fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1930819:date=Apr 27 2012, 10:30 PM:name=Yuuki)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Yuuki @ Apr 27 2012, 10:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I wouldn't count pres as a real resource like gas, in starcraft managing your gas is something tricky that a lot of players don't do well: put guys in gas at the right time, remove them when not needed, balance gas and mineral ratio in function of the build. Also gas intake is a strong indicator of build order and it's important to scout it. Nothing like that with pres, you can't manage them and they indicate nothing in terms of build order. It's more like a separate pool or something.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't disagree with you, but following that line of reasoning to its logical end would lead to the conclusion that none of the NS2 resources are a "real resource".
The main problems I see with NS2's balance so far come strongly from in the RTS economy.
The p-res and t-res issue comes out of the fact that p-res in a comm station or hive has a different scope of possibilities compared to p-res for an fps player. There needs to be a very structured understanding that p-res comm/khamm abilities should not be very different in their scope compared to an fps player spending p-res.
I would much rather have energy abilities for the inherently RTS-type comm/khamm abilities. Give Tech Points and or PNs an energy value. This would relate territory control for both sides with their materials/research economy (t-res) and action-upkeep capabilities (energy). Command p-res abilities would be limited to consumable/disposable actions like pre-buying lifeform eggs, cyst rupturing, drifter creation, meds and ammo, buying weapons and items, buying macs.
Controlling tech points and/or power-nodes suddenly has more value again. It prevents turtling as upkeep ability diminishes for scans/umbra/nano-shield/nano-build and other RTS-level abilities. This would greatly diminish the value of comm-switching and also bring back more of the comm-player support relationship. Having multiple Obs or Crags would be for maintaining energy reserve but not for increased energy income. Energy income would be similar to res.
This would strongly define the RTS resources of the game. There could even be dual requirements of t-res and energy for some upgrades/researches/purchases like augmentation or flame-throwers. This could help with making more trade-offs and control pacing.
Complexity just needs strong themes and guidelines to create an intuitive experience. The recent khamm changes have brought a lot of good intuitive aspects in that really are helping.
<!--quoteo(post=1930822:date=Apr 27 2012, 10:40 PM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Apr 27 2012, 10:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930822"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't disagree with you, but following that line of reasoning to its logical end would lead to the conclusion that none of the NS2 resources are a "real resource".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, you can certainly justify at least one resource using that logic.
The falsity of our multi-resource system is rather that you can't manage it in parts, you only manage resource towers which provide both T.res and P.res and never make a concious decision either way. This is not necessarily bad per se (although it kinda feels weird) if the intention is to always keep certain things in the game. For example, it's not unreasonable to think that meds and ammo are things that we would like commanders to feel compelled to drop and P.res is one way of achieving this. NS1 public commanders who sank all their resources into tech and structures and forewent player-support were quite frustrating to play under. NS2 commanders who neglect player-support have no excuse by comparison.
As it stands, I don't really endorse the multi-resource system because it's achieving a relatively small goal (emphasise player-support) at the expense of more important one (streamlined economy and strategic tradeoffs), as generalised by Fana. I'm not even that sure that P.res was introduced to emphasise player-support because I would have thought that nano-shield would also live under this umbrella and that costs energy unless UWE are wanting to emphasise things really specifically.
The statement behind confined-use resources is something along the lines of "X gives you ability Y-only because I want ability Y to feature in every game". While this probably leads to a wider set of tools being implemented in each round, the tools themselves become repetitive and false-choices. A good comm will ALWAYS nano-shield his marines, ALWAYS drop meds and ammo and ALWAYS scan when possible. Likewise a good khamm will ALWAYS umbra, ALWAYS mist etc. Pooling the energy or P.res would make it less obvious - perhaps a comm would forego nano-shield and scans for med-spamming or perhaps a kham would play the role of speedy-gardener instead of structure-supporter.
Anyway, probably a bit of a digression but it all falls under 'Simplicity for the sake of Complexity'.
I prefer wall jump to bhop because it seems to me to be considerably more dynamic and allow for a larger diversity of situations, it is as (or at last to me less) unintuitive as bhop but allows for differences in engagement based on terrain (open terrain tends for favour marines while corridors tend to favour skulks). It also makes one think more than when using bhop. Since you can only propel yourself off walls you have to take their positions into account in planning where you will end up after a flythrough of a group of marines since ending up in the open far from any wall is now proportionally more deadly. It also encourages the use of walls which is a lot more skulky then hopping about on the ground like a cracked up hare.
