How about the fact they just allowed a capable and enthusiastic community team to take over the game's development? The changes they have made already, and what's coming soon, are making the game much more attractive both for returning and new players. (Performance, team balance, general tweaks, ...)
Sure, some marketing on top of that would be great. But you can't expect a full-blown marketing campaign without a clear business benefit (ie, expected additional sales). But the CDT's work is helping a lot to keep the core community alive, which gives returning and new players something to stick to.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
UWE is working on Subnautica, the CDT are now the care takers of NS2, and definitely have some tricks up our sleeves besides the improvements Mrfangs pointed out.
Food for thought:
We're within 84 players of daily MAX of HAWKEN... Which came out more recently, is F2P, with a multi-million dollar annual PR budget, published by Activision and runs on a toaster.
Food for thought:
We're within 84 players of daily MAX of HAWKEN... Which came out more recently, is F2P, with a multi-million dollar annual PR budget, published by Activision and runs on a toaster.
Food for thought:
We're within 84 players of daily MAX of HAWKEN... Which came out more recently, is F2P, with a multi-million dollar annual PR budget, published by Activision and runs on a toaster.
Looking at stats like these, I realise how easy it is to hold NS2 playercounts to much higher standards. Like, most-popular-games-in-the-world standards. SC, LOL, COD... Games with huge budgets and thousands upon thousands of players.
And here we are, with our crappy performance, huge load times, limited skill pool etc etc (I know CDT are making leaps and bounds with this but hear me out )... And still being compared to these AAA titles.
I think that says something about what people think of NS2's potential. However easy it is to be critical of the game, every single person on here clearly thinks very highly of it. Else we wouldnt be here and you wouldnt be reading complaints, you'd be hearing crickets chirping.
Soul_RiderMod BeanJoin Date: 2004-06-19Member: 29388Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
Yes, it is relatively easy to add relocations, but they might screw up the pathing mesh or be just too big for some areas causing complete blockages. I think it would be a bad idea to try and use it, but it is possible...
Yes, it is relatively easy to add relocations, but they might screw up the pathing mesh or be just too big for some areas causing complete blockages. I think it would be a bad idea to try and use it, but it is possible...
Well, a CC blocking an area can be eaten, and it's an expensive block. Just make them like turret batteries, one per room, and you can't use them to block a techpoint room.
Worth noting of course there's an excellent strategical tradeoff -- if rines do an early relocate to a non-tech point, it frees up one more techpoint for aliens to use until such a time that either side can secure a hive.
Yes, it is relatively easy to add relocations, but they might screw up the pathing mesh or be just too big for some areas causing complete blockages. I think it would be a bad idea to try and use it, but it is possible...
Well, a CC blocking an area can be eaten, and it's an expensive block. Just make them like turret batteries, one per room, and you can't use them to block a techpoint room.
Worth noting of course there's an excellent strategical tradeoff -- if rines do an early relocate to a non-tech point, it frees up one more techpoint for aliens to use until such a time that either side can secure a hive.
I think that says something about what people think of NS2's potential. However easy it is to be critical of the game, every single person on here clearly thinks very highly of it. Else we wouldnt be here and you wouldnt be reading complaints, you'd be hearing crickets chirping.
If there is no here to hear the cricket chirp, did the cricket chirp?
Yes, it is relatively easy to add relocations, but they might screw up the pathing mesh or be just too big for some areas causing complete blockages. I think it would be a bad idea to try and use it, but it is possible...
Well, a CC blocking an area can be eaten, and it's an expensive block. Just make them like turret batteries, one per room, and you can't use them to block a techpoint room.
Worth noting of course there's an excellent strategical tradeoff -- if rines do an early relocate to a non-tech point, it frees up one more techpoint for aliens to use until such a time that either side can secure a hive.
Bring on the mod!
My only gripe with this is if you relo to a non-tech point that is between 2 tech points, you basically hold both as the walk distance can be short due to the current map design limitations. Eg. Relo to Reactor in Summit, and you basically hold Cross, Atrium and Data. Or Comp. lab and hold cross and flight (and may be sub.)
My only gripe with this is if you relo to a non-tech point that is between 2 tech points, you basically hold both as the walk distance can be short due to the current map design limitations. Eg. Relo to Reactor in Summit, and you basically hold Cross, Atrium and Data. Or Comp. lab and hold cross and flight (and may be sub.)
