As long as devs follow a basic rule of visual differentiation based on characteristics (which seems like a pretty core tenet of design) and it still takes you a while to figure out which targets are armored you lack common sense.
<!--quoteo(post=1773755:date=Jun 7 2010, 09:34 AM:name=FocusedWolf)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FocusedWolf @ Jun 7 2010, 09:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773755"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I'm going to go on a limb here and say everyone is incredibly confused.
According to the list a high-explosive launched grenade does not do any damage to living things... only structures... and to that i say wtf i want it to kill every skulk in the room. If you don't think every player will not (after spending money for the grenade-launcher attachment) be firing off several launched grenades at the enemy (in hopes of killing the enemy), then you haven't been playing any games for like several years now. To add CONFUSION to the game, the marine can fire a nerve-gas launched grenade to hurt the enemy but not structures... so why the double standard here... do i REALLY need to alternate my ammo types in the middle of battle to fire off both high explosive and nerve gas??<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whats the point ? In the news-update it says that rifle-grenades have double damage vs structures... not that they dont do any damage against lifeforms...
he speaks of the siege-cannon as an only-against-structure-weapon
I agree with FocusedWolf (*gasp*) ... actually with his first sentence ... I'm quite sure most people are confused by this post, it's not really well written imho, but I don't blame them for that, I know they need the time 'cause they work hard on the game.
There shouldn't be no special ammo or DNA changes, because this would make every equipment adjustable to the situation and for example a LMG with explosive ammo against buildings is inferior to a HMG with explosion ammo and that's what they don't want, they want a role asigned to every weapon / life form or even better the life forms role change dynamically depending how far every team has teched, which would add to the gameplay experience imho.
Also he said that the examples he mentioned below for the damage types are not all final, so no need to get hyped about them ... I'm not sure but I think I remember a post about that parasite will be back, but not the way we knew it.
I also object to the idea of gas grenades (no matter which way they are realised), even if they are limited to 1 grenade per player, you would have a squad of let's say 5 marines that can wipe out 5 potential ambush spots ... you are pretty much save for a looooong time this way. I personally hate public NS1 games where the marines have a decent number of Grenadelaunchers, because they just nuke every ambush spot (or at this point have even motion tracking) and you feel completly obsolete if you die and respawn as a skulk. I'm aware that this is just a subjective experience, but I guess some people feel like that, but I guess you are going to change this.
The whole idea of damage types is nice, but maybe there shouldn't be as many damage types as there are weapons, you can still variate with things like accuracy and range to make some weapons more usefull against less or more agile enemies. Also if you make it intuitive for people they also need (because everyone loves numbers) the numbers on the screen in plain text !
<!--quoteo(post=1773756:date=Jun 7 2010, 03:35 PM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ Jun 7 2010, 03:35 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773756"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As far as I can remember, the only weapon to be confirmed to be anything like that was the standard Rifle. Which makes sense; upgrading something basic to be viable late-game is a common option in strategy games.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well the way I understood it was that there was going to be some sort of "shotgun attachment" instead of an alternate weapon. Much like the fact that there is no more GL and no more HMG.
I dont think we can read too much into the examples. The overall idea i expect is what they are trying to get across. Most likely these examples were made up simply to illustrate the goal he is hoping to achieve, so i think we shouldnt read into the words used.
I know you want skulks to be useful right into the endgame and you want to avoid the shotty rush, but for rine weapons you have to look at how they behave in real life. Shotguns should tear through the unarmoured but have big difficulties with armoured. Minigun bullets should be armour-piercing. Swap them and there will be no confusions. (also, I'm assuming shotties are better up-close like before?)
This will of course unbalance some things as it re-opens the option to shotty rush, and allows you to have a single marine with a HMG, I mean, Minigun, defending a long open hallway... but with good level design it should even out. We are going for bigger, more complex rooms and less long open hallways, right? So skulks should have more ambush opportunities and be more effective right off the bat. Nerf the shotties only if it the gameplay tests prove that a nerf is needed.
p.s. The magnum was originally intended to be a portable elephant hunting rifle... and the new pistol was made to look like a hand cannon for a reason. As far as I can tell, it should serve the same purpose against an onos. I love that the pistol is armour-piercing. Besides, a small clip size and lack of semi-automatic firing only makes Dirty Harry more of a badass.
