So what if aliens are generally the winners, it's better than the balance landing the other way, as it's more fun on pubs. You won't get it exactly right with balance ever, not in a game this complex.
And a round of applause for the people that have got all bitchy about some of the more sensible things said by Necrosis (and others) and ended up resorting to just childish name calling, you're really making the NS community look good as you claim that it's laughing at him.
Oh, and a week isn't long enough, seeming within the week all people seem to do is go on to a server, **** together about SC, stop playing properly with the usual defeatist attiude that was ironically used on the flip side when SC was severely broken, and convince each other that they need to rant on the forums about how **** everything is.
If you still feel that SC is terribly broken in a couple more weeks then maybe people will listen to you with a bit more of a sympathetic ear.
<!--QuoteBegin-FCC+Mar 19 2005, 09:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (FCC @ Mar 19 2005, 09:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Mar 19 2005, 09:09 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Mar 19 2005, 09:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Right. That's if the magical numbers rolled around to disprove the other 20 experts.
Till then, it's good luck. I sincerely doubt that if the amount of people came about and all the said the same thing, that the numbers would be any different from what they said.
You know, one expert says, "Hey, I've written this bestseller and have a double Ph.D", the next says "I've probably researched this subject for over 15 works." and the next says "I've spent 30 years on this subject with no malpractice (malpractice is not strictly a medical term) charges ever brought against me, and I agree with the said claims." and so on from 17 other experts, do you REALLY think that numbers are going to magically appear to disprove them?
No way, these experts <b>are the numbers!</b> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Perhaps we should define the term expert. Is it someone who is knowledgeable in the subject at hand with formal proof, or simply someone who "goes with the flow?" Could I not simply repeat the statements that other so called experts stated, and proceed to consider myself an expert? What then is my proof? The other experts? And what are other expert's proof? The cycle continues. Your whole concept of experts collaborating to whole a unified proof is nothing more than a paradigm. Are you familiar with the Newtonian Paradigm? Hundreds of experts. And one man came along with his "magical numbers" and proved them all wrong: Einsten. And it was not like the Newtonian did not have formal proof. They did but it was flawed, but not as flawed as those with only informal proof.
Magical numbers do magically appear and disprove ideas. I am no way saying your analysis is incorrect; I am pleased to see someone who tries to voice his opinion on the chamber subject in a comprensible way. But numbers are an essential component of any proof. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Few problems here.
1. The expert here is someone who's good at the game of NS. Obviously clan players are good at NS so it's no coincidence they compromise 99% of the experts here. How do we know they are good at NS? Because they will beat you at the game, proving their ability. Very simple process for determining experts.
Experts may not have the best solutions for gameplay, that perhaps is where the developer have the final and best call, but they definately can figure out the game the best.
2. The proof is in the pudding; the expert says this is what is correct and then goes on to do it. With clanners you have people claiming sensory chambers are broken and then in game they tell their stories of how games should proceed. Often times they are correct; little coincidence!
3. The Newtonian Paradigm is an exception to the rule, hardly the stardard, and when talking about a simple game like NS there is far less complexity involved meaning less room for error, which in turn establishes credibility for the experts; aka the players who spend quality time on the game.
4. I really don't understand how hundereds of hours spent in game isn't considered as a number
5. I am not saying numbers cannot magically appear and disprove theories, but basically what you'd need to support what necrosis is saying are win rates of like
Marines: 60% Aliens: 40%
across all public and clan games.
Since all of the experts here rely off of their empirical evidence, have very little reason to lie, do you honestly think numbers like these will suddently and abruptly appear to disclaim us all?
<!--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-->Oh, and a week isn't long enough, seeming within the week all people seem to do is go on to a server, **** together about SC, stop playing properly with the usual defeatist attiude that was ironically used on the flip side when SC was severely broken, and convince each other that they need to rant on the forums about how **** everything is.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh yeah, that's all we did.
<!--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-->ended up resorting to just childish name calling, you're really making the NS community look good as you claim that it's laughing at him. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And you are making the community look good too pal, by swearing on the forums and pretending you know what people did with this game. Hypocrite.
<!--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-->That and putting a blanket ban on clanners bitching in the first fortnight after a release would also be great.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Keep it up.
Final edit:
Another fallacy in logic detected,
<!--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 wonder how many man hours are spent playign public games compared to playing clan based competative games...maybe if (as I'd expect) more hours are spent playing public games we should be spending more of our efforts balancing public games ON AVERAGE rather than pandering to a smaller segment of the community.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Less man hours are spent on public games, since each hour is exclusive to the player and more particularly the server.
Whereas clan hours are essentially shared as strategies spread like wildfire from clan to clan rather than server to server.
Case in point; Anyone remember how long it took before pubbers started to use the jetpack rush in 1.04? Clanners knew about it a few weeks into the game, it took pubbers forever to figure it out...
<!--QuoteBegin-fanatic+Mar 20 2005, 12:21 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (fanatic @ Mar 20 2005, 12:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Also, any point using public games as an example of why the game is balanced/unbalanced is instantly invalidated. Publics are in no way a good way to observe game balance, simply because teams are never balanced in a good way. Pubs are not organized, and do in no way push the game to its limits. There are too many variables to take into account, such as player skill or lack of skill for example, to even consider using it as reliable examples. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I wonder how many man hours are spent playign public games compared to playing clan based competative games...maybe if (as I'd expect) more hours are spent playing public games we should be spending more of our efforts balancing public games ON AVERAGE rather than pandering to a smaller segment of the community.
That and putting a blanket ban on clanners bitching in the first fortnight after a release would also be great.
<!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Mar 20 2005, 05:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Mar 20 2005, 05:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> 1. The expert here is someone who's good at the game of NS. Obviously clan players are good at NS so it's no coincidence they compromise 99% of the experts here. How do we know they are good at NS? <b>Because they will beat you at the game, proving their ability. Very simple process for determining experts.</b>
Experts may not have the best solutions for gameplay, that perhaps is where the developer have the final and best call, but they definately can figure out the game the best. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Oh, they're all good are they? Is this including all the clans that got together just to get vet status back along? They must all be "experts" right?
You're just talking usual elitist bollocks mate, especially that highly laughable bold section.
Experts are people that inherently know the game, not who are "good at beating people". Having you and your clan buddies play the game for a few days, with the usual defensive attitude to a new version, convince each other that it's not the lack of effort to evolve around the gameplay changes that is causing the problem, but the game itself...does not make you experts.
As it's been said, lets have numbers to prove what you're trying to say, not just a "movement" of opinion.
<!--QuoteBegin-niaccurshi+Mar 20 2005, 12:17 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (niaccurshi @ Mar 20 2005, 12:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Mar 20 2005, 05:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Mar 20 2005, 05:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> 1. The expert here is someone who's good at the game of NS. Obviously clan players are good at NS so it's no coincidence they compromise 99% of the experts here. How do we know they are good at NS? <b>Because they will beat you at the game, proving their ability. Very simple process for determining experts.</b>
Experts may not have the best solutions for gameplay, that perhaps is where the developer have the final and best call, but they definately can figure out the game the best. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Oh, they're all good are they? Is this including all the clans that got together just to get vet status back along? They must all be "experts" right?
You're just talking usual elitist bollocks mate, especially that highly laughable bold section.
Experts are people that inherently know the game, not who are "good at beating people". Having you and your clan buddies play the game for a few days, with the usual defensive attitude to a new version, convince each other that it's not the lack of effort to evolve around the gameplay changes that is causing the problem, but the game itself...does not make you experts.
As it's been said, lets have numbers to prove what you're trying to say, not just a "movement" of opinion. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> This is elitist? If someone beats you at a game it is considered elitist? Nice definition there, I think you might need to cool off, come back and start thinking rationally.
By the way, when did I ever say people with vet icons were experts? Or good at the game for that matter?
I'll state it again, and if you like it bolded I'll bold it for you:
<b>Experts in the game of NS are the ones who good at beating other people in NS.</b>
Sorry if you somehow feel exlcuded, because perhaps you aren't an expert since you don't beat other people, but life isn't fair and neither is rational logic.
<!--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-->with the usual defensive attitude to a new version<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No idea what you are talking about. Wanna support that statement with some evidence (aka numbers)? Or you just going to keep making statements saying I need numbers for my argument instead?
