now. Why should there be the "correct" thing to do? Why should there be "that one place we have to take and hold"? That doesn't sound like variety to me. The problem is given time, people will always find the best/quickest/easiest solution and stick with it. I think if there is true variety, the "best" option should never be entirely clear.
Sure, NS1 maps are a maze of corridors and vents. How many of those are actually useful? It may look like variety, but it's not really when everyone walks the same paths. NS2 maps may be simpler, but it's simply a case of trimming away unwanted fat.
One last thing is why is "more skilled" always better? Maybe it's not? Let's assume NS2 does lower the "skill ceiling" somewhat. Is that part not redeemable in other ways?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now I haven't played NS in.....well years. But as far as I can remember and form what huhuh was saying, there is a lot more than just one way to win. Yea there are your textbook routines you go through from the start, but this isn't an RTS. The opposing team doesn't do the same thing everygame, which is possibly thanks to randomed hive locations. If we get set spawn points for both races, it will infact DECREASE these varieties. From your reply it seems you're implying NS2 will be shedding these... "unwanted fats" But that FAT is what makes every game of NS different. GIVE ME MORE FAT
Also, what the heck does that last point mean? any examples of other ways?
<!--quoteo(post=1759984:date=Mar 18 2010, 08:03 PM:name=noncomposmentis)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (noncomposmentis @ Mar 18 2010, 08:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759984"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As far as making the object of the game more obvious to noobs. It's all well and good to have run ramboing for the first 10 minutes of the game, but then when the noobs are getting spawn killed by 4 fades, they don't make the connection between that and the fact that they didn't use any teamwork, so they get frustrated and ragequit. If powergrids and such make it obvious that teamwork is what wins then less newbies will act like chickens with their heads cut off. Obviously that's a pretty big if, though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't see how powergrids and techpoints will change the odd situation when you join a server and your team is getting spawncamped by 4 fades... And to be honest a lot of my NS games were won by CRAZY solo people who go off and end up either saving your defeat, or defeating the enemy while they weren't looking. No one sends their whole team of marines to go capping RT's.
<!--quoteo(post=1759993:date=Mar 18 2010, 10:46 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 18 2010, 10:46 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759993"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Of course, and you would have the right to draw a preliminary conclusion. To give up isn't helping anyone though, and is in fact harmful since one's input is no longer being considered. But I digress. It's a minor point about one sentence that's irrelevant. Carry on. :)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You're on a bus. There are a few signs you've seen before on other buses which you are able to read, they say "Westend". Now if you live in the Northend, perhaps you'll try to convince the bus driver to make a slight detour. Even if you fail, you stick around - it's not that far to walk. However if you live in the Eastend, there is no point in sticking around. The longer you do the further away from home you go and there is little chance of convincing the bus driver to turn around.
Consider those participating in this discussion to be residents of the West and Northends. Consider those who have "given up" to be in the Eastend; how could blame them for leaving as early as possible?
Here's the bottom line: if you 100% judge and make a decision on a feature before playing it you're a moron. Some of you people, mainly scrubs who think they're competitive players (looking at you, Renegade and TRC), who are able to predict how horrible this system think your opinion is correct and you cannot be wrong. If you're in this camp's logic you also happen to be a moron. Coincidence?
Most of you are looking back on NS1 with rose colored glasses. The average pub game of NS1 was a commander either screaming at his marines because they weren't listening or a commander doing nothing while the marines beg for items and res nodes. This isn't good gameplay. NS1 marines would wonder around the map and try to find areas with action in them then ask for a PG. The areas usually held little importance and combat only happened there because the other team was doing the same thing. This isn't good gameplay. NS2 will alleviate most of these problems with marines buying their own weapons and the power grid system.
Let your nerd rage subside for a few weeks until you try it out. It's not like you were even that good in NS1 to even be making generalizations like "this will be horrible and make the game linear." I mean, you can say that but no one will listen to you. No one even knows who are you and you're arguing a point that cannot be won. Relax.
Regarding alien upgrades, idea is not bad but there better be chamber attribute boosts aswell. I like the idea because it would most definetly add variety to the alien play. Anyone aware is this idea is going to be implimented or is it scrapped?
<!--quoteo(post=1759991:date=Mar 18 2010, 08:25 PM:name=Jiriki)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jiriki @ Mar 18 2010, 08:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759991"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think marine commanding is boring, because FPS is much more fun than RTS, esp. when you don't have much options unlike real RTS'es. Its just so much more fun to pwn as marines.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, I can totally understand that. The thing is I dunno if going in the direction of Starcraft ie more "strategic options" would be a good idea for the game as a whole. If you've played Savage 2, they tried to make the commanding a lot more like a RTS than NS did, and to do it they were apparently forced to make the FPS players into generic RTS units because the FPS combat is so boring.
