Helping Marine Comebacks

1567911

Comments

  • FrozenFrozen New York, NY Join Date: 2010-07-02 Member: 72228Members, Constellation Posts: 1,479 Advanced user
    edited May 2015
    IronHorse wrote: »
    mattji104 wrote: »
    But the idea would be lower starting res to make it similarly hard to expand as it currently. However if you are building off a cysts, you will require a gorge to do that. You COULD (instead of MUST) cyst to the RT to build it. Cysting could provide the maturation mechanics, among other ideas to make that position stronger.
    Lowering starting Tres would not be enough, as then it just allows hyper expansion during the time when expansion is the slowest / most contested, during the mid game.
    Basically acting as a general buff to aliens. You could balance it instead on building time and not costs, so it remains consistent at all times in a round.

    But regardless, it sounds like it'd be confusing to a player of what infestation is and what it does, if it's not a requirement or modeling well known things like Starcraft's "creep".
    Also would cysting ever be worth the costs for so little return?? You'd have to chop the price down to a fraction of 1 Tres to only be worth "providing maturation", which would be muddying things quickly as the only non whole number cost in the game, and then of course you'd have justification to put the stuff everywhere for that low cost. It would all get messy, fast.
    mattji104 wrote: »
    I DO NOT consider my ideas fleshed out, while I'm highly confident in my concept, I of course don't think I can make all the specific decisions around it perfectly, AT ALL. I just TRULY BELIEVE in the concept and how worth re-balancing for it is.
    You see, that's the issue with such a broad concept that isn't thought out entirely in every facet (and is why I believe in bringing these ideas forward to be thrown through the ringer, like this thread) - a concept can sound amazing and sound like the solution to all your problems, but until you've hashed it out entirely and ensured it's not broken once applied... well, it's simply a dream.
    One that could be a complete failure and waste of time once it's not just on paper anymore.

    So hash it out a tad and suggest it.. I've thought about this like you since the beta days (day 1 of flamethrower!) and so far everything I've thought through entirely comes up as insufficient in some way in the end.

    Cysts wouldn't JUST do that, I'm talking about making it worth pres investment in the cyst chain and further pres for commander abilities like bonewall and rupture. So players would know when they fight on infestation that they're at an active Player vs Comm disadvantage, instead of a passive Player vs Environment disadvantage. It's to engage players more, and elongate the early and mid game and open up the game design in a way that allows changes to create dynamic scenarios. I mean think things like x res to make an infestation area poisonous like a gorge tunnel. x res to electrify an RT. x res to gain motion tracking in a room. x res to reinforce an rt.

    Things like this can be tied to power and infestation, instead of the whole res game itself. It won't make res pressure impossible, it'll just make holding res more feasible and make sure the disparity between teams can stay more stable throughout the early and mid game. We NEED to stress early and mid game if want to have a meaningful late game. Here's why: Player game phase preferences

    If you want to make a new player to enjoy a round of NS2, then you need to make sure he gets to appreciate the parts of the game people like (early and mid game). This concept stabilizes the res game so we can make dynamic decisions about where we spend res to counter snowballing or to further snowball ourselves. I want games with even teams to be able to progress more evenly so that one teams better pressure doesn't create the predictable outcome you so loathe.

    edit: changing numbers to 'x' to avoid people focusing on the exact number
    mattji104
  • twilitebluetwiliteblue bug stalker Join Date: 2003-02-04 Member: 13116Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue Posts: 1,994 Advanced user
    edited May 2015
    I think Cysts auto defense (eg Spore-releasing or blinding cloud) is unnecessary. The Kharaa Commander already has the tool (Rupture) to fill that need. If Rupture is too weak, then buffing it would be a better solution.

    As for Marines, perhaps if MACs weren't so blind (default sight range of 3.5), or perhaps if there is an option upgrade to increase their sight range, Marines that have the resources to spare could set MACs on patrol to detect backdoor attempts.
    (Edit: Just realised MACs also lack a "patrol" command.)
    Post edited by twiliteblue on
  • FrozenFrozen New York, NY Join Date: 2010-07-02 Member: 72228Members, Constellation Posts: 1,479 Advanced user
    If . . . is too weak, then buffing it would be a better solution.

    I agree with this design philosophy
    mattji104
  • meatmachinemeatmachine South England Join Date: 2013-01-06 Member: 177858Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter Posts: 1,551 Advanced user
    As for Marines, perhaps if MACs weren't so blind (default sight range of 3.5), or perhaps if there is an option upgrade to increase their sight range, Marines that have the resources to spare could set MACs on patrol to detect backdoor attempts.
    Best "solution" yet.