EDIT: Was not the primary purpose of p-res to allow for balance through varying player counts? The reason that NS2 should be an fps first and RTS second seems pretty simple to me; the goal of a game is to be fun and there are only 2 commanders and two whole teams of fps players. While perhaps competitive players might be willing to sacrifice design catering to the majority for a more competitive game the rest of us most likely do not feel that way and we are the ones providing 90% of the revenue and playerbase, let mods cater to the competitive scene the regular game should be kept enjoyable in pubs. However if they can manage both then all the power to them!
<!--quoteo(post=1930822:date=Apr 27 2012, 05:40 PM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Apr 27 2012, 05:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930822"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't disagree with you, but following that line of reasoning to its logical end would lead to the conclusion that none of the NS2 resources are a "real resource".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
T-res certainly is, one has many equally valid choices for how to invest it that alter the gameplay and tactics of the entire team.
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited April 2012
<!--quoteo(post=1930819:date=Apr 27 2012, 10:30 PM:name=Yuuki)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Yuuki @ Apr 27 2012, 10:30 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930819"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I wouldn't count pres as a real resource like gas, in starcraft managing your gas is something tricky that a lot of players don't do well: put guys in gas at the right time, remove them when not needed, balance gas and mineral ratio in function of the build. Also gas intake is a strong indicator of build order and it's important to scout it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--quoteo(post=1930986:date=Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM:name=1dominator1)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1dominator1 @ Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->T-res certainly is, one has many equally valid choices for how to invest it that alter the gameplay and tactics of the entire team.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You sure about that?
Collecting resources in ns2 (ns1 was the same... something that could be improved on) is basically a game of Pokemon -- gotta catch em all. There aren't really any penalties for over-extending, so you simply want to build as many harvesters as the aliens will allow you to build. For the same reason, the opposing team can't use your amount of harvesters to guage what strat/build order you're going for.
<!--quoteo(post=1930986:date=Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM:name=1dominator1)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1dominator1 @ Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I prefer wall jump to bhop because it seems to me to be considerably more dynamic and allow for a larger diversity of situations, it is as (or at last to me less) unintuitive as bhop but allows for differences in engagement based on terrain (open terrain tends for favour marines while corridors tend to favour skulks). It also makes one think more than when using bhop.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> NS1 had both bunnyhopping and walljumping (albeit in a different form). Playing skulk in ns2 feels like wearing a straightjacket compared to ns1. It certainly isn't "more dynamic", nor does it allow for "a larger diversity of situations", or any other combination of buzzwords.
<!--quoteo(post=1930986:date=Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM:name=1dominator1)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1dominator1 @ Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->EDIT: Was not the primary purpose of p-res to allow for balance through varying player counts? The reason that NS2 should be an fps first and RTS second seems pretty simple to me; the goal of a game is to be fun and there are only 2 commanders and two whole teams of fps players.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I already explained this a few posts up and it is not a case of "competitive vs. public" (nor is it ever really a case of competitive vs. public play, but certain people like to pretend it is).
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->As it stands, I don't really endorse the multi-resource system because it's achieving a relatively small goal (emphasise player-support) at the expense of more important one (streamlined economy and strategic tradeoffs), as generalised by Fana. I'm not even that sure that P.res was introduced to emphasise player-support because I would have thought that nano-shield would also live under this umbrella and that costs energy unless UWE are wanting to emphasise things really specifically.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed, really wish they'd rework the resource model.
On the RTS side your resources are generally inside your base and protected. When you expand out it is generally where the resources are and considered another base. In NS you have resource areas that have no strategic value.
What about upping the node output but only putting them in tech points? Maybe making them as productive as now but have 3 nodes per tech point (we could make different tech points have different node counts or production values, like starting points have 3 and the extension bases 1-2).
Might improve things? At least it would force expansion and managing your Res because taking res is a very big commitment since you have to guard it and it also gives you a staging point to advance on the enemy while denying them Res and Tech.