Furthermore, while experts mostly agree with my analysis, most all the regular players who've posted here also agree with my analysis.
Try to keep the irrational (emotional) anti-clan agenda out of the thread, thanks.
And thanks for reading my essay, which I presume you did.
On my favorite pub Marines still beat aliens, therefore everything NGE has to say is bunk. (The game is balanced fine, the problem is with these uppity clanner skulks who think it's appropriate to take advantage of their chamber upgrades and use lame tactics like ambushing.)
NGE, niaccurshi, you are both right. That's right, you are BOTH correct. So stop being fools and arguing about stupid things. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
expert - A person with a high degree of skill in <span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'>or</span> knowledge of a certain subject.
(reference: dictionary.com)
and dictionary owns you all.
<!--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-->Sorry if you somehow feel exlcuded, because perhaps you aren't an expert since you don't beat other people, but life isn't fair and neither is rational logic.
Furthermore, while experts mostly agree with my analysis, most all the regular players who've posted here also agree with my analysis.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you are going to use words such as mostly, or most, either list the people or don't bother stating these statements, as they are too vague.
I also believe the thread has been thrown off into an argument war instead of what the original purpose was supposed to be about.
Good day. <!--emo&::gorge::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/pudgy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pudgy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
ps. traquilchaos... i also love teh princess mononoke.
it is inevitable and inescapable. in life we must bet on what is likely to happen. those who bet more rightly win. those whose brains better approximate reality win
numbers can't do stuff on their own. the person must interpret them correctly; the person must be able to see
also opinion herds are much more common amongst the humanities, as there is nothing sorting them out (strongly, that is) except sheer personality
for the clans there is competition. the universe is not ideal and not everything is perfect; however, the clan environment is far better suited to testing the limits of the game, and I'd wager that the clan system has not broken down so far yet as to be as idiotic as many of you seem to believe. that would be quite amazing imo. if i were to accuse someone of arrogance i might have occasion to pick certain non clanners, as they appear to not understand the nature of the clan community and how it is likely to operate, thereby making outrageous claims
balancing for pubs is a very subtle proposition. balancing for pubs means balancing for everyone, and that means accomodating a variety of skill levels. some people will always be better than others. how to make something so that if skilled people take advantage of it more fully, it will not be game breaking, while having some semblance of game depth?
o btw there is no folly of youth, there is only your folly
people may have no choice but to be stupid but the youth have the grown who are supposed to guide them. unfortunately people are stupid to varying degrees and this has affected countless generations down the line
the people need a leader, someone with balls. being older usually just means a bunch of random people, same as before, except older and worse
<!--QuoteBegin-FCC+Mar 19 2005, 07:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (FCC @ Mar 19 2005, 07:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-NGE+Mar 19 2005, 05:32 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Mar 19 2005, 05:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Imagine a case where 10 or 20 experts came in and all said the same thing. Good luck disproving that in the courtroom.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> If 10 to 20 experts said the same thing, all we would have is informal proof. It only takes one expert with numbers (formal proof) to completely neglect the informal proof of all those so called experts on that subject. Numbers will always reign supreme, regardless of how much informality it faces. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> unless the numbers are cooked, the interpretation is wrong, etc
the interpreters, the nature of the "experts", is very important
and who chooses them? it all hangs together precariously
Why do you assume that because we're clanners we're lying? Could you not just say:
<!--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-->Okay in competitive NS there is clearly an issue with aliens right now, particulary the sensory chamber. This issue might not be present in my public server but that doesn't mean people who play at a more organised level are making it up.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i bow down to you NGE, but you wont get, no tactics or arguments out of me, i arnt about to kill my self, but well down on letting every man and his dog kill him self, and i like your scortched earth method, by leting your self kill your self ; )
KenichiThis is not a pie.Join Date: 2002-11-01Member: 2941Members, NS1 Playtester
wow ben O_o simmer down. I know its a heated topic but wow.
All of you are letting this topic get out of hand. Seriously, everyone needs to open their mind. Just because its good in pub or bad in clan neither side is right. If there is such a huge discrepancy at all there is a problem. Balance will never be perfect. However, in differences this large there is a problem.
The non clanners out here need t remember that balance goes farther than your meager pub games. Many clan players as mrben stated DO know what their talking about. Granted the skill lvl tends to be of a higher calibur you do also have to remember, SO DOES THE OTHER TEAM. It is not as if 1 team is completly more skilled than the other in every situation.
Clanners....go easy on them. Clanners have bad reputations due to a select few of the uber obnoxious and the views get rejected by most every day posters.
Granted the game has no been out long. It has been 2 weeks and marine teams have made little headway into developing new strategies. Perhaps we broke down and are forcing marines to completly change play styles too drastically. Sensory could very well be over powered. However bickering amongst yourselves about it will not make these changes come properly where they need to be fixing the problems. Instead it will inflame more annoyance at these threads. If you want to be heard you should probably continue in as peacefull of a manner as possible. Otherwise this thread will eventually get locked as a nuisance to the forums by becoming a flame war.
<!--QuoteBegin-NEX9+Mar 20 2005, 06:11 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NEX9 @ Mar 20 2005, 06:11 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> i bow down to you NGE, but you wont get, no tactics or arguments out of me, i arnt about to kill my self, but well down on letting every man and his dog kill him self, and i like your scortched earth method, by leting your self kill your self ; )
EDIT: was checking for a wink smile <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I really don't have alot of time But I cannot ignore that terrible rhyme Take your dictionary off the shelf It's retarded to rhyme self with self.
Okay, so if we (the vocal majority in this case), are supposed to prove that 3.0F is imbalanced by numbers [Hey, I'm going to give that cloaking Skulk a 2!] - why does the statement that it <b>is balanced</b> stand without the slightest support?
Its no effort to prove that 3.0F is unbalanced, let me just whip out a demo where aliens play horribly and recover with ease due to free upgrades and all the other cool 3.0F features.
I think the only alien round we've lost at all in 3.0F has been with 2 ringers, and it ended up being a loss by just a few res and timelimit. We even beat Team USA on aliens, without as much as an effort. They didn't let us keep HLTV on though <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You see really everyone shouldn't be that shocked the game isnt balanced anymore in clan play, or in fact most decent pubs.
in b5 we started with a game that was for the most part well balanced on most maps, perhaps with a slight bias towards marines in early-mid game, ok?
now let's run through the changes made for 3.0f
- seiges no longer damage aliens (marine nerf, major) - shotgun range effectivly decreased (marine nerf) - changes to sensory chamber (alien buff) - changes to cloaking upgrade (alien buff) - innate regen (alien buff, major) - free upgrades (alien buff, major) - much shorter upgrade gestation times (alien buff, major) - 3d reload animations (alien buff)
can you see where this is going?
now as other people have said, i personally like all of the above changes except for the seige damage nerf, they're cool and add alot of variety to the game. unfortunately however they were introduced onto an existing build (b5) that already had a good amount of balance to it, with apparantly little to no thought about the consequences from the dev team :/
<!--QuoteBegin-Anderval+Mar 20 2005, 10:31 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Anderval @ Mar 20 2005, 10:31 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You see really everyone shouldn't be that shocked the game isnt balanced anymore in clan play, or in fact most decent pubs.
in b5 we started with a game that was for the most part well balanced on most maps, perhaps with a slight bias towards marines in early-mid game, ok?
now let's run through the changes made for 3.0f
- seiges no longer damage aliens (marine nerf, major) - shotgun range effectivly decreased (marine nerf) - changes to sensory chamber (alien buff) - changes to cloaking upgrade (alien buff) - innate regen (alien buff, major) - free upgrades (alien buff, major) - much shorter upgrade gestation times (alien buff, major) - 3d reload animations (alien buff)
can you see where this is going?
now as other people have said, i personally like all of the above changes except for the seige damage nerf, they're cool and add alot of variety to the game. unfortunately however they were introduced onto an existing build (b5) that already had a good amount of balance to it, with apparantly little to no thought about the consequences from the dev team :/ <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The sensory chamber upgrades and the new cloaking are more major alien buffs then inate regen IMOH. Expecially when you consider that innate regen helps the sensory chamber as first chamber more then either of the other chambers (DC you get regen anyways, and MC you can get back to the hive for healing quicker)
Also free upgrades/shorter gestation are also highly adventagious to the sensory first game.