    Also rupture does not need buffing confirmed.
    Too weird to live, yet too rare to die
  • UncleCrunchUncleCrunch Mayonnaise land Join Date: 2005-02-16 Member: 41365Members, Reinforced - Onos Posts: 1,542 Advanced user
    I think Cysts auto defense (eg Spore-releasing or blinding cloud) is unnecessary. The Kharaa Commander already has the tool (Rupture) to fill that need. If Rupture is too weak, then buffing it would be a better solution.

    As for Marines, perhaps if MACs weren't so blind (default sight range of 3.5), or perhaps if there is an option upgrade to increase their sight range, Marines that have the resources to spare could set MACs on patrol to detect backdoor attempts.

    But... it requires biomass 2.
    Making it biomass 0 or 1 would inevitably provide a serious buff for the commander as he already has some means to protect structures. But not for Cyst (at least not enough).

    Rupture is only useful when someone is here to intercept the marine. Bluring more the screen ? It won't stop the marine to shoot at the RT. And there are many other things to consider like graphics (level of detail), etc.

    While we're at it it would be nice to make graphic details by default to high. The only true FPS killer is 'Bloom' and 'Occlusion'. Other than that from low to high; i don't see any difference in FPS. The real FPS killer is CPU.

    Why should it be like that? Try it, you'll see that a skulk has many places to hide when many things block the view (atmospheric, infestation, etc...). But of course it won't stop those who use "pink-skulk mod" on loose consistency checking servers.

    Buffing Rupture with spore... Rooms filled with farts ?
    I think you get the point.


    @mattji104 :
    What you are describing is basically fortification (a buff with cyst or PN). Who said OC wall ?
    It will inevitably end up in creating hot spots which will be unbreakable. Leading to 100% Alien win. The aliens have structure that can be used on the field. I wouldn't say that for marines. It was a great problem on NS1.


    About maps. They should not be giving an advantage to one side or another. Think about this this way. If you are supposed to win as marine on a map, it's a shame to loose on it. Leading to many problems like :
    -players starting to rant, or leave server.
    -humiliation, taunt and such... There always an ass in there.
    -can't make another game on the same map (swap team).
    Not really the definition i imagine for "fun".

    I especially hate Jambi for being such a Marine map (no offense intended to the author). I did win as alien on this map, but that didn't felt good either.
    ChubbChubbs ???

    Reach me on NS2 forums in :
    Map: Outer Rim Ark and Outer Rim Ark Edge
  • DC_DarklingDC_Darkling Join Date: 2003-07-10 Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver Posts: 4,381 Advanced user
    So alien comebacks are usually done with gorge tunnels and bile rushes aye?
    I have a... odd idea now for marines. Bare with me.

    Unpowered structures do not show up on the (mini)map anymore, except in range of a drifter. (To not screw the comm over as he/she has a harder time spotting buildings from above.)

    It would give the need for aliens to pay more attention as they can not just see a dot on a map and move.
    They can still see the building if they ya know.. see it.
    Easier to sneak in a PG and finish the power. (or lols, power surge it). Depending on we may even consider power surge would not count as 'powered'... as in, still wont show on map.

    Would perhaps make a sneaky PG for shotgun rushing more viable?
    NS2
    Old/resigned Dutch Translation Lead. Give feedback about the translation, or help improve by clicking: Current NS2 Dutch translation project. Dutch players apply!
    NS2 Server Maintenance Manual
    WorkshopBackup Manual (WSB Server)
    Ingame: DCDarkling
    'DCDs Steam Workshop', for your NS2 X-Hairs and Viewmodel Weapon mods
    Viewmodels are the ones you hold in your hand, not the one shown in the world!

    Old NS2 Stuff:
    Marine Commander Guide NS2
    Alien Commander Guide NS2
    NS2 Mentor Program
    Old NS1 stuff:
    'Infested Pack v0.6' for models & props
    Darklings Guide to Commanding Version 1.001
  • 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 Posts: 8,191 admin
    What about resource towers losing their armor over time?


    Most strategy games incorporate up keep mechanics, so the concept wouldn't be so foreign. You wouldn't have to bother with welding / up keep so long as you were lane blocking well enough, which should get harder to accomplish the more a team expands, naturally providing more of a vulnerability should they fail to play the meta game adequately.

