without loss of generality, its basically revolving around 3 reasons:
1. performance. give me all those bull###### ###### my spec. i have an i7 8gb cpu and nvidia 560gt. i run everything smooth including guild wars 2. but this game lagged me to hell. 5 minutes load time in between maps. often spikes and delays. in game crashes. both the client side and server are not optimized. look at those 'official servers', exactly the official reports of how poor this game is. and yes dun ###### me about enjoying playing on 24er slots, this is the experience i have playing in 6vs6 competitive plays and spectates.
2. lack of strategic depth whatever you may blame it. no bhop, no relocation, no r4k, introduction of cysts and powernodes, less abilities for aliens, small maps, lack of maps, you name it. we may disagree each other in small points but we basically all agree this is not as deep as ns1
3. not fun. waiting ages for res, no r4k, maps gets bored very fast, no mechanics to challenge at, too much player vs structures, you name it. again same as #2
<!--quoteo(post=2041460:date=Dec 7 2012, 04:16 AM:name=Swiftspear)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Swiftspear @ Dec 7 2012, 04:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041460"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't think you're strictly right. I agree that it's VERY incorrect to NOT balance the game around the highest skill level, but I don't think it's correct to balance the game around one skill level and ignore all others. The skill curve itself should be intentionally designed and balanced. The ceiling lifted as much as possible, the cliffs and valleys ironed out. The best games encourage players to move from a scrubby bad player to the best player they can be natural by just constantly asking a little more of the player to reach the next rank, without ever being exceptionally unfair "oh well, now you have to unlearn all those old skills and learn this new on instead"
I believe a game where Team X beats Team Y 95% of the time at the lowest skill level is just as problematic as one where X beats Y 95% of the time at the highest skill level. A well balanced game balances for both.
Occasionally you need some concessions one way or another from one skill point to accommodate another one, and I think generally in those cases you should take from the low and give to the high, but as much as possible balance should be a universal thing that everyone gets to enjoy, not something that kicks in after 500 hours of play logged.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> yes, that's what the video mentions with having low skill -> high power mechanics as well, which I also agree with. I'm not saying it has to be one way or the other. NS2 has plenty of these mechanics already as I stated, it's just that most of them are poorly implemented.
lol. so many newbs equating skill and mastery of braindead tasks with strategy
strategy is about making non-obvious choices. strategic depth comes from a decision TREE (implying multiple valid CHOICES), where the amount of depth depends on how far ahead that tree goes and how hard it is to make the right decisions. it isn't about short-term gains (aim for the head, bhop to go faster) - it's about long-term victory
strategy is choosing between competing goals like research vs. upgrades vs. expansion vs. defense vs. offense vs. scouting. this almost entirely comes from resource management.
<!--quoteo(post=2041615:date=Dec 7 2012, 12:53 PM:name=Gliss)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gliss @ Dec 7 2012, 12:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041615"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->yes, that's what the video mentions with having low skill -> high power mechanics as well, which I also agree with. I'm not saying it has to be one way or the other. NS2 has plenty of these mechanics already as I stated, it's just that most of them are poorly implemented.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Only it really doesn't. There is no gun that will give a noob an even chance at the beginning of a round against aliens that aren't asleep. Maybe there shouldn't be, since NS2 has pulled every trick in the book to discourage new players, but the lack of such a weapon is actually quite noticeable and made even worse with the current way guns are dropped and lost for one death. There is a shotgun, but frankly the shotgun actually requires even more aiming than the LMG to be effective let alone the god-like destroyer of teams it has the potential to become. (And yes, I realize these mechanics are in the game for balance reasons as-is. I'm saying it's a poor way to balance as it simply isn't fun to anyone but the most hard core players around.)
Furthermore, the 'default' gun in NS2 requires high accuracy and disciplined trigger control. Rather than making the default gun useful for people of all skill levels, they made it into a precision weapon for excellent players while leaving newer players out in the cold. This, maybe more than any other reason, is what makes NS2 Marines lose 60% of the time.
Basically, NS2 is one of the most unfriendly new player experiences around. I know it's a small development team, but to have your 'new player' tutorials hosted on YouTube and half of them reference prior builds that are no longer relevant is, to put it mildly, pissing off new players to the point of quitting. Furthermore, the absurd weighting of wins on the Aliens team and the incredibly high Marine skill ceiling as commander further exacerbate this issue. Say what you will about 'pop up' tutorial assistance, it will teach you the game far better than any grouping of independently made YouTube videos will ever do. The current HUD help for structure placement isn't helpful either, it suggests structures but includes no description or suggestions, merely an icon to build a thing the player doesn't understand. The fact is, even the basics of NS2 are hidden so each player is required to painfully learn basic commanding by losing <i>constantly</i> to the linear, no difficulty alien command.