And you compleatly forgot that MT no longer tracks cloaked skulks. That is a major marine nerf when they go up against sensory chamber first alien teams.
You can argue that the game has unbalanced in general, but you are intentionally trying to ignore the fact that nearly all the alien buffs are either direct buffs TO the sensory chamber, or are most adventagious to sensory first teams. With the additional fact that one of the main marine counter to sensory chambers was invalidated in 3.0f
The sensory chamber HAS gained an edge it never had before, and that edge more then unbalancing it compared to the other chambers in the hands of a good team.
Developers know how the game is MEANT to be played. Players can only show them how it IS being played. And there's a world between intention and reality.
<!--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--> Imagine a case where 10 or 20 experts came in and all said the same thing. Good luck disproving that in the courtroom. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now do you see why you need varied comments from the entire community, as opposed to 10 "experts" from one side with a vested interest, hmmm?
The devs know the game's concept, how it is INTENDED to be played. You might know how it IS played. Please be aware of the difference between 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--> Next, I can't understand why the obs should be boosted, rather than go back to an older version of the SC that wasn't broken <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
An older version of the SC, ie where it was always the 3rd chamber? Yes, I can see how that livens up NS gameplay. It should be the case where all chambers are viable as first choice. Currently all are, so I would rather have minor tweaking to the counter rather than boot the game back to DMS/MDS.
Obs tweak is easy to judge, easy to balance. Touching the fade is only going to start heavily altering gameplay, I'm sure everyone can agree on that. It should be a last resort. Minor obs tweaking, and even minor SC tweaking, is much more preferable.
I mean the focus fade's main overpowering strength is the instakill. Cheaper obs mean an earlier warning system, and also means you're not having to sacrifice armour for obs power. That moves it back to skill - marine accuracy versus fade blink. Its a little equalizer, nothing more.
Fana -
Ignoring pub play is only cutting off your nose to spite your face. The game has to be balanced for both casual AND competitive play, and you will certainly see a wider variety of strats attempted in pub play. You might not be capable of understanding or accepting that, but its how it is. If the game was motivated purely by what works, it'd be a lot thinner on the ground by now and arguably not as enjoyable as it can be.
Church -
<!--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 personally consider 2 hives as alien end-game, because face it, aliens have won if they have 2 hives, unless they have absolutely 0 nodes for some odd reason. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, 2 well held hives is usually indicative of endgame. Where it all goes askew is when marines have managed to get a decent bit of res in and thus Onos are needed to break their base. Onos aren't as hard as they need to be versus full teched marines, but thats by the by. Again I hesitate at a broad fade nerf because the problem is really only limited to SC.
NGE - <!--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--> the skilled NS clanner is the fastest player to adapt <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, thats why sharks and crocodiles haven't changed in thousands of years, and also conveniently why they're slowly dying out.
Experts may know more about their field, but it doesn't necessarily mean they're right. Medieval "experts" knew the Earth was the centre of the universe. Greek "experts" knew that the world consisted of four elements.
The funny thing is, the medieval expert who knew the Sun was the centre of our solar system was browbeaten by his contemporaries... and its a little known fact that one Greek philosopher believed the world to be consisted of many tiny pieces of matter.
Experts are only so reliable. Hard fact and experimentation is much more indicative of the veracity of a claim. An expert at playing the game, AS IS, is not an expert at saying how the game is INTENDED to be played. NS is still in a state of flux, not one of us truly knows how it is INTENDED to be played.
Back onto the core of the topic - going backwards is not necessarily the answer. Nerfing SC leads us back to previous versions where it ended up consistently relegated to third chamber. Restricting the fade from using focus is, IMHO, a tad extreme. Restricting the fade in general is a broad sweeping change for what seems to be largely an SC problem.
So I again submit that the answer is a logical and easily balanced Obs boost. If the obs is boosted, and the problem remains, then we can explore the Fade. But if cheapening scan/obs cost alleviates the problem it would be 2 minor cost changes instead of reinventing a whole Alien class (with all the knock on effects associated therewith).
EDIT
Ben -
I personally don't think you are lying, and I fully apologise if I've ever directly or indirectly implied it, because in my dealings with you you appear to be an honest fellow.
Likewise I do believe that the competitive community is having some problems.
Its just I think we need a breakdown of the problem and evidence that every possible counter has been tried. Its the same when I'm debugging models, its the same when you're working with your maps. We all rely on hard examples as opposed to "Yeah Ben the map sucks cos of stuff". You wouldn't listen to that feedback, so how can anyone give credence to people giving "we did stuff" as a piece of positive feedback? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I am not intentionally or unintentionally trying to offend you as I personally have a great deal of respect for you and your work. Its just that I'm trying to get constructive criticism about the SC and genuine counters to it, so that at least any onlooking dev/admin/AI cant say people haven't tried.
<!--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-->Developers know how the game is MEANT to be played. Players can only show them how it IS being played. And there's a world between intention and reality.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which only proves the players are the best testers, to make sure the game is played how it's meant to be played.
Good players bring us back to reality.
<!--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 do you see why you need varied comments from the entire community, as opposed to 10 "experts" from one side with a vested interest, hmmm?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What vested interest do the clanners have aside from making a fun and balanced game?
Again, read the article I linked to you before, here are the interests of the clanner:
<!--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-->1) Gamers will uncover any and all relevant equations and formulas about a game through trial and error, testing, and hacking.
2) Gamers will find bugs and “features” that the developers never knew about.
3) Gamers will use features in bizarre ways never envisioned by the developers or even the testers.
4) Gamers have far, far more time to play the game than the developers do. The developers are busy making games, but hardcore gamers have seemingly infinite time. Just look at the EverQuest stats. 85 hours a month was the AVERAGE playing time last year, including people who pay but never log in. Just imagine how much the people at the other end of the curve are playing!
5) The gaming public just has far more pairs of eyeballs than the developers and testers. 1,000,000 people will find something that a team of 30 missed.
6) The developers and testers have skewed perceptions on balance since features change often throughout development. A particular move or strategy might be considered weak, but end up strong. The development team might have a bias against this move or strategy, since they remember it being too weak to bother trying.
7) The developers and testers are often playing without all the options available in the final game, or at least without the final tweaking in place. It’s very possible for entirely new strategies to become viable after new features are added at the last minute or old values are tweaked. Yet the developers often have little or no chance to test these newly-emerged strategies against other strategies they’ve deemed to be good.
8) Finally, the gamers have the motivation. If you discover a strategy in Starcraft or a deck in Magic the Gathering that truly breaks the game wide open, you have lots of rewards waiting for you. Fame, glory, tournament victories, even fabulous cash and prizes. You’ll have a reputation and in some circles, you’ll finally “be someone.” That’s a lot of incentive for some people. If you’re a tester at a game company and you discover the exact same thing before the game is released, then you get to type up another bug report and get you toys taken away from you. Not quite the same level of incentive.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So really there's no reason to lie... the experts on the game aren't trying to make a bundle by nerfing the sensory chamber.
<!--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-->Yes, thats why sharks and crocodiles haven't changed in thousands of years, and also conveniently why they're slowly dying out.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are sharks and crococidiles changing the fastest? Nope, and guess what, humans are who also conveniently populating the planet due to their surviviability. Clanners are humans?
<!--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-->Experts may know more about their field, but it doesn't necessarily mean they're right. Medieval "experts" knew the Earth was the centre of the universe. Greek "experts" knew that the world consisted of four elements.
The funny thing is, the medieval expert who knew the Sun was the centre of our solar system was browbeaten by his contemporaries... and its a little known fact that one Greek philosopher believed the world to be consisted of many tiny pieces of matter.
Experts are only so reliable. Hard fact and experimentation is much more indicative of the veracity of a claim. An expert at playing the game, AS IS, is not an expert at saying how the game is INTENDED to be played. NS is still in a state of flux, not one of us truly knows how it is INTENDED to be played.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You named exceptions to the rule, there is like 10 times out of 10000000 where the experts were wrong... in over 2000+ years?
