PETITION: Develop Vanilla NS2 separate from Competative Scene

245

Comments

  • RadmanRadman Join Date: 2013-04-05 Member: 184656Members
    I mentioned this in another thread, but bad players have fun in ns2 when there isnt a good player stomping their pub.

    Im pretty sure UWE could solve the problem by having a third server tag for tryharding servers. Or at least extend the rookie tag until 50-100 hours.
  • YMICrazyYMICrazy Join Date: 2012-11-02 Member: 165986Members
    edited July 2013
    I would be for it but it is not realistic at the moment. Looking at UWE's manpower they only have one guy working on the balance and it took months just to get 250 done. The point made about it being a hurdle into comp and having to relearn the game is pretty odd. Considering most people were stating that 250 was still NS2 at it's core and that it would not be that much of a change when faced with opposition to the implementation of the balance mod. A few differences in comp would not completely change the game like 250 did and those wanting to take their game to the next level would be curious enough to look into and adapt to the changes. After all this is natural selection 2 and like many were saying in relation to 250 you have to "adapt or die." Given the lack of in game tutorials atm, that is what you have to do to get good at the vanilla game quicker. Either way it will not happen within UWE and the only way I see it occurring is a community supported mod which will keep on breaking given the nature of updates unless constantly updated.

    I do not believe in separate games but I do know you need separate balance for different player counts. Egg spawning is an example that was implemented based on player counts. From the posts I see on these forums, competitive players would prefer the game balanced around lower player counts versus the casual players who would want the game balanced around higher numbers. There is also the issue of tech points being 4 vs 5 and how comp players usually have special maps to suit their needs. So it is obvious the two groups do want balance based around different player numbers and their own tastes. Though arguments here are usually not productive and usually turn into a biased flaming contest.
  • MaxAmusMaxAmus UK Join Date: 2003-12-26 Member: 24779Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow
    From reading all these threads it seems the same thin keeps poping up, the fade. Put in the hands if a pro comp player they can become un-killable there making it very unfun for a regular joe pub to kill, as te better the fade the more teamwork it will take to kill/trap the fade, again as i said before perhaps some servers should only allow players under a certain amount of hours played to play on this server.
  • It's Super Effective!It's Super Effective! Join Date: 2012-08-28 Member: 156625Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
    One other game I play, albeit it's symmetric apart from custom options, is Guns of Icarus on steam, quite fun, while it doesn't have a match making system per say (player made lobby setup like l4d) they do have levels (achieved from completing actions)

    Players above level 3 cannot join beginner's only lobbies(which in NS2's case would be Rookie Friendly server) The levels in this game doesn't do anything for the player other than give an idea how long play player has played as that respective role, it also gives them some cosmetic costumes and stuff.

    Something to think about.
  • Salraine_ChiSalraine_Chi Join Date: 2011-07-03 Member: 107669Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    Kouji_San wrote: »
    Some more "against" points:

    - Separation of the community
    - Having to relearn the game, when players are interested in going from pub to comp
    - Patches will break it, if it isn't officially supported
    - It is highly dependent on actual growth of the community, otherwise it's just creating a split with ~1000 concurrent players
    - Most competitive games have the same pub and pro gameplay, NS2 has issues with pubstomping mostly and the fact that a new player has a VERY slim chance of doing anything against a good/pro player. To them it feels like they aren't contributing anything to the outcome of the game. That is the bit that leads to frustration/leaving...


    Perhaps a "for point:

    - It redirects the pro pubstompers (the unintentional ones) from the pub servers (if the player count allows for this)

    Apart from the patch part of your post, you could be talking about exactly what b250 did to the community. Yet that didn't stop UWE/Sewlek going ahead anyway.