I certainly enjoyed playing NS2 for around 175 hours worth of play at the start, when everyone was new. I would have continued to enjoy NS2 if it were not for the sweeping game play changes that force me to relearn mechanics every few weeks, only to realize that the new 'ceiling' for skill has been brought down significantly for only one team. I'm a new player again every few weeks, and now that I know what slog is in front of me to relearn skills I was good at just days ago I'm not certain I'm willing to continue when more of the same is literally right on the horizon.
TL;DR
Only one team in NS2 is complex and contains depth of play, and it isn't coincidence that the team that doesn't have those things is winning constantly. This, to me, is what killed my enjoyment of NS2. Aliens are too simple, and Marines are too hard. Obviously this changes with experience, but the process to get to a point where you have fun is decidedly not fun. At least, not for me.
<!--quoteo(post=2041623:date=Dec 7 2012, 02:11 PM:name=biz)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (biz @ Dec 7 2012, 02:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041623"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->lol. so many newbs equating skill and mastery of braindead tasks with strategy
strategy is about making non-obvious choices. strategic depth comes from a decision TREE (implying multiple valid CHOICES), where the amount of depth depends on how far ahead that tree goes and how hard it is to make the right decisions. it isn't about short-term gains (aim for the head, bhop to go faster) - it's about long-term victory
strategy is choosing between competing goals like research vs. upgrades vs. expansion vs. defense vs. offense vs. scouting. this almost entirely comes from resource management.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I wouldn't call them newbs, but you're right. Bunnyhopping didn't really add "strategy" to the game. It added mechanical skill. Mechanical skills are fun, but not generally strategic innately, however they can effect strategy indirectly. Reasonably regularly you see a mechanical skill will effect tactics, none the less tactical skill is a different thing than mechanical skill.
So if I'm very well practiced with muta micro in Brood Wars, I have 6 mutalisks, and I see my opponent has 8 scourages, I may be able to use my muta's to kill the scourges before they take damage. In that case I can intelligently make the tactical decision to be offensive with my muta's in a case where if my mechanical skill was lower then I would have to follow a tactic of avoiding the scourges instead. Tactical skill is still it's own thing. If I have my 6 mutas and I see 20 scourges, and I try the same tactic I just described previously... then it's unlikely to work. I can't just ignore tactics because my mechanical skill goes up, I still need to have a good grasp on the tactics available for me in this situation, I can still overestimate my mechanical skill and tactically over commit, but my mechanical skill does effect the tactics I can perform.
Well, in a similar way, tactics can trickle up to strategy. If I've played 100 games of brood wars, and when I go muta they are consistently stopped by 8 scourges at the 12 minute mark, I may make the strategic decision to not go mutalisk, or likewise, I may make the strategic decision to be defensive with my mutalisks rather than offense at that point in time (it could represent the time stamp of the last effective offence for mutas). My strategic choices are shifted by what I perceive as valid strategic options and invalid strategic options. However, if I am reasonbly sure I can just kill his scourges when they come out, then I can maybe do not have to make the tactical choice to retreat muta's if I have them at the 12 minute mark, and I can therefore make the strategic choice to be aggressive with muta's because that strategy will not just be easily shut down when I have that mechanical skill.
This isn't to say that bunnyhopping in NS2 would effect strategy at all. I think it most likely would make very little strategic difference. It's more a mechanical skill in a game where mechanical skills are lacking more than they should be.
<!--quoteo(post=2041637:date=Dec 7 2012, 09:38 PM:name=SpaceJew)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SpaceJew @ Dec 7 2012, 09:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2041637"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Furthermore, the 'default' gun in NS2 requires high accuracy and disciplined trigger control. Rather than making the default gun useful for people of all skill levels, they made it into a precision weapon for excellent players while leaving newer players out in the cold. This, maybe more than any other reason, is what makes NS2 Marines lose 60% of the time. [...] Only one team in NS2 is complex and contains depth of play, and it isn't coincidence that the team that doesn't have those things is winning constantly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with this parts. So an easy solution would be to implement a noob tube. Lets say dual Machine Pistols. That would look badass, they could have way less accuracy than the LMG, but a slightly higher damage output. It would be a weapon, that you don't need this much aim for. It would be easier for noobs, but the people who can aim better would stick to the LMG or SG. A weapon with a low skill ceiling. This would make at least the marine battle more newb-friendly.