I really don't think people are going to make a huge blunder when it comes to judging the nature of a video 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-->Back onto the core of the topic - going backwards is not necessarily the answer. Nerfing SC leads us back to previous versions where it ended up consistently relegated to third chamber. Restricting the fade from using focus is, IMHO, a tad extreme. Restricting the fade in general is a broad sweeping change for what seems to be largely an SC problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm wondering if you read the original post carefully, as I clearly state that the b5 sensory chamber was not the 3rd chamber of choice:
<!--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-->One is sure by now to exclaim that sensory chambers were never used in previous versions as much as other chambers because they were underpowered. In actuality, this is a falsehood spawned by players who could not understand how to correctly use the sensory chambers.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sounds like you made like the shark and never <b>adapted</b> to the old sensory chamber. As one example of many, I remember my old clan (current clan???!), #cri, went sensory first, movement second, against another delta level clan on ns_nancy and won. Since the map had 2 chokepoints, it was easy to just get a sensory at point and camp them both with cloakus and dominate. This was in b5. Also, Terror, the champion clan of last sensory frequently went sensory chambers second, so they could mow down the marine with focus fades.
You say there's no adaptation... I say you are pulling unfounded opinions out of thin air.
<!--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-->So I again submit that the answer is a logical and easily balanced Obs boost. If the obs is boosted, and the problem remains, then we can explore the Fade. But if cheapening scan/obs cost alleviates the problem it would be 2 minor cost changes instead of reinventing a whole Alien class (with all the knock on effects associated therewith).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Really, boosting the obs isn't the answer, it's fix the sensory chamber. If anything, if you boost the obs you are making the sensory chamber too hard to use for the aliens at hive 1, which is not the intent of the developers, as they clearly want all chambers to be viable at all points of the game.
I too want to appologise incase any of my posts have offended the likes of Ben, I'm not suggesting clanners are wrong any more than I was suggesting pubbers are right. I was merely stating, like necrosis, that coming into a thread like this and stating "clanners are experts because they beat you" is not proof of being an expert, and condusively the supposed "expert belief" that something is wrong is just an opinion, not fact.
Utimately this thread is not fact at all in any way shape or form, not stats have been published, no proper figures given. It's just opinion and hearsay. This doesn't mean that it's wrong, just that within the first week or so of the version being released it is going to be held with a high degree of incertainty. After all, how many times have we heard about things being unbalanced in the first week of a release only for it to get all sorted out by players adapting a few weeks after?
And NGE, I'm not stating it's elitist to claim people can beat people, and if you're truly blind to how your comment in that post was elitist then...well...I'm not actually that surprised.
I don't want to get too deep into this thread, since it has gone far from the original topic. However, I did want to make a few brief remarks...
Are certain aspects of NS likely to be overpowered in pub vs clan games or vice versa? Most certainly. With the way NS is designed, real achievable balance for BOTH public play and clan play is impossible to attain if the game is kept the same for both public play and clan play. This point was made towards the end of the first post in this thread, and I agree.
I really think we could make gameplay better on both public and clan servers if we were to tailor specific changes to those modes of play. It doesn't have to be radically different, much could be improved with fairly minor changes. The public, which likely make up 90% of the people who play NS, would never know or care if there was a 'clan' mode in NS that changed aspects of NS when enabled.
We need to be honest here. No matter what changes are made, if those changes don't take the differences between public/clan play into account, then we will be back where we started. It will be a new 'problem' in NS because of some other issue, and that issue will cause balance in one mode while there is imbalance in the other. If we 'fix' sensory for clans then it will go unused on pubs because it is too weak. It's a no-win situation. Anyone who has been around a while can likely list off the key imbalances that have come with each build. Each time it has been a public/clan imbalance that has raised the ire of people on one side or the other.
I can't see any solution to this problem until the developers acknowledge that a new approach needs to be taken to address the unique needs in public vs clan play. Until that happens, we will continue to see threads like this with each new release.
<!--QuoteBegin-niaccurshi+Mar 20 2005, 11:36 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (niaccurshi @ Mar 20 2005, 11:36 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And NGE, I'm not stating it's elitist to claim people can beat people, and if you're truly blind to how your comment in that post was elitist then...well...I'm not actually that surprised. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Someone beats someone else at something 99/100 times. Odds are that they understand what they're doing better than the other said person. I don't understand how that's elitest, mean, or totally unfair/biased in anyway, since anyone can be good at the game. Elitism is along the lines of, "I'm better than you'll ever be, ha ha ha ha ha." Stating that someone who is good at the game knows what they're doing better than someone who's not as good at the game is what people keep asking for, these, "numbers." Once again, I fail to see how that's being elitest.
And you're right, there will be adaptation- people will start abuseing the new overpowered strats, changing the way things are done without actually balancing/fixing anything. It's like throwing up new drapes in a bombed out apartment rather than rebuilding it, and ultimately accomplishes nothing.
Savant:
Thanks for reading my post. And I'd figured you'd agree with the different clan/public changes I listed. <!--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-NGE+Mar 20 2005, 11:31 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (NGE @ Mar 20 2005, 11:31 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> [QUOTE = necro]Yes, thats why sharks and crocodiles haven't changed in thousands of years, and also conveniently why they're slowly dying out.[/QUOTE]
Are sharks and crococidiles changing the fastest? Nope, and guess what, humans are who also conveniently populating the planet due to their surviviability. Clanners are humans? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> No humans are CS nubs. There is alot of them, they haven't been around long, many of them hack, and they are jerks. They also whine the most when sensible ideas are mentioned at the expense of thier sense of progress, and it looks like they have a good chance of all killing themselfs, so they probably aren't too good at this game either. The one last thing is that they are the main factor responsible for killing off the crocs and sharks.
ChurchMeatshield grunt-fodder // Has pre-ordered NS2Join Date: 2002-12-31Member: 11646Members, Constellation
Necrosis: If the aliens have two hives and it hasn't JUST gone up, AND the marines still have a decent amount of res nodes, then something is WRONG...very wrong. Only time I can think of this happening is when the second hive takes 20 minutes to put up, and the marines have 3/3 JP/HA running around the map. Then, aliens will have a harder time beating the marines, but I still think 2-hive aliens are stronger than fully teched marines. The fact is, usually when the second hive is up, marines will lose almost all of their nodes.
The Onos could use a buff in base busting abilities sure, and I would gladly give the Onos mroe survivability if it means getting rid of devour, but that's a discussion for another time.
And as for not nerfing the Fade overall, I think I agree. that is why I suggested that we nerf the Fade's midgame if the aliens go sensory first by not letting Fades get focus. Fades will no longer be the monsters that they are with sensory first, and the cloakus skulks and SOF lerks more than make up for that.
<!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Mar 20 2005, 09:46 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Mar 20 2005, 09:46 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The sensory chamber upgrades and the new cloaking are more major alien buffs then inate regen IMOH. Expecially when you consider that innate regen helps the sensory chamber as first chamber more then either of the other chambers (DC you get regen anyways, and MC you can get back to the hive for healing quicker)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I disagree on this one. Innate regen helps both MC and SC equally. After all, not everybody takes celerity, just like not everybody takes cloak.
<!--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-->Also free upgrades/shorter gestation are also highly adventagious to the sensory first game.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why are they any more of an advantage to a sensory first as opposed to an MC or DC first game? I don't see any reasoning here pointing to the sensory chamber. If anything, it's more of an advantage to MC, because then you get your celerity that much quicker and shave off even more time that you're out of the fight after dying.
<!--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--> And you compleatly forgot that MT no longer tracks cloaked skulks. That is a major marine nerf when they go up against sensory chamber first alien teams.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's always better to argue from a point of knowledge. Saying stuff like this makes it harder to take your other points seriously, even if they were dead on.
The fact is that MT never did track cloaked skulks. Cloaking is and was the counter to MT. MT is the counter to silence, not cloaking. Scan and observatories are the counter to cloaking, and so far as I'm aware, always were.
<!--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--> You can argue that the game has unbalanced in general, but you are intentionally trying to ignore the fact that nearly all the alien buffs are either direct buffs TO the sensory chamber, or are most adventagious to sensory first teams. With the additional fact that one of the main marine counter to sensory chambers was invalidated in 3.0f<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Simply wrong.
<!--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--> The sensory chamber HAS gained an edge it never had before, and that edge more then unbalancing it compared to the other chambers in the hands of a good team.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes.. it's gained a localized SoF.. this is useful.
This is, so far as I can see, the only thing you can legitimately say it's gained beyond what the MC has gained.