    To me this seems like a perfect compromise in comparison to the OP idea, as it still involves risk taking, is not a cheap strategy, and cannot immediately win the round.
    There's no concern with inconsistency and communicating this to the player like there would be with variable HP for players, considering everyone (comm included) can visibly see the armor amount, and it's not uncommon or confusing to come across an already damaged tower currently. Potentially increases welder usage as well.

    Best part of this idea : you could use Benson's idea here in a more elegant implementation by simply increasing the starting armor amount slightly, to stabilize the early game and then later on when the armor runs down, destabilize the mid game.
    Tension and variety achieved
    QUOTE (Techercizer @ Feb 3 2012, 10:47 AM) »
    Every time you ask for troubleshooting without providing system info, ATI adds a rendering bug for an upcoming game.

    When you feel you need to be rude or angry about a game, just read these links and remember what role you are playing:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect
    http://www.eldergame.com/2008/06/taming-the-forum-tiger/
    moultanoWobNordic
  • moultanomoultano Creator of ns_shiva. Join Date: 2002-12-14 Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts Posts: 4,219 Advanced user
    I like the idea, but I think it would be better if it only applied to harvesters. Marine response time to res-biting skulks is a delicate thing, and I wouldn't want to mess with that much, but aliens typically have no trouble responding to a lone marine on a harvester. The increased initial armour on harvesters would also help early game aliens appropriately I think.
    meatmachine
  • YojimboYojimbo England Join Date: 2009-03-19 Member: 66806Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow Posts: 1,250 Advanced user
    edited May 2015
    @IronHorse slightly off topic but what was the main reason why electrify rt's wasn't in ns2? Always was curious
    Today's rookies are tomorrow's vets.

    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

    George Carlin.
  • MisterOizoMisterOizo Join Date: 2013-01-08 Member: 178214Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester Posts: 45 Fully active user
    Could the res towers continue smaller bleed out of armor, which has to be tended by healing or welder, even if cyst chain was restored or gorge biled ceased on it earlier. Maybe have babblers inflict bigger damage to just armor so they'de be more used offensively?

    Or the bleed out could apply to power nodes (e.g. itty bit of infestation gets "stuck" inside power node that has to be removed by welder)?
  • WobWob Join Date: 2005-04-08 Member: 47814Members, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow Posts: 483 Advanced user
    moultano wrote: »
    I like the idea, but I think it would be better if it only applied to harvesters. Marine response time to res-biting skulks is a delicate thing, and I wouldn't want to mess with that much, but aliens typically have no trouble responding to a lone marine on a harvester. The increased initial armour on harvesters would also help early game aliens appropriately I think.

    I disagree and think the effect should apply to both teams but with multipliers depending on player count precisely because of marine response. I also think that killing resource towers should have a much much much larger point contribution to score to encourage certain RTS behaviours.

    +25 points because that's a lot more than what it is now (+15 if you do it yourself), it's also more proportionate to what impact it actually provides to a game, and at the end of the day score doesn't really matter objectively other than an ego boost which might be enough of an incentive without any real disadvantage to change people's attitudes and potentially helping L2P a little... :wink::smiley:
    IronHorse
  • UncleCrunchUncleCrunch Mayonnaise land Join Date: 2005-02-16 Member: 41365Members, Reinforced - Onos Posts: 1,542 Advanced user
    IronHorse wrote: »
    What about resource towers losing their armor over time?


    Most strategy games incorporate up keep mechanics, so the concept wouldn't be so foreign. You wouldn't have to bother with welding / up keep so long as you were lane blocking well enough, which should get harder to accomplish the more a team expands, naturally providing more of a vulnerability should they fail to play the meta game adequately.

    To me this seems like a perfect compromise in comparison to the OP idea, as it still involves risk taking, is not a cheap strategy, and cannot immediately win the round.
    There's no concern with inconsistency and communicating this to the player like there would be with variable HP for players, considering everyone (comm included) can visibly see the armor amount, and it's not uncommon or confusing to come across an already damaged tower currently. Potentially increases welder usage as well.

    Best part of this idea : you could use Benson's idea here in a more elegant implementation by simply increasing the starting armor amount slightly, to stabilize the early game and then later on when the armor runs down, destabilize the mid game.
    Tension and variety achieved


    I see one problem. In this scenario, the game should be tuned in order to make sure no RT are getting up at the same couple of minutes. Like marines do in early game.

