<!--quoteo(post=2028713:date=Nov 19 2012, 10:45 PM:name=Babaganoush)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babaganoush @ Nov 19 2012, 10:45 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2028713"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Maps are one thing. I have yet to see Marines win in that Lava Flows map.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I won a game as marine comm on that map earlier today. Rush to and hold pipeworks, get phasegates up, push to lava falls, and then hold those 3 locations until you have maxed out all tech except exos. Avoid exos on that map, it's just way too big.
Some of the maps are outright terrible in terms of balance. Aside from that, how about we start by fixing the 6-minute onos egg first. It has been around many weeks now and there is an enormous consensus within both the pub and competitive community that it needs addressing. Unfortunately UWE has only recently picked up on this, and the solution they will bring forward will no doubt again be one that solves the symptom rather than the underlying cause.
The easiest fix really would be working with maturation time in regards to 2 hive onos egg (2 matured hives instead of just 2 hives), in combination with buffs to the fade and a general viability increase of single hive strategies.
I only play pubs but I've been played quite a bit since this came out on steam. This biggest change I've noticed on pubs especially as far as alien power is the new regen combined with lerks. Admittedly they needed a small boost but a well played one is almost unkillable by regular machine gun fire. I've had 4-5 marines shooting at me as long as there's some vertical room to maneuver you can easily dash off for 20 seconds heal to full and go back to chomp and harass. Don't care for regen on Onos but I tend to play on the larger servers isn't hard for a group of upgraded marines to whittle a lone onos at the forefront quickly which defeats their purpose if you need to run off frequently.
<!--quoteo(post=2028775:date=Nov 19 2012, 02:47 PM:name=Xarius)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Xarius @ Nov 19 2012, 02:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2028775"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Some of the maps are outright terrible in terms of balance. Aside from that, how about we start by fixing the 6-minute onos egg first. It has been around many weeks now and there is an enormous consensus within both the pub and competitive community that it needs addressing. Unfortunately UWE has only recently picked up on this, and the solution they will bring forward will no doubt again be one that solves the symptom rather than the underlying cause.
The easiest fix really would be working with maturation time in regards to 2 hive onos egg (2 matured hives instead of just 2 hives), in combination with buffs to the fade and a general viability increase of single hive strategies.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i don't like the maturation time idea because then marines would have to go around with a theoretical timer 'how long before onos?'... it might work for competitive, but still seems a bit clumsy.
i think alien would be fine if tres onos was entirely removed, but as a compromise i think tres onos at 3 hives would work - because at least it's easy to know when you can expect onos, it should be very apparent to the marines when/where the aliens have their 3rd hive and at that point the aliens are ahead and arguably deserving a reward like tres onos. this is contrary to the current tres onos where alien can contently sit on 2 hives and 3 extractors while the marines have 80% of the map - then pop onos and usually win back the entire map comfortably.
<!--quoteo(post=2028790:date=Nov 19 2012, 04:10 PM:name=tarquinbb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tarquinbb @ Nov 19 2012, 04:10 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2028790"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->i don't like the maturation time idea because then marines would have to go around with a theoretical timer 'how long before onos?'... it might work for competitive, but still seems a bit clumsy.
i think alien would be fine if tres onos was entirely removed, but as a compromise i think tres onos at 3 hives would work - because at least it's easy to know when you can expect onos, it should be very apparent to the marines when/where the aliens have their 3rd hive and at that point the aliens are ahead and arguably deserving a reward like tres onos. this is contrary to the current tres onos where alien can contently sit on 2 hives and 3 extractors while the marines have 80% of the map - then pop onos and usually win back the entire map comfortably.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The most elegant solution I saw so far to the whole early onos was a suggestion that Alien Commander can only Tres drop those lifeforms which were previously "researched" by one of the alien players evolving into it by using its own pres.
So Onos egg could be dropped only AFTER one of the player went Onos with his own pres.
The only major balance issue right now is the early Onos. If you eliminate that factor, the games would be just fine (well, that and the idiocy of Armories not being limited to 1/CC and Glancing Bites <i>still</i> being incredibly stupid--BUT HEY, NO HIDDEN MODIFIERS GUYS). All matches hinge on right now is whether or not the Marines are competent enough to keep the Aliens below 5 res nodes so they can tech up fast enough to kill the TRes Onos when it drops. If they fail at keeping the Aliens under 5 nodes, the game is more or less done unless the Onos is astonishingly bad.
I liked the idea of glancing bites when they were introduced, but that's another thing which I wouldn't mind being changed back to the way it was. While it isn't quite the "lawnmower mouth" effect of previous builds, it really removes a lot of aiming skill from skulk IMO, makes armor upgrades less meaningful, and diminishes the value of the 1 para - 2 bites mechanic which I actually enjoyed a lot early game.
Why fret so much about balance when this game is clearly so assymetric?
For me the real answer is out of the box. Create an additional game mode (let´s call it "mirror mode") where the two teams have to play 2 rounds, one as Marines and then reversing roles as Aliens in the same map. Only random element that could be considered would be the starting spots so to avoid hindsight on the 2nd round. Come up with a points system (shouldnt be too difficult, i.e. ressources gathered, tech researched, uptime per base or hive, kills etc etc and/or a weighed combo of all those). Ensure the point counters for each team are clearly visible and voila. All of a sudden both teams have exactly the same chances to win and therefore have all to play for and to keep motivation while playing for any of the two sides.
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
It's hilarious how easily aliens can harass with going camouflage first now. The recent camo buff means that aliens can move while being 100% cloaked, with the marines requiring constant scanning or observatory spam to not repeatedly die.
How to win in build 230.
Immediately get the camo upgrade. Have your skulks stealth harass and repeatedly take down Marine extractors. Punish every aggressive Marine push. Repeat until Onos. Kill low-tech Marine Base with Onos.
<!--quoteo(post=2030299:date=Nov 20 2012, 01:58 PM:name=Viajero)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Viajero @ Nov 20 2012, 01:58 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030299"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Why fret so much about balance when this game is clearly so assymetric?
For me the real answer is out of the box. Create an additional game mode (let´s call it "mirror mode") where the two teams have to play 2 rounds, one as Marines and then reversing roles as Aliens in the same map. Come up with a points system (shouldnt be too difficult, i.e. ressources gathered, tech researched, uptime per base or hive, kills etc etc and/or a weighed combo of all those). Ensure the point counters for each team are clearly visible and voila. All of a sudden both teams have exactly the same chances to win and therefore have all to play for and to keep motivation while playing for any of the two sides.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Smells like Left4Dead. People there used to think that the game was balanced "because you play both sides" regardless of how weak the Infected were compared to the Survivors.
It wasn't true then and shoe-horning NS2 into L4D's model won't make NS2 balanced either.
Predators in AvP2 had a cloak where you were 100% cloaked to marines when standing still but was slightly visible when moving. I think this concept is what they should be looking for rather than perma cloak. Despite the differences, aliens could see preds through their cloak, marines had motion scanner and preds had an energy system that slowly drained when cloaked.
There seems to be very few downsides to camo now other than it takes away silence but if you use camo you don't really need it anyway.
<!--quoteo(post=2030319:date=Nov 20 2012, 07:11 PM:name=RaZDaZ)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RaZDaZ @ Nov 20 2012, 07:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030319"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->an energy system that slowly drained when cloaked.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This might work. Adren + cloak for longer cloaking.