Instead of thinking of the commander as a Starcraft player I think of them as a FPS player in a support class like TF2 medic or spy, but with a lot of flexibility in their playstyle. I think if you look at it that way then you can work at making the stuff that an NS comm does more fun. Like providing more options vis-a-vis medpacks, catalyst packs, and scans so that the comm can be an important player on the front lines of the fight. That's why I was encouraged when the devs were talking about "spell-like" abilities a while ago. But I have no idea if they're following similar ideas.
<!--quoteo(post=1759994:date=Mar 18 2010, 11:56 PM:name=wesman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (wesman @ Mar 18 2010, 11:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759994"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Also, what the heck does that last point mean? any examples of other ways?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was a question directed to those who place so much importance on skill.
<!--quoteo(post=1759996:date=Mar 19 2010, 12:03 AM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ Mar 19 2010, 12:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759996"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're on a bus. There are a few signs you've seen before on other buses which you are able to read, they say "Westend". Now if you live in the Northend, perhaps you'll try to convince the bus driver to make a slight detour. Even if you fail, you stick around - it's not that far to walk. However if you live in the Eastend, there is no point in sticking around. The longer you do the further away from home you go and there is little chance of convincing the bus driver to turn around.
Consider those participating in this discussion to be residents of the West and Northends. Consider those who have "given up" to be in the Eastend; how could blame them for leaving as early as possible?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bad analogy which assumes the person on the bus knows exactly where the bus is going. The point is that we don't know exactly where it's going, and we don't know whether or not we will like the destination.
Unless you're referring to people who want NS2 to be an exact remake of NS1 with better graphics. In that case it's clear that NS2 won't be that. That's the only thing you can say with certainty. And even then, who knows if it wont be a good game in its own regard?
<!--quoteo(post=1760006:date=Mar 19 2010, 12:10 AM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 19 2010, 12:10 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760006"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Bad analogy which assumes the person on the bus knows exactly where the bus is going. The point is that we don't know exactly where it's going, and we don't know whether or not we will like the destination.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Perhaps the hint was too subtle for you - At no time do I say that you, the rider, <b>knows</b> where you are going; merely that you have <b>read</b> the signage. It is entirely possible that the signs are wrong or conflicting or that you simply cannot read them; however if you've correctly read similar signs in the past, then surely you would do well to put a query to the bus driver or other riders (or perhaps even get off) if it were not headed in your direction.
And so here we are with our query. Some riders confirm we are headed in the wrong direction, others deny it, and still others claim they do not know. What does the bus-driver say? "This bus is headed in a good direction."
<!--quoteo(post=1760019:date=Mar 19 2010, 08:21 AM:name=Invader_Scoot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Invader_Scoot @ Mar 19 2010, 08:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760019"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->P.S. Movement glitches like bunnyhopping increased the depth of NS enormously. I seriously hope that NS2 has a comparable "exploit".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd like to play NS without TF2 scouts jumping every where. I'll play TF2 for that.
<!--quoteo(post=1760009:date=Mar 19 2010, 02:22 AM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ Mar 19 2010, 02:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760009"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Perhaps the hint was too subtle for you - At no time do I say that you, the rider, <b>knows</b> where you are going; merely that you have <b>read</b> the signage.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Perhaps you should further develop your analogy-writing skills before accusing others of being unable to correctly interpret them, because your analogy clearly implied that the rider knew where the bus was going based on the obvious signage. You admit the signage is not so clear, something that was neither said nor implied in your analogy, assuming it was supposed to make sense
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...or that you simply cannot read them;<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought you established the rider read the sign. Again, poorly written analogy. Before making jabs at other people's intelligence, you may want to first assure yourself of your own. Your arguments also lose credibility when you do so.
What would someone have to lose by not giving up on UWE anyway? Nothing really. 15 minutes every so often invested in scanning the forums? Hope?
Let's say, that the people in question really just want NS2 to be exactly like NS1. What if it turns out that UWE is releasing two game modes, "classic" and "new", where classic is exactly the same as NS1? We've seen it before (classic and combat). The point is unless the developers tell us everything, it is impossible to know anything (no matter how much extrapolation and experienced hypothesizing you do) because there is an unlimited potential for things to be different or new. To give up when there is nothing to lose is stupid.
As I've said, it really doesn't matter. Of all the thing to be discussed, this is the most irrelevant. I could care less if someone across the Earth has decided to give up on NS2 for whatever reason.