The other part, is creating ways to fail for the alien com. You can't do much wrong as alien-com. Thats why it is easier to not lose. Thats what brings the 10%. The only solution here is, to get more valid options to spend resources and more options that can actually be countered by marines. Make it harder to play alien com. Not more stress-full - I like the variety between commanding both teams - but with more choices, that can actually be failures when marines react right.
This is interesting because this is what killed Savage off, the game COULD have had 10'000's of different strategies and build orders for commanders but thanks to the devs pandering to the fandumb in the end it boiled down to single strategy play, if you were the human player it was either a) flux rush or b) get impeached. Beasts got slightly more leeway but not that much.
What makes ns2 distinct from all other games is that it is truly team based and at the competitive levels resembles a team sport. What drives sports is the fun of forming teams locally like pub teams like a local soccer league.
We can say what is wrong with the game forever and eventually some those features will be changed etc. However, there are soo many levels of play that we can do now!
It all depends on knowing the competency of your current team. So what needs to be worked on is not so much match-making or new features; we need to be team making(gathers) even if temporary pub teams for tournaments. See tournaments can have prizes or just be publicly enjoyed by watching like any other sport. Normal pub play cannot.
Of course once this happens, the game needs to continue to evolve maps wise and strategic wise. But that seems to be happening already.
Comments
1. performance.
give me all those bull###### ###### my spec. i have an i7 8gb cpu and nvidia 560gt. i run everything smooth including guild wars 2. but this game lagged me to hell. 5 minutes load time in between maps. often spikes and delays. in game crashes. both the client side and server are not optimized. look at those 'official servers', exactly the official reports of how poor this game is. and yes dun ###### me about enjoying playing on 24er slots, this is the experience i have playing in 6vs6 competitive plays and spectates.
2. lack of strategic depth
whatever you may blame it. no bhop, no relocation, no r4k, introduction of cysts and powernodes, less abilities for aliens, small maps, lack of maps, you name it. we may disagree each other in small points but we basically all agree this is not as deep as ns1
3. not fun.
waiting ages for res, no r4k, maps gets bored very fast, no mechanics to challenge at, too much player vs structures, you name it. again same as #2
I believe a game where Team X beats Team Y 95% of the time at the lowest skill level is just as problematic as one where X beats Y 95% of the time at the highest skill level. A well balanced game balances for both.
Occasionally you need some concessions one way or another from one skill point to accommodate another one, and I think generally in those cases you should take from the low and give to the high, but as much as possible balance should be a universal thing that everyone gets to enjoy, not something that kicks in after 500 hours of play logged.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
yes, that's what the video mentions with having low skill -> high power mechanics as well, which I also agree with. I'm not saying it has to be one way or the other. NS2 has plenty of these mechanics already as I stated, it's just that most of them are poorly implemented.
strategy is about making non-obvious choices. strategic depth comes from a decision TREE (implying multiple valid CHOICES), where the amount of depth depends on how far ahead that tree goes and how hard it is to make the right decisions. it isn't about short-term gains (aim for the head, bhop to go faster) - it's about long-term victory
strategy is choosing between competing goals like research vs. upgrades vs. expansion vs. defense vs. offense vs. scouting. this almost entirely comes from resource management.
Only it really doesn't. There is no gun that will give a noob an even chance at the beginning of a round against aliens that aren't asleep. Maybe there shouldn't be, since NS2 has pulled every trick in the book to discourage new players, but the lack of such a weapon is actually quite noticeable and made even worse with the current way guns are dropped and lost for one death. There is a shotgun, but frankly the shotgun actually requires even more aiming than the LMG to be effective let alone the god-like destroyer of teams it has the potential to become. (And yes, I realize these mechanics are in the game for balance reasons as-is. I'm saying it's a poor way to balance as it simply isn't fun to anyone but the most hard core players around.)
Furthermore, the 'default' gun in NS2 requires high accuracy and disciplined trigger control. Rather than making the default gun useful for people of all skill levels, they made it into a precision weapon for excellent players while leaving newer players out in the cold. This, maybe more than any other reason, is what makes NS2 Marines lose 60% of the time.
Basically, NS2 is one of the most unfriendly new player experiences around. I know it's a small development team, but to have your 'new player' tutorials hosted on YouTube and half of them reference prior builds that are no longer relevant is, to put it mildly, pissing off new players to the point of quitting. Furthermore, the absurd weighting of wins on the Aliens team and the incredibly high Marine skill ceiling as commander further exacerbate this issue. Say what you will about 'pop up' tutorial assistance, it will teach you the game far better than any grouping of independently made YouTube videos will ever do. The current HUD help for structure placement isn't helpful either, it suggests structures but includes no description or suggestions, merely an icon to build a thing the player doesn't understand. The fact is, even the basics of NS2 are hidden so each player is required to painfully learn basic commanding by losing <i>constantly</i> to the linear, no difficulty alien command.