<!--quoteo(post=2030316:date=Nov 20 2012, 08:10 PM:name=MMZ_Torak)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MMZ_Torak @ Nov 20 2012, 08:10 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030316"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Smells like Left4Dead. People there used to think that the game was balanced "because you play both sides" regardless of how weak the Infected were compared to the Survivors.
It wasn't true then and shoe-horning NS2 into L4D's model won't make NS2 balanced either.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whats wrong with L4D2? People there "used" to think? Man, L4D2 was and still is one of the most successfull games in the history of Valve/Steam. And the 2 round mirror mode balance it is based on is precisely part of the appeal of the game and its success story. I am not saying that NS2 should copycat blindly, but if something really works well it merits some attention.
L4D2 is perfectly balanced due to the reverse 2 rounds in its "versus" mode. No one complains about balance in L4D2 I assure you precisely because both teams reverse roles in a completely balanced mirror way and earn points under very similar circumstances. The main point is that balance is not achieved by actually balancing the abilities of each team (that effort is wasted and utterly futile if you are trying to create a rich, stimulating and varied assymetric game) but by playing the game in 2 rounds reversing roles. NS2 is so assymetric that there will be always bitter debates like this about direct balancing. Direct balancing is going to take ages to achieve. Let developers get it as accurate as they can (which probably will never be balanced really) and then implement a 2 round, point based, reverse role game mode to achieve a truly 100% balanced match.
I dont see why this could not work here aswell. Just make it an additional and optional game mode if you insist. No need to force anyone.
L4D2´s assymetric balance model via 2 rounds has been tested and used for ages. Not just in L4D2 no (L4D2 does not have the "copyright" to the 2 rounds mirror game mode), but in many other assymetric games that use similar mirror logic, pc based or not. Traditional wargames for example. It works. Why not here? Just make it an additional and optional game mode.
Some may think this will actually double the duration of a game, and that would be entirely... true! But how many of us here just play "just one" game and then leave? Thought so! :p And even if you leave, someone will enter. In game player turnover will always be there I am afraid... it is an inherent feature of online gaming, either with the current unbalanced system or with a 2 round mirror mode.
camo is a game changer, but it's not necessarily OP.
if you discover that the aliens went shade hive/camo first then your commander needs to use more scans to help you.
you can also occasionally tap fire around you (i caught several camo skulks in an earlier game while doing this, and i had 45 kills 3 deaths by the end). remember that if a skulk gets revealed while cloaked, he's ridiculously vulnerable and basically a free kill.
camo is just so exciting and fun... why do you want to make it USELESS again by making it visible or drain energy? it's not like spy in tf2 - you have scan and obs to detect them.
<!--quoteo(post=2030433:date=Nov 20 2012, 03:53 PM:name=Viajero)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Viajero @ Nov 20 2012, 03:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030433"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Whats wrong with L4D2? People there "used" to think? Man, L4D2 was and still is one of the most successfull games in the history of Valve/Steam. And the 2 round mirror mode balance it is based on is precisely part of the appeal of the game and its success story. I am not saying that NS2 should copycat blindly, but if something really works well it merits some attention.
L4D2 is perfectly balanced due to the reverse 2 rounds in its "versus" mode. No one complains about balance in L4D2 I assure you precisely because both teams reverse roles in a completely balanced mirror way and earn points under very similar circumstances. The main point is that balance is not achieved by actually balancing the abilities of each team (that effort is wasted and utterly futile if you are trying to create a rich, stimulating and varied assymetric game) but by playing the game in 2 rounds reversing roles. NS2 is so assymetric that there will be always bitter debates like this about direct balancing. Direct balancing is going to take ages to achieve. Let developers get it as accurate as they can (which probably will never be balanced really) and then implement a 2 round, point based, reverse role game mode to achieve a truly 100% balanced match.
I dont see why this could not work here aswell. Just make it an additional and optional game mode if you insist. No need to force anyone.
L4D2´s assymetric balance model via 2 rounds has been tested and used for ages. Not just in L4D2 no (L4D2 does not have the "copyright" to the 2 rounds mirror game mode), but in many other assymetric games that use similar mirror logic, pc based or not. Traditional wargames for example. It works. Why not here? Just make it an additional and optional game mode.
Some may think this will actually double the duration of a game, and that would be entirely... true! But how many of us here just play "just one" game and then leave? Thought so! :p And even if you leave, someone will enter. In game player turnover will always be there I am afraid... it is an inherent feature of online gaming, either with the current unbalanced system or with a 2 round mirror mode.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
l;opve l4d2 but man oh MAN do people rage so much in that game. i seriously havent finished a complete vs game in about a year. after the 2nd round the other team rq's almost every single game...
<!--quoteo(post=2030433:date=Nov 20 2012, 03:53 PM:name=Viajero)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Viajero @ Nov 20 2012, 03:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030433"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Whats wrong with L4D2? People there "used" to think? Man, L4D2 was and still is one of the most successfull games in the history of Valve/Steam. And the 2 round mirror mode balance it is based on is precisely part of the appeal of the game and its success story. I am not saying that NS2 should copycat blindly, but if something really works well it merits some attention.
L4D2 is perfectly balanced due to the reverse 2 rounds in its "versus" mode. No one complains about balance in L4D2 I assure you precisely because both teams reverse roles in a completely balanced mirror way and earn points under very similar circumstances. The main point is that balance is not achieved by actually balancing the abilities of each team (that effort is wasted and utterly futile if you are trying to create a rich, stimulating and varied assymetric game) but by playing the game in 2 rounds reversing roles. NS2 is so assymetric that there will be always bitter debates like this about direct balancing. Direct balancing is going to take ages to achieve. Let developers get it as accurate as they can (which probably will never be balanced really) and then implement a 2 round, point based, reverse role game mode to achieve a truly 100% balanced match.
I dont see why this could not work here aswell. Just make it an additional and optional game mode if you insist. No need to force anyone.
L4D2´s assymetric balance model via 2 rounds has been tested and used for ages. Not just in L4D2 no (L4D2 does not have the "copyright" to the 2 rounds mirror game mode), but in many other assymetric games that use similar mirror logic, pc based or not. Traditional wargames for example. It works. Why not here? Just make it an additional and optional game mode.
Some may think this will actually double the duration of a game, and that would be entirely... true! But how many of us here just play "just one" game and then leave? Thought so! :p And even if you leave, someone will enter. In game player turnover will always be there I am afraid... it is an inherent feature of online gaming, either with the current unbalanced system or with a 2 round mirror mode.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There's a lot of inaccuracy in this post about L4D and how it worked and didn't work and how 2 rounds does not automatically balance a game like this. Firstly, one side was blatantly overpowered, the survivors.
The survival rate in vanilla configurations between two teams that were competent was around 80% based on vanilla tournament results and casuals over a couple years. NS2 doesn't have that problem as bad as a 6:4 matchup is the best that can be expected of such a game, and that's what we're seeing back and forth between these updates. The win rate isn't as much the problem as is the compression of tech trees and such that are unique to this game. But 2 rounds certainly will *not* fix the imbalances the game is left with.
The entire competitive community for L4D 1 and 2 used competitive configurations. All of the people that actually got good at the game, played in scrims and tournaments, or anything of the like, used community made balancing configs because of how imbalanced vanilla is. If playing both sides made for a balanced game they would not have been necessary. Playing an 8:2 game then a 2:8 game doesn't make the matchup balanced or fun, and it actually makes less of the game matter for the outcome of the match. Playing as survivors in vanilla steamrolling the SI 80% of the time means the only contentious point of the game is that little 20%, handing the other team the same advantage the next round might even out the numbers, but it's still just that 20% of the points/territory/game time you're contending over. That's why in L4D vanilla matches that lasted for over an hour over 5 maps would, regardless of the gap in skill between teams, be decided by one part of one map which only involved around 100 points out of about 4000.