    Then the primary targets would be the 2 natural RTs first when it's time. It will force both teams to go forward and back again forever (depending on the armor countdown). It would be a game of cats and mouse. Anticipation would be difficult as field units wouldn't know which of their own RTs are weaker. But Marines can recycle and rebuild... not a option for aliens.

    To unlock this, each team would have to rush an enemy base (soon enough) in a fashion that is clearly more organized than today. It could be done in competitive but not in Public games. It's already difficult to organize with 2 PGs...

    If the rush succeeds the game ends. If it fails the game turn upside down. The defender would then be the attacker and would ruin the opponent economy for good in a wink of an eye. We see that sometimes. It cripples the game. Of course with less chances of recovering. At least it will take time. Maybe too much time, leading to an big big extension of the mid-game if it happens.

    So it would be fast or totally slow depending on the ability to resist such a punch in the face. I guess the marine would be dominant over time as they can recycle/rebuild and also as they are used to rebuild. It's part of their process.


    @Nachos:
    Since a long long time i suggested and asked for such kind of idea, like bullet damage, health in RTs, economy speed depending on number of players and also based on players numbers in team. So you could start a game 4 vs 8... (more or less)

    We can't make a map shrink or inflate based on player number (12-18 slots etc). RT number is fixed. It was only logical to move the slider on something else. I grew discouraged to see this one day. Not because it could be hard to be done (which is not the case), but mostly because i think it's out of reach for some. That's sad, to be honest.


    ChubbChubbs ???

    Reach me on NS2 forums in :
    Map: Outer Rim Ark and Outer Rim Ark Edge
  • 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 Posts: 8,191 admin
    edited May 2015
    @Yojimbo Commander to enemy field player interaction was determined to be frustrating from an understandable perception of unfairness. Bonewall is the most impactful of an interaction allowed.. and is why other mechanics like rupture have a delay on them (to allow a player a chance to counter it).

    @nachos Are you and me agreeing on things?!... this feels weird.

    @UncleCrunch I think you are overthinking it ;) if an alien "natural" RT completes building by the time a marine enters the room, it will be stronger than a harvester is currently, and aliens would be responding to it quickly from being so close to base. Same goes for marine naturals... players will tend to focus more on the PvP early game, in order to push back accruing map control until a time comes when it's more viable to attack the RTs (unless there is an obviously safe opening)



    The only issue I see from this concept, is it will indirectly buff cysting-to-erode-structure-armor strategies unless the cysts are going across the map to a marine natural 6 minutes into a game where the armor is already gone.
    The good news is neither this concept nor cysts can actually destroy the structures, still, so it's still minor for an already minor threat.

    QUOTE (Techercizer @ Feb 3 2012, 10:47 AM) »
    Every time you ask for troubleshooting without providing system info, ATI adds a rendering bug for an upcoming game.

    When you feel you need to be rude or angry about a game, just read these links and remember what role you are playing:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect
    http://www.eldergame.com/2008/06/taming-the-forum-tiger/
  • WobWob Join Date: 2005-04-08 Member: 47814Members, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow Posts: 483 Advanced user
    edited May 2015
    IronHorse wrote: »
    @nachos Are you and me agreeing on things?!... this feels weird.

    I've agreed with you before on issues. I'm not one for holding a grudge against arguments, particularly because these two issues are independent of each other. GT BB rush is still a bad example to base a comeback mechanic on ;)
  • UncleCrunchUncleCrunch Mayonnaise land Join Date: 2005-02-16 Member: 41365Members, Reinforced - Onos Posts: 1,542 Advanced user
    IronHorse wrote: »
    @UncleCrunch I think you are overthinking it ;) if an alien "natural" RT completes building by the time a marine enters the room, it will be stronger than a harvester is currently, and aliens would be responding to it quickly from being so close to base. Same goes for marine naturals... players will tend to focus more on the PvP early game, in order to push back accruing map control until a time comes when it's more viable to attack the RTs (unless there is an obviously safe opening)


    The only issue I see from this concept, is it will indirectly buff cysting-to-erode-structure-armor strategies unless the cysts are going across the map to a marine natural 6 minutes into a game where the armor is already gone.
    The good news is neither this concept nor cysts can actually destroy the structures, still, so it's still minor for an already minor threat.

