Build 327 - UNEARTHED - Natural Selection 2

124

Comments

  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    For new players and vanity. It has very little to do with balance at this point in the game.

    You cant just ignore the small but existing influx of new players.
    Most of them had been gaming for decades, and will hand you your kharaa arse as a marine.
    All it takes is for them to prefer the arcade tab - where his ranking will never change - and he can single-handedly mess up all the rounds.

    Maybe that IS the plan in the long run, so UWE can kill off the arcade tab.
    But i dont think that half of the playerbase would migrate to ranked, 10v10 servers.
    Aeglos wrote: »
    And people's hive scores don't change that much or drastically, so it doesn't matter if you aren't going for "unsuspecting new players". Even if a couple of them do improve, well, the appeal of larger servers is that an individual's output is diluted.
    Aeglos wrote: »
    You are splitting the available pool of players. At the most extreme end, you would require double the amount of players to get servers seeded. That is unlikely as quick play will direct players to official player counts plus players might not care either way, but splitting any amount of players is not a good idea when we already have so few.

  • .trixX..trixX. Budapest Join Date: 2007-10-11 Member: 62605Members Posts: 856 Advanced user
    edited May 17
    Yeah, fuck what others enjoy, i get it.
    Let's just alienate even more players of the few regulars we have left.

    EDIT:
    The server population had been stable for the last what... 2 years? And the playerbase WAS split, without causing massive troubles.
    What we have now is LESS rounds than before. Im still waiting for someone to explain how is that a good thing.
    NO Cyril, when they're dead they're just hookers!
    jrgnMoFo1
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Yeah, fuck what others enjoy, i get it.
    Let's just alienate even more players of the few regulars we have left.

    EDIT:
    The server population had been stable for the last what... 2 years? And the playerbase WAS split, without causing massive troubles.
    What we have now is LESS rounds than before. Im still waiting for someone to explain how is that a good thing.

    What's done is done. I've been explaining that your "solution" makes it even worse.
  • .trixX..trixX. Budapest Join Date: 2007-10-11 Member: 62605Members Posts: 856 Advanced user
    Aeglos wrote: »
    What's done is done. I've been explaining that your "solution" makes it even worse.

    "My" solution would be to revert back to ranked 12v12 servers. I dont see how that's an impossible request.
    NO Cyril, when they're dead they're just hookers!
    MoFo1jrgn
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    What's done is done. I've been explaining that your "solution" makes it even worse.

    "My" solution would be to revert back to ranked 12v12 servers. I dont see how that's an impossible request.

    It's not impossible. Just selfish. You're just saying whatever to get your way. If you can't get your compromise then
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Yeah, fuck what others enjoy, i get it.
    Let's just alienate even more players of the few regulars we have left.

    You might want to take a look in the mirror.
  • MoFo1MoFo1 United States Join Date: 2014-07-25 Member: 197612Members Posts: 727 Advanced user
    edited May 21
    Aeglos wrote: »
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    What's done is done. I've been explaining that your "solution" makes it even worse.

    "My" solution would be to revert back to ranked 12v12 servers. I dont see how that's an impossible request.

    It's not impossible. Just selfish.

    Hmm seems to me the selfish ones are those who want it restricted to 10v10 or less

    Especially considering that a 12v12 limit allows for 8v8 and 10v10 servers, while 10v10 or less is effectively "sabotaging" 12v12 with outdated broken hiveskill/shuffle to force people into lower playercount servers...
    .trixX.
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    MoFo1 wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    What's done is done. I've been explaining that your "solution" makes it even worse.

    "My" solution would be to revert back to ranked 12v12 servers. I dont see how that's an impossible request.

    It's not impossible. Just selfish.

    Hmm seems to me the selfish ones are those who want it restricted to 10v10 or less

    Especially considering that a 12v12 limit allows for 8v8 and 10v10 servers, while 10v10 or less is effectively "sabotaging" 12v12 with outdated broken hiveskill/shuffle to force people into lower playercount servers...

    Shrug, your inability to understand isn't anything new.

    Lower player counts are not just not viable when put together with higher player counts. The vast majority of people wouldn't care what the player count is, and the minority of people who do care would just not play once they reach their breaking point. Its the former who are actually seed the servers so there is effectively no choice.