2 round games where the game is mismatched creates a game where only a small part of the gameplay actually matters, L4D is a perfect example of how 2 rounds does not in any way provide for a balanced competitive game, I say this as someone who was in the comp scene for L4D from the moment it was created and played in the largest tournaments that have existed for the game. 2 rounds is still necessary for games like L4D, CS, and NS, but you cannot ignore direct balancing and in no way does the 2 round system actually do anything to preserve the competitive integrity of the game.
Crags are seriously powerful and make solo harassment pointless without a GL. Camo clicks in so fast that I've seen people duck behind an armoury to cloak from marines. Wall jump and celerity mean seriously fast aliens early game, and near impossible to hit when a good player.
So far aliens have won every single game I've played. I played marines and as aliens. Always same result.
<!--quoteo(post=2030511:date=Nov 20 2012, 10:53 PM:name=VeNeM)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VeNeM @ Nov 20 2012, 10:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030511"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->l;opve l4d2 but man oh MAN do people rage so much in that game. i seriously havent finished a complete vs game in about a year. after the 2nd round the other team rq's almost every single game...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont see any reason to have a different rate of player "in game" turnover here in NS2 than whatever we have today, even if we implemented a 2 round mirror game mode. Player turnover is what it is, and what we have today will probably not change much if you play two consecutive but independent games or if you play two linked games in an eventual mirror mode.
<!--quoteo(post=2030540:date=Nov 20 2012, 11:14 PM:name=Asmodies)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Asmodies @ Nov 20 2012, 11:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030540"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There's a lot of inaccuracy in this post about L4D and how it worked and didn't work and how 2 rounds does not automatically balance a game like this. Firstly, one side was blatantly overpowered, the survivors.
The survival rate in vanilla configurations between two teams that were competent was around 80% based on vanilla tournament results and casuals over a couple years. NS2 doesn't have that problem as bad as a 6:4 matchup is the best that can be expected of such a game, and that's what we're seeing back and forth between these updates. The win rate isn't as much the problem as is the compression of tech trees and such that are unique to this game. But 2 rounds certainly will *not* fix the imbalances the game is left with.
The entire competitive community for L4D 1 and 2 used competitive configurations. All of the people that actually got good at the game, played in scrims and tournaments, or anything of the like, used community made balancing configs because of how imbalanced vanilla is. If playing both sides made for a balanced game they would not have been necessary. Playing an 8:2 game then a 2:8 game doesn't make the matchup balanced or fun, and it actually makes less of the game matter for the outcome of the match. Playing as survivors in vanilla steamrolling the SI 80% of the time means the only contentious point of the game is that little 20%, handing the other team the same advantage the next round might even out the numbers, but it's still just that 20% of the points/territory/game time you're contending over. That's why in L4D vanilla matches that lasted for over an hour over 5 maps would, regardless of the gap in skill between teams, be decided by one part of one map which only involved around 100 points out of about 4000.
2 round games where the game is mismatched creates a game where only a small part of the gameplay actually matters, L4D is a perfect example of how 2 rounds does not in any way provide for a balanced competitive game, I say this as someone who was in the comp scene for L4D from the moment it was created and played in the largest tournaments that have existed for the game. 2 rounds is still necessary for games like L4D, CS, and NS, but you cannot ignore direct balancing and in no way does the 2 round system actually do anything to preserve the competitive integrity of the game.
-Kaizoku<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hi Kaizoku,
Not sure where you got the impression I was trying to justify that L4D or L4D2 are not assymetric or that one side is not overpowered. Not the case, that is precisely the point. My only and simple point is to suggest that whenever you have two sides that are clearly unbalanced and different, as it is indeed the case of L4D and L4D2 the way to bring balance to the equation is to have 2 rounds were both teams of players take turns using first the underpowered race and then the overpowered one, and proceed on an equivalent criteria base to extract points. As I mentioned above this basic principle has been used in many games since the discovery of "assymetric" encounters, and as I said the traditional wargame is a case in point. Many unbalanced wargame scenarios are often played by 2 players in 2 rounds each switching sides each time. L4D or L4D2 didnt discovered the wheel here.
You seem not to have been playing L4D2 in the recent years, but in my case, currently still an avid L4D2 gamer, and with around 1200 hours clocked in the game I believe I can also say a thing or 2 about it.
L4D2 simply does not need to strive for direct balance in the abilities of the two races as hard as NS2 tries. L4D2 "Versus" mode mode takes care of that by making both teams of players switch. Many competitive tournaments around in L4D2 at the moment use this "versus" mode in essence which de facto acknowledges and welcomes the intrinsic unbalance of the two different races. These tourneys also typically use mods that allow them to customize the way points are accounted for etc but that does not affect the Game balance, they are all still Versus mode. L4D and L4D2 are truly assymetric games in that not only the two races abilities are different but also in that you will find one side that seems to be much more overpowered than the other. The big news is that, in "Versus" mode, that is Ok!! Simply because the 2 round mirror mode takes care of the inherent imbalance of the two races.
There is no such thing as 80/20 or 60/40 in L4D2 simply because the Versus mode makes each player play with both races in any given game! As such each player does not get "assigned" a side. Each player IS actually both races in each game. Race winning fractions are meaningless. A certain team of players either wins the Versus or loses it. There are no points assigned each to Survivors or Special Infected, only to each team of players. This eliminates the main headache to finetune Team balance "ad nauseam". While certain sense that each side has to have certain advantages over the other there is no pressuring need to make that patologically perfect as each player will play as both.
In other words, in Versus mode the best team usually wins <u>irrespective of the mods used </u>because both teams will use those mods (or vanilla) equally taking turns!
There are two key terms that I believe you are mixing up here:
- Race Balance - Game Balance
In the current form of NS2 pub games the two above are one and the same. In L4D2 multiplayer Versus they are completely independent.
Race Balance is an issue both in L4D2 and in NS2 (At the moment Aliens "seem" to be OP in pub games and in L4D2 one "may" think that Survivors are OP). The difference is that L4D2 has managed to eliminate the need for strict Race Balance thanks to a game mode (Versus) that makes both teams of players play two rounds switching race in each, and therefore making players go through exactly the same situations as their opponents from scratch. Each team has an equal opportunity to earn points in exactly the same way as their opponents irrespective of Race Balance!
Here one of the most popular mod configurations for L4D2 used in tourneys, Promod: <a href="http://www.l4d2pro.com/" target="_blank">http://www.l4d2pro.com/</a>, <a href="http://www.l4dnation.com/confogl-and-other-configs/pro-mod-3-1-discussion/" target="_blank">http://www.l4dnation.com/confogl-and-other...3-1-discussion/</a>
It is a common misconception that "the mods" were required to balance the Multiplayer versus Game. Not true. Eventhough the mods actually modified plenty of the Special Infected and Survivors abilities for the sake of a ceratin "balance" they were in no way geared to alter the overarching Game Balance mechanism which is the Versus switch. There has never been a major L4D2 issue in Game Balance, only Race Balance. And the 2 round team switch "Versus" mode takes care of that: Wether you decide to use mods or not the Game itself remains Balanced as a whole. The issue of Race Balance in L4D2 loses completely its NS2 meaning if you have to switch sides in the same game. The Race Balance, or lack thereof, achieved by the mods in L4D2 can not change the fact that the teams play as both races in the same Game.