The cloaking upgrade has also been boosted, but let's be clear on that.. that's the cloaking upgrade, not the sensory chamber. Does it promote the sensory chamber being used? Sure. But nerfing the chamber won't take that specific reason away, you have to re-examine cloaking for that.
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
<!--QuoteBegin-Shadowcat+Mar 20 2005, 07:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Shadowcat @ Mar 20 2005, 07:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> NGE is the root of NS's imbalance.. The chambers are just fine.
When I play marines, we sometimes win, we sometimes lose.. Depends on the commander really.
So NGE, maybe you should pick out good commanders and not some n00bs. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry.
Over to another subject, that doesn't involve unintended humour:
I've seen several people comment on balance in publics vs. balance in competitive gaming, which to me clearly tells me you haven't really thought about the subject. Yes, one can balance a game purely by looking at public gaming. This will however, invariably, be flawed balance, simply because public games never take the game to its limits. Public play never discovers the really game breaking strategies, not to mention that public games in 99,9999% of circumstances consist of players without the skill required to properly exploit game dynamics. Balancing a game strictly based on competitive games will also balance it for public play, and that is what people need to realize. There is however another factor involved here, which is the fun factor. A balanced game may not necessarily be fun to play on publics (although it in most cases will, unless it by default is a really boring game). This has nothing to do with balancing the game however, or game balance experiences.
Distinguish these when talking about balance, please.
<!--QuoteBegin-fanatic+Mar 20 2005, 01:28 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (fanatic @ Mar 20 2005, 01:28 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Over to another subject, that doesn't involve unintended humour:
Yes, one can balance a game purely by looking at public gaming. This will however, invariably, be flawed balance, simply because public games never take the game to its limits. Public play never discovers the really game breaking strategies, not to mention that public games in 99,9999% of circumstances consist of players without the skill required to properly exploit game dynamics.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I fully agree.
<!--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-->Balancing a game strictly based on competitive games will also balance it for public play, and that is what people need to realize. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I completely disagree.
I've pointed this out before, certain things may be balanced only once a certain skill level is achieved.
As a thought experiment, think about a game where a creature like the Lerk had three times the speed and did three times the damage or more with its bite, but had the weakness that if it hit a wall while flying it died.
Now imagine this game balanced in such a way that marines were expected to be dealing with highly skilled lerks of this variety. They have the armor, the firepower, the movement speed, etc, to be able to handle one of these things flying in, taking a chomp and taking off.
At high skill levels, the game is balanced, and those playing at those levels generally won't see a problem. At lower levels though? It's horribly unbalanced as the powerful marines blast through anything else that comes at them, and the unskilled lerks end up smearing themselves across the landscape.
This is an extreme example, I know, but I use it to point out that the idea "What's balanced for clans is balanced for pubs" is false.
Comments
And a round of applause for the people that have got all bitchy about some of the more sensible things said by Necrosis (and others) and ended up resorting to just childish name calling, you're really making the NS community look good as you claim that it's laughing at him.
Oh, and a week isn't long enough, seeming within the week all people seem to do is go on to a server, **** together about SC, stop playing properly with the usual defeatist attiude that was ironically used on the flip side when SC was severely broken, and convince each other that they need to rant on the forums about how **** everything is.
If you still feel that SC is terribly broken in a couple more weeks then maybe people will listen to you with a bit more of a sympathetic ear.
Till then, it's good luck. I sincerely doubt that if the amount of people came about and all the said the same thing, that the numbers would be any different from what they said.
You know, one expert says, "Hey, I've written this bestseller and have a double Ph.D", the next says "I've probably researched this subject for over 15 works." and the next says "I've spent 30 years on this subject with no malpractice (malpractice is not strictly a medical term) charges ever brought against me, and I agree with the said claims." and so on from 17 other experts, do you REALLY think that numbers are going to magically appear to disprove them?
No way, these experts <b>are the numbers!</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Perhaps we should define the term expert. Is it someone who is knowledgeable in the subject at hand with formal proof, or simply someone who "goes with the flow?" Could I not simply repeat the statements that other so called experts stated, and proceed to consider myself an expert? What then is my proof? The other experts? And what are other expert's proof? The cycle continues. Your whole concept of experts collaborating to whole a unified proof is nothing more than a paradigm. Are you familiar with the Newtonian Paradigm? Hundreds of experts. And one man came along with his "magical numbers" and proved them all wrong: Einsten. And it was not like the Newtonian did not have formal proof. They did but it was flawed, but not as flawed as those with only informal proof.
Magical numbers do magically appear and disprove ideas. I am no way saying your analysis is incorrect; I am pleased to see someone who tries to voice his opinion on the chamber subject in a comprensible way. But numbers are an essential component of any proof. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Few problems here.
1. The expert here is someone who's good at the game of NS. Obviously clan players are good at NS so it's no coincidence they compromise 99% of the experts here. How do we know they are good at NS? Because they will beat you at the game, proving their ability. Very simple process for determining experts.
Experts may not have the best solutions for gameplay, that perhaps is where the developer have the final and best call, but they definately can figure out the game the best.
2. The proof is in the pudding; the expert says this is what is correct and then goes on to do it. With clanners you have people claiming sensory chambers are broken and then in game they tell their stories of how games should proceed. Often times they are correct; little coincidence!
3. The Newtonian Paradigm is an exception to the rule, hardly the stardard, and when talking about a simple game like NS there is far less complexity involved meaning less room for error, which in turn establishes credibility for the experts; aka the players who spend quality time on the game.
4. I really don't understand how hundereds of hours spent in game isn't considered as a number
5. I am not saying numbers cannot magically appear and disprove theories, but basically what you'd need to support what necrosis is saying are win rates of like
Marines: 60%
Aliens: 40%
across all public and clan games.
Since all of the experts here rely off of their empirical evidence, have very little reason to lie, do you honestly think numbers like these will suddently and abruptly appear to disclaim us all?
<!--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-->Oh, and a week isn't long enough, seeming within the week all people seem to do is go on to a server, **** together about SC, stop playing properly with the usual defeatist attiude that was ironically used on the flip side when SC was severely broken, and convince each other that they need to rant on the forums about how **** everything is.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh yeah, that's all we did.
<!--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-->ended up resorting to just childish name calling, you're really making the NS community look good as you claim that it's laughing at him.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And you are making the community look good too pal, by swearing on the forums and pretending you know what people did with this game. Hypocrite.
<!--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-->That and putting a blanket ban on clanners bitching in the first fortnight after a release would also be great.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Keep it up.
Final edit:
Another fallacy in logic detected,
<!--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 wonder how many man hours are spent playign public games compared to playing clan based competative games...maybe if (as I'd expect) more hours are spent playing public games we should be spending more of our efforts balancing public games ON AVERAGE rather than pandering to a smaller segment of the community.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Less man hours are spent on public games, since each hour is exclusive to the player and more particularly the server.
Whereas clan hours are essentially shared as strategies spread like wildfire from clan to clan rather than server to server.
Case in point; Anyone remember how long it took before pubbers started to use the jetpack rush in 1.04? Clanners knew about it a few weeks into the game, it took pubbers forever to figure it out...
I wonder how many man hours are spent playign public games compared to playing clan based competative games...maybe if (as I'd expect) more hours are spent playing public games we should be spending more of our efforts balancing public games ON AVERAGE rather than pandering to a smaller segment of the community.
That and putting a blanket ban on clanners bitching in the first fortnight after a release would also be great.
Experts may not have the best solutions for gameplay, that perhaps is where the developer have the final and best call, but they definately can figure out the game the best. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh, they're all good are they? Is this including all the clans that got together just to get vet status back along? They must all be "experts" right?
You're just talking usual elitist bollocks mate, especially that highly laughable bold section.
Experts are people that inherently know the game, not who are "good at beating people". Having you and your clan buddies play the game for a few days, with the usual defensive attitude to a new version, convince each other that it's not the lack of effort to evolve around the gameplay changes that is causing the problem, but the game itself...does not make you experts.
As it's been said, lets have numbers to prove what you're trying to say, not just a "movement" of opinion.
Experts may not have the best solutions for gameplay, that perhaps is where the developer have the final and best call, but they definately can figure out the game the best. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh, they're all good are they? Is this including all the clans that got together just to get vet status back along? They must all be "experts" right?
You're just talking usual elitist bollocks mate, especially that highly laughable bold section.