<!--quoteo(post=1760092:date=Mar 19 2010, 05:55 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 19 2010, 05:55 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760092"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Let's say, that the people in question really just want NS2 to be exactly like NS1. What if it turns out that UWE is releasing two game modes, "classic" and "new", where classic is exactly the same as NS1? We've seen it before (classic and combat). The point is unless the developers tell us everything, it is impossible to know anything (no matter how much extrapolation and experienced hypothesizing you do) because there is an unlimited potential for things to be different or new. To give up when there is nothing to lose is stupid.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The problem with the 'we don't know' viewpoint is that almost every discussion becomes irrelevant. I agree that a part of comp scene is overconservative and you might call me that on more than a few gameplay aspects. Still, it's good that someone creates discussion and adds to the spectrum of viewpoints.
The devs have their final say on what goes into the game anyway. If they've got a good plan on some aspect, they are completely free to execute it. If someone on these forums posts some critisism or thoughts that give them new viewpoints for designing NS2, it's all good.
Of course, the critisism should be based on something not completely "It's not NS1", but then again "It's NS2" shouldn't be anything more viable as argumentation. I'd like to have my NS2 better, improved and refreshed, not just completely new, old or upside down.
<!--quoteo(post=1760092:date=Mar 19 2010, 11:55 AM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 19 2010, 11:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760092"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->your analogy clearly implied that the rider knew where the bus was going based on the obvious signage. You admit the signage is not so clear, something that was neither said nor implied in your analogy, assuming it was supposed to make sense<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->I admit tiring at your tattered logic, not that the signage is or isn't clear - that's dependent on your reading skills as a rider. In my case and others', we've ridden before, we understand the signs; in your case, you are a first-time rider who perhaps cannot read them. No one knows for sure where the bus is going, but some have a better idea than others.
Why are you not spending 15min on every gaming forum in hopes that it will cater to your needs? You seem not to understand the point of community - you invest time into things that matter to you. A bus you believe to be going West when you live East, is not something that matters to you and to hop on it simply to hope that you're wrong - well, clearly you've never taken transit.
This is what I think: Game is dead and played out to shreds. There was never any strategy in this game, since the only choice a commander has is really the choice between an armslab or an observatory first. There are plenty of tactics though, but their execution usually boils down to aim and movement skill.
Public players don't know what strategy or tactics are in NS.
<!--quoteo(post=1760019:date=Mar 19 2010, 02:21 AM:name=Invader_Scoot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Invader_Scoot @ Mar 19 2010, 02:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760019"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->P.S. Movement glitches like bunnyhopping increased the depth of NS enormously. I seriously hope that NS2 has a comparable "exploit".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"bunnyhopping" <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns/forums/index.php?showtopic=107569&st=0&p=1730475&#entry1730475" target="_blank">is in</a>, but mitigated via Hive1 Leap on Skulks.
I recommend people peruse this page to see what is confirmed versus what is just speculation: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/index.php/What%27s_new_from_NS1" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/inde...7s_new_from_NS1</a>
<!--quoteo(post=1760162:date=Mar 19 2010, 04:49 PM:name=spellman23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (spellman23 @ Mar 19 2010, 04:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760162"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"bunnyhopping" <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns/forums/index.php?showtopic=107569&st=0&p=1730475&#entry1730475" target="_blank">is in</a>, but mitigated via Hive1 Leap on Skulks.
I recommend people peruse this page to see what is confirmed versus what is just speculation: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/index.php/What%27s_new_from_NS1" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/inde...7s_new_from_NS1</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For skulks, that's all good and fine but the vanilla (non JP/ed and no HA/ed) marine would feel kind of empty without something. The best suggestion I saw was an upgrade that would allow marines to have a small burst of jump power (think rocket shoes?) that would be equivalent to bunny hoping. Just enough of a boost so that a marine timing it correctly could dodge an incoming bite or allow for maneuverability in combat.
Obviously this is treading close to the traditional JP's role but I would imagine the difference would be enough to justify both. The JP would be for transportation and flying/zooming around and the rocket shoes would be just enough power to get a marine off the ground. Either way, I'd hate to see vanilla marines without any kind of skill based movement.
There is sprinting, though you can't shoot while sprinting...
I've always found marine movement a bit silly looking; especially the slow backpedaling, when compared to his otherwise superhuman jumping capabilities. Though I don't disagree, it will feel bland to move around the world with simply the W key.
<!--quoteo(post=1760180:date=Mar 19 2010, 04:02 PM:name=Cereal_KillR)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cereal_KillR @ Mar 19 2010, 04:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760180"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There is sprinting, though you can't shoot while sprinting...