<!--quoteo(post=1773697:date=Jun 6 2010, 10:37 PM:name=Rezyk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rezyk @ Jun 6 2010, 10:37 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't understand why you don't follow Starcraft 2's lead and ditch the intermediate mapping layer of named damage types. Instead of a fade swipe reading "Does 60 heavy damage" (and having the player remember that Heavy means +40% vs armor), it would simply read "Does 60 damage (+24 versus armor)".
Having the explicit-named-types-layer makes more sense when you have a few types each representing many attacks, but you have tons of damage types each representing 2-3 attacks. Why bother the player with it?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good point. I wasn't thinking of bothering the player with it much at all anyways, but I think this is probably the way to go.
<!--quoteo(post=1773716:date=Jun 7 2010, 12:24 AM:name=Mortos)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mortos @ Jun 7 2010, 12:24 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773716"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->With all this, let's not forget that this game isn't Rock Paper Scissors, and it isn't SC2, units don't just face each other and shoot, then we add up the numbers and see who won and who is dead. Let scissors win against rock if he sets up an ambush, or manages to dodge well, or one of another thousand possible creative or even lucky maneuvers that are possible in an FPS that an RTS could never manage.
What worries me about so much focus on damage types is that picking the appropriate weapons and armor becomes a more important part of gameplay than what I consider to be the core of NS which is a squad of marines walking slowly down a hallway, checking for skulks in corners because an ambush could take them all out.
In my opinion, the situational factors (location + surprise) and skill should determine roughly 70-80% of battles (of enemies of roughly the same power level) with things like being equipped with the right armor or weapons useful, but nowhere near the main deciding factor.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I totally agree. Most of the advantages aren't going to be huge ones, but in the realm of 10-30%.
Regarding "No Hidden Modifiers": these modifiers won't be hidden, they will be described in-game and hopefully shown through audio/visuals as well, so this won't be violated.
Thanks for the comments regarding the shotgun. I have to admit it doesn't feel quite right to me either...I'm thinking about it. :)
P.S. There are quite a few new abilities and toys for the aliens you haven't heard about yet, so don't worry about the marines being OP...
I was worried at the start of the blog post, but I realize that this is a really good idea. It will also help make teamwork really pay off, and I hoped that this post would make people stop whining since you can't say "NS2 IS CASUAL" to a post like that. However, it seems like if people can't whine about one thing, they'll whine about something else, as apparently everyone on this forum thinks that they can design the game better than you can.
Wow, I'm surprised that so many ppl think this isn't good? Do you guys really want standard unidirectional upgrades that supersede everything that came before? I would definitely prefer a mechanic that forces me to think about what I'm about to do, to plan, to formulate a strategy with my team, and not give me one weapon that let's me be all "lol, time to kill everything in the room!" I'd like to see different kins of games, not just "If you don't follow X strategy and upgrade in Y order, then you lose."
<!--quoteo(post=1773773:date=Jun 7 2010, 06:40 PM:name=BigText)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigText @ Jun 7 2010, 06:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773773"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I was worried at the start of the blog post, but I realize that this is a really good idea. It will also help make teamwork really pay off, and I hoped that this post would make people stop whining since you can't say "NS2 IS CASUAL" to a post like that. However, it seems like if people can't whine about one thing, they'll whine about something else, as apparently everyone on this forum thinks that they can design the game better than you can.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's the same phenomena that 60 to 80 percent of the germans think they would be better coaching of the national football team than the real coach does ... it's not necessarily whining, it just shows that people feel strong about football and NS2, which is nice imho (not the football part, I couldn't care less :)
In game i think this will be pretty intuitive pretty quickly as long as it isnt over balanced ( so pistol or a shotty might do 20% more damage rather than 100% more than a rifle). In FPS people are always coming up with theories about which guns / attacks are better for what, this idea will give that some substance. Also if its noted early in your ingame hints system (this is still the tutorial idea right) i doubt you get many new players baffled.
although i agree with some comments about the shotgun. Typically shotties are supposed to do extra damage against un armoured tragets. An example of this would be Rambow Six (raven shield, might be in others aswell) in Raven shield you can buy slugs for improved armour penetration, where as buckshot deals more damage to unarmour targets.