  • aeroripperaeroripper Join Date: 2005-02-25 Member: 42471NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
    Against, for many of the reasons already brought up. I think NS2 would be better served by having some kind of 'ranking' system so brand new people to the game (or with low amount of playtime hours) would be matched with similar skill level servers. If any of you have played Starcraft 2 multiplayer and used their matchmaking ladder system, something similar would be fantastic for NS2. For reference: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Battle.net_Leagues

    I think the basic problem is that brand new players are joining servers that are populated by vets, and its not fun when you're getting stomped right out of the gate. Pairing new players with other new players somehow would be a lot funner for them.
  • TyrsisTyrsis Join Date: 2002-11-15 Member: 8804Members
    This has been suggested before, and will just never happen for one important reason: This will be a logistical nightmare for the devs. It's hard enough for a small company to keep things together, forcing multiple releases on a patch just doubles the problems on release. There is almost no benefit to doing that as well, as the changes required for competitive are small and already exist in mods.
  • Blake IceBlake Ice Join Date: 2012-11-18 Member: 172262Members
    @Sewlek

    Your response demonstrates the complete lack of leadership at UWE. UWE lacks an objective eye to make good decisions.

    THERE IS NOT ONE GAME PLAYED IN COMPETITION THAT DOES NOT HAVE A SPECIAL MOD FOR COMPETITIVE MODE!
  • KanehKaneh Join Date: 2012-12-11 Member: 174783Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
    Blake Ice wrote: »
    @Sewlek

    Your response demonstrates the complete lack of leadership at UWE. UWE lacks an objective eye to make good decisions.

    THERE IS NOT ONE GAME PLAYED IN COMPETITION THAT DOES NOT HAVE A SPECIAL MOD FOR COMPETITIVE MODE!

    uhhh there actually are. in fact we scrim like that right now because ns2stats hasn't been updated for the new patch yet. in fact, stuff like the game not being live until coms are in chair duplicate the effect 'readying' has.
  • JektJekt Join Date: 2012-02-05 Member: 143714Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
    Blake Ice wrote: »
    @Sewlek

    Your response demonstrates the complete lack of leadership at UWE. UWE lacks an objective eye to make good decisions.

    THERE IS NOT ONE GAME PLAYED IN COMPETITION THAT DOES NOT HAVE A SPECIAL MOD FOR COMPETITIVE MODE!

    Oh right. Except SC. And LoL. And Dota2. And QL. And CS. And you get the idea.

  • Blake IceBlake Ice Join Date: 2012-11-18 Member: 172262Members
    @Jekt

    Of couse I am talking about the genre in which NS2 belongs.
  • xDragonxDragon Join Date: 2012-04-04 Member: 149948Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited July 2013
    What other game is there in the genre of NS2 that is played comp?

    Yep, thought so.

    If your talking about matchmaking and trying to separate the players of varying skill, that is completely different then a competitive 'mod' to make the game more balance/fun in 6v6. Judging from your posts, you dont have a clue what you want even yet. Beyond that, the comp mod is a horrible idea, and this is coming from someone that HAS made comp mods for NS2 in the past.
  • Blake IceBlake Ice Join Date: 2012-11-18 Member: 172262Members
    @xDragon

    I would think this is obvious. First and foremost, NS2 is a first person shooter. It has an rts element for one player on each team, which is being dumbed down and eliminated slowly but surely.

    There is nothing vague about my posts. My posts have been few and clear as to what I want. How you could come to the conclusion that I don't know what I want is beyond me. I want the 249 mode of the game, the good version of docking with some tweaks, and for someone at UWE to take the leadership role with an objective eye before they go under.
  • dePARAdePARA Join Date: 2011-04-29 Member: 96321Members, Squad Five Blue
    edited July 2013
    @Blake Ice

    You want a 249 mode called "pro mod"?
    Thats funny cause the pros dont want to play 249 anymore for known reasons.

    You want "the good docking" for this pro mod?
    Thats funny cause no pro was playing this version.

    Why did you not release a mod called "Black Ice pro mod" with alle your changes.
    Im sure the pros going to love you for your leadership in this very important task.
  • It's Super Effective!It's Super Effective! Join Date: 2012-08-28 Member: 156625Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited July 2013
    There seems to be a lot of hostility in the posts here guys, (figure's it's the internet after all)

    But it is possible to share your view and provide supporting statements without making it personal.

    The post is to open dialog to see what people think, good idea? bad idea? Why? Keep it civil :)

    Cheers,
    ISE
  • FrozenFrozen New York, NY Join Date: 2010-07-02 Member: 72228Members, Constellation
    For.