I've always found marine movement a bit silly looking; especially the slow backpedaling, when compared to his otherwise superhuman jumping capabilities. Though I don't disagree, it will feel bland to move around the world with simply the W key.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> So don't then. Hop around all you like. Who knows, it may even save you from that first skulk bite if you're moving in a bit of a random fashion.
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited March 2010
<!--quoteo(post=1760156:date=Mar 19 2010, 09:36 PM:name=aNytiMe)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (aNytiMe @ Mar 19 2010, 09:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760156"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is what we, the ######bags think:<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You and your trolling buds don't speak for me, nor do you speak for the majority of us.
<!--quoteo(post=1760092:date=Mar 19 2010, 11:55 AM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 19 2010, 11:55 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760092"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Let's say, that the people in question really just want NS2 to be exactly like NS1. What if it turns out that UWE is releasing two game modes, "classic" and "new", where classic is exactly the same as NS1?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Impossible and worthless, NS1 is too dependant on the HL1 engine to be ported correctly onto Spark without majour changes.
<!--quoteo(post=1760156:date=Mar 19 2010, 03:36 PM:name=aNytiMe)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (aNytiMe @ Mar 19 2010, 03:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760156"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is what I think: Game is dead and played out to shreds. There was never any strategy in this game, since the only choice a commander has is really the choice between an armslab or an observatory first. There are plenty of tactics though, but their execution usually boils down to aim and movement skill.
Public players don't know what strategy or tactics are in NS.
<!--quoteo(post=1760206:date=Mar 20 2010, 12:34 AM:name=huhuh)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huhuh @ Mar 20 2010, 12:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760206"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Impossible and worthless, NS1 is too dependant on the HL1 engine to be ported correctly onto Spark without majour changes.
Sorry, who are you again for knowing the competitive community as well as the metagame so well ?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why is it impossible?
From what I know the main engine functions will remain the same in Spark, how the physics reacts, the way lighting and culling work etc. And the game is then layered over the top using LUA. The GoldSrc engine would be a benchmark for minimum expectation for such a new engine or there is no reason to upgrade, you could even employ that little bunny hopping trick in to it if you think it's really important for the game.
So what dependencies does NS1 require from GoldSrc that you believe Spark could never offer?
It sounds worthwhile to me. Although I probably don't have enough experience of <i>metagame</i> and competitive play to comment.
I would have thought it pretty easy to be honest, all you need to do is change the weapon balance and match all the movement speeds to NS1, basically get all the stats the same. Add in any missing weapons with Lua, copy an old map, and then disable the tech system and just allow free building placement.
Maybe you need to re-add the resource model and gorge building but that's easy enough with Lua, just add a menu which is enabled on gorge classes which calls all the 'build structure' functions and deducts numbers from a resource counter which is affected by how many RTs you have.
Building the mechanics of a game once you have the engine and art working is very easy, just look at the hundreds of garrysmod gamemodes that come out, the difficulty is in getting a good set of mechanics (the difference between a horribly balanced and repetitive game and a game that's fun to play) and getting an engine/asset set for them to run on/with. Making superficial changes like gun spread, bullet damage, and resource models is exactly the sort of thing Lua is good for. And you already know exactly what you need to do because NS is there as an example, you're just copying functionality, you don't need to balance or invent or do anything difficult.
Comments
I hope you didn't miss my previous rebuttal. It is only a theory until proven correct. Saying "I told you so" is no retort at all, since you weren't right before, only now. And those who agree who previously did not, are just as right as you are, and have ever been.
ns_tanith
ns_origin
ns_orbital_anslv2
ns_metal
ns_lucid
ns_lost
ns_eclipse
ns_ayumi_e_b5
ns_veil
that's still more maps than de_nuke, de_dust2, de_train, de_inferno, isn't it ?
Of course I am just talking about the competitively played maps. On pubs you can also find ns_caged, ns_nothing, .... and all those other maps that were "balanced" a bit at "random" and could use a short remake to make them viable ( i.e. look at the remake of ayumi ).
<!--quoteo(post=1759983:date=Mar 18 2010, 09:44 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 18 2010, 09:44 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759983"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Look at the state of strategy in NS right now. Why should there always be a "correct" thing to do? Why should there always be "that one place we have to take and hold"? That doesn't sound like variety to me. The problem is given time, people will always find the best/quickest/easiest solution and stick with it. I think if there is true variety, the "best" option should never be entirely clear.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Strategies in NS are a bit like in Starcraft. There are the most popular builds ( 2 caps / 3 sgs ; 3 lmgs pressure ; fast pg etc...) and some weirder stuff ( fast jp, fast mt, fast cata, 2 sgs pressure, reloc, ... ). Both work, depending on your team.