    Lets put it another way. 14v14 servers will definitely do better at being populated than 12v12 if allowed. It'll take a few months but if server operators put both player counts up, that will become the standard.
  • MoFo1MoFo1 United States Join Date: 2014-07-25 Member: 197612Members Posts: 727 Advanced user
    edited May 21
    Aeglos wrote: »
    MoFo1 wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    What's done is done. I've been explaining that your "solution" makes it even worse.

    "My" solution would be to revert back to ranked 12v12 servers. I dont see how that's an impossible request.

    It's not impossible. Just selfish.

    Hmm seems to me the selfish ones are those who want it restricted to 10v10 or less

    Especially considering that a 12v12 limit allows for 8v8 and 10v10 servers, while 10v10 or less is effectively "sabotaging" 12v12 with outdated broken hiveskill/shuffle to force people into lower playercount servers...

    Shrug, your inability to understand isn't anything new.

    The vast majority of people wouldn't care what the player count is, and the minority of people who do care would just not play once they reach their breaking point. Its the former who are actually seed the servers so there is effectively no choice.

    Yes NOW there is effectively no choice as anything over 10v10 is a disaster of stacked game after stacked game.

    Before your minority could choose to seed 8v8 servers if they wanted to, they just don't.


    See you're the one failing to understand that giving those 10v10+ servers working hiveskill doesn't make anything worse for anyone as you'd still have quick play forcing people into servers with the "official" playercount...



    Which would also allow certain servers to run mods without completely losing any ability to balance teams. (I already know of one server that removed great mods ONLY because it was required to have working hiveskill/shuffle)

    .trixX.
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    MoFo1 wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    MoFo1 wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    What's done is done. I've been explaining that your "solution" makes it even worse.

    "My" solution would be to revert back to ranked 12v12 servers. I dont see how that's an impossible request.

    It's not impossible. Just selfish.

    Hmm seems to me the selfish ones are those who want it restricted to 10v10 or less

    Especially considering that a 12v12 limit allows for 8v8 and 10v10 servers, while 10v10 or less is effectively "sabotaging" 12v12 with outdated broken hiveskill/shuffle to force people into lower playercount servers...

    Shrug, your inability to understand isn't anything new.

    The vast majority of people wouldn't care what the player count is, and the minority of people who do care would just not play once they reach their breaking point. Its the former who are actually seed the servers so there is effectively no choice.

    Yes NOW there is effectively no choice as anything over 10v10 is a disaster of stacked game after stacked game.

    Before your minority could choose to seed 8v8 servers if they wanted to, they just don't.


    See you're the one failing to understand that giving those 10v10+ servers working hiveskill doesn't make anything worse for anyone as you'd still have quick play forcing people into servers with the "official" playercount...



    Which would also allow certain servers to run mods without completely losing any ability to balance teams. (I already know of one server that removed great mods ONLY because it was required to have working hiveskill/shuffle)

    See, I've already explained everything that you have brought up previously. You continue to demonstrate a complete inability to learn or address points to argue. Repeating it doesn't make it more right.
    Nordic
  • SquishpokePOOPFACESquishpokePOOPFACE -21,248 posts (ignore below) Join Date: 2012-10-31 Member: 165262Members, Reinforced - Shadow Posts: 1,654 Advanced user
    12v12 is completely pointless to play. Why not just play Fortnite at that point?
    To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to play Natural Selection 2. The gameplay is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of military strategy and advanced mathematics you won't even win a single game. Theres also the game's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into the game. The maps and artwork draw heavily from Riddley Scott's Alien franchise, for instance. The players understand this stuff, they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depth of the game, to realise that it's not just great, that it also says something about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Natural Selection 2 truly ARE idiots. of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in the Marines' existential catchphrase "how do I get to be so good", which itself is a cryptic reference to the high degree of intelligence required to play the game as intended. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion when spectating a game. What fools... how I pity them. And, yes, by the way, i DO have a Fade tatoo. And no, you cannot see it. it's for the ladies' eyes only, and even then they have to demonstrate that they are within 50 hive skill points of my own (preferable lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid.
    Nordic
  • jrgnjrgn Join Date: 2006-11-03 Member: 58289Members Posts: 142 Advanced user
    edited May 21
  • jrgnjrgn Join Date: 2006-11-03 Member: 58289Members Posts: 142 Advanced user
    edited May 21
    People have different opinions than yours? @Squashpo......

  • 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 22
    jrgn wrote: »

    Nordic please repost on Discord.
    I don't understand what you mean. Which discord?