You could get round this by inventing a new type of buckshot, or giving them slugs
may i suggest a sort of tungsten superheated shot or some sort of API - armour piercing incindary.
Im not a gun buff i just googled this armour piercing
i want a squad feature for NS2 to squad up with 3-4 players and commander could give squad orders and squad leader could give order and so on (like in battlefield) same for the aliens call it breed feature or family Oo that would be awesome!!
and by the way i heard minigun ??? pls make it look cool and not like the todasy ones overzised bulky crap ....
keep on cant wait to play ^^
edit: hold on that guy above me made me think of a great idea !!
- Different Ammo Types!! The player can choose the type he wants from the amory and you got types for armoured unarmourded and both (but less dmg) thats realisctic its fast to impliment in the game (no gfx or mocap) and it will really make a strategic difference !!!
IeptBarakatThe most difficult name to speak ingame.Join Date: 2009-07-10Member: 68107Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Diamond, Reinforced - Shadow
Would be a great idea if the weapon buy screen showed the damage types. And maybe some info on what it'd be good against in like a weapon tip thing underneath the selection.
And whatever the new alien lifeform screen showing the damage types of each lifeforms abilities.
There has been talk about the shottie having a ricocheting flechette alt-fire. Is this to be a comm researched upgrade?
It seems the standard shottie should be much like the standard rifle. Good against most everything, but limited against armor. The alt-fire would be what you use to take down armored targets and possibly whips and hydras by ricochet.
I'm really glad to see more bits of gameplay info like this dropping out of the kimono.
<!--quoteo(post=1773772:date=Jun 7 2010, 04:36 PM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Jun 7 2010, 04:36 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773772"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thanks for the comments regarding the shotgun. I have to admit it doesn't feel quite right to me either...I'm thinking about it. :)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's what hit me, too...
To me, a shot-gun was always decent against skulks, decent against fades (well, actually I think the odds of a fade vs shotgun should be more like 2:1 than the 5:1 or whatever in NS1), and against bigger targets dealing some damage at close range, but ultimately not so good vs. armoured/bulkier targets (including buildings, unlike NS1?).
Make the HMG good vs. armour (onos in particular, fade to lesser extent), but without such high damage and high recoil. Then you have:
HMG vs. skulk: maybe equal, but HMG is expensive Shotgun: great vs. fade and skulk, rubbish vs. onos (you don't want to wait 'till he's close anyway!) Hydra: enough armour that you don't want to attack with a shotty, but grenades work well vs. structures Explosives do more damage vs. static targets than players/mobile characters (maybe can make grenade spam less of a horror to skulks than in NS1).
No one likes to spend 30 seconds not doing anything while they hold down the left mouse button and listen to lots of skulk bites while killing a structure. This is "un fun" gameplay and must go.
It would be nice if the skulk had an attack which dealt bonus damage against Structures. It is intuitive to make skulks more effective than normal at killing buildings because they are usually the ones who are doing it (because of their cheapness and combat ineffectiveness).
An analogy to Starcraft's zerglings can be made. They're really small so they can get a huge surround on buildings while being very cheap and ineffective individually. If they get a full surround, most buildings go down in less than 10 seconds (even the central buildings). Unless a Commander controlled building killer unit related to the MASC is created for the Aliens, the numbers type of advantage cannot be applied for NS2 because of course every skulk must be controlled by a player.
So for NS2, its either make a Tier 1 Structural type attack for skulks (or similarly cheap Tier 1 combat lifeform) or make a very cheap swarmable building killer unit controllable by the AComm.
If one doesn't want to make skulks the omni-lifeform by making them averagely good at everything and also good at killing buildings, allowing the AComm to replace individual skulks' bite attacks with a Structural attack for a small amount of resources would be a good choice. The flavor for this ability could be something as simple as serrated teeth vs. molar teeth, a special type of jaw configuration which is good at chewing through static chunks of metal but terrible at piercing flesh (perhaps increasing damage DoT ability which only works on static targets), or just removing the bite ability and adding in something like nanite killing chemical spray.