The key to remember is that both teams will "enjoy" these mods both as a direct beneficiaries and as a victims since both teams of players take turns using each race. And if there was no mod then both teams of players would also enjoy the vanilla game features both as a direct beneficiares and as a victims for the same reason. Still Full Balance. It is the mirror mode that primarily brings balance to the Game. Not the mods or the Races abilities.
The key to maintain intact the competitive integrity of the game resides in the way the victory point structure is proposed. L4D2 mechanics are quite simple in that regard and are pretty much fixed in pub games althugh the abovementioned modes have added an aditional layer of detail for competitive play (that has nothing to do with balance). In NS2 the level of detail where you could structure victory points around is enourmous... as I mentioned before you could issue points around base/hive uptime, enemy hive/base destroyed, ressources extracted, kills, tech etc. You can even conceivably allow the game host to select the type of victory points from a customizable menu.
The important thing to remember is that both teams will need to strive to achieve and maximize those victory points and that both will be measured 100% in the same way for each of the 2 rounds. This is tremendous competitive Game balance (with no Race balance strictly required).
As an aditional note I must state that NS2 competitive play seems to be acknowledging the need for some kind of "mirror" Versus mode (unless I am reading it wrong). It sufice to look at some of the rules of the recent Tourneys where each team has to play as both Marines and Aliens (i.e. switching side... rings a bell?) againts a given opponent: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=120706&view=findpost&p=1973782" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1973782</a> <a href="http://www.ensl.org/articles/714" target="_blank">http://www.ensl.org/articles/714</a>
Not sure where you got the impression I was trying to justify that L4D or L4D2 are not assymetric or that one side is not overpowered. Not the case, that is precisely the point. My only and simple point is to suggest that whenever you have two sides that are clearly unbalanced and different, as it is indeed the case of L4D and L4D2 the way to bring balance to the equation is to have 2 rounds were both teams of players take turns using first the underpowered race and then the overpowered one, and proceed on an equivalent criteria base to extract points. As I mentioned above this basic principle has been used in many games since the discovery of "assymetric" encounters, and as I said the traditional wargame is a case in point. Many unbalanced wargame scenarios are often played by 2 players in 2 rounds each switching sides each time. L4D or L4D2 didnt discovered the wheel here.
You seem not to have been playing L4D2 in the recent years, but in my case, currently still an avid L4D2 gamer, and with around 1200 hours clocked in the game I believe I can also say a thing or 2 about it.
L4D2 simply does not need to strive for direct balance in the abilities of the two races as hard as NS2 tries....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Still quite incorrect, no L4D tournament since the very first ones used vanilla config. Every tournament since then has used a competitive configuration aimed to directly balance the survivors against the infected, much as unknown worlds is trying to do with the marines and aliens. Not only have I asserted that matchup ratios do certainly exist, but I have already asserted why a 2 round mode does not take care of the problems such matchups present. To make it more clear, I will use the tactical nuke analogy.
One team is given tactical nuclear missiles that they can use instantly at the beginning of the round. The other team has one stick they all have to share. Is this game made to be competitive, enjoyable, or "fun" merely because the teams switch sides after one is nuked into oblivion?
In such a scenario and in vanilla L4D one or two, the difference in skill between two teams is not accurately represented, the team with the metaphorical nuke could be much worse than the team with the stick and vice versa, but you will never see that difference due to the direct imbalances between the sides the teams play. You would see teams in L4D that were miles apart in skill fighting over 25-100 points out of thousands, and that is directly cause by the imbalance between survivors and the infected. Likewise, a similar situation would arise in NS2 if balance between the rines and aliens were not kept as close to 50/50 potency as possible.
I get bored of easy wins when I play alien. I get frustrated because no matter how good our team is for a pub and have a decent comm, we would normally lose.
I think I'll just take a break from this game for a few builds...
<!--quoteo(post=2030759:date=Nov 20 2012, 05:50 PM:name=Babaganoush)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babaganoush @ Nov 20 2012, 05:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030759"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't know what to do.
I get bored of easy wins when I play alien. I get frustrated because no matter how good our team is for a pub and have a decent comm, we would normally lose.
I think I'll just take a break from this game for a few builds...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed, I'm done with this game for a few builds.
Aliens are base line too effective in unorganized play.
Marines need some godly coordination to be able to play at the same level.
<!--quoteo(post=2030739:date=Nov 21 2012, 02:28 AM:name=Asmodies)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Asmodies @ Nov 21 2012, 02:28 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030739"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Still quite incorrect, no L4D tournament since the very first ones used vanilla config. Every tournament since then has used a competitive configuration aimed to directly balance the survivors against the infected, much as unknown worlds is trying to do with the marines and aliens. Not only have I asserted that matchup ratios do certainly exist, but I have already asserted why a 2 round mode does not take care of the problems such matchups present. To make it more clear, I will use the tactical nuke analogy.
One team is given tactical nuclear missiles that they can use instantly at the beginning of the round. The other team has one stick they all have to share. Is this game made to be competitive, enjoyable, or "fun" merely because the teams switch sides after one is nuked into oblivion?
In such a scenario and in vanilla L4D one or two, the difference in skill between two teams is not accurately represented, the team with the metaphorical nuke could be much worse than the team with the stick and vice versa, but you will never see that difference due to the direct imbalances between the sides the teams play. You would see teams in L4D that were miles apart in skill fighting over 25-100 points out of thousands, and that is directly cause by the imbalance between survivors and the infected. Likewise, a similar situation would arise in NS2 if balance between the rines and aliens were not kept as close to 50/50 potency as possible.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In my previous post I also expain in detail some of the main L4D2 tournament mods, one of the most popular being Promod, which I have linked to and explained also above, that has been used extensively.
A proper mirrored game does not deal in absolutes like Nukes or like the current "Destroy all the bases/hives" in NS2.
In L4D2´s mirrored games it does not really matter if Survivors are so OP that ALWAYS make it to the safe house (your equivalent of the Nuke). What really matters to win the game is that your team does it in a more efficient way than your opponents do when you switch races with them! The only main issue with L4D2 in this regard was that the Vanilla point system is not accurate enough as you rightly point out. Therefore one of the major changes Promod and other tourney mods have introduced to ensure that you can measure how efficiently you play an inherently unbalanced game is by ensuring that points are earned not only for distance covered as Vanilla does but by many other factors including but not limited to Health remaining for example. Please understand that all these modded victory point conditions in no way affect the abilities or balance between the two races.
I repeat it does not matter if the races are unbalanced as long as the point structure makes the game inherently competitive. The mod also happens to change the abilities of the races, bugs/exploits and a number of other things for convenience of veteran players for the most part, but it does not change the fact that even if you didnt change each races abilities (as the NS2 community is discussing here) a mirrored game mode coupled with the right victory point structure can perfectly take care on its own of very very asymetric and unbalanced races. The main difference in how an accurate victory is assigned in L4D2 versus NS2 (pun intended) is not by making races balanced (L4D2 races are still quite unbalanced even after applying Promod) but by making the victory point system detailed and accurate enough so that you can see which team did better under a mirror scheme... and that is irrespetcive of the race balance.