    Precisely. The early game would be a little more quiet on the RT matter. But in the mean time, everyone will know the time it take to see a RT going to normal health... RT Feast time!
    I mean you will see 2 skulks (mini) team up to bite some RTs. Same goes for the marine but they will meet Lerks and Fades (the other part of the team) intercepting many attempts to kill RTs. A2/W2 isn't granting fade kills like that. So the marine would have to kill a hive fast or die. It would transform the mid-game or remove it eventually. Transform in the way it would be unforgiving the same for aliens and not providing many fights after all AND more risks to loose everything in a couple of minutes. Just the same regular stuff but with a dead end if something fails.

    If it was tuned for 50%/50% map control. Maybe. But not if it is 70/30 in marines favor, like today.
    ChubbChubbs ???

    Reach me on NS2 forums in :
    Map: Outer Rim Ark and Outer Rim Ark Edge
  • 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 Posts: 8,191 admin
    edited May 2015
    @UncleCrunch
    I am having trouble tracking you, could you try to explain what you are attempting to convey in a single concise sentence?
    I can't even tell if you are recommending an adjustment on what is proposed or not.

    @nachos
    Yea I know, I was just kidding with ya ;)
    QUOTE (Techercizer @ Feb 3 2012, 10:47 AM) »
    Every time you ask for troubleshooting without providing system info, ATI adds a rendering bug for an upcoming game.

    When you feel you need to be rude or angry about a game, just read these links and remember what role you are playing:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect
    http://www.eldergame.com/2008/06/taming-the-forum-tiger/
  • FrozenFrozen New York, NY Join Date: 2010-07-02 Member: 72228Members, Constellation Posts: 1,479 Advanced user
    IronHorse wrote: »
    @UncleCrunch
    I am having trouble tracking you, could you try to explain what you are attempting to convey in a single concise sentence?
    I can't even tell if you are recommending an adjustment on what is proposed or not.

    @nachos
    Yea I know, I was just kidding with ya ;)

    @IronHorse don't make fun of @UncleCrunch . Honest admissions of difficulty understanding his english count as mean.
    mattji104
    NotPaLaGi
  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow Posts: 4,771 Advanced user
    nachos wrote: »
    +25 points because that's a lot more than what it is now (+15 if you do it yourself), it's also more proportionate to what impact it actually provides to a game, and at the end of the day score doesn't really matter objectively other than an ego boost which might be enough of an incentive without any real disadvantage to change people's attitudes and potentially helping L2P a little... :wink::smiley:
    The whole point system could use a revamp. It is kind of a trello card too.
    https://trello.com/c/JB53k2TV/518-make-killing-hive-worth-more-then-25-points
    From my perspective UWE has been trying to both with what little resources they have given to the game. They don't have an AAA budget, let alone an indie game budget. They have the budget of a game that has been out 6 years. I want to say, don't half ass two things, whole ass one thing. I just don't think they have the resources to do it. Unlike many of the people on the forums, I guess I am just happy they are at least trying even though I may not like what they end up doing.
  • UncleCrunchUncleCrunch Mayonnaise land Join Date: 2005-02-16 Member: 41365Members, Reinforced - Onos Posts: 1,542 Advanced user
    edited May 2015
    IronHorse wrote: »
    @UncleCrunch
    I am having trouble tracking you, could you try to explain what you are attempting to convey in a single concise sentence? I can't even tell if you are recommending an adjustment on what is proposed or not.

    For what you suggest, the Aliens shouldn't fight for the 2 harvesters they have outside the hive.

    Why ? Early game will focus on PvP. Yes, precisely, you're right.
    When does it changes ? At the moment the RTs have normal health. Before or during mid-game isn't really relevant.

    -When it's time (normal health on RTs); 2 or 3 (with the kham) skulks go Res biting. Needless to say it has become critical to do so for the Alien team. They have to do it fast. They avoid contact to keep the pack safe. It would be dumb to do otherwise. But nothing would surprise me on this area considering some comments over here. Let's say these players have brains. The Marines can try to defend Extractors but it would mean to give more map control to the aliens. So most likely they have 2 guys rebuilding RTs (East and West side). 3 guys on the front.

    -Marines will try the same on the 2 harvesters. But it's only 2 targets. So as you pointed out before, it will be easy to know where the marines will attack. It will be one fight for one Harvester. Probably 3 marines against a mixed pack of Lerks and Fades. Fades are out because no Harvesters was killed before.