    Edit: This is the only discord I am on now. https://discord.gg/aPAmEKU

    Edit2: Oh Nin. You say off topic on me, but not jgrn. I don't know what he means and that literally is the only discord I hang out in. If he is looking to get ahold of me on discord that is the place.
    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.
    Nintendows
  • .trixX..trixX. Budapest Join Date: 2007-10-11 Member: 62605Members Posts: 856 Advanced user
    edited May 22
    Aeglos wrote: »
    You might want to take a look in the mirror.

    Wow, that's a deep point. You've convinced me mate.
    You could say im a jackass, or a rude fuck. But im not selfish nor a pretentious asshole like some here.

    As some of us pointed out, you can have 9v9 server with a 12v12 player cap, but not the other way around.
    Do you think every gamer will come here or to discrod and complain? This simply is not representative.

    Who are YOU to say what is a good and enjoyable game? Im arguing for the ability for server operators to CHOOSE their player count, to cater to THEIR playerbase.
    Does that sound selfish to you?
    We dont have more players, we dont have more active servers.
    What the fuck was the whole point to this change, and why the fuck chase something that hasnt proven to achieve what it was designed to?


    Can someone point me to a stat that says yes, 9v9 was a good change?
    @Nordic ?
    @IronHorse ?
    Post edited by .trixX. on
    NO Cyril, when they're dead they're just hookers!
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    edited May 22
    .trixX. wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    You might want to take a look in the mirror.

    Wow, that's a deep point. You've convinced me mate.
    You could say im a jackass, or a rude fuck. But im not selfish nor a pretentious asshole like some here.

    As some of us pointed out, you can have 9v9 server with a 12v12 player cap, but not the other way around.
    Do you think every gamer will come here or to discrod and complain? This simply is not representative.

    Who are YOU to say what is a good and enjoyable game? Im arguing for the ability for server operators to CHOOSE their player count, to cater to THEIR playerbase.
    Does that sound selfish to you?
    We dont have more players, we dont have more active servers.
    What the fuck was the whole point to this change, and why the fuck chase something that hasnt proven to achieve what it was designed to?


    Can someone point me to a stat that says yes, 9v9 was a good change?

    Oh, struck a nerve?

    I'm going to try one last time. I'll even number them in the hope that either you or mofo can actually respond and have a discussion rather than repeating yourselves and ignoring what others are saying.

    1. It is not practical to have a lower player count server together with a higher player count server. Possible is not plausible. Higher player counts will eventually win out, be it 8v8, 10v10, 12v12, 14v14.It is difficult to seed and easy to fill. Enjoyment doesn't come into play when seeding a server. It only comes when you reach what people are unwilling to accept. It is not an indicator of how happy they are with the player count.

    2. Yeah, not everyone comes here to complain and it is not representative. Look in the mirror. That is true for either side. What's your point again?

    3. Who am I? Say hi to the mirror again. Who are you?

    The change was made by the devs who have a vision they want to achieve. You don't agree? Well, they are the ones in power so tough luck. Reminder to any dev reading that HP bars suck by the way.

    4. See: 1. Seeding is hard, operators prefer not to fund empty servers, there is no real choice. You can have lots of regulars who prefer to play your server with whatever settings and mods but there is no use if they aren't there together at the same time.

    5. What others enjoy = alienate player base, what you enjoy = not alienate player base. Sounds pretty selfish to me.

    6. Point can be seen below from the news post of this topic if you cared enough to read rather than just express your opinion.
    The goal with this is two fold: First, to provide a better gameplay experience with the new balance changes, as we feel both game and map balance are improved with these numbers. Secondly, it will by proxy reduce stress on servers and net performance gains and a smoother experience for all players.

    I don't know about proof, but at the very least it seems it wasn't designed with 12v12 in mind. Not sure why you are chasing 12v12 then.

    7. For what it's worth, I agree that the quantitative stats would probably suffer. I don't have the numbers but it is unlikely that we have more players or active servers. That wasn't the point of the change though but unfortunately qualitative stats are inherently hard to measure, so it is unlikely that there are stats available.


    And yes, I'm an asshole. I'm not proud of it, but it is what it is. Doesn't make me wrong though and I also admit my faults when I face them.
  • .trixX..trixX. Budapest Join Date: 2007-10-11 Member: 62605Members Posts: 856 Advanced user
    Aeglos wrote: »
    Oh, struck a nerve?
    Yeah, accusing me of selfishness when the 9v9 proponents are the real ones, for starters.
    Aeglos wrote: »
    1. It is not practical to have a lower player count server together with a higher player count server. Possible is not plausible. Higher player counts will eventually win out, be it 8v8, 10v10, 12v12, 14v14.It is difficult to seed and easy to fill. Enjoyment doesn't come into play when seeding a server. It only comes when you reach what people are unwilling to accept. It is not an indicator of how happy they are with the player count.
    So when there's a free market, and people choose something over another, then they are not more happy with their choice?
    Thats a bit condescending.
    A lot of players preferred 12v12, that's why those servers were the populated ones.