<!--quoteo(post=1773770:date=Jun 7 2010, 11:30 AM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Jun 7 2010, 11:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=1773697:date=Jun 7 2010, 12:37 AM:name=Rezyk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rezyk @ Jun 7 2010, 12:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I don't understand why you don't follow Starcraft 2's lead and ditch the intermediate mapping layer of named damage types. Instead of a fade swipe reading "Does 60 heavy damage" (and having the player remember that Heavy means +40% vs armor), it would simply read "Does 60 damage (+24 versus armor)".
Having the explicit-named-types-layer makes more sense when you have a few types each representing many attacks, but you have tons of damage types each representing 2-3 attacks. Why bother the player with it?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Good point. I wasn't thinking of bothering the player with it much at all anyways, but I think this is probably the way to go. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I would definitely prefer "Fade swipe: 60 damage (+24 vs. Armored)" than having to multiply in my head (60x1.4 = ???). Even better would be "Fade swipe: 60 damage (+24 vs. Armored = 84 vs. Armored)", giving the base damage, bonus damage, and sum damage.
<!--quoteo(post=1773770:date=Jun 7 2010, 04:30 PM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Jun 7 2010, 04:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=Rezyk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rezyk)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I don't understand why you don't follow Starcraft 2's lead and ditch the intermediate mapping layer of named damage types. Instead of a fade swipe reading "Does 60 heavy damage" (and having the player remember that Heavy means +40% vs armor), it would simply read "Does 60 damage (+24 versus armor)".
Having the explicit-named-types-layer makes more sense when you have a few types each representing many attacks, but you have tons of damage types each representing 2-3 attacks. Why bother the player with it?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Good point. I wasn't thinking of bothering the player with it much at all anyways, but I think this is probably the way to go. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nice.
Also, if there is any potential for bodypart-based damage modifiers, you may want to consider structuring things to avoid any "+dmg versus armored" attacks (sticking to -dmg versus armored). For example, if the onos forearms are considered armored and his stomach is not, you lose a lot of intuitiveness by having the shotgun be more effective on the forearms ("aim for the armor plates!"). It should always be the same or better to target unarmored flesh instead.
I really like the idea of damage types. However not as much because of the Rock-Paper-Scissors but more from the point of view that this way you can keep the bread and butter units useful in the mid and late game. Also it gives units specialized roles.
I think we are all forgetting the alien science of the old days I refer back to Duke Nukem 3D (R.I.P. Duke)
So you have a shotgun, that is cool, now lets pick up these red tipped shells. Now I have an EXPLOSIVE shotgun.
Now I am not expecting this will be put in game. But if I could become Duke Nukem with an explosive shelled Shotgun I would be a happy man.
This does fall in-line with what others have said in this thread though that there could be different ammo-types and explosive tipped bullets are a no-brainer as a simple way to increase damage of most ammo.
The only con I have with this is I can see players QQ'ing that they are getting slaughtered and not understanding this is because of an ammo upgrade but yeah don't know how to make it easy to distinguish those type of things. I would probably do the same if I just walked into the game and started getting raped by enhanced upgrades that were not easily noticeable visually.
I did find the whole A,B,C,D part of the blog post a bit confusing, might of been easier to make reference to some basic terms like "marine" "turret" "armor" etc.
I also disagreed with this:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->By contrast, without variable damage types (payoffs), everything just does damage and there is little maneuvering, tactics or interest. I just build more and better units and so do you. They fight, and whomever built more wins.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have played with some very skilled players in NS and with that in mind there is still going to be a significant amount of variation on how skilled your team-mates are as this is not a generic A.I. based game.
While the rest sounds interesting and does require a few re-reads to understand. If it's pulled off the way you say it is and is clear and understandable it should be good.
Of course once we play the Alpha etc I'm sure you guys will take on the community feedback to look at tweaks or way it could be enhanced and hopefully by consensus we should have some winning damage enhancement systems.
realy.. shotguns vs armored? that does not make sense to me... shotguns have 0 armor piercing abilities... big pointu bullets = good against armor.. shotguns = small round bullets..
