Just have to point out the irony in Necrosis argueing in a CC blocking thread about not arguing in a CC blocking thread.
Just messin <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I see CC blocking as a fundamental part of NS in that it was NOT meant to be there<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
bhop is a fundamental part of HL that was not meant to be there.. and everyone has gotten used to bhop. I'm just pointing that out though.
<b>Nec</b> - Sure people come and go. My point though, is that if you've got <b>A LOT</b>, and i mean a lot of clans/clanners leaving the game out of boredom with the game and the lack of it not forfilling it's true potential because rather than fixing gameplay and actual big, important bugs we get silly variables, which are unneeded, and fixes to things no one even realised were broken. Surely you must see that something is wrong.
At this rate i'd not put the clan scenes lifeline at much longer than another 2 CAL seasons max. Surely you must see that if you've got nearly every single experienced, competitive player is leaving the scene slowly that there must be something wrong. People don't leave because a game it's fun, flayra should see what is happening and do something to address it, listen to what we have to say and stop fobbing us off with "it's lame, it's not your game." Instead we get variables like blockscripts or ambiguous rules on what in my opinion is a valid tactic and they create more problems than they solve.
On a final note to you, a lot of people complain, especially on pubs that fades are overpowered. You'd think they'd welcome another way of killing them but apparently not. I fade and i comm, i've been cc blocked and i've cc blocked, you say it's not part of the game but it is, i don't cry if i get cc blocked, i suck it up and deal with it because it's part of the game. I give mad props to the comm too because it's something that a lot of people simply aren't good enough to do.
Now you may not think it doesn't require skill but you try cc blocking a celerity fade as it does hit and runs, money says you miss him or are too late, not to mention you have to have presence of mind to do it and you can't neglect other duties whilst you wait for the opportunity.
<b>Alpha</b> - you're totally right about the divide it has created. People say it's a "choice" but when it comes to public play it severly limits what is available. Server ops are making decisions based off uneducation and a poor understanding of what you can do with scripts.
I'll name no names but putting blockscripts to 1 "because i say so" is a **** TASTIC reason and it's sad that people who come out with these things are the people who run servers. It's also sad that despite the endless posts by people on the forums trying to educate people about scripts that they're still seen as the big bad wolf and the root of all evil. Adding this variable only enforced the belief that they were bad to uneducated people and does nothing but further divide the community and mislead.
Not so long a post, and then I'm off to play Gal Con so you've a brief respite folks.
Nad
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Like I said I'm not replying to you until you quote me paragraphs at a time <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You just replied to me?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I will though, reiterate that I'm not talking about CC blocking. I COULD CARE LESS IF IT GOES OR NOT. Get it? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Do You Approve Of Comm Chair Blocking? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
DO YOU GET IT?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I merely think that if the community decides something about a bug in the game, Flayra should go along. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If the community decides NS should be an RTS about Roman soldiers, should Flayra just hold his hands up and say "well ok guys, I'm your slave. I'll forget this NS idea of mine and I'll turn the whole company around, we'll do an ancient history RTS instead"?? If the dev team decide something is a bug in the game then the community should accept it and drive on. CC blocking can be exploited, so the dev team have made known their opinion on the matter. All going well, we can expect to see this exploit fixed. Where's the beef?
Alpha
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Wow your a lost one arn't you.... Spliting up the competitive/pub community <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How am I splitting them up, exactly?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> i know that many pubbers will not join competitive ns in these mp_bs 1 because they will feel like their playing with cheaters if they do. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Pubbers wont play in a blockscript server because they think they're playing with cheats? What?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Now you split the community because i will not play on a mp_bs 1 server <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Me? How? Do tell?
As a by the by, this is a CC blocking thread, I'm happy to reply to your OT and frankly quite odd opinion on how I'm the blame for blockscripts, etc, but not in this thread. Have fun gaming on servers that allow you the bhop script.
Alkiller
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Necrosis argueing in a CC blocking thread about not arguing in a CC blocking thread. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, I'm saying we shouldn't be discussing scripting in a CC blocking thread. Unfortunately Nad and Alpha have some problem with differentiating the two.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> bhop is a fundamental part of HL that was not meant to be there.. and everyone has gotten used to bhop. I'm just pointing that out though. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bhop was removed for marines, and kept in for aliens, afaik. That was a design choice. I'm just pointing that out though. IIRC, a design choice from the dev team. The people who know what NS really is about.
Ben-
Silly or not, I believe its been stated that it was already meant to have been implemented ages ago. Secondly, 2.0 wasn't referred to as a beta, it could have remained the benchmark for NS competitive play. The problem is that some groups continued to compete with betas as opposed to earlier, more complete builds.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> stop fobbing us off with "it's lame, it's not your game." Instead we get variables like blockscripts or ambiguous rules on what in my opinion is a valid tactic and they create more problems than they solve. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Things which should have been in at the start but have been left in the buglist for some time now. In your opinion CC blocking is a valid tactic, and shockingly yes the dev's interim rules say that its ok to block corridors. However the problem is with the exploitation of this tactic. I don't really see how they create more problems when the path of least resistance is just for people to keep to their preferred servers and not join other ones expressly to rant about how terrible it is to have any other ruleset.
I'm not saying "its lame" at any point, merely stating that if you don't like the concept then you really shouldn't be here. The final NS product will likely not have exploitative CC blocking, so look at it from that point of view. The only stumbling block will be people who *need* to exploit in order to win, and lets be clear on this - CC blocking of players is an exploit. Its no different to dropping structs on IPs, which was another exploit that got fixed.
Its not about "skill", or how hard/lame it is, its about the fact that in certain situations its considered an exploit. People will have to learn to live without it just as easily as we have learned to live with it. Why are people resisting the removal of a simple exploit?
Server admins do what they like, its their servers. They don't spend the money to host a server with rules they don't like. If other people dont like it, they play somewhere else. Just like forum admins and their forums.
Its relatively easy for someone to get an HL server up and running, and any major group of like minded players can easily fund one. If I had 20 friends who needed to play a version of NS with exploits (such as OC blocking IPs) then I'd set a server up between us all for that purpose.
It'll be just as easy for anyone else. Then they can enjoy their games with exploiting building placement while everyone else enjoys the "official" version of NS. The forums clean up because noone has the urge to vent their spleen with "I went to a different server and they used different rules and they suck and I rock so there kthx" posts. Its black and white stuff here, CC blocking's an exploit which will eventually be fixed like any other exploit. So why the hassle? If anything it'll benefit NS in the long run since further balance tweaks will not have to take into account accepted exploits.
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
edited September 2004
Off Topic
Necrosis, you miss the point that Nadagast is attempting to explain, but seems to be struggling with. No one argues that anyone but Flayra should design the game, or implement the changes as he sees fit. It is indeed his game, his idea, and his work. Nadagast's point is that all great games of the past, present, and future have been and will be balanced around the ability of the best players. NS does not shine in even the best of pubs, it shines when 2 competitive teams slug it out until someone wins. The competitive scene is where the most skilled players gravitate to, this is a fact that cannot be argued with. If you get a great amount of skill, you will at least think about playing competitively. Very few players are quite skilled, yet are not currently nor have ever been in a clan. The only person that comes to my mind when I say this is a_civilian, because I don't think he's in a clan currently, yet certainly should be <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
What this leaves you with is this: A hardened core of competitive players that are among the best in the game, and have the skills, experience, and knowledge necessary to say things about the game that aren't biased by lack of skill, bad experienced against a significantly better player, or general lack of knowledge. A competitive player knows how the game works at the most fundamental level, and understands how to react to most situations at a a nearly unconscious level. I know the flow of the game as Commander, I react to things almost instantly and without a second thought. I have no other choice, because I'd be overwhelmed in a competitive game if I was any slower. This gives me insight that most commanders completely lack. This isn't arrogance, this is nothing less than <b>the fact</b> that I am better qualified to judge what is unbalanced and what isn't. <b><i><u>Flayra may design NS, but he does not possess this level of experience or skill playing it that competitive players possess. </u></i></b>This is why the competitive players replying to you continue to debate this topic with you. He is the creator, and he can do as he wishes, but he relies on the experience of the best players to tell him what is balanced and what is not. This information CANNOT be acquired from a pub, which has too many variables to account for in terms of skill, experience, and knowledge. It is an unreliable source, whereas the competitive scene is much more stable in terms of these variables. Saying "If you don't like it go away" is not a valid response as I'm sure you know. That is simply a way out of the debate you feel you need to use.