    Aeglos wrote: »
    3. Yeah, not everyone comes here to complain and it is not representative. Look in the mirror. That is true for either side. What's your point again?
    What's up with this mirror idiom? Im not arguing for only 12v12, im arguing for a choice.

    Aeglos wrote: »
    4. Who am I? Say hi to the mirror again. Who are you?
    You're the one advocating to limit choice. Im the one advocating for choice.
    Which is more selfish again?

    Aeglos wrote: »
    The change was made by the devs who have a vision they want to achieve. You don't agree? Well, they are the ones in power so tough luck. Reminder to any dev reading that HP bars suck by the way.
    And maybe these forums are here so they can get feedback from the playerbase?
    But I guess bathing in an echo chamber is more comfortable.
    (and yes, HP bars kill small-scale tactical scenarios :( )
    Aeglos wrote: »
    4. See: 1. Seeding is hard, operators prefer not to fund empty servers, there is no real choice. You can have lots of regulars who prefer to play your server with whatever settings and mods but there is no use if they aren't there together at the same time.
    I dont operate any servers. I was a regular to one, but it died off right after the update.
    I havent seen ~half the server play NS2 since.
    Aeglos wrote: »
    5. What others enjoy = alienate player base, what you enjoy = not alienate player base. Sounds pretty selfish to me.
    As I've said, a lot of the regulars i've played with laid off NS2 since the update.
    It's not just about my preference, but the preference of the community I played with.
    I still play the game, but they dont, still sounds selfish?

    Aeglos wrote: »
    6. Point can be seen below from the news post of this topic if you cared enough to read rather than just express your opinion.
    Server performance can be objectively measured, it's not my opinion.
    Gorge Selection had no trouble whatsoever for a 40EUR/month fee.
    You know, this sounds to me like this:
    "we cant improve the game anymore, so even though you are paying for dedicated servers, we are going to decrease the player count just because. but hey, it's all for your sake!"

    Aeglos wrote: »
    I don't know about proof, but at the very least it seems it wasn't designed with 12v12 in mind. Not sure why you are chasing 12v12 then.
    I dont know anymore what UWE designed the game for. Vanilla doesnt work for comp 6v6.
    12v12 was enjoyable and worked like a charm, why deny it?

    Aeglos wrote: »
    7. For what it's worth, I agree that the quantitative stats would probably suffer. I don't have the numbers but it is unlikely that we have more players or active servers. That wasn't the point of the change though but unfortunately qualitative stats are inherently hard to measure, so it is unlikely that there are stats available.
    So basically UWE alienated some of their players in exchange for nothing.
    The qualitative part is what's subjective, and a matter of taste. That's the part where we can't reason, and that's the part where UWE should leave options for their playerbase.

    Aeglos wrote: »
    And yes, I'm an asshole. I'm not proud of it, but it is what it is. Doesn't make me wrong though and I also admit my faults when I face them.

    Same with me, but first you have to convince me with reason that im wrong, not just by telling me to look in the mirror :P
    NO Cyril, when they're dead they're just hookers!
    jrgnMoFo1
  • 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
    I don't know which stat would actually support or not support any claims here. Secondly, I don't do stats anymore.
    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.
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    .trixX. wrote: »
    snip for length

    Sorry, not keen on doing multi quotes like you did. Numbering seems to be a bit off though. Might switch to something else. Maybe.

    1. People don't "prefer" 12v12. You need to understand this. They do not want to seed so they go to wherever they can get a game. That happens to be 12v12 because they don't die as much after long games. You keep saying that there is a choice but the choice is not between 12v12 or 8v8. It is between playing or seeding.
    Higher player counts will eventually win out, be it 8v8, 10v10, 12v12, 14v14. It is difficult to seed and easy to fill. Enjoyment doesn't come into play when seeding a server. It only comes when you reach what people are unwilling to accept. It is not an indicator of how happy they are with the player count.

    Bolded is key. It is less enjoyment and more acceptable.

    3. Mirror = Whatever you said applies to you too. You can't say that either side is not representative because both sides aren't.