<!--quoteo(post=1773781:date=Jun 7 2010, 12:59 PM:name=Karrde)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Karrde @ Jun 7 2010, 12:59 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773781"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Wow, I'm surprised that so many ppl think this isn't good? Do you guys really want standard unidirectional upgrades that supersede everything that came before?<u> I would definitely prefer a mechanic that forces me to think about what I'm about to do, to plan, to formulate a strategy with my team, and not give me one weapon that let's me be all "lol, time to kill everything in the room!"</u> I'd like to see different kins of games, not just "If you don't follow X strategy and upgrade in Y order, then you lose."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The reality of NS is very often it's up to 1 marine to kill 1 or more aliens.
The alien team is designed so 1 alien can stand alone (without health, ammo, catalyst, or special equipment or weapons) and they're fast enough to get away if their health dips below 150.
Even in a big hallway you get at most 3 people shooting at the same super armored aliens, and their isn't a lot of time before they close the gap at a high rate of speed to kill your group with extremely overpowered melee attacks.
============
Bottom line is:
1. There is <u>no time</u> to figure out what type of bullet or weapon you need to kill a random alien, or a room full of random aliens. Therefore <u>every marine weapon needs to be effective at CLOSE range just like the alien melee attacks</u> (because at close range IT IS 1 ON 1). The game should be balanced based on better accuracy, rate of fire, damage, and splash-damage at <u>longer range</u>, i.e. the pistol should be effective ONLY at close range (where longer distances result in less damage and accuracy).
2. There is no time to organize your marines to say "ok you and you use nerve gas grenades, and you and you use HI-EX grenades, and we need 4 people with shotguns, 10 with miniguns..." ya right that's a waste of time and the minute a handful of marines die your team has been compromised well over 80% because their's going to be a shortage of special niche weapons to kill a randomly attacking alien, that's only vulnerable to weapon X. I mean look at NS1... the choice is simple with everyone with HMGs and it's still not deadly enough (because you need a large number of marines in the same spot that know how to shoot THE SAME ALIEN... and how often are you that lucky :P).
3. In NS2 everyone has a personal choice for weapons. This is good and bad. For example if too many people are using the same weapons, then your team will only be effective against a certain range of alien lifeforms. At the other extreme if too many people have too large of a variety of weaponry, then their won't be enough "special" guns in the same room to kill the alien that is only hurt by this particular type of weapon.
Marines need weapons that can kill the aliens before they can run away. If you cannot achieve the kill then all your doing is wasting ammunition.
<!--quoteo(post=1773609:date=Jun 6 2010, 08:09 PM:name=Cyanide)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cyanide @ Jun 6 2010, 08:09 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773609"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Really, NS2 seems complex as hell, and its starting to get me to realize just why there's so much delay. You guys are really creating a deep experience and I am extremely excited to play it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm thinking the opposite. I think game is getting more and more simple.
Comments
i is excited moar naow.
According to the list a high-explosive launched grenade does not do any damage to living things... only structures... and to that i say wtf i want it to kill every skulk in the room. If you don't think every player will not (after spending money for the grenade-launcher attachment) be firing off several launched grenades at the enemy (in hopes of killing the enemy), then you haven't been playing any games for like several years now. To add CONFUSION to the game, the marine can fire a nerve-gas launched grenade to hurt the enemy but not structures... so why the double standard here... do i REALLY need to alternate my ammo types in the middle of battle to fire off both high explosive and nerve gas??<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whats the point ?
In the news-update it says that rifle-grenades have double damage vs structures... not that they dont do any damage against lifeforms...
he speaks of the siege-cannon as an only-against-structure-weapon
There shouldn't be no special ammo or DNA changes, because this would make every equipment adjustable to the situation and for example a LMG with explosive ammo against buildings is inferior to a HMG with explosion ammo and that's what they don't want, they want a role asigned to every weapon / life form or even better the life forms role change dynamically depending how far every team has teched, which would add to the gameplay experience imho.
Also he said that the examples he mentioned below for the damage types are not all final, so no need to get hyped about them ... I'm not sure but I think I remember a post about that parasite will be back, but not the way we knew it.