That's the point, relos are about location. However, they come with a risk -- if you do it at game start, failing to get there as a team or holding long enough to get IPs is game over. You rolled the dice, and lost. If a relo is done mid game, it's still an expensive cost -- which delays other upgrades -- and aliens can still stop you putting it up in the first place. There are always strategies and counter-strategies.
This is no different than in NS1, where relos were an option in both pub and comp play. My own clan used them for comp games when we thought the risk was worth taking, leading to some epic fun games whether we won or lost.
It is one of the sadder aspects of the move to NS2. In an effort to 'standardise' gameplay (along with things like alien comm), entire fields of strategy and gameplay were shutdown, some of the elements that made NS1 so fun to begin with. NS2 has its own charms, of course, but this and devour are two elements I miss the most.
Edit: Anyway, where is this mod Benson? Maybe it can be updated. And I can imagine size being a limitation, but perhaps also a balancing function. The NS1 CC was tiny and could be squeezed between a crevice, that the larger NS2 one requires more space will make it more vulnerable. I don't see a problem with this as a natural balancer.
a half-built or in-use CC blocks the entrances to nanogrid, so the only remaining way in for aliens is through the vents.
Or.. destroy it? That's why skulks have teeth and onos have horns. No different than blocking with any other structure.
And again, as I said above, one per room. Both entrances couldn't be blocked regardless.
Edit: And whatever happened to welding vents? ahhh... NS1.
It's simply too big to sensibly go anywhere, that's the issue.
I agree - weldable vents and doors (smashable with onos/exo?) would be absolutely lovely. They made for some really fun times in NS1 and added at least a little bit of depth and strategy to the game. Maybe the CDT can make this happen?
Can we please just go back to considering structure blocking an exploit. It's so fucking dumb.
If it's being used as a reason to not reimplement relocations, then it's a god damn shame. There may be plenty of other reasons not to allow unrestricted CC building, but allowing the current legitimacy of structure blocking to be a contributing factor in such a decision would be very disappointing.
Can we please just go back to considering structure blocking an exploit. It's so fucking dumb.
If it's being used as a reason to not reimplement relocations, then it's a god damn shame. There may be plenty of other reasons not to allow unrestricted CC building, but allowing the current legitimacy of structure blocking to be a contributing factor in such a decision would be very disappointing.
Not going to happen. Where is the line? A structure that DOESN'T block an onos, but still makes it incredibly difficult could be argued as perfectly 'legal' as it doesn't block, but would surely go against the ethos you're suggesting.
The argument FOR allowing structure blocking has always been that doing so costs resources. If that balance isn't right, then perhaps we need to consider the size/shape/clipping for certain cheap and large structures such that the tradeoff is acceptable.
You'll never find an easy way to make structure blocking considered an exploit, as the boundaries are simply too fuzzy for it to work. However, things like robo factories that are half inside walls could maybe be fixed still further (they already received some love a long time ago), such that no part of it can clip with any scenery, but this is rarely an issue as they're low enough to be jumped over anyway.
The only way to address your question that makes sense to me is to reduce the height of the clip box of the armory such that an onos can jump over it. Even then, armories on slopes might still be problematic, and it could look strange as well.
The argument FOR allowing structure blocking has always been that doing so costs resources. If that balance isn't right, then perhaps we need to consider the size/shape/clipping for certain cheap and large structures such that the tradeoff is acceptable.
This. Structure blocking is a legitimate strategy as it has natural counters, mostly though restricting placement would remove even more options and in turn narrow the game. Though I think you were arguing for CC relocs dopedog minus your objection to blocking?
If we want to talk **** dumb mechanics, bunny hopping marines that look and play ridiculous is at the top. I'll be willing to trade that for devour, anyone?
Can't find the CC mod on Workshop Benson. I'll send chocolates to whoever makes this real (I've sent beer internationally before. You want beer?)
If we want to talk **** dumb mechanics, bunny hopping marines that look and play ridiculous is at the top. I'll be willing to trade that for devour, anyone?
Devour was the single worst thing ever to happen to the NS universe! I was relieved when UWE announced it wouldn't be making a comeback for NS2, and massively disheartened to hear that it *will* be in combat, in any form in which they decide to dress it up.
I wouldn't trade anything in this game that brings back devour in any guise!
I think the balance regarding structure blocking is fine. In fact, it's effectiveness is so underwhelming that it's often not worth it at all apart from in very rare scenarios. However, I just dislike the type of gameplay that results. Shooting an onos that can't reach you is just boring and lame regardless of the state of tradeoffs/balance. It's not a big issue when it happens as it's usually just a matter of getting a gorge to bile it down, but it's still a pet peeve as the act of doing it simply rubs me the wrong way.