On Topic
Server rules are up the admins of the server. The Devteam can give its ruling on what it deems exploitive and what isn't, but the fact of the matter is that it comes down to the server admins and the league admins. The "opinion" given by the devteam is that blocking vents is illegal (also illegal in CAL). The devteam states that a strategic block (blocking a hallway/doorway with a CC) is in fact legal (also legal in CAL). The devteam also states that a tactical block with the purpose of preventing an alien from moving is illegal (legal in CAL). This wording is quite frankly very open to interpretation, which is why most servers just say "no cc blocking", because of it's ambigious wording. Not that being clear would prevent server ops from just outlawing it anyways.
Off Topic
This is becoming a recurring problem with statements or actions of the devteam, it leaves a lot open to interpretation. Instead of giving an opinion on scripting, the devteam creates a server variable that can block scripts and says "Its up to the server operators", yet give no official opinion on scripting itself, beyond certain "Official" people saying "scripting is lame/evil/exploitive/non-skilled/skilled/non-exploitive/etc". No binding opinion has ever been given, and I think Zunni making a post that says "Scripting is not exploitive, does indeed take skill to use (Negating the "scripts play for you" argument), and is fully accepted by the devteam" would eliminate a lot of the bias that exists right now. I know I personally will be writing a scripting tutorial for the new 3.0 Manual that's nearly complete, so the "It's not known how to script by the masses" argument will be nullified. Scripting will be talked about in the Official 3.0 Manual in-depth unless I'm told by the Devteam "Hey don't include that", which I don't think will be happening.
How utterly numb do you have to be to not understand the ambiguity in "Its okay to drop a CC, but not right infront of a lifeform"? That is so utterly vague - because right infront of can be anything, and that Onos could be walking backwards while you drop a CC right on his butt. There was no point at all to the "official dev oppinion", as we already have CAL rules (no ventblocking, everything else is fair game) and pub rules (even dropping a CC on a pile of OCs will get you bitched at).
Now the devs come in, <b>oblivious to the fact that noone cares how they think we should play</b> ( "competitive play without console" anyone ? ), and throw in a third, more impractical and ambigious ruling into the mix. Man, that sure helped alot!
Good job mate. You fail to understand even one point and.... english is my second language and you are completely clueless. People like you are the problem in ns. Nothing more can be said.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Necrosis argueing in a CC blocking thread about not arguing in a CC blocking thread. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, I'm saying we shouldn't be discussing scripting in a CC blocking thread. Unfortunately Nad and Alpha have some problem with differentiating the two. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Joke <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Necrosis+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Necrosis)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Alkiller+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Alkiller)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> bhop is a fundamental part of HL that was not meant to be there.. and everyone has gotten used to bhop. I'm just pointing that out though. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bhop was removed for marines, and kept in for aliens, afaik. That was a design choice. I'm just pointing that out though. IIRC, a design choice from the dev team. The people who know what NS really is about.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But NS was balanced around bhop, and it integrated it into the game. NS needs to do the same about scripts. Right now that cvar, imho, is a dirty fix. Instead of fixing the problem they've made a bypass which prevents the problem from happening. I'ld love it if they would just remove that cvar and fix the exploitative scripts instead...
And I think they are going to do the same thing about structures in the upcoming versions... Like make them start out as ghosted, but I'm not sure.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Nadagast's point is that all great games of the past, present, and future have been and will be balanced around the ability of the best players. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do hope you've some evidence for this, other than an opinion. Games are PT'd and Beta'd and the small closed group of players make comments on bugs, balance, etc, but they don't dictate the vision of the game. It's simple enough, the devs see certain types of CC blocking as an exploit. If you don't like it, sadly thats just tough luck. I have yet to hear of a game where the players have actively dictated the game concept before release, let alone the PT group dictating it.
"skill" does not qualify you to dictate concept. No matter how "educated" one believes themselves to be, they will not be able to persuade the devs to allow wallhacking, speedhacking, etc. CC blocking of lifeforms is just another exploit, and only people who have lost touch with reality would be attempting to argue that their OPINION of what is an exploit should automatically override the people who KNOW what the concept is.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I am better qualified to judge what is unbalanced and what isn't. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Balance maybe, exploit no. Exploits tend to be things being used outside of their intended purpose, in a fashion that the devs/producer would deem improper. Bhopping in other games would be considered an exploit, but in NS its considered ok for aliens. Strucutre blocking IPs was considered an exploit. CC blocking players is considered an exploit. Experience is irrelevant, you might as well argue that god mode should be in.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This is why the competitive players replying to you continue to debate this topic with you. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
TBH all we can see in this thread now is how "skill" and "experience" with the game engine somehow entitles a person to dictate what the game is about. It doesnt. <b>"skill" and "experience" entitle you to make semi-informed comments on game balance. It does NOT entitle you to decide whether or not something is an exploit.</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Saying "If you don't like it go away" is not a valid response as I'm sure you know. That is simply a way out of the debate you feel you need to use. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you can't accept that you do not dictate the concept of NS, then you are harming the community. You SHOULD leave. If you don't understand the difference between a balance decision and an exploit then one should keep their opinion to themself, or find a different community. People who sit in a community, screaming about how THEY should decide how the game should be played, are only harming its spirit.
Discover the difference between a balance issue (such as improving shotgun damage) and an exploit issue (removing structure blocking IPs).
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> This wording is quite frankly very open to interpretation, which is why most servers just say "no cc blocking", because of it's ambigious wording. Not that being clear would prevent server ops from just outlawing it anyways. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if you don't like it, don't play on those servers. Its that easy. There seems to be lots of vocal and likeminded people, so between you why not create your own server to enhance your enjoyment of the game?
I don't see where the "ambiguity" exists... I mean if you drop a CC to catch a fleeing alien then its quite obvious what you've just done. And it certainly differs from dropping a CC or two in a room you're trying to lame up.
Again, look at it from the viewpoint of any other game. I don't like FFA JKIII, so I don't play on those servers. I play the ones I like, I keep myself happy, and I don't irritate people by telling them how they should run THEIR server.
Flay/Dev team make the game according to their concept, noone else's. Forum admins keep forums clean according to their rules, noone else's. Server admins run servers according to their rules, noone else's.
If a person can't cope with that, then they don't have a place in those groups. A server, a forum, a game, they've benevolent dictatorships. The guy running the show decides what is kosher and what is not. Balance issues are not the same as exploits. Balance issues are a case of more or less, exploits are a case of LEGALITY.
Adj, its a CC blocking thread, scripting goes elsewhere. We're discussing the CC blocking exploit. If you have a beef with something else, start a new topic on it and we'll continue there. My only comment on your Manual is that since blockscripts is a variable, and since servers exist with blockscripts 0, then scripting deserves a place in the manual. Thats pretty elementary. We're discussing the CC blocking exploit here.
Nad-
Posting an entire site is a bit vague, don't you think? Is there a specific part you would care for us to read? A part explaining how the players should decide what is an exploit and what is not?
Saltz-
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Now the devs come in, oblivious to the fact that noone cares how they think we should play <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Odd... I would imagine the guys who understand the game concept would know more about what is or is not an exploit as opposed to a group of people who don't?