I also object to the idea of gas grenades (no matter which way they are realised), even if they are limited to 1 grenade per player, you would have a squad of let's say 5 marines that can wipe out 5 potential ambush spots ... you are pretty much save for a looooong time this way.
I personally hate public NS1 games where the marines have a decent number of Grenadelaunchers, because they just nuke every ambush spot (or at this point have even motion tracking) and you feel completly obsolete if you die and respawn as a skulk. I'm aware that this is just a subjective experience, but I guess some people feel like that, but I guess you are going to change this.
The whole idea of damage types is nice, but maybe there shouldn't be as many damage types as there are weapons, you can still variate with things like accuracy and range to make some weapons more usefull against less or more agile enemies. Also if you make it intuitive for people they also need (because everyone loves numbers) the numbers on the screen in plain text !
Well, just my random thoughts.
Well the way I understood it was that there was going to be some sort of "shotgun attachment" instead of an alternate weapon. Much like the fact that there is no more GL and no more HMG.
(also, I'm assuming shotties are better up-close like before?)
This will of course unbalance some things as it re-opens the option to shotty rush, and allows you to have a single marine with a HMG, I mean, Minigun, defending a long open hallway... but with good level design it should even out. We are going for bigger, more complex rooms and less long open hallways, right? So skulks should have more ambush opportunities and be more effective right off the bat. Nerf the shotties only if it the gameplay tests prove that a nerf is needed.
p.s. The magnum was originally intended to be a portable elephant hunting rifle... and the new pistol was made to look like a hand cannon for a reason. As far as I can tell, it should serve the same purpose against an onos. I love that the pistol is armour-piercing. Besides, a small clip size and lack of semi-automatic firing only makes Dirty Harry more of a badass.
Having the explicit-named-types-layer makes more sense when you have a few types each representing many attacks, but you have tons of damage types each representing 2-3 attacks. Why bother the player with it?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good point. I wasn't thinking of bothering the player with it much at all anyways, but I think this is probably the way to go.
What worries me about so much focus on damage types is that picking the appropriate weapons and armor becomes a more important part of gameplay than what I consider to be the core of NS which is a squad of marines walking slowly down a hallway, checking for skulks in corners because an ambush could take them all out.
In my opinion, the situational factors (location + surprise) and skill should determine roughly 70-80% of battles (of enemies of roughly the same power level) with things like being equipped with the right armor or weapons useful, but nowhere near the main deciding factor.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I totally agree. Most of the advantages aren't going to be huge ones, but in the realm of 10-30%.
Regarding "No Hidden Modifiers": these modifiers won't be hidden, they will be described in-game and hopefully shown through audio/visuals as well, so this won't be violated.
Thanks for the comments regarding the shotgun. I have to admit it doesn't feel quite right to me either...I'm thinking about it. :)
P.S. There are quite a few new abilities and toys for the aliens you haven't heard about yet, so don't worry about the marines being OP...
It's the same phenomena that 60 to 80 percent of the germans think they would be better coaching of the national football team than the real coach does ... it's not necessarily whining, it just shows that people feel strong about football and NS2, which is nice imho (not the football part, I couldn't care less :)
And thanks for the clarifications Charlie.
although i agree with some comments about the shotgun. Typically shotties are supposed to do extra damage against un armoured tragets. An example of this would be Rambow Six (raven shield, might be in others aswell) in Raven shield you can buy slugs for improved armour penetration, where as buckshot deals more damage to unarmour targets.
You could get round this by inventing a new type of buckshot, or giving them slugs
may i suggest a sort of tungsten superheated shot or some sort of API - armour piercing incindary.
Im not a gun buff i just googled this armour piercing
do me a favour and make fps gameplay also fun ;-P
i want a squad feature for NS2 to squad up with 3-4 players and commander could give squad orders and squad leader could give order and so on (like in battlefield)
same for the aliens call it breed feature or family Oo that would be awesome!!
and by the way i heard minigun ??? pls make it look cool and not like the todasy ones overzised bulky crap ....
keep on cant wait to play ^^
edit: hold on that guy above me made me think of a great idea !!