We might have just got used to RT points scattered everywhere, ignoring what RTS games do. Double node in NS1 was generally always a contested area and a good marine relocate.
So..taking this back to my original idea (without reading every post)...
Has there ever been a build where everything comes from 1 resource? If I was designing the game in a sandbox I would start with that, then find the points where it *should* branch off to more than 1 resource (for encouraging strategy, scouting options etc). If there are multiple resources, they should probably be tied to multiple parts of the map that are taken by teams (like minerals/gas in starcraft) so that strategies can be shown/hidden in that way. Like fana mentioned, the current goal is to take as many res towers as you want, and they're internally split 2 or 3 ways, so the opposing team has no way to scout you based on your economy (whereas in starcraft you count the number of gas geysers being mined, the number of workers on minerals, the number of minerals/gas left at a particular spot, and you can make reads based on all of that). The res model is complex in areas that don't benefit gameplay in any obvious sense.
It's great to theorize about how the game's resource model should work, but it's obvious that a lot of problems in accessibility and balancing stem from the current resource model (which was not designed iteratively through testing like I'm encouraging). I don't see why we can't wait for the shift/exosuit, and then take a build or two to overhaul the res model, though...there's still hope for this :)
Comments
I don't disagree with you, but following that line of reasoning to its logical end would lead to the conclusion that none of the NS2 resources are a "real resource".
The p-res and t-res issue comes out of the fact that p-res in a comm station or hive has a different scope of possibilities compared to p-res for an fps player. There needs to be a very structured understanding that p-res comm/khamm abilities should not be very different in their scope compared to an fps player spending p-res.
I would much rather have energy abilities for the inherently RTS-type comm/khamm abilities. Give Tech Points and or PNs an energy value. This would relate territory control for both sides with their materials/research economy (t-res) and action-upkeep capabilities (energy). Command p-res abilities would be limited to consumable/disposable actions like pre-buying lifeform eggs, cyst rupturing, drifter creation, meds and ammo, buying weapons and items, buying macs.
Controlling tech points and/or power-nodes suddenly has more value again. It prevents turtling as upkeep ability diminishes for scans/umbra/nano-shield/nano-build and other RTS-level abilities. This would greatly diminish the value of comm-switching and also bring back more of the comm-player support relationship. Having multiple Obs or Crags would be for maintaining energy reserve but not for increased energy income. Energy income would be similar to res.
This would strongly define the RTS resources of the game. There could even be dual requirements of t-res and energy for some upgrades/researches/purchases like augmentation or flame-throwers. This could help with making more trade-offs and control pacing.
Complexity just needs strong themes and guidelines to create an intuitive experience. The recent khamm changes have brought a lot of good intuitive aspects in that really are helping.
Well, you can certainly justify at least one resource using that logic.
The falsity of our multi-resource system is rather that you can't manage it in parts, you only manage resource towers which provide both T.res and P.res and never make a concious decision either way. This is not necessarily bad per se (although it kinda feels weird) if the intention is to always keep certain things in the game. For example, it's not unreasonable to think that meds and ammo are things that we would like commanders to feel compelled to drop and P.res is one way of achieving this. NS1 public commanders who sank all their resources into tech and structures and forewent player-support were quite frustrating to play under. NS2 commanders who neglect player-support have no excuse by comparison.
As it stands, I don't really endorse the multi-resource system because it's achieving a relatively small goal (emphasise player-support) at the expense of more important one (streamlined economy and strategic tradeoffs), as generalised by Fana. I'm not even that sure that P.res was introduced to emphasise player-support because I would have thought that nano-shield would also live under this umbrella and that costs energy unless UWE are wanting to emphasise things really specifically.
The statement behind confined-use resources is something along the lines of "X gives you ability Y-only because I want ability Y to feature in every game". While this probably leads to a wider set of tools being implemented in each round, the tools themselves become repetitive and false-choices. A good comm will ALWAYS nano-shield his marines, ALWAYS drop meds and ammo and ALWAYS scan when possible. Likewise a good khamm will ALWAYS umbra, ALWAYS mist etc. Pooling the energy or P.res would make it less obvious - perhaps a comm would forego nano-shield and scans for med-spamming or perhaps a kham would play the role of speedy-gardener instead of structure-supporter.
Anyway, probably a bit of a digression but it all falls under 'Simplicity for the sake of Complexity'.