Alkiller
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> NS needs to do the same about scripts <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indiana... Let. It. Go.
CC BLOCKING THREAD, Al. Exploit thread.
Look guys you're going to end up arguing in circles, I can see a lot of you have some problem with accepting this is a discussion about exploits. I don't think anyone who's in full control of their mental faculties could somehow effectively tell the game's creators that:
"I know what abusing the game is and what isnt, I know how structures should be used, you know nothing because you're only the guy who invented the game, invented CCs, and decided that CCs were meant to be used for Commanding from, I've played this game for X amount of time and I have decided that a CC is really a wall, you should rename it to Command Wall. And while we're at it here's a few more exploits you got wrong, I should be allowed to structure block IPs, OCs should shoot at harmless structures first, aliens should be able to use phases, everyone should have wallhacks and seeking weaponry, and res should be taken out because I say it only slows down my game"
Realise how unimportant and uninformed we all are in regards to GAME CONCEPT. We all have a voice in suggesting balance issues, but NOT EXPLOITS.
Even an "educated" person should be able to understand that?
and necrosis still manages to avoid the point completely... good job
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Experience is irrelevant, you might as well argue that god mode should be in.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> WORST. ARGUMENT. EVER.
You have no say in something because you could argue that godmode and aimbots should be turned on! Nevermind that nobody in their right mind would do that! You still have no say!
Flayra shouldn't have any say in the game, cuz he could want to turn godmode on. I realize you're gonna say that "It's Flayra's game he can do that if he wants!" but that's just being naive imo. How many people would play NS if godmode was on?
What about C++? Shouldn't the creators of C++ have complete control of anything done with it? They did make it after all. Computers? Whoever created computers should be able to stop us all from playing tomorrow right?
This logic that makes Flayra into some sort of God is hurting my head.... Let me reiterate... I UNDERSTAND IT'S FLAYRA'S GAME, and I understand obviously he can do whatever he wants with it. But, 99% of the time it's the best option to listen to the educated community on wether or not an exploit should be removed or not. He just doesn't have the experience or knowledge of how the game works at the top levels to know, and that isn't his fault.
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
edited September 2004
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I do hope you've some evidence for this, other than an opinion. Games are PT'd and Beta'd and the small closed group of players make comments on bugs, balance, etc, but they don't dictate the vision of the game. It's simple enough, the devs see certain types of CC blocking as an exploit. If you don't like it, sadly thats just tough luck. I have yet to hear of a game where the players have actively dictated the game concept before release, let alone the PT group dictating it.
"skill" does not qualify you to dictate concept. No matter how "educated" one believes themselves to be, they will not be able to persuade the devs to allow wallhacking, speedhacking, etc. CC blocking of lifeforms is just another exploit, and only people who have lost touch with reality would be attempting to argue that their OPINION of what is an exploit should automatically override the people who KNOW what the concept is.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not talking about concept, I'm talking about balance. I don't know how you pulled vision or concept out of that. You're off the mark here. All great games are balanced out by the best players. Magic: The Gathering is a wonderful example of a company using its best and brightest players to balance out the game.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Balance maybe, exploit no. Exploits tend to be things being used outside of their intended purpose, in a fashion that the devs/producer would deem improper. Bhopping in other games would be considered an exploit, but in NS its considered ok for aliens. Strucutre blocking IPs was considered an exploit. CC blocking players is considered an exploit. Experience is irrelevant, you might as well argue that god mode should be in.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you notice I didn't speak about exploits, simply balance. You're putting words into text that I did not write. Note that I used On and Off Topic tags to dictate when I was talking about CC Blocking and General Balance, which is what this discussion has changed into. Do not confuse the two.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->TBH all we can see in this thread now is how "skill" and "experience" with the game engine somehow entitles a person to dictate what the game is about. It doesnt. <b>"skill" and "experience" entitle you to make semi-informed comments on game balance. It does NOT entitle you to decide whether or not something is an exploit.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Once again I didn't say my experience and skill entitled me to anything but to balance the game, not determine exploits or dictate the game. Please don't imply I am saying this, because you're currently implying I'm saying these things and I'm not. Please read what I am saying and stop contorting my words.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If you can't accept that you do not dictate the concept of NS, then you are harming the community. You SHOULD leave. If you don't understand the difference between a balance decision and an exploit then one should keep their opinion to themself, or find a different community. People who sit in a community, screaming about how THEY should decide how the game should be played, are only harming its spirit.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...Yet again, read what I said, because your entire reply to me is off the point of what I said. Never have I said that I personally should dictate the concept of ns (did I even use the words vision or concept in my initial post? I don't think I did. I think I used balance in off topic, and exploit in on topic). It's not up to the players to determine how the game is, it's up to them to determine when something is too weak or too strong, which is BALANCE. Please read what I write before you reply next time.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Discover the difference between a balance issue (such as improving shotgun damage) and an exploit issue (removing structure blocking IPs).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you read what I wrote, you'd notice that I did just this. Note the On Topic (About CC Blocking) and Off Topic (About Competitive Players / Balance / etc). You should discover the difference between reading comprehension and skimming for "the gist", because you clearly either did not read what I said in full and understand it, or you simply don't care as to what I said, you care simply about warping it to your point of view.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Adj, its a CC blocking thread, scripting goes elsewhere. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I used scripting as another example of ambigious "rulings" by the Devteam. I also labeled it Off-Topic, although in a way it is related to CC Blocking (My argument that the devteam is being ambigious in some of it's decisions, namely defining some cc blocks as exploits while not others, and its decision to not talk about scripts beyond "let the server admin decide" is how they are related). Once again please read what I wrote, I included Off and On Topic tags to clearly define what was about cc blocking and what wasn't, and you still managed to not understand. Please re-read my initial post, understand what I am talking about, and reply again, this time replying to what I ACTUALLY wrote, not what YOU THINK I wrote.
Note: I am not flaming Necrosis, but it is clear to me (and should be to anyone else) that he did not read what I posted, which is why I replied in the way I did.
If we dont like comm chair blocking, then why should we allow gorges to spam OC's or DC's en masse in front of marines? It runs about the same principle.
<!--QuoteBegin-Recoup+Sep 26 2004, 08:58 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Recoup @ Sep 26 2004, 08:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If we dont like comm chair blocking, then why should we allow gorges to spam OC's or DC's en masse in front of marines? It runs about the same principle. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> And that a gorge has to be near a rine to drop chambers. The comm block aliens witheout beeing in danger. He can also recycle the CCs afterwards thus making it a cheap block. Btw it's really hard to spamm chambers as gorges, unless you are holding nearly 80% of the maps RTs.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> How many people would play NS if godmode was on? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly my point. If you're going to keep in an exploit such as CC blocking, then why stop there? Why not keep in every exploit and cheat under the sun? What makes CC blocking so special that it should be the only exploit to earn a reprieve?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But, 99% of the time it's the best option to listen to the educated community on wether or not an exploit should be removed or not. He just doesn't have the experience or knowledge of how the game works at the top levels to know, and that isn't his fault. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Honestly do not know whether to laugh or cry at the sheer delusional nature of this statement. The community does not decide whether or not something is an exploit. 100% of the time its a good idea to leave concept decisions in the hands of the person who invented the concept. "How that game works" often has very little relevance to "How I intended the game to work". The game is intended NOT to have CC blocking, or wallhacking, speedhacking, aimbots, IP blocking, etc etc etc. All these things will be removed. An exploit is an exploit, you can't argue the validity of one without having to justify the removal of the others.
I dunno where you get this whole "Flayra is god" thing from, noone's said that at all. Keep to reading the posts instead of inventing things noone has said.
Adj-
CC blocking is not a balance issue. Exploits are more game bugs than balance issues. Exploits are about concepts, intended use of structures, how the game was intended to be played. Balance is only tangentially connected to it.