Experts are people that inherently know the game, not who are "good at beating people". Having you and your clan buddies play the game for a few days, with the usual defensive attitude to a new version, convince each other that it's not the lack of effort to evolve around the gameplay changes that is causing the problem, but the game itself...does not make you experts.
As it's been said, lets have numbers to prove what you're trying to say, not just a "movement" of opinion. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is elitist? If someone beats you at a game it is considered elitist? Nice definition there, I think you might need to cool off, come back and start thinking rationally.
By the way, when did I ever say people with vet icons were experts? Or good at the game for that matter?
I'll state it again, and if you like it bolded I'll bold it for you:
<b>Experts in the game of NS are the ones who good at beating other people in NS.</b>
Sorry if you somehow feel exlcuded, because perhaps you aren't an expert since you don't beat other people, but life isn't fair and neither is rational logic.
<!--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-->with the usual defensive attitude to a new version<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No idea what you are talking about. Wanna support that statement with some evidence (aka numbers)?
Or you just going to keep making statements saying I need numbers for my argument instead?
Furthermore, while experts mostly agree with my analysis, most all the regular players who've posted here also agree with my analysis.
Try to keep the irrational (emotional) anti-clan agenda out of the thread, thanks.
And thanks for reading my essay, which I presume you did.
expert - A person with a high degree of skill in <span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'>or</span> knowledge of a certain subject.
(reference: dictionary.com)
and dictionary owns you all.
<!--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-->Sorry if you somehow feel exlcuded, because perhaps you aren't an expert since you don't beat other people, but life isn't fair and neither is rational logic.
Furthermore, while experts mostly agree with my analysis, most all the regular players who've posted here also agree with my analysis.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you are going to use words such as mostly, or most, either list the people or don't bother stating these statements, as they are too vague.
I also believe the thread has been thrown off into an argument war instead of what the original purpose was supposed to be about.
Good day. <!--emo&::gorge::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/pudgy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pudgy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
ps. traquilchaos... i also love teh princess mononoke.
it is inevitable and inescapable. in life we must bet on what is likely to happen. those who bet more rightly win. those whose brains better approximate reality win
numbers can't do stuff on their own. the person must interpret them correctly; the person must be able to see
also opinion herds are much more common amongst the humanities, as there is nothing sorting them out (strongly, that is) except sheer personality
for the clans there is competition. the universe is not ideal and not everything is perfect; however, the clan environment is far better suited to testing the limits of the game, and I'd wager that the clan system has not broken down so far yet as to be as idiotic as many of you seem to believe. that would be quite amazing imo. if i were to accuse someone of arrogance i might have occasion to pick certain non clanners, as they appear to not understand the nature of the clan community and how it is likely to operate, thereby making outrageous claims
balancing for pubs is a very subtle proposition. balancing for pubs means balancing for everyone, and that means accomodating a variety of skill levels. some people will always be better than others. how to make something so that if skilled people take advantage of it more fully, it will not be game breaking, while having some semblance of game depth?
people may have no choice but to be stupid but the youth have the grown who are supposed to guide them. unfortunately people are stupid to varying degrees and this has affected countless generations down the line
the people need a leader, someone with balls. being older usually just means a bunch of random people, same as before, except older and worse
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If 10 to 20 experts said the same thing, all we would have is informal proof. It only takes one expert with numbers (formal proof) to completely neglect the informal proof of all those so called experts on that subject. Numbers will always reign supreme, regardless of how much informality it faces. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
unless the numbers are cooked, the interpretation is wrong, etc
the interpreters, the nature of the "experts", is very important
and who chooses them? it all hangs together precariously
p.s. i am thinking of a damn sexy girl
<!--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-->Okay in competitive NS there is clearly an issue with aliens right now, particulary the sensory chamber. This issue might not be present in my public server but that doesn't mean people who play at a more organised level are making it up.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
EDIT: was checking for a wink smile
All of you are letting this topic get out of hand. Seriously, everyone needs to open their mind. Just because its good in pub or bad in clan neither side is right. If there is such a huge discrepancy at all there is a problem. Balance will never be perfect. However, in differences this large there is a problem.
The non clanners out here need t remember that balance goes farther than your meager pub games. Many clan players as mrben stated DO know what their talking about. Granted the skill lvl tends to be of a higher calibur you do also have to remember, SO DOES THE OTHER TEAM. It is not as if 1 team is completly more skilled than the other in every situation.
Clanners....go easy on them. Clanners have bad reputations due to a select few of the uber obnoxious and the views get rejected by most every day posters.
Granted the game has no been out long. It has been 2 weeks and marine teams have made little headway into developing new strategies. Perhaps we broke down and are forcing marines to completly change play styles too drastically. Sensory could very well be over powered. However bickering amongst yourselves about it will not make these changes come properly where they need to be fixing the problems. Instead it will inflame more annoyance at these threads. If you want to be heard you should probably continue in as peacefull of a manner as possible. Otherwise this thread will eventually get locked as a nuisance to the forums by becoming a flame war.
EDIT: was checking for a wink smile <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I really don't have alot of time
But I cannot ignore that terrible rhyme
Take your dictionary off the shelf
It's retarded to rhyme self with self.
Its no effort to prove that 3.0F is unbalanced, let me just whip out a demo where aliens play horribly and recover with ease due to free upgrades and all the other cool 3.0F features.
I think the only alien round we've lost at all in 3.0F has been with 2 ringers, and it ended up being a loss by just a few res and timelimit. We even beat Team USA on aliens, without as much as an effort. They didn't let us keep HLTV on though <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
in b5 we started with a game that was for the most part well balanced on most maps, perhaps with a slight bias towards marines in early-mid game, ok?
now let's run through the changes made for 3.0f
- seiges no longer damage aliens (marine nerf, major)
- shotgun range effectivly decreased (marine nerf)
- changes to sensory chamber (alien buff)
- changes to cloaking upgrade (alien buff)
- innate regen (alien buff, major)
- free upgrades (alien buff, major)
- much shorter upgrade gestation times (alien buff, major)
- 3d reload animations (alien buff)
can you see where this is going?
now as other people have said, i personally like all of the above changes except for the seige damage nerf, they're cool and add alot of variety to the game. unfortunately however they were introduced onto an existing build (b5) that already had a good amount of balance to it, with apparantly little to no thought about the consequences from the dev team :/
in b5 we started with a game that was for the most part well balanced on most maps, perhaps with a slight bias towards marines in early-mid game, ok?
now let's run through the changes made for 3.0f
- seiges no longer damage aliens (marine nerf, major)
- shotgun range effectivly decreased (marine nerf)
- changes to sensory chamber (alien buff)
- changes to cloaking upgrade (alien buff)
- innate regen (alien buff, major)
- free upgrades (alien buff, major)
- much shorter upgrade gestation times (alien buff, major)
- 3d reload animations (alien buff)
can you see where this is going?
now as other people have said, i personally like all of the above changes except for the seige damage nerf, they're cool and add alot of variety to the game. unfortunately however they were introduced onto an existing build (b5) that already had a good amount of balance to it, with apparantly little to no thought about the consequences from the dev team :/ <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The sensory chamber upgrades and the new cloaking are more major alien buffs then inate regen IMOH. Expecially when you consider that innate regen helps the sensory chamber as first chamber more then either of the other chambers (DC you get regen anyways, and MC you can get back to the hive for healing quicker)
Also free upgrades/shorter gestation are also highly adventagious to the sensory first game.
And you compleatly forgot that MT no longer tracks cloaked skulks. That is a major marine nerf when they go up against sensory chamber first alien teams.
You can argue that the game has unbalanced in general, but you are intentionally trying to ignore the fact that nearly all the alien buffs are either direct buffs TO the sensory chamber, or are most adventagious to sensory first teams. With the additional fact that one of the main marine counter to sensory chambers was invalidated in 3.0f
The sensory chamber HAS gained an edge it never had before, and that edge more then unbalancing it compared to the other chambers in the hands of a good team.
Developers know how the game is MEANT to be played. Players can only show them how it IS being played. And there's a world between intention and reality.
<!--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-->
Imagine a case where 10 or 20 experts came in and all said the same thing. Good luck disproving that in the courtroom.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href='http://www2.indystar.com/articles/3/225336-4833-052.html' target='_blank'>http://www2.indystar.com/articles/3/225336-4833-052.html</a>
Now do you see why you need varied comments from the entire community, as opposed to 10 "experts" from one side with a vested interest, hmmm?
