About Game Balance
MEShootHere
Join Date: 2002-11-05 Member: 6975Members
Join Date: 2002-11-05 Member: 6975Members
<div class="IPBDescription">Such a problem?</div> As with my previous posts I shall state that this topic is free to be locked or deleted if it turns into a flame war of any sorts. I shall also state again that if one does not have anything valid to say or anything constructive to add to this conversation I ask of you to refrain from posting.
"Why can't we go back to 1.04?!?!?!?!"
Never thought I'd read that in this forum.
Oddly, a lot of people seem to think 1.04 was a lot more balanced than the latest release.
Well I guess it is all a matter of taste but I have to say something about that.
A lot of the I&S threads come from ideas to counter a certain ability of the other team so that there is a counter to every strategic strike one team may deliver to the other.
Why is there such a need for this?
I remember enjoying long and rich games back in the 1.x days and they were good.
I enjoy the same kind of games in the new 3.0b5.
It seems that there must be a counter for any strategy (like HA train or JP rush) because they win games. I don't think this is necessary.
Sure when thinking back about the 1.x days with the unlimited jetpackers winning games solo that was bad. Or hitbox issues where crouching marines in vents were darn hard to hit.
THOSE influence balance because they aren't a natural course of gaming.
I personally think that some tactics are better than others and are a lot harder to counter. But why would there be a need for a direct counter?
I cannot explain the pleasures of back in the day where the ultimate JP/HMG rush was a game winner but through some VERY strong teamwork and excellent players you managed to break the assault, survive and counter now that the commander has spent so much res and probably doesnt have that much left.
The game doesn't "need to be balanced", it needs to be a challenging experience where it is rewarding for players that, through skill and experience, manage to stop that insane strategy that is supposedly the hardest thing to counter in the entire game.
Sure I agree that some things should be fixed, but this mainly comes down to bugs more than general balance. Also certain techniques shouldn't be insanely cheap and easy to reproduce.
A typical example is the shotgun rush.
The commander takes a risk. Spends all his res on shotguns and it will be a win or lose situation.
Either the players manage to fend off the big wave of aliens and then manage to keep them down because they spawn at a slow rate or his team gets decimated either through poor marine players, good alien players or just plain bad luck.
But nowhere on this forum (or at least not so much as any other strategy) will you find complaints about a shotty rush. And believe me, if you just started a round and manage to nicely set up a cozy little spot with a few chambers protecting you as a gorge, nothing is more frustrating than getting beat down by a few unarmoured marines with bewmsticks.
More elaborate strategies often require more res and thus have a bigger chance of succeeding but also a bigger penalty for the marines if it fails because of all the wasted res.
Stopping such an expensive assault as an alien is worth 10 rounds of standard victories.
So I shall say that balance is a very loose term, especially when it comes to NS because the 2 teams are so incredibly different. Balancing strategies/weapons/whatnot is not done by "Every action should have a counter" but by deeper research.
I don't mind losing if the marines play well and manage some sort of rush that is indeed incredibly hard to stop. But if that 1% of the time you DO succeed in stopping it, that feeling is probably worth a million bucks.
My views on balance by M.S. Here
my 2c
"Why can't we go back to 1.04?!?!?!?!"
Never thought I'd read that in this forum.
Oddly, a lot of people seem to think 1.04 was a lot more balanced than the latest release.
Well I guess it is all a matter of taste but I have to say something about that.
A lot of the I&S threads come from ideas to counter a certain ability of the other team so that there is a counter to every strategic strike one team may deliver to the other.
Why is there such a need for this?
I remember enjoying long and rich games back in the 1.x days and they were good.
I enjoy the same kind of games in the new 3.0b5.
It seems that there must be a counter for any strategy (like HA train or JP rush) because they win games. I don't think this is necessary.
Sure when thinking back about the 1.x days with the unlimited jetpackers winning games solo that was bad. Or hitbox issues where crouching marines in vents were darn hard to hit.
THOSE influence balance because they aren't a natural course of gaming.
I personally think that some tactics are better than others and are a lot harder to counter. But why would there be a need for a direct counter?
I cannot explain the pleasures of back in the day where the ultimate JP/HMG rush was a game winner but through some VERY strong teamwork and excellent players you managed to break the assault, survive and counter now that the commander has spent so much res and probably doesnt have that much left.
The game doesn't "need to be balanced", it needs to be a challenging experience where it is rewarding for players that, through skill and experience, manage to stop that insane strategy that is supposedly the hardest thing to counter in the entire game.
Sure I agree that some things should be fixed, but this mainly comes down to bugs more than general balance. Also certain techniques shouldn't be insanely cheap and easy to reproduce.
A typical example is the shotgun rush.
The commander takes a risk. Spends all his res on shotguns and it will be a win or lose situation.
Either the players manage to fend off the big wave of aliens and then manage to keep them down because they spawn at a slow rate or his team gets decimated either through poor marine players, good alien players or just plain bad luck.
But nowhere on this forum (or at least not so much as any other strategy) will you find complaints about a shotty rush. And believe me, if you just started a round and manage to nicely set up a cozy little spot with a few chambers protecting you as a gorge, nothing is more frustrating than getting beat down by a few unarmoured marines with bewmsticks.
More elaborate strategies often require more res and thus have a bigger chance of succeeding but also a bigger penalty for the marines if it fails because of all the wasted res.
Stopping such an expensive assault as an alien is worth 10 rounds of standard victories.
So I shall say that balance is a very loose term, especially when it comes to NS because the 2 teams are so incredibly different. Balancing strategies/weapons/whatnot is not done by "Every action should have a counter" but by deeper research.
I don't mind losing if the marines play well and manage some sort of rush that is indeed incredibly hard to stop. But if that 1% of the time you DO succeed in stopping it, that feeling is probably worth a million bucks.
My views on balance by M.S. Here
my 2c
Comments
but the thing that drives me nuts is that they complain web is too umbalenced and that there is no way to counter it.
<b>hello?!?! you have a welder in slot 4, 1 sec, PRICE CHECK ON STANDARD EDITION TSA WIELDER!</b>
1.04 made the pistol go byby in 1.04... so actually now web doesnt cripple marines anymore... at least as far as choosing a welder to combat it.