I certainly enjoyed playing NS2 for around 175 hours worth of play at the start, when everyone was new. I would have continued to enjoy NS2 if it were not for the sweeping game play changes that force me to relearn mechanics every few weeks, only to realize that the new 'ceiling' for skill has been brought down significantly for only one team. I'm a new player again every few weeks, and now that I know what slog is in front of me to relearn skills I was good at just days ago I'm not certain I'm willing to continue when more of the same is literally right on the horizon.
TL;DR
Only one team in NS2 is complex and contains depth of play, and it isn't coincidence that the team that doesn't have those things is winning constantly. This, to me, is what killed my enjoyment of NS2. Aliens are too simple, and Marines are too hard. Obviously this changes with experience, but the process to get to a point where you have fun is decidedly not fun. At least, not for me.
strategy is about making non-obvious choices. strategic depth comes from a decision TREE (implying multiple valid CHOICES), where the amount of depth depends on how far ahead that tree goes and how hard it is to make the right decisions. it isn't about short-term gains (aim for the head, bhop to go faster) - it's about long-term victory
strategy is choosing between competing goals like research vs. upgrades vs. expansion vs. defense vs. offense vs. scouting. this almost entirely comes from resource management.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I wouldn't call them newbs, but you're right. Bunnyhopping didn't really add "strategy" to the game. It added mechanical skill. Mechanical skills are fun, but not generally strategic innately, however they can effect strategy indirectly. Reasonably regularly you see a mechanical skill will effect tactics, none the less tactical skill is a different thing than mechanical skill.
So if I'm very well practiced with muta micro in Brood Wars, I have 6 mutalisks, and I see my opponent has 8 scourages, I may be able to use my muta's to kill the scourges before they take damage. In that case I can intelligently make the tactical decision to be offensive with my muta's in a case where if my mechanical skill was lower then I would have to follow a tactic of avoiding the scourges instead. Tactical skill is still it's own thing. If I have my 6 mutas and I see 20 scourges, and I try the same tactic I just described previously... then it's unlikely to work. I can't just ignore tactics because my mechanical skill goes up, I still need to have a good grasp on the tactics available for me in this situation, I can still overestimate my mechanical skill and tactically over commit, but my mechanical skill does effect the tactics I can perform.
Well, in a similar way, tactics can trickle up to strategy. If I've played 100 games of brood wars, and when I go muta they are consistently stopped by 8 scourges at the 12 minute mark, I may make the strategic decision to not go mutalisk, or likewise, I may make the strategic decision to be defensive with my mutalisks rather than offense at that point in time (it could represent the time stamp of the last effective offence for mutas). My strategic choices are shifted by what I perceive as valid strategic options and invalid strategic options. However, if I am reasonbly sure I can just kill his scourges when they come out, then I can maybe do not have to make the tactical choice to retreat muta's if I have them at the 12 minute mark, and I can therefore make the strategic choice to be aggressive with muta's because that strategy will not just be easily shut down when I have that mechanical skill.
This isn't to say that bunnyhopping in NS2 would effect strategy at all. I think it most likely would make very little strategic difference. It's more a mechanical skill in a game where mechanical skills are lacking more than they should be.
[...]
Only one team in NS2 is complex and contains depth of play, and it isn't coincidence that the team that doesn't have those things is winning constantly.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with this parts. So an easy solution would be to implement a noob tube. Lets say dual Machine Pistols. That would look badass, they could have way less accuracy than the LMG, but a slightly higher damage output. It would be a weapon, that you don't need this much aim for. It would be easier for noobs, but the people who can aim better would stick to the LMG or SG. A weapon with a low skill ceiling. This would make at least the marine battle more newb-friendly.
The other part, is creating ways to fail for the alien com. You can't do much wrong as alien-com. Thats why it is easier to not lose. Thats what brings the 10%.
The only solution here is, to get more valid options to spend resources and more options that can actually be countered by marines. Make it harder to play alien com. Not more stress-full - I like the variety between commanding both teams - but with more choices, that can actually be failures when marines react right.
Beasts got slightly more leeway but not that much.
We can say what is wrong with the game forever and eventually some those features will be changed etc. However, there are soo many levels of play that we can do now!
It all depends on knowing the competency of your current team. So what needs to be worked on is not so much match-making or new features; we need to be team making(gathers) even if temporary pub teams for tournaments. See tournaments can have prizes or just be publicly enjoyed by watching like any other sport. Normal pub play cannot.
Of course once this happens, the game needs to continue to evolve maps wise and strategic wise. But that seems to be happening already.