    The changes don't need to be drastic and won't change the game. Friendly Fire On and Draw Damage off for instance
  • xDragonxDragon Join Date: 2012-04-04 Member: 149948Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow
    Its a bad idea, which is why not a single decent person from the competitive community has ever seriously suggested this... To me its honestly like some cruel joke the public community is playing to get revenge.

    Small changes like that are hardly a 'pro mod' and should just be part of a basic tournament mode (no autobalance/teambalance, ready command and ff).
  • IronHorseIronHorse Developer, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributor Join Date: 2010-05-08 Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
    xDragon wrote: »
    Its a bad idea, which is why not a single decent person from the competitive community has ever seriously suggested this...
    xDragon wrote: »
    and this is coming from someone that HAS made comp mods for NS2 in the past.
    #-o
  • xDragonxDragon Join Date: 2012-04-04 Member: 149948Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow
    They were done as an experiment for changes, to provide better feedback to UWE.... Not as true replacements for the game longterm. Unless you forget the days of 6 minute onos or aliens turtling 1 hive with 3 crags and umbra.
  • eh?eh? Join Date: 2012-03-03 Member: 147997Members
    Ironically the only thing it accomplished was the realization that giving constructive feedback way back then was a big waste of time. And from what I've seen of the game; either the feedback has gotten much worse or nothing has really changed.

    I used to think that was just a consequence of being mid-development and things being hectic, but looking back it seems more like it was just always a persistent lack of vision and incompetence.

    Should probably sort those problems out first tbh.
  • MaxAmusMaxAmus UK Join Date: 2003-12-26 Member: 24779Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow
    Blake Ice wrote: »

    I would think this is obvious. First and foremost, NS2 is a first person shooter. It has an rts element for one player on each team, which is being dumbed down and eliminated slowly but surely.

    There is nothing vague about my posts. My posts have been few and clear as to what I want. How you could come to the conclusion that I don't know what I want is beyond me. I want the 249 mode of the game, the good version of docking with some tweaks, and for someone at UWE to take the leadership role with an objective eye before they go under.

    Your jokeing right?? In build 249 there was only handfull of tactics you could use both in comp play and in pub play, with the changes brought in 250 it opened up the alien tech path and the marines a little more.

    I wanna know what chnages (apart from just saying bring back build 249) you want in the game, what do u think would make this game "fun" again?
  • AurOn2AurOn2 COOKIES! FREEDOM, AND BISCUITS! Australia Join Date: 2012-01-13 Member: 140224Members, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Forum staff
    Blake Ice wrote: »
    @Sewlek

    Your response demonstrates the complete lack of leadership at UWE. UWE lacks an objective eye to make good decisions.

    THERE IS NOT ONE GAME PLAYED IN COMPETITION THAT DOES NOT HAVE A SPECIAL MOD FOR COMPETITIVE MODE!

    Ex fucking Xcuse me? Do you even PLAY COMPETITIVE? Do you?! The reason for comp play IS TO PLAY AS A TEAM, WITHOUT MODS (give or take xhair mods and server admin mods) As the game IS CURRENTLY AND WILL BE UNLESS SPECIFIC CRITERIA IS MET (like, for example, a combat mod cup, or balance test cup, etc etc)

    And as i said in the other thread: DO NOT DO SEPERATE THE PUBLIC SCENE AND COMPETITIVE SCENE. Any time it's ever been done in the history of gaming, ITS BROKEN SAID GAME. because you have to learn TWO DIFFERENT RULESETS if you want to play competitive, (and arent playing SOLELY competitive)

    And bam, half your Comp scene which is comprised of halfies (such as myself) who play comp games and pub games alike. because they are gunna be forced to pick one.


  • IronHorseIronHorse Developer, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributor Join Date: 2010-05-08 Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
    eh? wrote: »
    Ironically the only thing it accomplished was the realization that giving constructive feedback way back then was a big waste of time.
    Funny, because i just remember the mod piquing interest and then eventually turning a healthy chunk of people away because of small details that they disagreed with - i.e. Conflicting feedback from many angles. But ok.
  • xDragonxDragon Join Date: 2012-04-04 Member: 149948Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Gold, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow
    The only conflict back then was over a single change, and honestly there was really 1 or 2 vocal people that disagreed with it. However honestly I dont think you remember even which mod I am talking about, I doubt you played it.
  • SeahuntsSeahunts Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151973Members
    Against.