    -These Marines get intercepted and killed (most likely) while the extractors are going down one by one (and fast). They probably get to kill one Harvester but it won't matter as they loose so much (behind the front line). In fact everything. Plus the 3 skulks can help against the 3 Marines at front (from behind). These 3 are expendables. The Aliens will be able to rebuild the Harvester easily and then conquer. One Lerk can cover great distances and give intel on what's going on. The Marines will have difficulties from that point. More than in a vanilla game.

    -If the Marines anticipate this res biting session. The best choice would be to set up mines on Extractors. So they will have to wait for the shotguns a little longer. At least part of the team. It won't stop the res biting non the less. In the worst case, one skulk (the kham) sacrifice; the other 2 finish it.

    PGs ? In comp PG are usually close to hive in order to rush it. So it won't allow to defend Extractors. In pub, it's used to lock a TP. Still, 2 or 3 Skulks on a PG is an easy task.


    So the Marines have 2 choices to be the victors :
    -Rebuild and reconquer, but Fades/Lerks are still around (most likely). Long and difficult. Rate success is still low.
    -Killing the hive in one single stroke. Flipping a coin.
    ... die.

    The pivot point becomes a single or 2 fights and not the entire mid-game. More than what it is today.

    Another note. Nothing prevents to go res biting with 3 skulks in early game or mid (after rebuild). It depends on the strategy choice of course.
    Post edited by UncleCrunch on
    ChubbChubbs ???

    Reach me on NS2 forums in :
    Map: Outer Rim Ark and Outer Rim Ark Edge
  • LuchsLuchs Switzerland Join Date: 2014-07-23 Member: 197569Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow Posts: 75 Fully active user
    mattji104 wrote: »
    @IronHorse don't make fun of @UncleCrunch . Honest admissions of difficulty understanding his english count as mean.
    @mattji104 A polite request to rephrase something in a simpler way in order to better understand it counts as a sign of honest interest in a discussion.

    SantaClawsNordicIronHorsecoolitic
  • 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 Posts: 8,191 admin
    @UncleCrunch that is the opposite of a single, concise sentence. ;)

    While I still don't get the point you are trying to convey, I do understand you are pointing out potential scenarios that could occur. I think the issue I see with this is that you are only considering a few of them, which is presuming a lot..

    You mentioned a scenario where marines attempting to down a typical health harvester would lose all of their back res in the process.
    If the timing is that both teams' towers are at typical armor levels as it is currently, how would that play out any differently than it is now? You also presume a lot about the theoretical engagements. Those three defending /capping marines may be able to fight off 2 skulks + 1 lerk, just like the 2 offensive marines might be able to fight off 1 or 2 defending skulks (1 if a gorge is off building /healing). Or the aliens could smash marines on both fronts.

    Basically I don't see any guaranteed outcome in any way, just like it is currently.

    "Nothing prevents to go res biting with 3 skulks in early game"
    No and nothing should prevent such a thing.. But at least it would be more difficult now, by providing a longer time to respond with increased armor from a recently built tower.
    QUOTE (Techercizer @ Feb 3 2012, 10:47 AM) »
    Every time you ask for troubleshooting without providing system info, ATI adds a rendering bug for an upcoming game.

    When you feel you need to be rude or angry about a game, just read these links and remember what role you are playing:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect
    http://www.eldergame.com/2008/06/taming-the-forum-tiger/
  • FrozenFrozen New York, NY Join Date: 2010-07-02 Member: 72228Members, Constellation Posts: 1,479 Advanced user
    This whole extra armor on new RTs thing is just another band-aid.
    mattji104
  • 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 Posts: 8,191 admin
    It's an adjustment.
    Again, a complete redesign is *absolutely* out of the question... So if you want improvements still you're going to have to get over this thought that any adjustment is a bandaid.
    QUOTE (Techercizer @ Feb 3 2012, 10:47 AM) »
    Every time you ask for troubleshooting without providing system info, ATI adds a rendering bug for an upcoming game.

    When you feel you need to be rude or angry about a game, just read these links and remember what role you are playing:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect
    http://www.eldergame.com/2008/06/taming-the-forum-tiger/
  • moultanomoultano Creator of ns_shiva. Join Date: 2002-12-14 Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts Posts: 4,219 Advanced user
    @mattji104 Would you mind starting another thread for the powernodes/cysting discussion and taking that line there? While it may have merit, it's a way larger change than the character of the things we are discussing here, and isn't likely to happen outside of a mod.
  • UncleCrunchUncleCrunch Mayonnaise land Join Date: 2005-02-16 Member: 41365Members, Reinforced - Onos Posts: 1,542 Advanced user
    IronHorse wrote: »
    @UncleCrunch that is the opposite of a single, concise sentence. ;)

    While I still don't get the point you are trying to convey, I do understand you are pointing out potential scenarios that could occur. I think the issue I see with this is that you are only considering a few of them, which is presuming a lot..