Please also note that whereas pub games in NS2 are allegedly broken to some, that is strictly not the case in L4D2. Pub L4D2 Versus games are composed in its majority by servers that havent implemented Promod or any of the competitive mods around, and yet it is not broken. Pub games tend to be composed of players with a wide variety of skill levels and the final point counts in those pub games is very often big enough to be a truly meaningful indicator of which team was best. Pub games where the point difference is under 100-150 points are really a minority and for the most part only tend to happen when both teams are really skilled at the game... i.e. in competitive environments.
But let´s take a quick look at NS2 competitive play. In my previous post I also note that even in the most recent NS2 competitive tourneys organizers seem to have started acknowledging that mirror games is the way to go. Most of those tourneys have now some form of "Team A and Team B play: First Team A plays Marines and then Team B plays Marines"... why not make that mirror philosophy applied offline in competitive play happen also in pub games via inbuilt code? As I mentioned above the scoring system would be critical though. This would require a fully new victory point system to go with it, something a bit more detailed than just "destroy all enemy bases/hives".
As Bill Clinton would put it "... it is the scoring system, stupid!" :D
But dont get me wrong, if NS2 developers manage to get a reasonable balance with the game as is I am all for it. A mirror game mode based on a reasonable and competitive victory point system is a perfectly viable alternative should developers fail at balancing the 2 races though.
<!--quoteo(post=2030540:date=Nov 20 2012, 05:14 PM:name=Asmodies)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Asmodies @ Nov 20 2012, 05:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2030540"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There's a lot of inaccuracy in this post about L4D and how it worked and didn't work and how 2 rounds does not automatically balance a game like this. Firstly, one side was blatantly overpowered, the survivors.
The survival rate in vanilla configurations between two teams that were competent was around 80% based on vanilla tournament results and casuals over a couple years. NS2 doesn't have that problem as bad as a 6:4 matchup is the best that can be expected of such a game, and that's what we're seeing back and forth between these updates. The win rate isn't as much the problem as is the compression of tech trees and such that are unique to this game. But 2 rounds certainly will *not* fix the imbalances the game is left with.
The entire competitive community for L4D 1 and 2 used competitive configurations. All of the people that actually got good at the game, played in scrims and tournaments, or anything of the like, used community made balancing configs because of how imbalanced vanilla is. If playing both sides made for a balanced game they would not have been necessary. Playing an 8:2 game then a 2:8 game doesn't make the matchup balanced or fun, and it actually makes less of the game matter for the outcome of the match. Playing as survivors in vanilla steamrolling the SI 80% of the time means the only contentious point of the game is that little 20%, handing the other team the same advantage the next round might even out the numbers, but it's still just that 20% of the points/territory/game time you're contending over. That's why in L4D vanilla matches that lasted for over an hour over 5 maps would, regardless of the gap in skill between teams, be decided by one part of one map which only involved around 100 points out of about 4000.
2 round games where the game is mismatched creates a game where only a small part of the gameplay actually matters, L4D is a perfect example of how 2 rounds does not in any way provide for a balanced competitive game, I say this as someone who was in the comp scene for L4D from the moment it was created and played in the largest tournaments that have existed for the game. 2 rounds is still necessary for games like L4D, CS, and NS, but you cannot ignore direct balancing and in no way does the 2 round system actually do anything to preserve the competitive integrity of the game.
If you're tired of "easy wins", play the other side and use your knowledge to level the playing field. Dropping an Obs and scanning borks most pub Camo Kharaa plans and puts the game back in your favour. Drop shirtguns, cap nodes, laugh at one hive Onos.
Comments
I won a game as marine comm on that map earlier today. Rush to and hold pipeworks, get phasegates up, push to lava falls, and then hold those 3 locations until you have maxed out all tech except exos. Avoid exos on that map, it's just way too big.
The easiest fix really would be working with maturation time in regards to 2 hive onos egg (2 matured hives instead of just 2 hives), in combination with buffs to the fade and a general viability increase of single hive strategies.
The easiest fix really would be working with maturation time in regards to 2 hive onos egg (2 matured hives instead of just 2 hives), in combination with buffs to the fade and a general viability increase of single hive strategies.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i don't like the maturation time idea because then marines would have to go around with a theoretical timer 'how long before onos?'... it might work for competitive, but still seems a bit clumsy.
i think alien would be fine if tres onos was entirely removed, but as a compromise i think tres onos at 3 hives would work - because at least it's easy to know when you can expect onos, it should be very apparent to the marines when/where the aliens have their 3rd hive and at that point the aliens are ahead and arguably deserving a reward like tres onos. this is contrary to the current tres onos where alien can contently sit on 2 hives and 3 extractors while the marines have 80% of the map - then pop onos and usually win back the entire map comfortably.
i think alien would be fine if tres onos was entirely removed, but as a compromise i think tres onos at 3 hives would work - because at least it's easy to know when you can expect onos, it should be very apparent to the marines when/where the aliens have their 3rd hive and at that point the aliens are ahead and arguably deserving a reward like tres onos. this is contrary to the current tres onos where alien can contently sit on 2 hives and 3 extractors while the marines have 80% of the map - then pop onos and usually win back the entire map comfortably.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The most elegant solution I saw so far to the whole early onos was a suggestion that Alien Commander can only Tres drop those lifeforms which were previously "researched" by one of the alien players evolving into it by using its own pres.
So Onos egg could be dropped only AFTER one of the player went Onos with his own pres.
For me the real answer is out of the box. Create an additional game mode (let´s call it "mirror mode") where the two teams have to play 2 rounds, one as Marines and then reversing roles as Aliens in the same map. Only random element that could be considered would be the starting spots so to avoid hindsight on the 2nd round. Come up with a points system (shouldnt be too difficult, i.e. ressources gathered, tech researched, uptime per base or hive, kills etc etc and/or a weighed combo of all those). Ensure the point counters for each team are clearly visible and voila. All of a sudden both teams have exactly the same chances to win and therefore have all to play for and to keep motivation while playing for any of the two sides.
How to win in build 230.
Immediately get the camo upgrade.
Have your skulks stealth harass and repeatedly take down Marine extractors.
Punish every aggressive Marine push.
Repeat until Onos.
Kill low-tech Marine Base with Onos.
For me the real answer is out of the box. Create an additional game mode (let´s call it "mirror mode") where the two teams have to play 2 rounds, one as Marines and then reversing roles as Aliens in the same map. Come up with a points system (shouldnt be too difficult, i.e. ressources gathered, tech researched, uptime per base or hive, kills etc etc and/or a weighed combo of all those). Ensure the point counters for each team are clearly visible and voila. All of a sudden both teams have exactly the same chances to win and therefore have all to play for and to keep motivation while playing for any of the two sides.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Smells like Left4Dead. People there used to think that the game was balanced "because you play both sides" regardless of how weak the Infected were compared to the Survivors.
It wasn't true then and shoe-horning NS2 into L4D's model won't make NS2 balanced either.
On infestation = completely invisible whether moving or not
Off infestation = predator shimmer when moving, completely invisible when not moving, takes 1 second longer to recloak than when you're on infestation
There seems to be very few downsides to camo now other than it takes away silence but if you use camo you don't really need it anyway.
This might work.
Adren + cloak for longer cloaking.
It wasn't true then and shoe-horning NS2 into L4D's model won't make NS2 balanced either.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whats wrong with L4D2? People there "used" to think? Man, L4D2 was and still is one of the most successfull games in the history of Valve/Steam. And the 2 round mirror mode balance it is based on is precisely part of the appeal of the game and its success story. I am not saying that NS2 should copycat blindly, but if something really works well it merits some attention.