    Mainly due to the likelihood that it would split the very small community making finding a pub game more difficult.

    I'd rather see minor tweaks to stuff that does not effect the FPS play to address the problem of balance between different server sizes. By this I mean leaving movement, health/armour/damage alone. If stuff must be changed then only change things such as item costs / research times. This way if you jump in a small server or large, at least things feel the same from the FPS perspective.
  • xBlueXFoxxxBlueXFoxx Join Date: 2013-06-07 Member: 185497Members, Reinforced - Supporter
    I'm against 2 rule sets, if there's the need to make a second rule set for competitive play then there must be something wrong with the vanilla game. Correct issues, do not make multiple resolutions based on preference.

    I do not see balance currently as a huge flaw in NS2 to the extent that it's unplayable, but I will go ahead and say I could give a rats ass less for competitive streams and competitions, I just enjoy playing the game for the game, I could care less for watching skilled players play the game for me.

    From what I see pub stomping is a major issue that will always plague the game, you will not once have a day where everyone is getting along and allowing rookies to always be the commander, it doesn't work that way, you will instead the biggest bad ass known to man flipping tables and forcefully trying to eject the comm because he has no clue what he is doing. In a game like "for the love of god don't say it!!!" Call of Duty, you jump in, there's no learning curve, you have auto aim and quick reactions guide you to victory. In NS2, it's the complete opposite, it may be a very friendly community willing to assist new players, but it doesn't prevent those who want to shove them away and drive them out,

    This is where the community should have a small split separation, rookie servers should be a bit more rookie friendly as they say they are, right now they seem like the perfect place for experienced fades to hop in and get off on getting a 50-3 ratio and make randoms complain on the forum that they're incredibly OP. (I do argue that they could use some work as they're introduced onto the field way too early currently but that's a different argument for a different topic.) I feel the servers should be separated into 3 different fields..

    [Green] Rookie - Open to all players, as limiting to rookie only would be separating in ways - but forced training mode on perhaps?
    [White] Public - Open to all players.
    [Yellow] Competitive - No greens allowed.


    [Topic derail alert!]

    The feedback forums at times I feel should just be an open incinerator with the words "Insert feedback here," feedback is always great, but I feel there's a bit more things needed addressed than just balanced, rookies are left stranded, but is the learning curve all that's driving them away?
    Recommended requirements
    OS:Windows 7 32/64-bit / Vista 32/64 / XP
    Processor:Core 2 Duo 3.0 ghz
    Memory:4 GB RAM
    Graphics:DirectX 9 compatible video card with 1GB, AMD 5770, NVidia GTX 450 or better
    DirectX®:9.0
    Hard Drive:5 GB HD space
    Other Requirements:Broadband Internet connection

    Honestly, on those specs my PC would explode running this game at lowest, I pitty those who would buy the game and cannot run it on their not so up-to-date video cards at 15-25 FPS, the game is very reaction and skilled based and is much more playable at a comforting 45FPS, this is a major thing I think that should be addressed, there should be much more performance effecting options in the video settings that can be scaled to their system specs. Model detail, object details (cups, paper, random decals on the floor) should be changable, the maps currently have metal plates and various details that actually take a very large amount of poly's, being able to cut down on those would be much for comforting. Many people do not have $700 PC's that can run this game at a playable/functional rate, they end up buying the game and cannot run it that well then leaving it behind, as it's not exactly a triple-A title worth running out and buying a new GPU for.

    On the subject of performance, I feel the dedicated server side of things really needs a rethink, it may be major, but the core server currently runs terribly, on the backend of things it should be running like NS1 (never played before, but I do know it's a mod for half-life) where I imagine the required server specs are a cheap dual core, a gb of ram and a good internet speed. Unlike the client it does not need to render shaders, models, sprites, particles, etc, it just needs to coordinate where such things are, I think that burning up a $400 i7 CPU is a bit absurd for a 24 slots, since $400 i7's aren't exactly easily available with many datacenters/enterprise class connections. Clans typically have to resort to home hosting their servers, which results in pretty sketchy pings and late round performance for a lot of servers that aren't paying for their highest tier business class lines in their area. The most popular servers are 20-24 slot, the game should be better optimized around that as a lot of people thrive for intense shit-storms when raping a comm chair.