    3. Again, there is effectively no choice. It is either or. We do not have enough players willing to seed.

    3b. Yeah, I am giving feedback too. So why are you asking me who I am? Also, I give the devs more shit than you do. Quite sure I'm not the one comfortable in an echo chamber.

    4. Really? Which server is that? Because TA and TTO look very healthy to me.

    5. Yeah, and people who don't play 12v12 play now. Anecdotal evidence isn't very useful.

    6. You may not agree but that is the opinion of the devs. Also higher player counts also affect client performance. It becomes more obvious on weaker machines and late game.

    6b. No, game was never designed for 6v6. Repeating it doesn't make it true. What they have said is "we feel both game and map balance are improved with these numbers." As far as enjoyable goes, that is subjective. As far as "work" goes, I don't know how many versions of docking they have revised because it doesn't work. Doesn't stop people from thinking it does or caring. Also, why do you get to define what is enjoyable and what works but everyone else just have opinions?

    7. Well, that's the cost of lower player counts. I'm not sure they have thought it through but their aim is again, "we feel both game and map balance are improved with these numbers."

    If we are unable to solve the problem of seeding, it becomes that less people are able to play and people gradually play less. Which is why I've been giving Nordic shit on his 8v8 proposal, because even though I do prefer playing that, I don't think quick play is sufficient to seed more servers or more importantly, keep servers seeded. It is hard to seed, easy to fill and also easy to empty. There is a serious bottleneck on seeding.

    And you are the one asking for stats. Why are you telling me that we can't reason now?

    8. I've been doing that for the past page. I'm not fond of repeating myself to a wall.
  • MoFo1MoFo1 United States Join Date: 2014-07-25 Member: 197612Members Posts: 727 Advanced user
    I've still yet to hear any reason why it can't be as follows.

    10v10 or less = tied to quick play, in "ranked" tab, working hiveskill/shuffle

    10v10 or more = no quick play, in "arcade" tab, working hiveskill/shuffle


    All that's been said about it so far can be summed up to "it doesn't matter" and that's hardly "explaining" anything.

    If I'm repeating myself it's only because you've shown a complete inability to comprehend what I'm telling you.


    So lets try this again with a different approach. See if you can answer just this one question.

    Why should 10v10+ servers be sabotaged with outdated hiveskill/shuffle?

    It can't be seeding concerns as they are in arcade without quick play
    It can't be "dividing the community" concerns because it was already divided.

    So what's the reason? Because the only one I can see is this..

    They should be sabotaged so they die off and people are forced into the 10v10 or under servers if they want to continue playing.

    Give me another.
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    edited May 22
    It can't be seeding concerns as they are in arcade without quick play

    Seeding is the root of all problems. You only have so many players. There are even fewer willing to seed. People go to whichever server that has players and is not full. Large players have a) higher capacity b) less chances of emptying out. Therefore people will eventually gather there.

    I don't see what is so difficult to understand about this.
    It can't be "dividing the community" concerns because it was already divided.

    Yeah, so don't divide it further.
    Nordic
  • 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
    No doubt, it is a wall. I have been repeating myself for years to explain simple things to Mofo. I have tried to say the same thing in so many different ways. I don't think he is stupid, but rather he is completely unwilling to change his mind.

    I slowed down in here because it is frustrating to keep running into this wall on the fact that people don't prefer 12v12 because only 12v12 is played. I am at a complete loss on how to explain this. It doesn't read like you guys are disagreeing, but outright ignoring what we are saying.

    I believe everything I have said in this thread but I spoke up because it was fun to fight the good fight for 8v8. This isn't fun. This isn't going anywhere. This has been a thread that can't move on because basic facts don't seem to be agreed upon. We have had at least 2 pages of discussion without moving forward. I am certain now that certain individuals here are completely unwilling to accept something different than they believe. The echo chamber has spoken.
    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.
    Kasharic
  • MoFo1MoFo1 United States Join Date: 2014-07-25 Member: 197612Members Posts: 727 Advanced user
    Aeglos wrote: »
    It can't be seeding concerns as they are in arcade without quick play.

    Seeding is the root of all problems. You only have so many players. There are even fewer willing to seed. People go to whichever server that has players and is not full. Large players have a) higher capacity b) less chances of emptying out. Therefore people will eventually gather there.

    I don't see what is so difficult to understand about this.