L4D2 is perfectly balanced due to the reverse 2 rounds in its "versus" mode. No one complains about balance in L4D2 I assure you precisely because both teams reverse roles in a completely balanced mirror way and earn points under very similar circumstances. The main point is that balance is not achieved by actually balancing the abilities of each team (that effort is wasted and utterly futile if you are trying to create a rich, stimulating and varied assymetric game) but by playing the game in 2 rounds reversing roles. NS2 is so assymetric that there will be always bitter debates like this about direct balancing. Direct balancing is going to take ages to achieve. Let developers get it as accurate as they can (which probably will never be balanced really) and then implement a 2 round, point based, reverse role game mode to achieve a truly 100% balanced match.
I dont see why this could not work here aswell. Just make it an additional and optional game mode if you insist. No need to force anyone.
L4D2´s assymetric balance model via 2 rounds has been tested and used for ages. Not just in L4D2 no (L4D2 does not have the "copyright" to the 2 rounds mirror game mode), but in many other assymetric games that use similar mirror logic, pc based or not. Traditional wargames for example. It works. Why not here? Just make it an additional and optional game mode.
Some may think this will actually double the duration of a game, and that would be entirely... true! But how many of us here just play "just one" game and then leave? Thought so! :p And even if you leave, someone will enter. In game player turnover will always be there I am afraid... it is an inherent feature of online gaming, either with the current unbalanced system or with a 2 round mirror mode.
if you discover that the aliens went shade hive/camo first then your commander needs to use more scans to help you.
you can also occasionally tap fire around you (i caught several camo skulks in an earlier game while doing this, and i had 45 kills 3 deaths by the end). remember that if a skulk gets revealed while cloaked, he's ridiculously vulnerable and basically a free kill.
camo is just so exciting and fun... why do you want to make it USELESS again by making it visible or drain energy? it's not like spy in tf2 - you have scan and obs to detect them.
L4D2 is perfectly balanced due to the reverse 2 rounds in its "versus" mode. No one complains about balance in L4D2 I assure you precisely because both teams reverse roles in a completely balanced mirror way and earn points under very similar circumstances. The main point is that balance is not achieved by actually balancing the abilities of each team (that effort is wasted and utterly futile if you are trying to create a rich, stimulating and varied assymetric game) but by playing the game in 2 rounds reversing roles. NS2 is so assymetric that there will be always bitter debates like this about direct balancing. Direct balancing is going to take ages to achieve. Let developers get it as accurate as they can (which probably will never be balanced really) and then implement a 2 round, point based, reverse role game mode to achieve a truly 100% balanced match.
I dont see why this could not work here aswell. Just make it an additional and optional game mode if you insist. No need to force anyone.
L4D2´s assymetric balance model via 2 rounds has been tested and used for ages. Not just in L4D2 no (L4D2 does not have the "copyright" to the 2 rounds mirror game mode), but in many other assymetric games that use similar mirror logic, pc based or not. Traditional wargames for example. It works. Why not here? Just make it an additional and optional game mode.
Some may think this will actually double the duration of a game, and that would be entirely... true! But how many of us here just play "just one" game and then leave? Thought so! :p And even if you leave, someone will enter. In game player turnover will always be there I am afraid... it is an inherent feature of online gaming, either with the current unbalanced system or with a 2 round mirror mode.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
l;opve l4d2 but man oh MAN do people rage so much in that game. i seriously havent finished a complete vs game in about a year. after the 2nd round the other team rq's almost every single game...
No they don't. You're just doing it wrong.
L4D2 is perfectly balanced due to the reverse 2 rounds in its "versus" mode. No one complains about balance in L4D2 I assure you precisely because both teams reverse roles in a completely balanced mirror way and earn points under very similar circumstances. The main point is that balance is not achieved by actually balancing the abilities of each team (that effort is wasted and utterly futile if you are trying to create a rich, stimulating and varied assymetric game) but by playing the game in 2 rounds reversing roles. NS2 is so assymetric that there will be always bitter debates like this about direct balancing. Direct balancing is going to take ages to achieve. Let developers get it as accurate as they can (which probably will never be balanced really) and then implement a 2 round, point based, reverse role game mode to achieve a truly 100% balanced match.
I dont see why this could not work here aswell. Just make it an additional and optional game mode if you insist. No need to force anyone.
L4D2´s assymetric balance model via 2 rounds has been tested and used for ages. Not just in L4D2 no (L4D2 does not have the "copyright" to the 2 rounds mirror game mode), but in many other assymetric games that use similar mirror logic, pc based or not. Traditional wargames for example. It works. Why not here? Just make it an additional and optional game mode.
Some may think this will actually double the duration of a game, and that would be entirely... true! But how many of us here just play "just one" game and then leave? Thought so! :p And even if you leave, someone will enter. In game player turnover will always be there I am afraid... it is an inherent feature of online gaming, either with the current unbalanced system or with a 2 round mirror mode.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There's a lot of inaccuracy in this post about L4D and how it worked and didn't work and how 2 rounds does not automatically balance a game like this. Firstly, one side was blatantly overpowered, the survivors.
The survival rate in vanilla configurations between two teams that were competent was around 80% based on vanilla tournament results and casuals over a couple years. NS2 doesn't have that problem as bad as a 6:4 matchup is the best that can be expected of such a game, and that's what we're seeing back and forth between these updates. The win rate isn't as much the problem as is the compression of tech trees and such that are unique to this game. But 2 rounds certainly will *not* fix the imbalances the game is left with.
The entire competitive community for L4D 1 and 2 used competitive configurations. All of the people that actually got good at the game, played in scrims and tournaments, or anything of the like, used community made balancing configs because of how imbalanced vanilla is. If playing both sides made for a balanced game they would not have been necessary. Playing an 8:2 game then a 2:8 game doesn't make the matchup balanced or fun, and it actually makes less of the game matter for the outcome of the match. Playing as survivors in vanilla steamrolling the SI 80% of the time means the only contentious point of the game is that little 20%, handing the other team the same advantage the next round might even out the numbers, but it's still just that 20% of the points/territory/game time you're contending over. That's why in L4D vanilla matches that lasted for over an hour over 5 maps would, regardless of the gap in skill between teams, be decided by one part of one map which only involved around 100 points out of about 4000.
2 round games where the game is mismatched creates a game where only a small part of the gameplay actually matters, L4D is a perfect example of how 2 rounds does not in any way provide for a balanced competitive game, I say this as someone who was in the comp scene for L4D from the moment it was created and played in the largest tournaments that have existed for the game. 2 rounds is still necessary for games like L4D, CS, and NS, but you cannot ignore direct balancing and in no way does the 2 round system actually do anything to preserve the competitive integrity of the game.
-Kaizoku
Crags are seriously powerful and make solo harassment pointless without a GL.
Camo clicks in so fast that I've seen people duck behind an armoury to cloak from marines.
Wall jump and celerity mean seriously fast aliens early game, and near impossible to hit when a good player.
So far aliens have won every single game I've played. I played marines and as aliens. Always same result.
I dont see any reason to have a different rate of player "in game" turnover here in NS2 than whatever we have today, even if we implemented a 2 round mirror game mode. Player turnover is what it is, and what we have today will probably not change much if you play two consecutive but independent games or if you play two linked games in an eventual mirror mode.
The survival rate in vanilla configurations between two teams that were competent was around 80% based on vanilla tournament results and casuals over a couple years. NS2 doesn't have that problem as bad as a 6:4 matchup is the best that can be expected of such a game, and that's what we're seeing back and forth between these updates. The win rate isn't as much the problem as is the compression of tech trees and such that are unique to this game. But 2 rounds certainly will *not* fix the imbalances the game is left with.