With regard to enforcement, I understand the "where's the line" issue - and you're right, there is no line. At the end of the day it should come down to intent - and thus it would be up to an admin's discretion to make a judgement call on that. If it's fairly obvious that a structure's placement is intended to block an onos, then that should be disallowed. It's usually pretty clear when an intentional structure block takes place regardless of the fuzzy boundaries in "what should be considered a structure block". Surely these fuzzy lines existed in ns1, and there wasn't really any issue in enforcing against it. There was never any need to define the lines between what is acceptable and what isn't because intent was always very clear.
I know it's not going to happen. So I guess rather than sharing my negativity towards structure blocking (which I apologize that I can usually never resist voicing whenever the topic comes up), I should add something more constructive towards this topic: if unrestricted CC building is ever reimplemented, partially built command stations could always be changed to be built in an "opened" state (rather than closed, as if a commander is using it). That way, the issue of CC blocking is almost completely mitigated, as you could only use the in-use CC as a means of blocking a hallway.
if unrestricted CC building is ever reimplemented, partially built command stations could always be changed to be built in an "opened" state (rather than closed, as if a commander is using it). That way, the issue of CC blocking is almost completely mitigated, as you could only use the in-use CC as a means of blocking a hallway.
Yep, sounds good and makes perfect sense. Only manned CCs are closed anyway.
I LOVED relocations but I also think the current command center is way WAY to big for relocs.
Now if it was a good old command chair... :P
That's kind of the point. The NS1 chair was so small you could stick it in a vent. The NS2 CC size actually means it's inherently more balanced in where it can be placed, and what relocations are viable.
Here is where I saw the CC being unlocked. It was one change in what latter became the 250 balance mod. It was called NS2_Strategics and it was made by sewlek, so I'd PM him to find out how he did it
Join Date: 2012-12-11 Member: 174770Members, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Shadow
Comments
Sure, some marketing on top of that would be great. But you can't expect a full-blown marketing campaign without a clear business benefit (ie, expected additional sales). But the CDT's work is helping a lot to keep the core community alive, which gives returning and new players something to stick to.
Food for thought:
We're within 84 players of daily MAX of HAWKEN... Which came out more recently, is F2P, with a multi-million dollar annual PR budget, published by Activision and runs on a toaster.
http://www.steamcharts.com/app/246700#All
Really great game. Fairly recent. Fun, too. Easy to get into.
And there's about 20 people playing it daily. For months now.
And then... NS2 doesn't look so bad after all.
That doesn't mean we don't have a problem... but it could be a whole lot worse.
So basically everything NS2 never had and moar.
Looking at stats like these, I realise how easy it is to hold NS2 playercounts to much higher standards. Like, most-popular-games-in-the-world standards. SC, LOL, COD... Games with huge budgets and thousands upon thousands of players.
And here we are, with our crappy performance, huge load times, limited skill pool etc etc (I know CDT are making leaps and bounds with this but hear me out
I think that says something about what people think of NS2's potential. However easy it is to be critical of the game, every single person on here clearly thinks very highly of it. Else we wouldnt be here and you wouldnt be reading complaints, you'd be hearing crickets chirping.
timed_door entity support outside of having "Extraentitiesmod" for siege map support?
Bring back CC relocations! And Devour!
Two things that went with the change from NS1->NS2 that were immensely fun, and now missing.
(Seriously, is it possible to add CC relocations via a mod, even with the bulky big-ass CC chair?)
Worth noting of course there's an excellent strategical tradeoff -- if rines do an early relocate to a non-tech point, it frees up one more techpoint for aliens to use until such a time that either side can secure a hive.
Bring on the mod!
I'd like to see this, all the same.
If there is no here to hear the cricket chirp, did the cricket chirp?
My only gripe with this is if you relo to a non-tech point that is between 2 tech points, you basically hold both as the walk distance can be short due to the current map design limitations. Eg. Relo to Reactor in Summit, and you basically hold Cross, Atrium and Data. Or Comp. lab and hold cross and flight (and may be sub.)
That's the point, relos are about location. However, they come with a risk -- if you do it at game start, failing to get there as a team or holding long enough to get IPs is game over. You rolled the dice, and lost. If a relo is done mid game, it's still an expensive cost -- which delays other upgrades -- and aliens can still stop you putting it up in the first place. There are always strategies and counter-strategies.