Balance was covered in your Off Topic section. Balance has very very little to do with dev team decisions about bugs and exploits. You're talking about balance when the issue at hand is game concept. CC blocking was not intended to be used in an exploitative fashion. YOU are way off the mark. All great games came from a great concept, a concept that was not tinkered with by a bunch of people who've played the end product.
I'll take your Magic: The Gathering example. Say I choose my card, fold it sharply, then gouge my opponents eye out. I'm exploiting the fact that the cards are hard. I could say "I've played this for years, gouging an eye out isn't exploiting, its all part of the play. I know some guy thought it should be about using the cards to beat other cards, but I know better than him, he only invented it and nurtured it, I've played it" and to be honest I'd reckon most people would think I'm insane.
Using an exploit and then turning around and saying its a-ok is totally ridiculous, and verges on delusions of grandeur if it gets to the point where someone thinks that PLAYING the game somehow equates to DICTATING GAME CONCEPT.
Nadagast's "point" about balance and pt groups is entirely irrelevant to a discussion about exploits and concept. I am not "missing" Nadagast's point... I am saying it is utterly ridiculous. There is NO game, NO system where the fundamental concept has been altered by the beta test group. You will not see NS become Terrorists vs CTs just because X amount of the community say so.
You will also note I am not putting words into your mouth in my posts. "Balance yes, exploit no" is my concession that balance issues should involve a playtest community, but at the same time noone outside of the development team is entitled to say whether or not something is an exploit. Which leads back to the confusion between Balance and Concept.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Please don't imply I am saying this, because you're currently implying I'm saying these things and I'm not. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, you're confusing my use of the phrase "you". You will of course note in the previous sentence I said "a person". "You" is not used as a personal accusative. If it makes it easier for you, read it like this
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <b>"skill" and "experience" entitles one to make semi-informed comments on game balance. It does NOT entitle one to decide whether or not something is an exploit.</b> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hope thats clarified it for you and soothed the paranoia. Please continue to read the rest of my post replacing the word "you" with "one", "oneself", and "someone". You will also take care to note that we both agree that balance is something for a pt group..... CC blocking is not about balance. The same way struture blocking IPs isn't about balance. Unless of course you take it in the loosest possible sense (wallhacking is unbalancing, but its more of an exploit than a balance issue. Rapid firing the pistol is unbalancing, but its more of a balance issue than an exploit).
Please note, your "Off Topic" part refers to the core of Nadagast's On Topic problem, which is confusing Balance with Concept. Hence my lengthy reply on the issue. If you understood the difference then you would not be continuing to hammer on about Balance when balance simply is NOT the issue at hand. You did not at any point in your post explore the difference between balance and concept, instead merely discussing how balance is dictated by PTs. Thats pretty obvious, we've already covered it and everyone knows it. The problem is that balance is not concept.
Your brief On Topic segment continued one small point, and that was Ambiguity. Unfortunately you chose to elaborate on in a further off topic section. Taking your On Topic section on its own merit, there was very little to reply to. The Off Topic sections contained the most interesting segments, hence why they got the biggest amount of attention, and since your On Topic section was identical in content to the Off Topic section it was prudent to treat them as a single entity.
I do hope you've noticed the irony inherent to your post...... you complain about ambiguity, and yet when the devs definitively state that structure blocking of lifeforms is an exploit.................... you're still not happy.
Please re-read every post in the thread. Nad is hammering on about playtesters, betatesters, and game balance. Experienced players making game tweaks. The actual topic at hand is about exploits and game concepts. Jabbering on about how its true that PT dictate balance is only taking the thread off on a tangent. Noone denies the roles of PTers in balance tweaks....... what some people have trouble accepting is that exploits are not balance tweaks. And ultimately it is the people involved in the creation of the game CONCEPT who decide what is "proper use" of the game's contents. No amount of play experience gives a person the right to say that the dev team is wrong on how to use a structure.
What looks to be the key issue now is this-
<b>Does hard game experience entitle you to tell the game's designer that he doesn't know how his chambers were meant to be used?</b>
In his posts, Nad is effectively stating that yes, he does know better and that he knows what every structure was intended for and how it was meant to be used. He knows that Flayra intended CCs to be cheap wall blocks to teleport onto retreating aliens. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Nadagast... you seem to career from "I don't care about this thread I'm posting in" (which is basically an open admittance of spam) to "Experience entitles me to comment on things I know nothing about".
Adj, take a long hard look at the question. Do you think that hard game experience entitles someone to tell a game's designer that they know the concept, the intended use of things, better than they do? Don't sidetrack onto balance. We know the answer to that question. We're talking about exploits, concepts, imagery.
For me, I say no. I say the game's designer knows how structures were MEANT to be used, how they SHOULD be used. Noone else. If someone claims they know the concept better than its creator then they're delusional, misinformed, or conceited beyond all belief. If the people making a game decide something is an exploit, then thats entirely their decision. Its nothing to do with play experience.
Recoup -
Its just a little different. A gorge needs to be infront of the marine, he wastes 10 res which he CANNOT recover, they're easy to kill, and the structure remains there for the rest of the game. A CC can be placed ANYWHERE, costs virtually nothing, is built like a brick outhouse, and as it can be recycled it doesn't have to affect the rest of the game.
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Adj, take a long hard look at the question. Do you think that hard game experience entitles someone to tell a game's designer that they know the concept, the intended use of things, better than they do? Don't sidetrack onto balance. We know the answer to that question. We're talking about exploits, concepts, imagery.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok I'll take the bait and comment. I think that experience entitled me to give a reccomendation on if an exploit can be successfully balanced into the game or not. The fact that something is an exploit does not exclude it from the balance equation. Flayra did not design NS with the concept of skulks flying down the hall at nearly double their default speed. As has been argued before, it he had initially intended that, he would have set skulk speed to 500 and bhopping wouldn't even be used in NS. However an exploit of the game engine was used in order to boost the speed of all the game units to nearly double their default speeds. What was decided was that it was acceptable to include bunnyhopping in the balance for aliens, but not for marines. Concepts can be molded around balance, balance is quite difficult to mold around concepts. Given that the alien concept is speed and mobility, they weren't supposed to have THAT MUCH speed early game, but it was balanced to include it even if the concept didn't support this. Flayra may have an idea of how he wants things to be, and an exploit that goes around his initial idea may in the end be better than what he initially invisioned. This is not side-tracking. The intended use or the concept of something may be flawed in such a way that practical experience dictates to alter the concept to fit what is needed or what balances out in a better fashion.
Camping, CC blocking, WOLing...all of them 'valid' but extremely inconsiderate. It's a part of the complete incompatibility between competetive and casual players. One wants to win and will use any means possible, the other wants to have fun. Being blocked from moving from moving by a wall appearing out of thin air is NOT fun, but is highly effective: so whether you want CC blocking or not depends at least partly on what level you play at. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
One solution would be to make unbuilt buidling knock over-able, which is a good comprimise from the clippable buildings suggested on page 1. Might have to wait for Source though.
From my viewpoint tho, exploits and balance tweaks are different things. I can see where you're coming from, but in the case of bhopping I would argue that its not really opposed to the game concept, whereas most forms of structure blocking ARE directly opposed to the game concept.
Wouldn't building mine ladders and structure boosting be opposed to the game concept as well? But ingenius marines and commanders will put those two tactics into good use as well and it seems to be accepted since no one is whining about them.