    By that logic the server browser would be full of 42 player servers... except they were moved to the arcade tab so that doesn't happen. They don't seed easily so we only have 1-2 opposed to the 5-6 we used to have.

    Over 10v10 would be in arcade also, so again why sabotage 10v10+ with a broken outdated hiveskill/shuffle system
    Aeglos wrote: »
    It can't be "dividing the community" concerns because it was already divided.

    Yeah, so don't divide it further.

    It wouldn't be dividing it any further...

    We've lost great servers (and most of their communities) due to crap like this and it's not necessary.

    What's worse, letting a sever have a few extra players, maybe even a few mods, in the arcade tab, with working hiveskill/shuffle... or sabotaging that server with broken outdated hiveskill/shuffle so every game is unbalanced, the server dies, and people who enjoyed it quit playing.

    Seems like giving people choices is what will lead to a larger healthier community... You act like what I'm arguing for will drive everyone into 10v10+ and that simply isn't the case.

  • SquishpokePOOPFACESquishpokePOOPFACE -21,248 posts (ignore below) Join Date: 2012-10-31 Member: 165262Members, Reinforced - Shadow Posts: 1,654 Advanced user
    8v8
    To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to play Natural Selection 2. The gameplay is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of military strategy and advanced mathematics you won't even win a single game. Theres also the game's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into the game. The maps and artwork draw heavily from Riddley Scott's Alien franchise, for instance. The players understand this stuff, they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depth of the game, to realise that it's not just great, that it also says something about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Natural Selection 2 truly ARE idiots. of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the humour in the Marines' existential catchphrase "how do I get to be so good", which itself is a cryptic reference to the high degree of intelligence required to play the game as intended. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion when spectating a game. What fools... how I pity them. And, yes, by the way, i DO have a Fade tatoo. And no, you cannot see it. it's for the ladies' eyes only, and even then they have to demonstrate that they are within 50 hive skill points of my own (preferable lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid.
    Nordic
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    MoFo1 wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »
    It can't be seeding concerns as they are in arcade without quick play.

    Seeding is the root of all problems. You only have so many players. There are even fewer willing to seed. People go to whichever server that has players and is not full. Large players have a) higher capacity b) less chances of emptying out. Therefore people will eventually gather there.

    I don't see what is so difficult to understand about this.

    By that logic the server browser would be full of 42 player servers... except they were moved to the arcade tab so that doesn't happen. They don't seed easily so we only have 1-2 opposed to the 5-6 we used to have.

    Over 10v10 would be in arcade also, so again why sabotage 10v10+ with a broken outdated hiveskill/shuffle system

    You've never had 5-6 42 player servers even before the arcade was set up. And that 42 player server was populated practically 90% of the time then while other servers did 50% at best.

    Also, as I mentioned to trixx, it is about what people are willing to accept. Going from 20 to 24 and vice versa isn't a big difference. Going to 42 is. Putting 24 players as the same level as 20 players means that there is effectively no difference which means that 20 players is not workable in the long run.
    MoFo1 wrote: »
    It wouldn't be dividing it any further...

    We've lost great servers (and most of their communities) due to crap like this and it's not necessary.

    What's worse, letting a sever have a few extra players, maybe even a few mods, in the arcade tab, with working hiveskill/shuffle... or sabotaging that server with broken outdated hiveskill/shuffle so every game is unbalanced, the server dies, and people who enjoyed it quit playing.

    Seems like giving people choices is what will lead to a larger healthier community... You act like what I'm arguing for will drive everyone into 10v10+ and that simply isn't the case.

    Yes it will. If we don't successfully seed a server after a certain period of time, people tend to leave and we have to start over. When you create more divisions, you fail more often. Its not hard. Its a similar problem with going 8v8. We have more servers to seed but we don't have enough seeders for the additional servers.

    I'm not sure why you are so hard up on hive skill and shuffle. Its not as if you aren't having severely imbalanced games even with it, and the "outdated" one will still be fairly accurate.

    As far as UWE's whitelist on mods go, well a server that runs all kinds of shit is still on while servers which only remove HP bars are off. I still play on the one that is off hive when it is populated and has a high enough average skill. Not seeing the unbalanced every game scenario.

    You know what leads to a larger healthier community? Solving the problem of seeding. We fill servers much more easily than we seed servers. You can stay at 6 players the whole night or you can hit 12 active players and it fills within an hour with half the spectator slots filled as well. The choice is between a seeded or an unseeded server. Not whatever player count or mod you prefer.
  • skav2skav2 Join Date: 2007-05-28 Member: 61037Members, Reinforced - Gold Posts: 190 Advanced user
    Im confused on which side either of you are trying to talk about. One side im seeing is that seeding is hard, the other is that unranked servers do not update hive skill,

    I hate arguing about what is wrong with something when we should be talking about how to fix said problem.