It's the same for most mechanics of the game.
Wanna save rts as marines ? mine 'em, or get a pg on that side, or get mines on the rts.
Wanna kill a hive ? Can you sg it ? Or siege it ?
Wanna grow up your hive ? Have you got lifeforms to hold it ? Or should you get lifeform instead ? Will you try to save it at all cost or profit the marines will go there to get the aa and the rts ?
Of course some ways are always, on average, a bit safer than others. Straight A1 or fast pgs are quite safe. Going fade/lerk/rt/rt/mc/hive is safe too. But playing safe is sometimes not enough. As have proven NewstyleD Return by scoring a round against the current ENSL favorites thanks to a nice shotgun rush, as have proven Stray Dogs against 2Balls by getting a round thanks to dcs in double, origin. (Jiriki will also add that W2 issue but well... :p). Still, most of those matches which ended 3-1 were predicted 4-0 by like 95% of the community.
By the way, I didn't mention it, but what's also amazing in NS is the possibilites for comeback. Rushing base with the right timing, or going into the main hive can both be VERY profitable. And we've all played that 40-60 min pub game where marines full upgraded were stuck in their base and then slowly pushed out to finally win the game. And most of competitive players have that game where you fail everything early on and then 10 minutes later you win because you've done what had to be done. THAT is great.
So changing the game is obviously OK. But removing all those mechanisms that allow such thrilling games, without replacing them ( or telling us ... ?! ) is REALLY ... disappointing for, I hope they feel like me - at least I'm pretty sure my team does -, most competitive players.
<!--quoteo(post=1759984:date=Mar 18 2010, 10:03 PM:name=noncomposmentis)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (noncomposmentis @ Mar 18 2010, 10:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759984"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Read my first sentence like this: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole" target="_blank">"Yo dude you had a totally different experience then me man."</a> Really, I promise I never intend to be insulting =)
I remember thinking that it was a good example of how Euros took things more seriously then Americans how you guys called your competitive games "CLAN WARS" (RARGL) whereas we call them scrims or matches. But maybe this is a counterexample?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Still, do I get it right saying you're doubting of what Jiriki said ?
Because he's right. If you play RTS like Starcraft or Starcraft 2, playing commander ( especially on pub, even with 12 marines ) is pretty boring compared to these games. I'd say it's half "demanding". Which is rather logical since NS is not a pure FPS. But not a reason as to remove features from the Commander ( although I'm pretty convinced he'll have enough stuff to deal with eh ).
<!--quoteo(post=1759987:date=Mar 18 2010, 10:13 PM:name=Donner & Blitzen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Donner & Blitzen @ Mar 18 2010, 10:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759987"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It is only a theory until proven correct.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This may be a bit out of context, but this sentence alone is pretty wrong. Many things in science are still at a state of "theory" but are still used everyday and they work good. Even if we can't prove it.
CALM DOWN!
Good <i>lord</i>, do you know how silly this all looks? You're bickering over stuff you haven't experienced yet, based on hints and ideas, some of which are actually almost a year old. Between then and now, they almost planned to nix dynamic infestation, which was supposed to be a huge part of the game! Do you really think all those old tidbits are reliable enough to provide accurate speculation?
None of you have played the game, thus none of you know how it will play. Expressing your concerns is fine, but all of this bickering is nothing short of ridiculous. 'Stupid' would probably be a good term with which to describe it.
UWE said that they aren't "pandering to casual players" or whatever people accused them of. They said they're simply trying to make the best game they can. They're obviously not done, a TON of stuff could still change, so to whine and argue amongst each other is a complete waste of your time.
Calm down, wait for the alpha (or beta), play it, tell UWE about your ideas and concerns, and voila, you've just accomplished more than all this kvetching ever will.
Relax!
I've played thousands of rounds as a commander in NS1 so let me rephrase myself. I think marine commanding is boring, because FPS is much more fun than RTS, esp. when you don't have much options unlike real RTS'es. I've to command like 80-90% of the games I play. This doesn't mean the commander doesn't have much to do. Indeed, commanding requires reflexes and microing like Starcraft and with the players I play with, I'll get super rage for late meds. I'm not saying its objectively boring, but I can tell you that CC is not the most wanted job in NS, and that's not only because of the huge learning curve. Its just so much more fun to pwn as marines.
About multiple commanders. I don't mind it as an extra feature for 16vs16 pubfests but I don't see 2 commanders necessary for 6vs6 games (competitive games are not anything above because its already hard to get 6 players online at the same time) As long as its extra, its okay, but if multiple commanders become a necessity I'm worried.