From my viewpoint tho, exploits and balance tweaks are different things. I can see where you're coming from, but in the case of bhopping I would argue that its not really opposed to the game concept, whereas most forms of structure blocking ARE directly opposed to the game concept. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I knew you'd say that. I argued that bhopping isn't opposed to the game concept, but it definitely is taking it further than the concept invisioned. Vanilla skulks are faster than marines, but they weren't supposed go to twice as fast as marines (vanilla marines go around 200, a bhopping skulk can go 500). This could be considered unbalancing by many, and "not how the game was meant to be played". However this was fixed when it was declared that aliens could indeed bhop, and that it fit the concept of how the game should be played. My point on cc blocking is that its ok to block a doorway to prevent access to the room (which in affect is preventing an alien from moving using a structure), but it's not ok to drop a CC to prevent an alien from moving? It's not the actions that are ambiguous (Barring blind luck it's obvious when someone blocks an area off and when they try to block an alien thats running), but the concept of it is ambiguous. So it's ok to drop a cc in a doorway to prevent aliens from easily entering or leaving the room (a strategic block, its area denial), but it's not ok to attempt to slow down an alien leaving the room as it's being shot at (a tactical block, trying to prevent the enemy from escaping easily to allow it to be killed)? If anything I would argue the opposite from a balance perspective, any new comm can drop ccs in a doorway just to keep aliens out, only a truly skilled commander could do a tactical cc block to kill a fleeing alien. This is how balance and concept can be mixed, because in this case the two are at direct odds with one another.
I'm glad we appear to have reached an understanding of each other's viewpoint. Its a pleasant change from mindless degeneration into circular arguments, hehe.
Well one example of this that I can give is from CS... Shields were introduced and they were all intended in the developers visions and stuff, but 90% of pubs and 100% of clan games have shields banned.
Comments
Just messin <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I see CC blocking as a fundamental part of NS in that it was NOT meant to be there<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
bhop is a fundamental part of HL that was not meant to be there.. and everyone has gotten used to bhop. I'm just pointing that out though.
At this rate i'd not put the clan scenes lifeline at much longer than another 2 CAL seasons max. Surely you must see that if you've got nearly every single experienced, competitive player is leaving the scene slowly that there must be something wrong. People don't leave because a game it's fun, flayra should see what is happening and do something to address it, listen to what we have to say and stop fobbing us off with "it's lame, it's not your game." Instead we get variables like blockscripts or ambiguous rules on what in my opinion is a valid tactic and they create more problems than they solve.
On a final note to you, a lot of people complain, especially on pubs that fades are overpowered. You'd think they'd welcome another way of killing them but apparently not. I fade and i comm, i've been cc blocked and i've cc blocked, you say it's not part of the game but it is, i don't cry if i get cc blocked, i suck it up and deal with it because it's part of the game. I give mad props to the comm too because it's something that a lot of people simply aren't good enough to do.
Now you may not think it doesn't require skill but you try cc blocking a celerity fade as it does hit and runs, money says you miss him or are too late, not to mention you have to have presence of mind to do it and you can't neglect other duties whilst you wait for the opportunity.
<b>Alpha</b> - you're totally right about the divide it has created. People say it's a "choice" but when it comes to public play it severly limits what is available. Server ops are making decisions based off uneducation and a poor understanding of what you can do with scripts.
I'll name no names but putting blockscripts to 1 "because i say so" is a **** TASTIC reason and it's sad that people who come out with these things are the people who run servers. It's also sad that despite the endless posts by people on the forums trying to educate people about scripts that they're still seen as the big bad wolf and the root of all evil. Adding this variable only enforced the belief that they were bad to uneducated people and does nothing but further divide the community and mislead.
<b>Nada</b>- <3
Nad
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Like I said I'm not replying to you until you quote me paragraphs at a time
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You just replied to me?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I will though, reiterate that I'm not talking about CC blocking. I COULD CARE LESS IF IT GOES OR NOT. Get it?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Do You Approve Of Comm Chair Blocking?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
DO YOU GET IT?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I merely think that if the community decides something about a bug in the game, Flayra should go along.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If the community decides NS should be an RTS about Roman soldiers, should Flayra just hold his hands up and say "well ok guys, I'm your slave. I'll forget this NS idea of mine and I'll turn the whole company around, we'll do an ancient history RTS instead"?? If the dev team decide something is a bug in the game then the community should accept it and drive on. CC blocking can be exploited, so the dev team have made known their opinion on the matter. All going well, we can expect to see this exploit fixed. Where's the beef?
Alpha
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Wow your a lost one arn't you.... Spliting up the competitive/pub community
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How am I splitting them up, exactly?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
i know that many pubbers will not join competitive ns in these mp_bs 1 because they will feel like their playing with cheaters if they do.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Pubbers wont play in a blockscript server because they think they're playing with cheats? What?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Now you split the community because i will not play on a mp_bs 1 server
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Me? How? Do tell?
As a by the by, this is a CC blocking thread, I'm happy to reply to your OT and frankly quite odd opinion on how I'm the blame for blockscripts, etc, but not in this thread. Have fun gaming on servers that allow you the bhop script.
Alkiller
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Necrosis argueing in a CC blocking thread about not arguing in a CC blocking thread.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, I'm saying we shouldn't be discussing scripting in a CC blocking thread. Unfortunately Nad and Alpha have some problem with differentiating the two.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
bhop is a fundamental part of HL that was not meant to be there.. and everyone has gotten used to bhop. I'm just pointing that out though.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bhop was removed for marines, and kept in for aliens, afaik. That was a design choice. I'm just pointing that out though. IIRC, a design choice from the dev team. The people who know what NS really is about.
Ben-
Silly or not, I believe its been stated that it was already meant to have been implemented ages ago. Secondly, 2.0 wasn't referred to as a beta, it could have remained the benchmark for NS competitive play. The problem is that some groups continued to compete with betas as opposed to earlier, more complete builds.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
stop fobbing us off with "it's lame, it's not your game." Instead we get variables like blockscripts or ambiguous rules on what in my opinion is a valid tactic and they create more problems than they solve.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Things which should have been in at the start but have been left in the buglist for some time now. In your opinion CC blocking is a valid tactic, and shockingly yes the dev's interim rules say that its ok to block corridors. However the problem is with the exploitation of this tactic. I don't really see how they create more problems when the path of least resistance is just for people to keep to their preferred servers and not join other ones expressly to rant about how terrible it is to have any other ruleset.
I'm not saying "its lame" at any point, merely stating that if you don't like the concept then you really shouldn't be here. The final NS product will likely not have exploitative CC blocking, so look at it from that point of view. The only stumbling block will be people who *need* to exploit in order to win, and lets be clear on this - CC blocking of players is an exploit. Its no different to dropping structs on IPs, which was another exploit that got fixed.
Its not about "skill", or how hard/lame it is, its about the fact that in certain situations its considered an exploit. People will have to learn to live without it just as easily as we have learned to live with it. Why are people resisting the removal of a simple exploit?
Server admins do what they like, its their servers. They don't spend the money to host a server with rules they don't like. If other people dont like it, they play somewhere else. Just like forum admins and their forums.
Its relatively easy for someone to get an HL server up and running, and any major group of like minded players can easily fund one. If I had 20 friends who needed to play a version of NS with exploits (such as OC blocking IPs) then I'd set a server up between us all for that purpose.
It'll be just as easy for anyone else. Then they can enjoy their games with exploiting building placement while everyone else enjoys the "official" version of NS. The forums clean up because noone has the urge to vent their spleen with "I went to a different server and they used different rules and they suck and I rock so there kthx" posts. Its black and white stuff here, CC blocking's an exploit which will eventually be fixed like any other exploit. So why the hassle? If anything it'll benefit NS in the long run since further balance tweaks will not have to take into account accepted exploits.
Necrosis, you miss the point that Nadagast is attempting to explain, but seems to be struggling with. No one argues that anyone but Flayra should design the game, or implement the changes as he sees fit. It is indeed his game, his idea, and his work. Nadagast's point is that all great games of the past, present, and future have been and will be balanced around the ability of the best players. NS does not shine in even the best of pubs, it shines when 2 competitive teams slug it out until someone wins. The competitive scene is where the most skilled players gravitate to, this is a fact that cannot be argued with. If you get a great amount of skill, you will at least think about playing competitively. Very few players are quite skilled, yet are not currently nor have ever been in a clan. The only person that comes to my mind when I say this is a_civilian, because I don't think he's in a clan currently, yet certainly should be <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->.