The entire competitive community for L4D 1 and 2 used competitive configurations. All of the people that actually got good at the game, played in scrims and tournaments, or anything of the like, used community made balancing configs because of how imbalanced vanilla is. If playing both sides made for a balanced game they would not have been necessary. Playing an 8:2 game then a 2:8 game doesn't make the matchup balanced or fun, and it actually makes less of the game matter for the outcome of the match. Playing as survivors in vanilla steamrolling the SI 80% of the time means the only contentious point of the game is that little 20%, handing the other team the same advantage the next round might even out the numbers, but it's still just that 20% of the points/territory/game time you're contending over. That's why in L4D vanilla matches that lasted for over an hour over 5 maps would, regardless of the gap in skill between teams, be decided by one part of one map which only involved around 100 points out of about 4000.
2 round games where the game is mismatched creates a game where only a small part of the gameplay actually matters, L4D is a perfect example of how 2 rounds does not in any way provide for a balanced competitive game, I say this as someone who was in the comp scene for L4D from the moment it was created and played in the largest tournaments that have existed for the game. 2 rounds is still necessary for games like L4D, CS, and NS, but you cannot ignore direct balancing and in no way does the 2 round system actually do anything to preserve the competitive integrity of the game.
-Kaizoku<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hi Kaizoku,
Not sure where you got the impression I was trying to justify that L4D or L4D2 are not assymetric or that one side is not overpowered. Not the case, that is precisely the point. My only and simple point is to suggest that whenever you have two sides that are clearly unbalanced and different, as it is indeed the case of L4D and L4D2 the way to bring balance to the equation is to have 2 rounds were both teams of players take turns using first the underpowered race and then the overpowered one, and proceed on an equivalent criteria base to extract points. As I mentioned above this basic principle has been used in many games since the discovery of "assymetric" encounters, and as I said the traditional wargame is a case in point. Many unbalanced wargame scenarios are often played by 2 players in 2 rounds each switching sides each time. L4D or L4D2 didnt discovered the wheel here.
You seem not to have been playing L4D2 in the recent years, but in my case, currently still an avid L4D2 gamer, and with around 1200 hours clocked in the game I believe I can also say a thing or 2 about it.
L4D2 simply does not need to strive for direct balance in the abilities of the two races as hard as NS2 tries. L4D2 "Versus" mode mode takes care of that by making both teams of players switch. Many competitive tournaments around in L4D2 at the moment use this "versus" mode in essence which de facto acknowledges and welcomes the intrinsic unbalance of the two different races. These tourneys also typically use mods that allow them to customize the way points are accounted for etc but that does not affect the Game balance, they are all still Versus mode. L4D and L4D2 are truly assymetric games in that not only the two races abilities are different but also in that you will find one side that seems to be much more overpowered than the other. The big news is that, in "Versus" mode, that is Ok!! Simply because the 2 round mirror mode takes care of the inherent imbalance of the two races.
There is no such thing as 80/20 or 60/40 in L4D2 simply because the Versus mode makes each player play with both races in any given game! As such each player does not get "assigned" a side. Each player IS actually both races in each game. Race winning fractions are meaningless. A certain team of players either wins the Versus or loses it. There are no points assigned each to Survivors or Special Infected, only to each team of players. This eliminates the main headache to finetune Team balance "ad nauseam". While certain sense that each side has to have certain advantages over the other there is no pressuring need to make that patologically perfect as each player will play as both.
In other words, in Versus mode the best team usually wins <u>irrespective of the mods used </u>because both teams will use those mods (or vanilla) equally taking turns!
There are two key terms that I believe you are mixing up here:
- Race Balance
- Game Balance
In the current form of NS2 pub games the two above are one and the same. In L4D2 multiplayer Versus they are completely independent.
Race Balance is an issue both in L4D2 and in NS2 (At the moment Aliens "seem" to be OP in pub games and in L4D2 one "may" think that Survivors are OP). The difference is that L4D2 has managed to eliminate the need for strict Race Balance thanks to a game mode (Versus) that makes both teams of players play two rounds switching race in each, and therefore making players go through exactly the same situations as their opponents from scratch. Each team has an equal opportunity to earn points in exactly the same way as their opponents irrespective of Race Balance!
Here one of the most popular mod configurations for L4D2 used in tourneys, Promod: <a href="http://www.l4d2pro.com/" target="_blank">http://www.l4d2pro.com/</a>, <a href="http://www.l4dnation.com/confogl-and-other-configs/pro-mod-3-1-discussion/" target="_blank">http://www.l4dnation.com/confogl-and-other...3-1-discussion/</a>
It is a common misconception that "the mods" were required to balance the Multiplayer versus Game. Not true. Eventhough the mods actually modified plenty of the Special Infected and Survivors abilities for the sake of a ceratin "balance" they were in no way geared to alter the overarching Game Balance mechanism which is the Versus switch. There has never been a major L4D2 issue in Game Balance, only Race Balance. And the 2 round team switch "Versus" mode takes care of that: Wether you decide to use mods or not the Game itself remains Balanced as a whole. The issue of Race Balance in L4D2 loses completely its NS2 meaning if you have to switch sides in the same game. The Race Balance, or lack thereof, achieved by the mods in L4D2 can not change the fact that the teams play as both races in the same Game.
The key to remember is that both teams will "enjoy" these mods both as a direct beneficiaries and as a victims since both teams of players take turns using each race. And if there was no mod then both teams of players would also enjoy the vanilla game features both as a direct beneficiares and as a victims for the same reason. Still Full Balance. It is the mirror mode that primarily brings balance to the Game. Not the mods or the Races abilities.
The key to maintain intact the competitive integrity of the game resides in the way the victory point structure is proposed. L4D2 mechanics are quite simple in that regard and are pretty much fixed in pub games althugh the abovementioned modes have added an aditional layer of detail for competitive play (that has nothing to do with balance). In NS2 the level of detail where you could structure victory points around is enourmous... as I mentioned before you could issue points around base/hive uptime, enemy hive/base destroyed, ressources extracted, kills, tech etc. You can even conceivably allow the game host to select the type of victory points from a customizable menu.
The important thing to remember is that both teams will need to strive to achieve and maximize those victory points and that both will be measured 100% in the same way for each of the 2 rounds. This is tremendous competitive Game balance (with no Race balance strictly required).
As an aditional note I must state that NS2 competitive play seems to be acknowledging the need for some kind of "mirror" Versus mode (unless I am reading it wrong). It sufice to look at some of the rules of the recent Tourneys where each team has to play as both Marines and Aliens (i.e. switching side... rings a bell?) againts a given opponent: <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=120706&view=findpost&p=1973782" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...t&p=1973782</a>
<a href="http://www.ensl.org/articles/714" target="_blank">http://www.ensl.org/articles/714</a>
Balance has a long way to go ( if this game even has a substantial player-base in 3 - 6 months).
Not sure where you got the impression I was trying to justify that L4D or L4D2 are not assymetric or that one side is not overpowered. Not the case, that is precisely the point. My only and simple point is to suggest that whenever you have two sides that are clearly unbalanced and different, as it is indeed the case of L4D and L4D2 the way to bring balance to the equation is to have 2 rounds were both teams of players take turns using first the underpowered race and then the overpowered one, and proceed on an equivalent criteria base to extract points. As I mentioned above this basic principle has been used in many games since the discovery of "assymetric" encounters, and as I said the traditional wargame is a case in point. Many unbalanced wargame scenarios are often played by 2 players in 2 rounds each switching sides each time. L4D or L4D2 didnt discovered the wheel here.