- Different Ammo Types!! The player can choose the type he wants from the amory and you got types for armoured unarmourded and both (but less dmg)
thats realisctic its fast to impliment in the game (no gfx or mocap) and it will really make a strategic difference !!!
think about it , good night n´ good fight ;-P
And whatever the new alien lifeform screen showing the damage types of each lifeforms abilities.
It seems the standard shottie should be much like the standard rifle. Good against most everything, but limited against armor. The alt-fire would be what you use to take down armored targets and possibly whips and hydras by ricochet.
I'm really glad to see more bits of gameplay info like this dropping out of the kimono.
Thanks Devs!
It's what hit me, too...
To me, a shot-gun was always decent against skulks, decent against fades (well, actually I think the odds of a fade vs shotgun should be more like 2:1 than the 5:1 or whatever in NS1), and against bigger targets dealing some damage at close range, but ultimately not so good vs. armoured/bulkier targets (including buildings, unlike NS1?).
Make the HMG good vs. armour (onos in particular, fade to lesser extent), but without such high damage and high recoil. Then you have:
HMG vs. skulk: maybe equal, but HMG is expensive
Shotgun: great vs. fade and skulk, rubbish vs. onos (you don't want to wait 'till he's close anyway!)
Hydra: enough armour that you don't want to attack with a shotty, but grenades work well vs. structures
Explosives do more damage vs. static targets than players/mobile characters (maybe can make grenade spam less of a horror to skulks than in NS1).
Glad to hear the pistol's still got its uses! ;)
It would be nice if the skulk had an attack which dealt bonus damage against Structures. It is intuitive to make skulks more effective than normal at killing buildings because they are usually the ones who are doing it (because of their cheapness and combat ineffectiveness).
An analogy to Starcraft's zerglings can be made. They're really small so they can get a huge surround on buildings while being very cheap and ineffective individually. If they get a full surround, most buildings go down in less than 10 seconds (even the central buildings). Unless a Commander controlled building killer unit related to the MASC is created for the Aliens, the numbers type of advantage cannot be applied for NS2 because of course every skulk must be controlled by a player.
So for NS2, its either make a Tier 1 Structural type attack for skulks (or similarly cheap Tier 1 combat lifeform) or make a very cheap swarmable building killer unit controllable by the AComm.
If one doesn't want to make skulks the omni-lifeform by making them averagely good at everything and also good at killing buildings, allowing the AComm to replace individual skulks' bite attacks with a Structural attack for a small amount of resources would be a good choice. The flavor for this ability could be something as simple as serrated teeth vs. molar teeth, a special type of jaw configuration which is good at chewing through static chunks of metal but terrible at piercing flesh (perhaps increasing damage DoT ability which only works on static targets), or just removing the bite ability and adding in something like nanite killing chemical spray.
<!--quoteo(post=1773770:date=Jun 7 2010, 11:30 AM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Jun 7 2010, 11:30 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773770"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=1773697:date=Jun 7 2010, 12:37 AM:name=Rezyk)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rezyk @ Jun 7 2010, 12:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1773697"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
I don't understand why you don't follow Starcraft 2's lead and ditch the intermediate mapping layer of named damage types. Instead of a fade swipe reading "Does 60 heavy damage" (and having the player remember that Heavy means +40% vs armor), it would simply read "Does 60 damage (+24 versus armor)".
Having the explicit-named-types-layer makes more sense when you have a few types each representing many attacks, but you have tons of damage types each representing 2-3 attacks. Why bother the player with it?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good point. I wasn't thinking of bothering the player with it much at all anyways, but I think this is probably the way to go.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would definitely prefer "Fade swipe: 60 damage (+24 vs. Armored)" than having to multiply in my head (60x1.4 = ???). Even better would be "Fade swipe: 60 damage (+24 vs. Armored = 84 vs. Armored)", giving the base damage, bonus damage, and sum damage.
I don't understand why you don't follow Starcraft 2's lead and ditch the intermediate mapping layer of named damage types. Instead of a fade swipe reading "Does 60 heavy damage" (and having the player remember that Heavy means +40% vs armor), it would simply read "Does 60 damage (+24 versus armor)".