    I will give in and say, this game has gone a long ways in performance since I've started playing it.
  • elodeaelodea Editlodea Join Date: 2009-06-20 Member: 67877Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    @elodea, can you elaborate on your point.
    It simply means that what pubbers want from gameplay, and what comp players want from gameplay are for all intents and purposes pretty much identical. The only differences are level of organisation and general game experience, which just means you focus evaluation of game mechanics from comp, and accessibility from pub.

    Because of this, generally, what improves pub improves comp, and what improves comp improves pub. The relationship is/should be mutually beneficial. The tutorial, matchmaking, mmr angle etc. has been covered alot on these forums already so I'm not going to ramble into that.

    Instead of a petition with theoretical pros and cons that doesn't help anyone, I would have rather seen you give a considerable list of solid gameplay items that significantly hold back pub for the sake of comp, vice versa.

    Describe exactly how differently NS2 would look like from current if developed separately from comp. Where and what would be the real gameplay benefits. Actual reasons that have led you to believe that splitting version development like this is desirable.

    I think what you are looking for is actually a singleplayer that simplifies mechanics etc. a bit in order to better ease new players into the game. And that i would support. It's ok to draw the line between sp and mp, but not between 'pub/comp' groupings in mp.
  • |DFA| Havoc|DFA| Havoc Join Date: 2009-08-07 Member: 68375Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    I'd be curious to know how many of the people voting 'against' are involved in or interested in competitive play. As I've already said, I think the general forum population is vastly skewed in that direction and not at all indicative of the actual ratio of competitive to pub games played, where comp play is a tiny percentage. I don't think there's much point in asking for a 'show of hands' when the representation is so lopsided. The vocal minority is here in force, and anything said that even hints at being contrary to competitive interests just gets shouted down.

    While comp players generally possess a far better understanding of the game and its mechanics, and are therefore in a better position to give feedback overall, to me it seems pretty blindly optimistic / narcissistic to claim 'whatever I want is the best thing for everyone'. There is a skill gap between the top competitive players and the general pub population that will never disappear, regardless of hours played, and there are game mechanics that are heavily dependent upon the skill of the user in order to be considered 'balanced'. As a purely theoretical example, a particular weapon might be considered simultaneously overpowered / overutilized in competitive play and an underpowered res sink in pub play simply because of the differential in average accuracy levels between the two groups.

    Competitive gameplay is a completely different animal from what you get in pubs, and I think anyone who thinks otherwise is flat out in denial. It follows that the mechanics which support one structure are not necessarily going to work as well for the other. I can think of some specific examples, but each one probably deserves its own thread, and I think it would simply derail / devolve the topic into semantic arguments.
  • CCTEECCTEE Join Date: 2013-06-20 Member: 185634Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    IF (big if) you want to somehow split up the scene you make a Rookie version pub play and a Normal version pub play, not pub vs competition.
  • DC_DarklingDC_Darkling Join Date: 2003-07-10 Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
    @|DFA| Havoc
    There are no 2 groups. 'Competitive' vs 'NonCompetitive' isnt the only true split.

    Competitive is split up in devisions for a reason. Also you could probably split pug in 3 'divisions'' also.
    * the absolute rookies
    * the folk who played it a while but are on parts still rather stuborn or clueless.
    * the real experienced folk, who may or may not pick up comp play.

    Inbetween these 3 are gaps just like inbetween comp play devisions.
    And between these experienced puggers and many comp players is also a gap.

    On a 'good' day I can have highly stupid k/d ratio's versus must puggers also, but if I see a comp player im still pretty much screwed.
    (I havent done devision yet and thereby count msyelf noncomp for the sake of this arguement)


    Making 2 rulesets is wishfull thinking as stacking will still happen. Vast skill difference will still happen.
    Some puggers will atleast outperform diuv 3comp players and some puggers will never learn.
    It may minimize the chance of it all happening by a small margin, but at the end skill and experience will simply dominate. I highly doubt that onm 'pug rules' a comp player would not still be on top.
Sign In or Register to comment.