You seem not to have been playing L4D2 in the recent years, but in my case, currently still an avid L4D2 gamer, and with around 1200 hours clocked in the game I believe I can also say a thing or 2 about it.
L4D2 simply does not need to strive for direct balance in the abilities of the two races as hard as NS2 tries....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Still quite incorrect, no L4D tournament since the very first ones used vanilla config. Every tournament since then has used a competitive configuration aimed to directly balance the survivors against the infected, much as unknown worlds is trying to do with the marines and aliens. Not only have I asserted that matchup ratios do certainly exist, but I have already asserted why a 2 round mode does not take care of the problems such matchups present. To make it more clear, I will use the tactical nuke analogy.
One team is given tactical nuclear missiles that they can use instantly at the beginning of the round. The other team has one stick they all have to share. Is this game made to be competitive, enjoyable, or "fun" merely because the teams switch sides after one is nuked into oblivion?
In such a scenario and in vanilla L4D one or two, the difference in skill between two teams is not accurately represented, the team with the metaphorical nuke could be much worse than the team with the stick and vice versa, but you will never see that difference due to the direct imbalances between the sides the teams play. You would see teams in L4D that were miles apart in skill fighting over 25-100 points out of thousands, and that is directly cause by the imbalance between survivors and the infected. Likewise, a similar situation would arise in NS2 if balance between the rines and aliens were not kept as close to 50/50 potency as possible.
I get bored of easy wins when I play alien.
I get frustrated because no matter how good our team is for a pub and have a decent comm, we would normally lose.
I think I'll just take a break from this game for a few builds...
I get bored of easy wins when I play alien.
I get frustrated because no matter how good our team is for a pub and have a decent comm, we would normally lose.
I think I'll just take a break from this game for a few builds...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Agreed, I'm done with this game for a few builds.
Aliens are base line too effective in unorganized play.
Marines need some godly coordination to be able to play at the same level.
One team is given tactical nuclear missiles that they can use instantly at the beginning of the round. The other team has one stick they all have to share. Is this game made to be competitive, enjoyable, or "fun" merely because the teams switch sides after one is nuked into oblivion?
In such a scenario and in vanilla L4D one or two, the difference in skill between two teams is not accurately represented, the team with the metaphorical nuke could be much worse than the team with the stick and vice versa, but you will never see that difference due to the direct imbalances between the sides the teams play. You would see teams in L4D that were miles apart in skill fighting over 25-100 points out of thousands, and that is directly cause by the imbalance between survivors and the infected. Likewise, a similar situation would arise in NS2 if balance between the rines and aliens were not kept as close to 50/50 potency as possible.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In my previous post I also expain in detail some of the main L4D2 tournament mods, one of the most popular being Promod, which I have linked to and explained also above, that has been used extensively.
A proper mirrored game does not deal in absolutes like Nukes or like the current "Destroy all the bases/hives" in NS2.
In L4D2´s mirrored games it does not really matter if Survivors are so OP that ALWAYS make it to the safe house (your equivalent of the Nuke). What really matters to win the game is that your team does it in a more efficient way than your opponents do when you switch races with them! The only main issue with L4D2 in this regard was that the Vanilla point system is not accurate enough as you rightly point out. Therefore one of the major changes Promod and other tourney mods have introduced to ensure that you can measure how efficiently you play an inherently unbalanced game is by ensuring that points are earned not only for distance covered as Vanilla does but by many other factors including but not limited to Health remaining for example. Please understand that all these modded victory point conditions in no way affect the abilities or balance between the two races.
I repeat it does not matter if the races are unbalanced as long as the point structure makes the game inherently competitive. The mod also happens to change the abilities of the races, bugs/exploits and a number of other things for convenience of veteran players for the most part, but it does not change the fact that even if you didnt change each races abilities (as the NS2 community is discussing here) a mirrored game mode coupled with the right victory point structure can perfectly take care on its own of very very asymetric and unbalanced races. The main difference in how an accurate victory is assigned in L4D2 versus NS2 (pun intended) is not by making races balanced (L4D2 races are still quite unbalanced even after applying Promod) but by making the victory point system detailed and accurate enough so that you can see which team did better under a mirror scheme... and that is irrespetcive of the race balance.
Please also note that whereas pub games in NS2 are allegedly broken to some, that is strictly not the case in L4D2. Pub L4D2 Versus games are composed in its majority by servers that havent implemented Promod or any of the competitive mods around, and yet it is not broken. Pub games tend to be composed of players with a wide variety of skill levels and the final point counts in those pub games is very often big enough to be a truly meaningful indicator of which team was best. Pub games where the point difference is under 100-150 points are really a minority and for the most part only tend to happen when both teams are really skilled at the game... i.e. in competitive environments.
But let´s take a quick look at NS2 competitive play. In my previous post I also note that even in the most recent NS2 competitive tourneys organizers seem to have started acknowledging that mirror games is the way to go. Most of those tourneys have now some form of "Team A and Team B play: First Team A plays Marines and then Team B plays Marines"... why not make that mirror philosophy applied offline in competitive play happen also in pub games via inbuilt code? As I mentioned above the scoring system would be critical though. This would require a fully new victory point system to go with it, something a bit more detailed than just "destroy all enemy bases/hives".
As Bill Clinton would put it "... it is the scoring system, stupid!" :D
But dont get me wrong, if NS2 developers manage to get a reasonable balance with the game as is I am all for it. A mirror game mode based on a reasonable and competitive victory point system is a perfectly viable alternative should developers fail at balancing the 2 races though.
The survival rate in vanilla configurations between two teams that were competent was around 80% based on vanilla tournament results and casuals over a couple years. NS2 doesn't have that problem as bad as a 6:4 matchup is the best that can be expected of such a game, and that's what we're seeing back and forth between these updates. The win rate isn't as much the problem as is the compression of tech trees and such that are unique to this game. But 2 rounds certainly will *not* fix the imbalances the game is left with.
The entire competitive community for L4D 1 and 2 used competitive configurations. All of the people that actually got good at the game, played in scrims and tournaments, or anything of the like, used community made balancing configs because of how imbalanced vanilla is. If playing both sides made for a balanced game they would not have been necessary. Playing an 8:2 game then a 2:8 game doesn't make the matchup balanced or fun, and it actually makes less of the game matter for the outcome of the match. Playing as survivors in vanilla steamrolling the SI 80% of the time means the only contentious point of the game is that little 20%, handing the other team the same advantage the next round might even out the numbers, but it's still just that 20% of the points/territory/game time you're contending over. That's why in L4D vanilla matches that lasted for over an hour over 5 maps would, regardless of the gap in skill between teams, be decided by one part of one map which only involved around 100 points out of about 4000.
2 round games where the game is mismatched creates a game where only a small part of the gameplay actually matters, L4D is a perfect example of how 2 rounds does not in any way provide for a balanced competitive game, I say this as someone who was in the comp scene for L4D from the moment it was created and played in the largest tournaments that have existed for the game. 2 rounds is still necessary for games like L4D, CS, and NS, but you cannot ignore direct balancing and in no way does the 2 round system actually do anything to preserve the competitive integrity of the game.
-Kaizoku<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks Kai!
Saved me the trouble of writing all that out!