EDIT: Was not the primary purpose of p-res to allow for balance through varying player counts? The reason that NS2 should be an fps first and RTS second seems pretty simple to me; the goal of a game is to be fun and there are only 2 commanders and two whole teams of fps players. While perhaps competitive players might be willing to sacrifice design catering to the majority for a more competitive game the rest of us most likely do not feel that way and we are the ones providing 90% of the revenue and playerbase, let mods cater to the competitive scene the regular game should be kept enjoyable in pubs. However if they can manage both then all the power to them!
<!--quoteo(post=1930822:date=Apr 27 2012, 05:40 PM:name=fanatic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (fanatic @ Apr 27 2012, 05:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930822"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't disagree with you, but following that line of reasoning to its logical end would lead to the conclusion that none of the NS2 resources are a "real resource".<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
T-res certainly is, one has many equally valid choices for how to invest it that alter the gameplay and tactics of the entire team.
<!--quoteo(post=1930986:date=Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM:name=1dominator1)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1dominator1 @ Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->T-res certainly is, one has many equally valid choices for how to invest it that alter the gameplay and tactics of the entire team.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You sure about that?
Collecting resources in ns2 (ns1 was the same... something that could be improved on) is basically a game of Pokemon -- gotta catch em all. There aren't really any penalties for over-extending, so you simply want to build as many harvesters as the aliens will allow you to build. For the same reason, the opposing team can't use your amount of harvesters to guage what strat/build order you're going for.
<!--quoteo(post=1930986:date=Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM:name=1dominator1)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1dominator1 @ Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I prefer wall jump to bhop because it seems to me to be considerably more dynamic and allow for a larger diversity of situations, it is as (or at last to me less) unintuitive as bhop but allows for differences in engagement based on terrain (open terrain tends for favour marines while corridors tend to favour skulks). It also makes one think more than when using bhop.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS1 had both bunnyhopping and walljumping (albeit in a different form). Playing skulk in ns2 feels like wearing a straightjacket compared to ns1. It certainly isn't "more dynamic", nor does it allow for "a larger diversity of situations", or any other combination of buzzwords.
<!--quoteo(post=1930986:date=Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM:name=1dominator1)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (1dominator1 @ Apr 28 2012, 08:22 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1930986"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->EDIT: Was not the primary purpose of p-res to allow for balance through varying player counts? The reason that NS2 should be an fps first and RTS second seems pretty simple to me; the goal of a game is to be fun and there are only 2 commanders and two whole teams of fps players.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I already explained this a few posts up and it is not a case of "competitive vs. public" (nor is it ever really a case of competitive vs. public play, but certain people like to pretend it is).
Agreed, really wish they'd rework the resource model.
What about upping the node output but only putting them in tech points? Maybe making them as productive as now but have 3 nodes per tech point (we could make different tech points have different node counts or production values, like starting points have 3 and the extension bases 1-2).
Might improve things? At least it would force expansion and managing your Res because taking res is a very big commitment since you have to guard it and it also gives you a staging point to advance on the enemy while denying them Res and Tech.
We might have just got used to RT points scattered everywhere, ignoring what RTS games do. Double node in NS1 was generally always a contested area and a good marine relocate.
Has there ever been a build where everything comes from 1 resource? If I was designing the game in a sandbox I would start with that, then find the points where it *should* branch off to more than 1 resource (for encouraging strategy, scouting options etc). If there are multiple resources, they should probably be tied to multiple parts of the map that are taken by teams (like minerals/gas in starcraft) so that strategies can be shown/hidden in that way. Like fana mentioned, the current goal is to take as many res towers as you want, and they're internally split 2 or 3 ways, so the opposing team has no way to scout you based on your economy (whereas in starcraft you count the number of gas geysers being mined, the number of workers on minerals, the number of minerals/gas left at a particular spot, and you can make reads based on all of that). The res model is complex in areas that don't benefit gameplay in any obvious sense.
It's great to theorize about how the game's resource model should work, but it's obvious that a lot of problems in accessibility and balancing stem from the current resource model (which was not designed iteratively through testing like I'm encouraging). I don't see why we can't wait for the shift/exosuit, and then take a build or two to overhaul the res model, though...there's still hope for this :)