The devs know the game's concept, how it is INTENDED to be played. You might know how it IS played. Please be aware of the difference between 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-->
Next, I can't understand why the obs should be boosted, rather than go back to an older version of the SC that wasn't broken
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
An older version of the SC, ie where it was always the 3rd chamber? Yes, I can see how that livens up NS gameplay. It should be the case where all chambers are viable as first choice. Currently all are, so I would rather have minor tweaking to the counter rather than boot the game back to DMS/MDS.
Obs tweak is easy to judge, easy to balance. Touching the fade is only going to start heavily altering gameplay, I'm sure everyone can agree on that. It should be a last resort. Minor obs tweaking, and even minor SC tweaking, is much more preferable.
I mean the focus fade's main overpowering strength is the instakill. Cheaper obs mean an earlier warning system, and also means you're not having to sacrifice armour for obs power. That moves it back to skill - marine accuracy versus fade blink. Its a little equalizer, nothing more.
Fana -
Ignoring pub play is only cutting off your nose to spite your face. The game has to be balanced for both casual AND competitive play, and you will certainly see a wider variety of strats attempted in pub play. You might not be capable of understanding or accepting that, but its how it is. If the game was motivated purely by what works, it'd be a lot thinner on the ground by now and arguably not as enjoyable as it can be.
Church -
<!--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 personally consider 2 hives as alien end-game, because face it, aliens have won if they have 2 hives, unless they have absolutely 0 nodes for some odd reason.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree, 2 well held hives is usually indicative of endgame. Where it all goes askew is when marines have managed to get a decent bit of res in and thus Onos are needed to break their base. Onos aren't as hard as they need to be versus full teched marines, but thats by the by. Again I hesitate at a broad fade nerf because the problem is really only limited to SC.
NGE -
<!--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-->
the skilled NS clanner is the fastest player to adapt
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, thats why sharks and crocodiles haven't changed in thousands of years, and also conveniently why they're slowly dying out.
Experts may know more about their field, but it doesn't necessarily mean they're right. Medieval "experts" knew the Earth was the centre of the universe. Greek "experts" knew that the world consisted of four elements.
The funny thing is, the medieval expert who knew the Sun was the centre of our solar system was browbeaten by his contemporaries... and its a little known fact that one Greek philosopher believed the world to be consisted of many tiny pieces of matter.
Experts are only so reliable. Hard fact and experimentation is much more indicative of the veracity of a claim. An expert at playing the game, AS IS, is not an expert at saying how the game is INTENDED to be played. NS is still in a state of flux, not one of us truly knows how it is INTENDED to be played.
Back onto the core of the topic - going backwards is not necessarily the answer. Nerfing SC leads us back to previous versions where it ended up consistently relegated to third chamber. Restricting the fade from using focus is, IMHO, a tad extreme. Restricting the fade in general is a broad sweeping change for what seems to be largely an SC problem.
So I again submit that the answer is a logical and easily balanced Obs boost. If the obs is boosted, and the problem remains, then we can explore the Fade. But if cheapening scan/obs cost alleviates the problem it would be 2 minor cost changes instead of reinventing a whole Alien class (with all the knock on effects associated therewith).
EDIT
Ben -
I personally don't think you are lying, and I fully apologise if I've ever directly or indirectly implied it, because in my dealings with you you appear to be an honest fellow.
Likewise I do believe that the competitive community is having some problems.
Its just I think we need a breakdown of the problem and evidence that every possible counter has been tried. Its the same when I'm debugging models, its the same when you're working with your maps. We all rely on hard examples as opposed to "Yeah Ben the map sucks cos of stuff". You wouldn't listen to that feedback, so how can anyone give credence to people giving "we did stuff" as a piece of positive feedback? <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I am not intentionally or unintentionally trying to offend you as I personally have a great deal of respect for you and your work. Its just that I'm trying to get constructive criticism about the SC and genuine counters to it, so that at least any onlooking dev/admin/AI cant say people haven't tried.
<!--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-->Developers know how the game is MEANT to be played. Players can only show them how it IS being played. And there's a world between intention and reality.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which only proves the players are the best testers, to make sure the game is played how it's meant to be played.
Good players bring us back to reality.
<!--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 do you see why you need varied comments from the entire community, as opposed to 10 "experts" from one side with a vested interest, hmmm?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What vested interest do the clanners have aside from making a fun and balanced game?
Again, read the article I linked to you before, here are the interests of the clanner:
<a href='http://www.sirlin.net/Features/feature_GameBalancePart1.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.sirlin.net/Features/feature_GameBalancePart1.htm</a>
<!--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-->1) Gamers will uncover any and all relevant equations and formulas about a game through trial and error, testing, and hacking.
2) Gamers will find bugs and “features” that the developers never knew about.
3) Gamers will use features in bizarre ways never envisioned by the developers or even the testers.
4) Gamers have far, far more time to play the game than the developers do. The developers are busy making games, but hardcore gamers have seemingly infinite time. Just look at the EverQuest stats. 85 hours a month was the AVERAGE playing time last year, including people who pay but never log in. Just imagine how much the people at the other end of the curve are playing!
5) The gaming public just has far more pairs of eyeballs than the developers and testers. 1,000,000 people will find something that a team of 30 missed.
6) The developers and testers have skewed perceptions on balance since features change often throughout development. A particular move or strategy might be considered weak, but end up strong. The development team might have a bias against this move or strategy, since they remember it being too weak to bother trying.
7) The developers and testers are often playing without all the options available in the final game, or at least without the final tweaking in place. It’s very possible for entirely new strategies to become viable after new features are added at the last minute or old values are tweaked. Yet the developers often have little or no chance to test these newly-emerged strategies against other strategies they’ve deemed to be good.
8) Finally, the gamers have the motivation. If you discover a strategy in Starcraft or a deck in Magic the Gathering that truly breaks the game wide open, you have lots of rewards waiting for you. Fame, glory, tournament victories, even fabulous cash and prizes. You’ll have a reputation and in some circles, you’ll finally “be someone.” That’s a lot of incentive for some people. If you’re a tester at a game company and you discover the exact same thing before the game is released, then you get to type up another bug report and get you toys taken away from you. Not quite the same level of incentive.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So really there's no reason to lie... the experts on the game aren't trying to make a bundle by nerfing the sensory chamber.
<!--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-->Yes, thats why sharks and crocodiles haven't changed in thousands of years, and also conveniently why they're slowly dying out.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are sharks and crococidiles changing the fastest? Nope, and guess what, humans are who also conveniently populating the planet due to their surviviability. Clanners are humans?
<!--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-->Experts may know more about their field, but it doesn't necessarily mean they're right. Medieval "experts" knew the Earth was the centre of the universe. Greek "experts" knew that the world consisted of four elements.
The funny thing is, the medieval expert who knew the Sun was the centre of our solar system was browbeaten by his contemporaries... and its a little known fact that one Greek philosopher believed the world to be consisted of many tiny pieces of matter.
Experts are only so reliable. Hard fact and experimentation is much more indicative of the veracity of a claim. An expert at playing the game, AS IS, is not an expert at saying how the game is INTENDED to be played. NS is still in a state of flux, not one of us truly knows how it is INTENDED to be played.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You named exceptions to the rule, there is like 10 times out of 10000000 where the experts were wrong... in over 2000+ years?
I really don't think people are going to make a huge blunder when it comes to judging the nature of a video 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-->Back onto the core of the topic - going backwards is not necessarily the answer. Nerfing SC leads us back to previous versions where it ended up consistently relegated to third chamber. Restricting the fade from using focus is, IMHO, a tad extreme. Restricting the fade in general is a broad sweeping change for what seems to be largely an SC problem.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm wondering if you read the original post carefully, as I clearly state that the b5 sensory chamber was not the 3rd chamber of choice:
<!--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-->One is sure by now to exclaim that sensory chambers were never used in previous versions as much as other chambers because they were underpowered. In actuality, this is a falsehood spawned by players who could not understand how to correctly use the sensory chambers.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sounds like you made like the shark and never <b>adapted</b> to the old sensory chamber. As one example of many, I remember my old clan (current clan???!), #cri, went sensory first, movement second, against another delta level clan on ns_nancy and won. Since the map had 2 chokepoints, it was easy to just get a sensory at point and camp them both with cloakus and dominate. This was in b5. Also, Terror, the champion clan of last sensory frequently went sensory chambers second, so they could mow down the marine with focus fades.