And my remark to TrC was that there're some stuff that we can more easily comment (like the lerk spikes) and some that's hard to judge before seen in action (DI, power grid). So while there're lots of negative responses, saying that competitive scene sees NS2 completely negatively is a bit harsh simplifcation. Of course there're lots of competitive players who have very negative expectations of NS2, but I'm pretty sure there're equally as many people waiting for the release to make a real judgement.
I did, but thanks for pointing it out. As a man of science, yea a theory must be proven to be correct. As a man of reason, I hope you do not miss my rebuttal wherein I present you "theories" that were unproven at the time when savvy gamers used them to pass judgment on the quality of MW2 and TF2. It is naive to think we must prove every theory before we reach a conclusion. There is the concept of <i>sufficing</i>; and for myself, many in this thread, and an as-yet-to-be-determined number of NS vets and comps, there are already enough "theories" for us to draw a preliminary conclusion about the gameplay of NS2. And thus we discuss them here.
But I digress. It's a minor point about one sentence that's irrelevant. Carry on. :)
Sure, NS1 maps are a maze of corridors and vents. How many of those are actually useful? It may look like variety, but it's not really when everyone walks the same paths. NS2 maps may be simpler, but it's simply a case of trimming away unwanted fat.
One last thing is why is "more skilled" always better? Maybe it's not? Let's assume NS2 does lower the "skill ceiling" somewhat. Is that part not redeemable in other ways?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now I haven't played NS in.....well years. But as far as I can remember and form what huhuh was saying, there is a lot more than just one way to win. Yea there are your textbook routines you go through from the start, but this isn't an RTS. The opposing team doesn't do the same thing everygame, which is possibly thanks to randomed hive locations. If we get set spawn points for both races, it will infact DECREASE these varieties. From your reply it seems you're implying NS2 will be shedding these... "unwanted fats" But that FAT is what makes every game of NS different. GIVE ME MORE FAT
Also, what the heck does that last point mean? any examples of other ways?
<!--quoteo(post=1759984:date=Mar 18 2010, 08:03 PM:name=noncomposmentis)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (noncomposmentis @ Mar 18 2010, 08:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759984"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As far as making the object of the game more obvious to noobs. It's all well and good to have run ramboing for the first 10 minutes of the game, but then when the noobs are getting spawn killed by 4 fades, they don't make the connection between that and the fact that they didn't use any teamwork, so they get frustrated and ragequit. If powergrids and such make it obvious that teamwork is what wins then less newbies will act like chickens with their heads cut off. Obviously that's a pretty big if, though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't see how powergrids and techpoints will change the odd situation when you join a server and your team is getting spawncamped by 4 fades... And to be honest a lot of my NS games were won by CRAZY solo people who go off and end up either saving your defeat, or defeating the enemy while they weren't looking. No one sends their whole team of marines to go capping RT's.
But I digress. It's a minor point about one sentence that's irrelevant. Carry on. :)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're on a bus. There are a few signs you've seen before on other buses which you are able to read, they say "Westend". Now if you live in the Northend, perhaps you'll try to convince the bus driver to make a slight detour. Even if you fail, you stick around - it's not that far to walk. However if you live in the Eastend, there is no point in sticking around. The longer you do the further away from home you go and there is little chance of convincing the bus driver to turn around.
Consider those participating in this discussion to be residents of the West and Northends. Consider those who have "given up" to be in the Eastend; how could blame them for leaving as early as possible?
Most of you are looking back on NS1 with rose colored glasses. The average pub game of NS1 was a commander either screaming at his marines because they weren't listening or a commander doing nothing while the marines beg for items and res nodes. This isn't good gameplay. NS1 marines would wonder around the map and try to find areas with action in them then ask for a PG. The areas usually held little importance and combat only happened there because the other team was doing the same thing. This isn't good gameplay. NS2 will alleviate most of these problems with marines buying their own weapons and the power grid system.
Let your nerd rage subside for a few weeks until you try it out. It's not like you were even that good in NS1 to even be making generalizations like "this will be horrible and make the game linear." I mean, you can say that but no one will listen to you. No one even knows who are you and you're arguing a point that cannot be won. Relax.
Regarding alien upgrades, idea is not bad but there better be chamber attribute boosts aswell. I like the idea because it would most definetly add variety to the alien play. Anyone aware is this idea is going to be implimented or is it scrapped?
Actually, I can totally understand that. The thing is I dunno if going in the direction of Starcraft ie more "strategic options" would be a good idea for the game as a whole. If you've played Savage 2, they tried to make the commanding a lot more like a RTS than NS did, and to do it they were apparently forced to make the FPS players into generic RTS units because the FPS combat is so boring.