What this leaves you with is this: A hardened core of competitive players that are among the best in the game, and have the skills, experience, and knowledge necessary to say things about the game that aren't biased by lack of skill, bad experienced against a significantly better player, or general lack of knowledge. A competitive player knows how the game works at the most fundamental level, and understands how to react to most situations at a a nearly unconscious level. I know the flow of the game as Commander, I react to things almost instantly and without a second thought. I have no other choice, because I'd be overwhelmed in a competitive game if I was any slower. This gives me insight that most commanders completely lack. This isn't arrogance, this is nothing less than <b>the fact</b> that I am better qualified to judge what is unbalanced and what isn't. <b><i><u>Flayra may design NS, but he does not possess this level of experience or skill playing it that competitive players possess. </u></i></b>This is why the competitive players replying to you continue to debate this topic with you. He is the creator, and he can do as he wishes, but he relies on the experience of the best players to tell him what is balanced and what is not. This information CANNOT be acquired from a pub, which has too many variables to account for in terms of skill, experience, and knowledge. It is an unreliable source, whereas the competitive scene is much more stable in terms of these variables. Saying "If you don't like it go away" is not a valid response as I'm sure you know. That is simply a way out of the debate you feel you need to use.
On Topic
Server rules are up the admins of the server. The Devteam can give its ruling on what it deems exploitive and what isn't, but the fact of the matter is that it comes down to the server admins and the league admins. The "opinion" given by the devteam is that blocking vents is illegal (also illegal in CAL). The devteam states that a strategic block (blocking a hallway/doorway with a CC) is in fact legal (also legal in CAL). The devteam also states that a tactical block with the purpose of preventing an alien from moving is illegal (legal in CAL). This wording is quite frankly very open to interpretation, which is why most servers just say "no cc blocking", because of it's ambigious wording. Not that being clear would prevent server ops from just outlawing it anyways.
Off Topic
This is becoming a recurring problem with statements or actions of the devteam, it leaves a lot open to interpretation. Instead of giving an opinion on scripting, the devteam creates a server variable that can block scripts and says "Its up to the server operators", yet give no official opinion on scripting itself, beyond certain "Official" people saying "scripting is lame/evil/exploitive/non-skilled/skilled/non-exploitive/etc". No binding opinion has ever been given, and I think Zunni making a post that says "Scripting is not exploitive, does indeed take skill to use (Negating the "scripts play for you" argument), and is fully accepted by the devteam" would eliminate a lot of the bias that exists right now. I know I personally will be writing a scripting tutorial for the new 3.0 Manual that's nearly complete, so the "It's not known how to script by the masses" argument will be nullified. Scripting will be talked about in the Official 3.0 Manual in-depth unless I'm told by the Devteam "Hey don't include that", which I don't think will be happening.
Now the devs come in, <b>oblivious to the fact that noone cares how they think we should play</b> ( "competitive play without console" anyone ? ), and throw in a third, more impractical and ambigious ruling into the mix. Man, that sure helped alot!
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Necrosis argueing in a CC blocking thread about not arguing in a CC blocking thread.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, I'm saying we shouldn't be discussing scripting in a CC blocking thread. Unfortunately Nad and Alpha have some problem with differentiating the two. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Joke <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Necrosis+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Necrosis)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Alkiller+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Alkiller)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
bhop is a fundamental part of HL that was not meant to be there.. and everyone has gotten used to bhop. I'm just pointing that out though.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bhop was removed for marines, and kept in for aliens, afaik. That was a design choice. I'm just pointing that out though. IIRC, a design choice from the dev team. The people who know what NS really is about.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But NS was balanced around bhop, and it integrated it into the game. NS needs to do the same about scripts. Right now that cvar, imho, is a dirty fix. Instead of fixing the problem they've made a bypass which prevents the problem from happening. I'ld love it if they would just remove that cvar and fix the exploitative scripts instead...
And I think they are going to do the same thing about structures in the upcoming versions... Like make them start out as ghosted, but I'm not sure.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Nadagast's point is that all great games of the past, present, and future have been and will be balanced around the ability of the best players.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do hope you've some evidence for this, other than an opinion. Games are PT'd and Beta'd and the small closed group of players make comments on bugs, balance, etc, but they don't dictate the vision of the game. It's simple enough, the devs see certain types of CC blocking as an exploit. If you don't like it, sadly thats just tough luck. I have yet to hear of a game where the players have actively dictated the game concept before release, let alone the PT group dictating it.
"skill" does not qualify you to dictate concept. No matter how "educated" one believes themselves to be, they will not be able to persuade the devs to allow wallhacking, speedhacking, etc. CC blocking of lifeforms is just another exploit, and only people who have lost touch with reality would be attempting to argue that their OPINION of what is an exploit should automatically override the people who KNOW what the concept is.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I am better qualified to judge what is unbalanced and what isn't.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Balance maybe, exploit no. Exploits tend to be things being used outside of their intended purpose, in a fashion that the devs/producer would deem improper. Bhopping in other games would be considered an exploit, but in NS its considered ok for aliens. Strucutre blocking IPs was considered an exploit. CC blocking players is considered an exploit. Experience is irrelevant, you might as well argue that god mode should be in.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
This is why the competitive players replying to you continue to debate this topic with you.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
TBH all we can see in this thread now is how "skill" and "experience" with the game engine somehow entitles a person to dictate what the game is about. It doesnt. <b>"skill" and "experience" entitle you to make semi-informed comments on game balance. It does NOT entitle you to decide whether or not something is an exploit.</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Saying "If you don't like it go away" is not a valid response as I'm sure you know. That is simply a way out of the debate you feel you need to use.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you can't accept that you do not dictate the concept of NS, then you are harming the community. You SHOULD leave. If you don't understand the difference between a balance decision and an exploit then one should keep their opinion to themself, or find a different community. People who sit in a community, screaming about how THEY should decide how the game should be played, are only harming its spirit.
Discover the difference between a balance issue (such as improving shotgun damage) and an exploit issue (removing structure blocking IPs).
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
This wording is quite frankly very open to interpretation, which is why most servers just say "no cc blocking", because of it's ambigious wording. Not that being clear would prevent server ops from just outlawing it anyways.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And if you don't like it, don't play on those servers. Its that easy. There seems to be lots of vocal and likeminded people, so between you why not create your own server to enhance your enjoyment of the game?
I don't see where the "ambiguity" exists... I mean if you drop a CC to catch a fleeing alien then its quite obvious what you've just done. And it certainly differs from dropping a CC or two in a room you're trying to lame up.
Again, look at it from the viewpoint of any other game. I don't like FFA JKIII, so I don't play on those servers. I play the ones I like, I keep myself happy, and I don't irritate people by telling them how they should run THEIR server.
Flay/Dev team make the game according to their concept, noone else's.
Forum admins keep forums clean according to their rules, noone else's.
Server admins run servers according to their rules, noone else's.
If a person can't cope with that, then they don't have a place in those groups. A server, a forum, a game, they've benevolent dictatorships. The guy running the show decides what is kosher and what is not. Balance issues are not the same as exploits. Balance issues are a case of more or less, exploits are a case of LEGALITY.
Adj, its a CC blocking thread, scripting goes elsewhere. We're discussing the CC blocking exploit. If you have a beef with something else, start a new topic on it and we'll continue there. My only comment on your Manual is that since blockscripts is a variable, and since servers exist with blockscripts 0, then scripting deserves a place in the manual. Thats pretty elementary. We're discussing the CC blocking exploit here.
Nad-
Posting an entire site is a bit vague, don't you think? Is there a specific part you would care for us to read? A part explaining how the players should decide what is an exploit and what is not?