    You mentioned a scenario where marines attempting to down a typical health harvester would lose all of their back res in the process.
    If the timing is that both teams' towers are at typical armor levels as it is currently, how would that play out any differently than it is now? You also presume a lot about the theoretical engagements. Those three defending /capping marines may be able to fight off 2 skulks + 1 lerk, just like the 2 offensive marines might be able to fight off 1 or 2 defending skulks (1 if a gorge is off building /healing). Or the aliens could smash marines on both fronts.

    Basically I don't see any guaranteed outcome in any way, just like it is currently.

    "Nothing prevents to go res biting with 3 skulks in early game"
    No and nothing should prevent such a thing.. But at least it would be more difficult now, by providing a longer time to respond with increased armor from a recently built tower.

    Of course if a team is clearly superior and wins everything; the RTs will fall anyways.

    These scenarios i described are the most common to my knowledge.

    Another one ?
    Let's say the marines have 70% res node on the map. But with luck the Aliens kill 3 guys in the middle of the map (the pushers). Usually it's stalled (70/30) until higher life forms are out. So the Alien made a hole in the front line. They would probably not try to bite Extractors close to the hive but the closest to the marine base. leading to this :
    -The Alien will move as a pack (3).
    -The Marines will have to deal with a threat close to the base. There is always a chance the skulk pack would be targeting the base instead of the Extractors. It's close to the base but there's 3 skulks... if the marines have only one IP... the fresh guy will have to be one with 100% accuracy (not a good incentive by the way).
    -The Marines would eventually kill the threat and recap the naturals but it takes time (re-spawn, build etc).
    -Then the alien pack would kill the Extractors in the middle of the map without any real threat.

    A cat & mouse game. So the marine will run forever chasing the aliens killing the Extractors. If the marines deploy differently to cover as much as possible (4 to 6 Rts). They inevitably loose the map control. 2 hives at high skill level is kind of deadly (as it is currently). You would say it looks like the same as vanilla, but it's far more different in reality.

    The thing is, this suggestion brings an 'order of things to do' a little more than usual. It's more 'visible' that players will focus on PvP first (preventing the opponent to build). But as soon as it is possible (or easier), the targets will be the weakest RTs. But this time with more dedication. It's critical to bite res for the Aliens. That armor stuff moves the pressure slider up when they have to wait.

    Also It can change the priorities. If you can't kill a RT fast (more time needed), "let's kill a base, we're already there...". Or the whole Alien team will act as a meat ball. It would be a game killer somehow.

    On the other hand if the aliens get to cap 50% of all res nodes, it would work differently. With proper economy changes of course. Won't happen.

    Still, in all scenarios (the ones i describe are the most common, TBH) it will not remove the pressure but concentrate it on the moment it's ok to bite. Eventually leading to 'surrender' without a proper or complete mid-game.

    Any teams will look for the most efficient way to do things. It's what i presume they'll do. I would. Also, why kill a RT when i can kill a base faster ?

    That is why i prefer 'auto defending' stuff like Cyst/Harvester-Spore (and something for marine). You can kill RTs but you have to proceed properly. It removes some pressure without changing the actual front line (70/30). In fact i think it would enable potential bigger changes. If one defending system is doing less damage you can move the front line at will. 50/50 ? maybe.


    ChubbChubbs ???

    Reach me on NS2 forums in :
    Map: Outer Rim Ark and Outer Rim Ark Edge
  • 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 Posts: 8,191 admin
    edited May 2015
    "why kill a RT when i can kill a base faster ?"

    Because base is way easier to defend (and prevent) with spawning players and a commander, especially compared to some far away random room on the other side of a map with a single undefended structure. Also you'd need more players to accomplish this, which puts your team into the spawn queue when you fail, giving marines breathing room.

    No offense intended - because I do appreciate the effort to point out flaws - but you are just hypothetically listing scenarios that already occur. I could just as easily list scenarios that are the exact opposite and they would be just as likely.

    I think you misunderstand the goal of the idea ; it's not to lessen pressure, but instead to provide economical stability in the early game, followed by economical instability mid game on - in order to lessen the compounding advantage that comes with properly playing the meta game, to provide a better chance of a well earned comeback and to prevent demoralizing odds.