Having the explicit-named-types-layer makes more sense when you have a few types each representing many attacks, but you have tons of damage types each representing 2-3 attacks. Why bother the player with it?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good point. I wasn't thinking of bothering the player with it much at all anyways, but I think this is probably the way to go.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nice.
Also, if there is any potential for bodypart-based damage modifiers, you may want to consider structuring things to avoid any "+dmg versus armored" attacks (sticking to -dmg versus armored). For example, if the onos forearms are considered armored and his stomach is not, you lose a lot of intuitiveness by having the shotgun be more effective on the forearms ("aim for the armor plates!"). It should always be the same or better to target unarmored flesh instead.
Fallout crotch shot on the other hand *Ouch*
So you have a shotgun, that is cool, now lets pick up these red tipped shells. Now I have an EXPLOSIVE shotgun.
Now I am not expecting this will be put in game. But if I could become Duke Nukem with an explosive shelled Shotgun I would be a happy man.
This does fall in-line with what others have said in this thread though that there could be different ammo-types and explosive tipped bullets are a no-brainer as a simple way to increase damage of most ammo.
The only con I have with this is I can see players QQ'ing that they are getting slaughtered and not understanding this is because of an ammo upgrade but yeah don't know how to make it easy to distinguish those type of things. I would probably do the same if I just walked into the game and started getting raped by enhanced upgrades that were not easily noticeable visually.
I did find the whole A,B,C,D part of the blog post a bit confusing, might of been easier to make reference to some basic terms like "marine" "turret" "armor" etc.
I also disagreed with this:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->By contrast, without variable damage types (payoffs), everything just does damage and there is little maneuvering, tactics or interest. I just build more and better units and so do you. They fight, and whomever built more wins.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have played with some very skilled players in NS and with that in mind there is still going to be a significant amount of variation on how skilled your team-mates are as this is not a generic A.I. based game.
While the rest sounds interesting and does require a few re-reads to understand. If it's pulled off the way you say it is and is clear and understandable it should be good.
Of course once we play the Alpha etc I'm sure you guys will take on the community feedback to look at tweaks or way it could be enhanced and hopefully by consensus we should have some winning damage enhancement systems.
big pointu bullets = good against armor.. shotguns = small round bullets..
just my 5c =)
The reality of NS is very often it's up to 1 marine to kill 1 or more aliens.
The alien team is designed so 1 alien can stand alone (without health, ammo, catalyst, or special equipment or weapons) and they're fast enough to get away if their health dips below 150.
Even in a big hallway you get at most 3 people shooting at the same super armored aliens, and their isn't a lot of time before they close the gap at a high rate of speed to kill your group with extremely overpowered melee attacks.
============
Bottom line is:
1. There is <u>no time</u> to figure out what type of bullet or weapon you need to kill a random alien, or a room full of random aliens. Therefore <u>every marine weapon needs to be effective at CLOSE range just like the alien melee attacks</u> (because at close range IT IS 1 ON 1). The game should be balanced based on better accuracy, rate of fire, damage, and splash-damage at <u>longer range</u>, i.e. the pistol should be effective ONLY at close range (where longer distances result in less damage and accuracy).
2. There is no time to organize your marines to say "ok you and you use nerve gas grenades, and you and you use HI-EX grenades, and we need 4 people with shotguns, 10 with miniguns..." ya right that's a waste of time and the minute a handful of marines die your team has been compromised well over 80% because their's going to be a shortage of special niche weapons to kill a randomly attacking alien, that's only vulnerable to weapon X. I mean look at NS1... the choice is simple with everyone with HMGs and it's still not deadly enough (because you need a large number of marines in the same spot that know how to shoot THE SAME ALIEN... and how often are you that lucky :P).
3. In NS2 everyone has a personal choice for weapons. This is good and bad. For example if too many people are using the same weapons, then your team will only be effective against a certain range of alien lifeforms. At the other extreme if too many people have too large of a variety of weaponry, then their won't be enough "special" guns in the same room to kill the alien that is only hurt by this particular type of weapon.
Marines need weapons that can kill the aliens before they can run away. If you cannot achieve the kill then all your doing is wasting ammunition.
I'm thinking the opposite. I think game is getting more and more simple.