Saltz-
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Now the devs come in, oblivious to the fact that noone cares how they think we should play
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Odd... I would imagine the guys who understand the game concept would know more about what is or is not an exploit as opposed to a group of people who don't?
Alkiller
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
NS needs to do the same about scripts
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indiana... Let. It. Go.
CC BLOCKING THREAD, Al. Exploit thread.
Look guys you're going to end up arguing in circles, I can see a lot of you have some problem with accepting this is a discussion about exploits. I don't think anyone who's in full control of their mental faculties could somehow effectively tell the game's creators that:
"I know what abusing the game is and what isnt, I know how structures should be used, you know nothing because you're only the guy who invented the game, invented CCs, and decided that CCs were meant to be used for Commanding from, I've played this game for X amount of time and I have decided that a CC is really a wall, you should rename it to Command Wall. And while we're at it here's a few more exploits you got wrong, I should be allowed to structure block IPs, OCs should shoot at harmless structures first, aliens should be able to use phases, everyone should have wallhacks and seeking weaponry, and res should be taken out because I say it only slows down my game"
Realise how unimportant and uninformed we all are in regards to GAME CONCEPT. We all have a voice in suggesting balance issues, but NOT EXPLOITS.
Even an "educated" person should be able to understand that?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Experience is irrelevant, you might as well argue that god mode should be in.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> WORST. ARGUMENT. EVER.
You have no say in something because you could argue that godmode and aimbots should be turned on! Nevermind that nobody in their right mind would do that! You still have no say!
Flayra shouldn't have any say in the game, cuz he could want to turn godmode on. I realize you're gonna say that "It's Flayra's game he can do that if he wants!" but that's just being naive imo. How many people would play NS if godmode was on?
What about C++? Shouldn't the creators of C++ have complete control of anything done with it? They did make it after all. Computers? Whoever created computers should be able to stop us all from playing tomorrow right?
This logic that makes Flayra into some sort of God is hurting my head.... Let me reiterate... I UNDERSTAND IT'S FLAYRA'S GAME, and I understand obviously he can do whatever he wants with it. But, 99% of the time it's the best option to listen to the educated community on wether or not an exploit should be removed or not. He just doesn't have the experience or knowledge of how the game works at the top levels to know, and that isn't his fault.
"skill" does not qualify you to dictate concept. No matter how "educated" one believes themselves to be, they will not be able to persuade the devs to allow wallhacking, speedhacking, etc. CC blocking of lifeforms is just another exploit, and only people who have lost touch with reality would be attempting to argue that their OPINION of what is an exploit should automatically override the people who KNOW what the concept is.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not talking about concept, I'm talking about balance. I don't know how you pulled vision or concept out of that. You're off the mark here. All great games are balanced out by the best players. Magic: The Gathering is a wonderful example of a company using its best and brightest players to balance out the game.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Balance maybe, exploit no. Exploits tend to be things being used outside of their intended purpose, in a fashion that the devs/producer would deem improper. Bhopping in other games would be considered an exploit, but in NS its considered ok for aliens. Strucutre blocking IPs was considered an exploit. CC blocking players is considered an exploit. Experience is irrelevant, you might as well argue that god mode should be in.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you notice I didn't speak about exploits, simply balance. You're putting words into text that I did not write. Note that I used On and Off Topic tags to dictate when I was talking about CC Blocking and General Balance, which is what this discussion has changed into. Do not confuse the two.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->TBH all we can see in this thread now is how "skill" and "experience" with the game engine somehow entitles a person to dictate what the game is about. It doesnt. <b>"skill" and "experience" entitle you to make semi-informed comments on game balance. It does NOT entitle you to decide whether or not something is an exploit.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Once again I didn't say my experience and skill entitled me to anything but to balance the game, not determine exploits or dictate the game. Please don't imply I am saying this, because you're currently implying I'm saying these things and I'm not. Please read what I am saying and stop contorting my words.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If you can't accept that you do not dictate the concept of NS, then you are harming the community. You SHOULD leave. If you don't understand the difference between a balance decision and an exploit then one should keep their opinion to themself, or find a different community. People who sit in a community, screaming about how THEY should decide how the game should be played, are only harming its spirit.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
...Yet again, read what I said, because your entire reply to me is off the point of what I said. Never have I said that I personally should dictate the concept of ns (did I even use the words vision or concept in my initial post? I don't think I did. I think I used balance in off topic, and exploit in on topic). It's not up to the players to determine how the game is, it's up to them to determine when something is too weak or too strong, which is BALANCE. Please read what I write before you reply next time.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Discover the difference between a balance issue (such as improving shotgun damage) and an exploit issue (removing structure blocking IPs).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you read what I wrote, you'd notice that I did just this. Note the On Topic (About CC Blocking) and Off Topic (About Competitive Players / Balance / etc). You should discover the difference between reading comprehension and skimming for "the gist", because you clearly either did not read what I said in full and understand it, or you simply don't care as to what I said, you care simply about warping it to your point of view.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Adj, its a CC blocking thread, scripting goes elsewhere. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I used scripting as another example of ambigious "rulings" by the Devteam. I also labeled it Off-Topic, although in a way it is related to CC Blocking (My argument that the devteam is being ambigious in some of it's decisions, namely defining some cc blocks as exploits while not others, and its decision to not talk about scripts beyond "let the server admin decide" is how they are related). Once again please read what I wrote, I included Off and On Topic tags to clearly define what was about cc blocking and what wasn't, and you still managed to not understand. Please re-read my initial post, understand what I am talking about, and reply again, this time replying to what I ACTUALLY wrote, not what YOU THINK I wrote.
Note: I am not flaming Necrosis, but it is clear to me (and should be to anyone else) that he did not read what I posted, which is why I replied in the way I did.
not that i have a problem with either, just pointing things out :rolleyes:
And that a gorge has to be near a rine to drop chambers. The comm block aliens witheout beeing in danger. He can also recycle the CCs afterwards thus making it a cheap block.
Btw it's really hard to spamm chambers as gorges, unless you are holding nearly 80% of the maps RTs.
but why is the cc made taller than most other buildings, making it unable to jump/crouch on to?
i mean if the ns programmers made it that way...obviously they approve of at least some types of cc blocking?
imagine a marine sitting inside a turret factory. :P
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
How many people would play NS if godmode was on?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Exactly my point. If you're going to keep in an exploit such as CC blocking, then why stop there? Why not keep in every exploit and cheat under the sun? What makes CC blocking so special that it should be the only exploit to earn a reprieve?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
But, 99% of the time it's the best option to listen to the educated community on wether or not an exploit should be removed or not. He just doesn't have the experience or knowledge of how the game works at the top levels to know, and that isn't his fault.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Honestly do not know whether to laugh or cry at the sheer delusional nature of this statement. The community does not decide whether or not something is an exploit. 100% of the time its a good idea to leave concept decisions in the hands of the person who invented the concept. "How that game works" often has very little relevance to "How I intended the game to work". The game is intended NOT to have CC blocking, or wallhacking, speedhacking, aimbots, IP blocking, etc etc etc. All these things will be removed. An exploit is an exploit, you can't argue the validity of one without having to justify the removal of the others.
I dunno where you get this whole "Flayra is god" thing from, noone's said that at all. Keep to reading the posts instead of inventing things noone has said.
Adj-
CC blocking is not a balance issue. Exploits are more game bugs than balance issues. Exploits are about concepts, intended use of structures, how the game was intended to be played. Balance is only tangentially connected to it.
Balance was covered in your Off Topic section. Balance has very very little to do with dev team decisions about bugs and exploits. You're talking about balance when the issue at hand is game concept. CC blocking was not intended to be used in an exploitative fashion. YOU are way off the mark. All great games came from a great concept, a concept that was not tinkered with by a bunch of people who've played the end product.