Instead of thinking of the commander as a Starcraft player I think of them as a FPS player in a support class like TF2 medic or spy, but with a lot of flexibility in their playstyle. I think if you look at it that way then you can work at making the stuff that an NS comm does more fun. Like providing more options vis-a-vis medpacks, catalyst packs, and scans so that the comm can be an important player on the front lines of the fight. That's why I was encouraged when the devs were talking about "spell-like" abilities a while ago. But I have no idea if they're following similar ideas.
It was a question directed to those who place so much importance on skill.
<!--quoteo(post=1759996:date=Mar 19 2010, 12:03 AM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ Mar 19 2010, 12:03 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1759996"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're on a bus. There are a few signs you've seen before on other buses which you are able to read, they say "Westend". Now if you live in the Northend, perhaps you'll try to convince the bus driver to make a slight detour. Even if you fail, you stick around - it's not that far to walk. However if you live in the Eastend, there is no point in sticking around. The longer you do the further away from home you go and there is little chance of convincing the bus driver to turn around.
Consider those participating in this discussion to be residents of the West and Northends. Consider those who have "given up" to be in the Eastend; how could blame them for leaving as early as possible?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bad analogy which assumes the person on the bus knows exactly where the bus is going. The point is that we don't know exactly where it's going, and we don't know whether or not we will like the destination.
Unless you're referring to people who want NS2 to be an exact remake of NS1 with better graphics. In that case it's clear that NS2 won't be that. That's the only thing you can say with certainty. And even then, who knows if it wont be a good game in its own regard?
Perhaps the hint was too subtle for you - At no time do I say that you, the rider, <b>knows</b> where you are going; merely that you have <b>read</b> the signage.
It is entirely possible that the signs are wrong or conflicting or that you simply cannot read them; however if you've correctly read similar signs in the past, then surely you would do well to put a query to the bus driver or other riders (or perhaps even get off) if it were not headed in your direction.
And so here we are with our query. Some riders confirm we are headed in the wrong direction, others deny it, and still others claim they do not know. What does the bus-driver say?
"This bus is headed in a good direction."
Pugs = Random Players put into a Match either by Randomly or by Team Captain Picking.
Pub Play = Random Players joining Random Servers for a Round.
Round = Playing by Picking a Character(if DM/FFA setting)/Team for 1 Map.
Map = The Level you play on.
(LOL DEFINITIONS)
*NOTE*
More maps are always better. It would be nice if NS1 had an update to re-add all the Official Maps that were removed from the default list.
P.S. Movement glitches like bunnyhopping increased the depth of NS enormously. I seriously hope that NS2 has a comparable "exploit".
I'd like to play NS without TF2 scouts jumping every where. I'll play TF2 for that.
Perhaps you should further develop your analogy-writing skills before accusing others of being unable to correctly interpret them, because your analogy clearly implied that the rider knew where the bus was going based on the obvious signage. You admit the signage is not so clear, something that was neither said nor implied in your analogy, assuming it was supposed to make sense
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->...or that you simply cannot read them;<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I thought you established the rider read the sign. Again, poorly written analogy. Before making jabs at other people's intelligence, you may want to first assure yourself of your own. Your arguments also lose credibility when you do so.
What would someone have to lose by not giving up on UWE anyway? Nothing really. 15 minutes every so often invested in scanning the forums? Hope?
Let's say, that the people in question really just want NS2 to be exactly like NS1. What if it turns out that UWE is releasing two game modes, "classic" and "new", where classic is exactly the same as NS1? We've seen it before (classic and combat). The point is unless the developers tell us everything, it is impossible to know anything (no matter how much extrapolation and experienced hypothesizing you do) because there is an unlimited potential for things to be different or new. To give up when there is nothing to lose is stupid.
As I've said, it really doesn't matter. Of all the thing to be discussed, this is the most irrelevant. I could care less if someone across the Earth has decided to give up on NS2 for whatever reason.
The problem with the 'we don't know' viewpoint is that almost every discussion becomes irrelevant. I agree that a part of comp scene is overconservative and you might call me that on more than a few gameplay aspects. Still, it's good that someone creates discussion and adds to the spectrum of viewpoints.
The devs have their final say on what goes into the game anyway. If they've got a good plan on some aspect, they are completely free to execute it. If someone on these forums posts some critisism or thoughts that give them new viewpoints for designing NS2, it's all good.
Of course, the critisism should be based on something not completely "It's not NS1", but then again "It's NS2" shouldn't be anything more viable as argumentation. I'd like to have my NS2 better, improved and refreshed, not just completely new, old or upside down.