    1 - Seeding is hard? As far as I can tell there is no solid solution to this. Our community is a small but passionate bunch therefor it is tough to keep servers filled due to low population. That is an established fact. One solution could be quick play not filling empty servers but instead fill up servers that recently lost significant player count first. Like 4+. Then any remainders will top off other servers before starting to fill empty servers. Taking into account favorited servers first would be dope too.

    Also why not have server switching penalties? Say you hop to 3 different servers in an hour. Maybe get a temporary 5 minute cooldown before you can join again? People hate waiting and it could be a very effective deterrent. Times can be adjusted to suit severity. This could also be applied for people who leave during a match.

    2 - Hive skill doesnt change in unranked servers - I personally have not had any issues in unranked servers with this. I can see where you are coming from where someone who only plays in unranked servers can get much better and dominate while retaining their low rank thus skewing the team balance. Smurfs can also abuse this because they can get a new account and keep it at level 0-2 without ever ranking up. Again skewing balance.

    I dont have a one size fits all solution but a seperate hive skill or even a scoring system for unranked game modes would be really cool. The former would be just like Hive Skill. The latter example would be just a score to show how much you played so far in those modes. Maybe gaining ranks the more you play.




  • 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 24
    I enjoy your enthusiasm but you can't agree on a solution if you can't agree on the problem. You can't agree on the problem if you don't agree on basic facts. You can't agree on basic facts with people who are completely unwilling to accept anything else.

    Edit: I get it now nin. You are trolling with the off topic buttons.
    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.
  • MoFo1MoFo1 United States Join Date: 2014-07-25 Member: 197612Members Posts: 727 Advanced user
    Aeglos wrote: »
    Seeding is the root of all problems. You only have so many players. There are even fewer willing to seed. People go to whichever server that has players and is not full. Large players have a) higher capacity b) less chances of emptying out. Therefore people will eventually gather there.

    I don't see what is so difficult to understand about this.
    Aeglos wrote: »
    Also, as I mentioned to trixx, it is about what people are willing to accept. Going from 20 to 24 and vice versa isn't a big difference. Going to 42 is. Putting 24 players as the same level as 20 players means that there is effectively no difference which means that 20 players is not workable in the long run.

    Those are reasons they shouldn't be in the "ranked" tab and linked to quick play.. I actually agree with your reasoning as well, those servers should not be in ranked with quick play sending them players.

    However they are not reasons to sabotage them with broken outdated hiveskill/shuffle.

    Aeglos wrote: »
    I'm not sure why you are so hard up on hive skill and shuffle. Its not as if you aren't having severely imbalanced games even with it, and the "outdated" one will still be fairly accurate.


    Because I've heard from two different server owners that they are working on upgrading the hiveskill system to include a separate number for each team. So a person could FINALLY show as a tier 2 on one side and a tier 6 on the other... Such a change would DRAMATICALLY improve the quality of hiveskill and shuffle... and there is no reason to sabotage servers that aren't the "official whitelisted playercount" by not giving them the same upgraded hiveskill system.


    Maybe I feel so passionately about this because I saw the same thing happening in the days when CoD was being driven into the dirt by a horrible development team that didn't give one rats ass about the players... They sabotaged the HELL out of "unranked" mode time and time again in a pathetic effort to force everyone into the "ranked" mode that ran on their precious matchmaking system.

    Keeping unranked servers without the benefit of the latest greatest hiveskill/shuffle system would be sort of like preventing them from being able to run NS2+. You could use the exact same argument of "well people only want to play on servers with the NS2+ mod, if those servers are allowed to run it the community will be divided and it will be harder to seed"


    Aeglos wrote: »
    The choice is between a seeded or an unseeded server. Not whatever player count or mod you prefer.

    It doesn't have to be!!! Don't you realize by sabotaging certain servers and killing off a portion of the community you are making this problem worse?


    Why even go through the effort of sabotaging them in the first place? Why not just have UWE forcibly shut down any server that isn't whitelisted with an under 10v10 playercount?







    skav2 wrote: »
    Also why not have server switching penalties? Say you hop to 3 different servers in an hour. Maybe get a temporary 5 minute cooldown before you can join again? People hate waiting and it could be a very effective deterrent. Times can be adjusted to suit severity.