This is no different than in NS1, where relos were an option in both pub and comp play. My own clan used them for comp games when we thought the risk was worth taking, leading to some epic fun games whether we won or lost.
It is one of the sadder aspects of the move to NS2. In an effort to 'standardise' gameplay (along with things like alien comm), entire fields of strategy and gameplay were shutdown, some of the elements that made NS1 so fun to begin with. NS2 has its own charms, of course, but this and devour are two elements I miss the most.
Edit: Anyway, where is this mod Benson? Maybe it can be updated. And I can imagine size being a limitation, but perhaps also a balancing function. The NS1 CC was tiny and could be squeezed between a crevice, that the larger NS2 one requires more space will make it more vulnerable. I don't see a problem with this as a natural balancer.
I fondly remember relocates from ns1 as well, but that boat sailed a long time ago.
As for devour, don't even get me started on that POS idea.
And again, as I said above, one per room. Both entrances couldn't be blocked regardless.
Edit: And whatever happened to welding vents?
It's simply too big to sensibly go anywhere, that's the issue.
I agree - weldable vents and doors (smashable with onos/exo?) would be absolutely lovely. They made for some really fun times in NS1 and added at least a little bit of depth and strategy to the game. Maybe the CDT can make this happen?
If it's being used as a reason to not reimplement relocations, then it's a god damn shame. There may be plenty of other reasons not to allow unrestricted CC building, but allowing the current legitimacy of structure blocking to be a contributing factor in such a decision would be very disappointing.
Not going to happen. Where is the line? A structure that DOESN'T block an onos, but still makes it incredibly difficult could be argued as perfectly 'legal' as it doesn't block, but would surely go against the ethos you're suggesting.
The argument FOR allowing structure blocking has always been that doing so costs resources. If that balance isn't right, then perhaps we need to consider the size/shape/clipping for certain cheap and large structures such that the tradeoff is acceptable.
You'll never find an easy way to make structure blocking considered an exploit, as the boundaries are simply too fuzzy for it to work. However, things like robo factories that are half inside walls could maybe be fixed still further (they already received some love a long time ago), such that no part of it can clip with any scenery, but this is rarely an issue as they're low enough to be jumped over anyway.
The only way to address your question that makes sense to me is to reduce the height of the clip box of the armory such that an onos can jump over it. Even then, armories on slopes might still be problematic, and it could look strange as well.
If we want to talk **** dumb mechanics, bunny hopping marines that look and play ridiculous is at the top. I'll be willing to trade that for devour, anyone?
Can't find the CC mod on Workshop Benson. I'll send chocolates to whoever makes this real (I've sent beer internationally before. You want beer?)
Devour was the single worst thing ever to happen to the NS universe! I was relieved when UWE announced it wouldn't be making a comeback for NS2, and massively disheartened to hear that it *will* be in combat, in any form in which they decide to dress it up.
I wouldn't trade anything in this game that brings back devour in any guise!
With regard to enforcement, I understand the "where's the line" issue - and you're right, there is no line. At the end of the day it should come down to intent - and thus it would be up to an admin's discretion to make a judgement call on that. If it's fairly obvious that a structure's placement is intended to block an onos, then that should be disallowed. It's usually pretty clear when an intentional structure block takes place regardless of the fuzzy boundaries in "what should be considered a structure block". Surely these fuzzy lines existed in ns1, and there wasn't really any issue in enforcing against it. There was never any need to define the lines between what is acceptable and what isn't because intent was always very clear.
I know it's not going to happen. So I guess rather than sharing my negativity towards structure blocking (which I apologize that I can usually never resist voicing whenever the topic comes up), I should add something more constructive towards this topic: if unrestricted CC building is ever reimplemented, partially built command stations could always be changed to be built in an "opened" state (rather than closed, as if a commander is using it). That way, the issue of CC blocking is almost completely mitigated, as you could only use the in-use CC as a means of blocking a hallway.
Now if it was a good old command chair... :P
That's kind of the point. The NS1 chair was so small you could stick it in a vent. The NS2 CC size actually means it's inherently more balanced in where it can be placed, and what relocations are viable.
Here is where I saw the CC being unlocked. It was one change in what latter became the 250 balance mod. It was called NS2_Strategics and it was made by sewlek, so I'd PM him to find out how he did it
http://forums.unknownworlds.com/discussion/126036/ns2-strategics/p1