You say there's no adaptation... I say you are pulling unfounded opinions out of thin air.
<!--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-->So I again submit that the answer is a logical and easily balanced Obs boost. If the obs is boosted, and the problem remains, then we can explore the Fade. But if cheapening scan/obs cost alleviates the problem it would be 2 minor cost changes instead of reinventing a whole Alien class (with all the knock on effects associated therewith).<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Really, boosting the obs isn't the answer, it's fix the sensory chamber. If anything, if you boost the obs you are making the sensory chamber too hard to use for the aliens at hive 1, which is not the intent of the developers, as they clearly want all chambers to be viable at all points of the game.
Utimately this thread is not fact at all in any way shape or form, not stats have been published, no proper figures given. It's just opinion and hearsay. This doesn't mean that it's wrong, just that within the first week or so of the version being released it is going to be held with a high degree of incertainty. After all, how many times have we heard about things being unbalanced in the first week of a release only for it to get all sorted out by players adapting a few weeks after?
And NGE, I'm not stating it's elitist to claim people can beat people, and if you're truly blind to how your comment in that post was elitist then...well...I'm not actually that surprised.
Are certain aspects of NS likely to be overpowered in pub vs clan games or vice versa? Most certainly. With the way NS is designed, real achievable balance for BOTH public play and clan play is impossible to attain if the game is kept the same for both public play and clan play. This point was made towards the end of the first post in this thread, and I agree.
I really think we could make gameplay better on both public and clan servers if we were to tailor specific changes to those modes of play. It doesn't have to be radically different, much could be improved with fairly minor changes. The public, which likely make up 90% of the people who play NS, would never know or care if there was a 'clan' mode in NS that changed aspects of NS when enabled.
We need to be honest here. No matter what changes are made, if those changes don't take the differences between public/clan play into account, then we will be back where we started. It will be a new 'problem' in NS because of some other issue, and that issue will cause balance in one mode while there is imbalance in the other. If we 'fix' sensory for clans then it will go unused on pubs because it is too weak. It's a no-win situation. Anyone who has been around a while can likely list off the key imbalances that have come with each build. Each time it has been a public/clan imbalance that has raised the ire of people on one side or the other.
I can't see any solution to this problem until the developers acknowledge that a new approach needs to be taken to address the unique needs in public vs clan play. Until that happens, we will continue to see threads like this with each new release.
Regards,
Savant
Someone beats someone else at something 99/100 times. Odds are that they understand what they're doing better than the other said person. I don't understand how that's elitest, mean, or totally unfair/biased in anyway, since anyone can be good at the game. Elitism is along the lines of, "I'm better than you'll ever be, ha ha ha ha ha." Stating that someone who is good at the game knows what they're doing better than someone who's not as good at the game is what people keep asking for, these, "numbers." Once again, I fail to see how that's being elitest.
And you're right, there will be adaptation- people will start abuseing the new overpowered strats, changing the way things are done without actually balancing/fixing anything. It's like throwing up new drapes in a bombed out apartment rather than rebuilding it, and ultimately accomplishes nothing.
Savant:
Thanks for reading my post. And I'd figured you'd agree with the different clan/public changes I listed. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Are sharks and crococidiles changing the fastest? Nope, and guess what, humans are who also conveniently populating the planet due to their surviviability. Clanners are humans? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
No humans are CS nubs. There is alot of them, they haven't been around long, many of them hack, and they are jerks. They also whine the most when sensible ideas are mentioned at the expense of thier sense of progress, and it looks like they have a good chance of all killing themselfs, so they probably aren't too good at this game either. The one last thing is that they are the main factor responsible for killing off the crocs and sharks.
The Onos could use a buff in base busting abilities sure, and I would gladly give the Onos mroe survivability if it means getting rid of devour, but that's a discussion for another time.
And as for not nerfing the Fade overall, I think I agree. that is why I suggested that we nerf the Fade's midgame if the aliens go sensory first by not letting Fades get focus. Fades will no longer be the monsters that they are with sensory first, and the cloakus skulks and SOF lerks more than make up for that.
When I play marines, we sometimes win, we sometimes lose.. Depends on the commander really.
So NGE, maybe you should pick out good commanders and not some n00bs.
I disagree on this one. Innate regen helps both MC and SC equally. After all, not everybody takes celerity, just like not everybody takes cloak.
<!--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-->Also free upgrades/shorter gestation are also highly adventagious to the sensory first game.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why are they any more of an advantage to a sensory first as opposed to an MC or DC first game? I don't see any reasoning here pointing to the sensory chamber. If anything, it's more of an advantage to MC, because then you get your celerity that much quicker and shave off even more time that you're out of the fight after dying.
<!--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-->
And you compleatly forgot that MT no longer tracks cloaked skulks. That is a major marine nerf when they go up against sensory chamber first alien teams.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's always better to argue from a point of knowledge. Saying stuff like this makes it harder to take your other points seriously, even if they were dead on.
The fact is that MT never did track cloaked skulks. Cloaking is and was the counter to MT. MT is the counter to silence, not cloaking. Scan and observatories are the counter to cloaking, and so far as I'm aware, always were.
<!--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-->
You can argue that the game has unbalanced in general, but you are intentionally trying to ignore the fact that nearly all the alien buffs are either direct buffs TO the sensory chamber, or are most adventagious to sensory first teams. With the additional fact that one of the main marine counter to sensory chambers was invalidated in 3.0f<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Simply wrong.
<!--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-->
The sensory chamber HAS gained an edge it never had before, and that edge more then unbalancing it compared to the other chambers in the hands of a good team.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes.. it's gained a localized SoF.. this is useful.
This is, so far as I can see, the only thing you can legitimately say it's gained beyond what the MC has gained.
The cloaking upgrade has also been boosted, but let's be clear on that.. that's the cloaking upgrade, not the sensory chamber. Does it promote the sensory chamber being used? Sure. But nerfing the chamber won't take that specific reason away, you have to re-examine cloaking for that.
When I play marines, we sometimes win, we sometimes lose.. Depends on the commander really.
So NGE, maybe you should pick out good commanders and not some n00bs. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry.
Over to another subject, that doesn't involve unintended humour:
I've seen several people comment on balance in publics vs. balance in competitive gaming, which to me clearly tells me you haven't really thought about the subject. Yes, one can balance a game purely by looking at public gaming. This will however, invariably, be flawed balance, simply because public games never take the game to its limits. Public play never discovers the really game breaking strategies, not to mention that public games in 99,9999% of circumstances consist of players without the skill required to properly exploit game dynamics. Balancing a game strictly based on competitive games will also balance it for public play, and that is what people need to realize. There is however another factor involved here, which is the fun factor. A balanced game may not necessarily be fun to play on publics (although it in most cases will, unless it by default is a really boring game). This has nothing to do with balancing the game however, or game balance experiences.
Distinguish these when talking about balance, please.
Yes, one can balance a game purely by looking at public gaming. This will however, invariably, be flawed balance, simply because public games never take the game to its limits. Public play never discovers the really game breaking strategies, not to mention that public games in 99,9999% of circumstances consist of players without the skill required to properly exploit game dynamics.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I fully agree.
<!--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-->Balancing a game strictly based on competitive games will also balance it for public play, and that is what people need to realize. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I completely disagree.
I've pointed this out before, certain things may be balanced only once a certain skill level is achieved.
As a thought experiment, think about a game where a creature like the Lerk had three times the speed and did three times the damage or more with its bite, but had the weakness that if it hit a wall while flying it died.
Now imagine this game balanced in such a way that marines were expected to be dealing with highly skilled lerks of this variety. They have the armor, the firepower, the movement speed, etc, to be able to handle one of these things flying in, taking a chomp and taking off.
At high skill levels, the game is balanced, and those playing at those levels generally won't see a problem. At lower levels though? It's horribly unbalanced as the powerful marines blast through anything else that comes at them, and the unskilled lerks end up smearing themselves across the landscape.
This is an extreme example, I know, but I use it to point out that the idea "What's balanced for clans is balanced for pubs" is false.