I'll take your Magic: The Gathering example. Say I choose my card, fold it sharply, then gouge my opponents eye out. I'm exploiting the fact that the cards are hard. I could say "I've played this for years, gouging an eye out isn't exploiting, its all part of the play. I know some guy thought it should be about using the cards to beat other cards, but I know better than him, he only invented it and nurtured it, I've played it" and to be honest I'd reckon most people would think I'm insane.
Using an exploit and then turning around and saying its a-ok is totally ridiculous, and verges on delusions of grandeur if it gets to the point where someone thinks that PLAYING the game somehow equates to DICTATING GAME CONCEPT.
Nadagast's "point" about balance and pt groups is entirely irrelevant to a discussion about exploits and concept. I am not "missing" Nadagast's point... I am saying it is utterly ridiculous. There is NO game, NO system where the fundamental concept has been altered by the beta test group. You will not see NS become Terrorists vs CTs just because X amount of the community say so.
You will also note I am not putting words into your mouth in my posts. "Balance yes, exploit no" is my concession that balance issues should involve a playtest community, but at the same time noone outside of the development team is entitled to say whether or not something is an exploit. Which leads back to the confusion between Balance and Concept.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Please don't imply I am saying this, because you're currently implying I'm saying these things and I'm not.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, you're confusing my use of the phrase "you". You will of course note in the previous sentence I said "a person". "You" is not used as a personal accusative. If it makes it easier for you, read it like this
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
<b>"skill" and "experience" entitles one to make semi-informed comments on game balance. It does NOT entitle one to decide whether or not something is an exploit.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I hope thats clarified it for you and soothed the paranoia. Please continue to read the rest of my post replacing the word "you" with "one", "oneself", and "someone". You will also take care to note that we both agree that balance is something for a pt group..... CC blocking is not about balance. The same way struture blocking IPs isn't about balance. Unless of course you take it in the loosest possible sense (wallhacking is unbalancing, but its more of an exploit than a balance issue. Rapid firing the pistol is unbalancing, but its more of a balance issue than an exploit).
Please note, your "Off Topic" part refers to the core of Nadagast's On Topic problem, which is confusing Balance with Concept. Hence my lengthy reply on the issue. If you understood the difference then you would not be continuing to hammer on about Balance when balance simply is NOT the issue at hand. You did not at any point in your post explore the difference between balance and concept, instead merely discussing how balance is dictated by PTs. Thats pretty obvious, we've already covered it and everyone knows it. The problem is that balance is not concept.
Your brief On Topic segment continued one small point, and that was Ambiguity. Unfortunately you chose to elaborate on in a further off topic section. Taking your On Topic section on its own merit, there was very little to reply to. The Off Topic sections contained the most interesting segments, hence why they got the biggest amount of attention, and since your On Topic section was identical in content to the Off Topic section it was prudent to treat them as a single entity.
I do hope you've noticed the irony inherent to your post...... you complain about ambiguity, and yet when the devs definitively state that structure blocking of lifeforms is an exploit.................... you're still not happy.
Please re-read every post in the thread. Nad is hammering on about playtesters, betatesters, and game balance. Experienced players making game tweaks. The actual topic at hand is about exploits and game concepts. Jabbering on about how its true that PT dictate balance is only taking the thread off on a tangent. Noone denies the roles of PTers in balance tweaks....... what some people have trouble accepting is that exploits are not balance tweaks. And ultimately it is the people involved in the creation of the game CONCEPT who decide what is "proper use" of the game's contents. No amount of play experience gives a person the right to say that the dev team is wrong on how to use a structure.
What looks to be the key issue now is this-
<b>Does hard game experience entitle you to tell the game's designer that he doesn't know how his chambers were meant to be used?</b>
In his posts, Nad is effectively stating that yes, he does know better and that he knows what every structure was intended for and how it was meant to be used. He knows that Flayra intended CCs to be cheap wall blocks to teleport onto retreating aliens. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Nadagast... you seem to career from "I don't care about this thread I'm posting in" (which is basically an open admittance of spam) to "Experience entitles me to comment on things I know nothing about".
Adj, take a long hard look at the question. Do you think that hard game experience entitles someone to tell a game's designer that they know the concept, the intended use of things, better than they do? Don't sidetrack onto balance. We know the answer to that question. We're talking about exploits, concepts, imagery.
For me, I say no. I say the game's designer knows how structures were MEANT to be used, how they SHOULD be used. Noone else. If someone claims they know the concept better than its creator then they're delusional, misinformed, or conceited beyond all belief. If the people making a game decide something is an exploit, then thats entirely their decision. Its nothing to do with play experience.
Recoup -
Its just a little different. A gorge needs to be infront of the marine, he wastes 10 res which he CANNOT recover, they're easy to kill, and the structure remains there for the rest of the game. A CC can be placed ANYWHERE, costs virtually nothing, is built like a brick outhouse, and as it can be recycled it doesn't have to affect the rest of the game.
Ok I'll take the bait and comment. I think that experience entitled me to give a reccomendation on if an exploit can be successfully balanced into the game or not. The fact that something is an exploit does not exclude it from the balance equation. Flayra did not design NS with the concept of skulks flying down the hall at nearly double their default speed. As has been argued before, it he had initially intended that, he would have set skulk speed to 500 and bhopping wouldn't even be used in NS. However an exploit of the game engine was used in order to boost the speed of all the game units to nearly double their default speeds. What was decided was that it was acceptable to include bunnyhopping in the balance for aliens, but not for marines. Concepts can be molded around balance, balance is quite difficult to mold around concepts. Given that the alien concept is speed and mobility, they weren't supposed to have THAT MUCH speed early game, but it was balanced to include it even if the concept didn't support this. Flayra may have an idea of how he wants things to be, and an exploit that goes around his initial idea may in the end be better than what he initially invisioned. This is not side-tracking. The intended use or the concept of something may be flawed in such a way that practical experience dictates to alter the concept to fit what is needed or what balances out in a better fashion.
One solution would be to make unbuilt buidling knock over-able, which is a good comprimise from the clippable buildings suggested on page 1. Might have to wait for Source though.
From my viewpoint tho, exploits and balance tweaks are different things. I can see where you're coming from, but in the case of bhopping I would argue that its not really opposed to the game concept, whereas most forms of structure blocking ARE directly opposed to the game concept.
Truer words have never been spoken.
From my viewpoint tho, exploits and balance tweaks are different things. I can see where you're coming from, but in the case of bhopping I would argue that its not really opposed to the game concept, whereas most forms of structure blocking ARE directly opposed to the game concept. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I knew you'd say that. I argued that bhopping isn't opposed to the game concept, but it definitely is taking it further than the concept invisioned. Vanilla skulks are faster than marines, but they weren't supposed go to twice as fast as marines (vanilla marines go around 200, a bhopping skulk can go 500). This could be considered unbalancing by many, and "not how the game was meant to be played". However this was fixed when it was declared that aliens could indeed bhop, and that it fit the concept of how the game should be played. My point on cc blocking is that its ok to block a doorway to prevent access to the room (which in affect is preventing an alien from moving using a structure), but it's not ok to drop a CC to prevent an alien from moving? It's not the actions that are ambiguous (Barring blind luck it's obvious when someone blocks an area off and when they try to block an alien thats running), but the concept of it is ambiguous. So it's ok to drop a cc in a doorway to prevent aliens from easily entering or leaving the room (a strategic block, its area denial), but it's not ok to attempt to slow down an alien leaving the room as it's being shot at (a tactical block, trying to prevent the enemy from escaping easily to allow it to be killed)? If anything I would argue the opposite from a balance perspective, any new comm can drop ccs in a doorway just to keep aliens out, only a truly skilled commander could do a tactical cc block to kill a fleeing alien. This is how balance and concept can be mixed, because in this case the two are at direct odds with one another.
SHRUG <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->