    Post edited by IronHorse on
    QUOTE (Techercizer @ Feb 3 2012, 10:47 AM) »
    Every time you ask for troubleshooting without providing system info, ATI adds a rendering bug for an upcoming game.

    When you feel you need to be rude or angry about a game, just read these links and remember what role you are playing:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect
    http://www.eldergame.com/2008/06/taming-the-forum-tiger/
  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow Posts: 4,771 Advanced user
    edited May 2015
    To us veterans biting rt's seems necessary and good. It is part of the rts side of the game. I remember when I was new I thought that biting rt's for what felt like an incredibly long time was so boring. One unintended consequence to this is just that, increasing the time to kill rts at certain times of the game.

    Saying that, I don't want the game solely focused on pvp.
    From my perspective UWE has been trying to both with what little resources they have given to the game. They don't have an AAA budget, let alone an indie game budget. They have the budget of a game that has been out 6 years. I want to say, don't half ass two things, whole ass one thing. I just don't think they have the resources to do it. Unlike many of the people on the forums, I guess I am just happy they are at least trying even though I may not like what they end up doing.
    BensonUncleCrunch
  • 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 Posts: 8,191 admin
    edited May 2015
    @Nordic It's actually the opposite..

    Newer or less skilled players 95% of the time will encounter resource towers with less effective HP with this change, throughout the round.

    This is because of two reasons :

    1) Newer or less skilled players do not rush to the enemy's naturals when the round starts - in fact most of the time they build one room at a time as marines, starting from base, or as aliens they just engage marines and typically do so after marines move beyond their naturals. If they succeeded then they more than likely have assisting aliens or have some en route, to negate the difference in increased armor, assuming they wouldn't do the statistically likely thing of continuing to engage players..

    2) The towers would only be increased in armor for a very short duration, the remaining time in a round, basically the other 90% of a round, they would be much weaker than what exists currently. "but what if marines get aggressive with forward RTs?" then you'd be playing wrong to attack those first, (this is nothing new) considering how compounding factors make the back res or naturals better targets - both due to marines not near them and due to much less eHP.
    Even if an alien did attack a new RT that was closer to their hive, they'd then have more available to teammates to assist.
    QUOTE (Techercizer @ Feb 3 2012, 10:47 AM) »
    Every time you ask for troubleshooting without providing system info, ATI adds a rendering bug for an upcoming game.

    When you feel you need to be rude or angry about a game, just read these links and remember what role you are playing:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect
    http://www.eldergame.com/2008/06/taming-the-forum-tiger/
  • NordicNordic Long term camping in Kodiak Join Date: 2012-05-13 Member: 151995Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow Posts: 4,771 Advanced user
    edited May 2015
    I could argue either way, but I guess it would have to be tested in that environment. Needs testing in more environments than that. I mostly want to see how it does at the top end and the low end. When, where, and especially if this will get tested is a big question.

    @ironhorse, how long do you consider a short while for the armor to go down? 30 seconds, 2 minutes, 5 minutes? A fine line will have to be found and it may differ with player count and skill. If you set it too low rt's will go down quicker, too high and they will stay up longer. It might even require further economy tweaks.

    I really do think this might be a good area for hidden scaling by player count. The armor is always visible. Scaling would make it work in 6v6 to 12v12. It might even make the 25v25 games somewhat more like regular ns2.
    Post edited by Nordic on
    From my perspective UWE has been trying to both with what little resources they have given to the game. They don't have an AAA budget, let alone an indie game budget. They have the budget of a game that has been out 6 years. I want to say, don't half ass two things, whole ass one thing. I just don't think they have the resources to do it. Unlike many of the people on the forums, I guess I am just happy they are at least trying even though I may not like what they end up doing.
  • BensonBenson Join Date: 2012-03-07 Member: 148303Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow Posts: 1,296 Advanced user
    edited May 2015
    Just throwing an idea out:

    When testing the idea of reducing Resource Tower HP after time, I would say the best time would be to reduce the tower's effective HP at least once it has paid for itself (earned 10 res)

    Also:
    To indicate to players the "age" of an extractor, a (Decayed) tag on the affected RTs could be nice (when looked at, not on minimap)
    If we are to be damned, let us be damned for what we really are. - Capt. Jean Luc Picard
    Nordic
Sign In or Register to comment.