    How would trying to force people to stay on one server to avoid a penalty help anything?

    I actually see a penalty like this harming people who help seed more than anyone else.




  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    edited May 24
    MoFo1 wrote: »

    Those are reasons they shouldn't be in the "ranked" tab and linked to quick play.. I actually agree with your reasoning as well, those servers should not be in ranked with quick play sending them players.

    However they are not reasons to sabotage them with broken outdated hiveskill/shuffle.

    Yeah, and they are practically the same as the official play count otherwise. Which means that people will eventually gather there after a few rounds.
    MoFo1 wrote: »

    Because I've heard from two different server owners that they are working on upgrading the hiveskill system to include a separate number for each team. So a person could FINALLY show as a tier 2 on one side and a tier 6 on the other... Such a change would DRAMATICALLY improve the quality of hiveskill and shuffle... and there is no reason to sabotage servers that aren't the "official whitelisted playercount" by not giving them the same upgraded hiveskill system.


    Maybe I feel so passionately about this because I saw the same thing happening in the days when CoD was being driven into the dirt by a horrible development team that didn't give one rats ass about the players... They sabotaged the HELL out of "unranked" mode time and time again in a pathetic effort to force everyone into the "ranked" mode that ran on their precious matchmaking system.

    Keeping unranked servers without the benefit of the latest greatest hiveskill/shuffle system would be sort of like preventing them from being able to run NS2+. You could use the exact same argument of "well people only want to play on servers with the NS2+ mod, if those servers are allowed to run it the community will be divided and it will be harder to seed"

    I'll believe it when I see it. Also, they announced that they were already collecting data for it awhile back so you do have the same hive skill system.

    Well, I've seen other games die and current NS2 communities die because they couldn't get enough people together at the same time to play a game. And what is the big difference between 10v10 and 12v12 anyway? Maybe I'll have more sympathy for you if they actually changed it to 8v8.

    The NS2+ example is a joke. Because it actually happened. NS2+ was banned from consistency check. Between no NS2+ and shit performance, UWE officials were only frequented by rookies and largely abandoned otherwise. Maybe you could encourage your fellow 12v12 enthusiasts do the same.
    MoFo1 wrote: »
    It doesn't have to be!!! Don't you realize by sabotaging certain servers and killing off a portion of the community you are making this problem worse?


    Why even go through the effort of sabotaging them in the first place? Why not just have UWE forcibly shut down any server that isn't whitelisted with an under 10v10 playercount?

    With our player base? It already is. There is no "have to be". As far as killing off a portion of the community goes, I'd rather chop off a finger than lose an arm trying to save the finger. Neither are good choices but you have to take the best.

    Also, UWE is probably not actively thinking about how to make things hard for 12v12. It is more like arcade does not reflect normal game conditions therefore including them will affect accuracy of hiveskill. Of course, 10v10 and 12v12 aren't that much different, but that is what happens once you get placed in the arcade tab.
  • NintendowsNintendows Join Date: 2016-11-07 Member: 223716Members, Squad Five Blue Posts: 379 Advanced user
    edited May 24
    Aeglos wrote: »

    Also, UWE is probably not actively thinking about how to make things hard for 12v12. It is more like arcade does not reflect normal game conditions therefore including them will affect accuracy of hiveskill. Of course, 10v10 and 12v12 aren't that much different, but that is what happens once you get placed in the arcade tab.


    The guy who created the entire hive skill algorithm has advocated for including arcade servers (that behave) in the results. It's not like there are any arcade servers that sell smaller hitboxes.
  • AeglosAeglos Join Date: 2010-04-06 Member: 71189Members Posts: 622 Advanced user
    Nintendows wrote: »
    Aeglos wrote: »

    Also, UWE is probably not actively thinking about how to make things hard for 12v12. It is more like arcade does not reflect normal game conditions therefore including them will affect accuracy of hiveskill. Of course, 10v10 and 12v12 aren't that much different, but that is what happens once you get placed in the arcade tab.


    The guy who created the entire hive skill algorithm has advocated for including arcade servers (that behave) in the results. It's not like there are any arcade servers that sell smaller hitboxes.

    Bolded is key. It is easier to not manage at all than check and determine which behaves.

    That is just my opinion though, I have no idea what goes on in about what servers are whitelisted or not even in the non-arcade tab. Let's just leave it as I strongly disagree about some servers.
Sign In or Register to comment.