Why are you not spending 15min on every gaming forum in hopes that it will cater to your needs? You seem not to understand the point of community - you invest time into things that matter to you. A bus you believe to be going West when you live East, is not something that matters to you and to hop on it simply to hope that you're wrong - well, clearly you've never taken transit.
Game is dead and played out to shreds. There was never any strategy in this game, since the only choice a commander has is really the choice between an armslab or an observatory first. There are plenty of tactics though, but their execution usually boils down to aim and movement skill.
Public players don't know what strategy or tactics are in NS.
This is what we, the competitive players think:
www.steamcommunity.com/groups/MarinesONLY
www.steamcommunity.com/groups/TheGamebreakers
"bunnyhopping" <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns/forums/index.php?showtopic=107569&st=0&p=1730475&#entry1730475" target="_blank">is in</a>, but mitigated via Hive1 Leap on Skulks.
I recommend people peruse this page to see what is confirmed versus what is just speculation:
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/index.php/What%27s_new_from_NS1" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/inde...7s_new_from_NS1</a>
I recommend people peruse this page to see what is confirmed versus what is just speculation:
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/index.php/What%27s_new_from_NS1" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/wiki/inde...7s_new_from_NS1</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For skulks, that's all good and fine but the vanilla (non JP/ed and no HA/ed) marine would feel kind of empty without something. The best suggestion I saw was an upgrade that would allow marines to have a small burst of jump power (think rocket shoes?) that would be equivalent to bunny hoping. Just enough of a boost so that a marine timing it correctly could dodge an incoming bite or allow for maneuverability in combat.
Obviously this is treading close to the traditional JP's role but I would imagine the difference would be enough to justify both. The JP would be for transportation and flying/zooming around and the rocket shoes would be just enough power to get a marine off the ground. Either way, I'd hate to see vanilla marines without any kind of skill based movement.
I've always found marine movement a bit silly looking; especially the slow backpedaling, when compared to his otherwise superhuman jumping capabilities. Though I don't disagree, it will feel bland to move around the world with simply the W key.
I've always found marine movement a bit silly looking; especially the slow backpedaling, when compared to his otherwise superhuman jumping capabilities. Though I don't disagree, it will feel bland to move around the world with simply the W key.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So don't then. Hop around all you like. Who knows, it may even save you from that first skulk bite if you're moving in a bit of a random fashion.
You and your trolling buds don't speak for me, nor do you speak for the majority of us.
Impossible and worthless, NS1 is too dependant on the HL1 engine to be ported correctly onto Spark without majour changes.
<!--quoteo(post=1760156:date=Mar 19 2010, 03:36 PM:name=aNytiMe)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (aNytiMe @ Mar 19 2010, 03:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1760156"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This is what I think:
Game is dead and played out to shreds. There was never any strategy in this game, since the only choice a commander has is really the choice between an armslab or an observatory first. There are plenty of tactics though, but their execution usually boils down to aim and movement skill.
Public players don't know what strategy or tactics are in NS.
This is what we, the competitive players think:
www.steamcommunity.com/groups/MarinesONLY
www.steamcommunity.com/groups/TheGamebreakers<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry, who are you again for knowing the competitive community as well as the metagame so well ?
Sorry, who are you again for knowing the competitive community as well as the metagame so well ?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why is it impossible?
From what I know the main engine functions will remain the same in Spark, how the physics reacts, the way lighting and culling work etc. And the game is then layered over the top using LUA. The GoldSrc engine would be a benchmark for minimum expectation for such a new engine or there is no reason to upgrade, you could even employ that little bunny hopping trick in to it if you think it's really important for the game.
So what dependencies does NS1 require from GoldSrc that you believe Spark could never offer?
It sounds worthwhile to me. Although I probably don't have enough experience of <i>metagame</i> and competitive play to comment.
Maybe you need to re-add the resource model and gorge building but that's easy enough with Lua, just add a menu which is enabled on gorge classes which calls all the 'build structure' functions and deducts numbers from a resource counter which is affected by how many RTs you have.
Building the mechanics of a game once you have the engine and art working is very easy, just look at the hundreds of garrysmod gamemodes that come out, the difficulty is in getting a good set of mechanics (the difference between a horribly balanced and repetitive game and a game that's fun to play) and getting an engine/asset set for them to run on/with. Making superficial changes like gun spread, bullet damage, and resource models is exactly the sort of thing Lua is good for. And you already know exactly what you need to do because NS is there as an example, you're just copying functionality, you don't need to balance or invent or do anything difficult.
One month's work for a good programmer at most.