Please remove static defence
Wilson
Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72867Members
Join Date: 2010-07-26 Member: 72867Members
Please remove static defence from the game. I don't understand the purpose of them (please tell me). They just suck the fun right out of the game and make it a tedious chore to play. I don't find it fun to fight against turrets or AI units. I play multiplayer games to fight against other players. Static defence in a pure RTS is fine, but it doesn't work very well in an FPS.
If a team requires static defence to win the game or to defend their base properly then something is fundamentally wrong. IMO the game should be balanced around pure player vs player combat. Even hydras, which have a hard counter (GL) are still a pain in the ass and just slow the gameplay down.
The most fun I have in NS2 is when I'm engaged in combat with the other team. The most frustration I experience is when I'm being constantly limited by where I can go because of static defence and when the other team is just sitting behind a wall of defence and I can't do anything until they come out.
Also if you're playing marine com, please don't mass sentries and drag the game out for hours. It's no fun for either team and everyone just ends up leaving. I'd much rather play 5 quicker games where I'm constantly engaged in fighting with the enemy than 1 long game filled with sentries.
IMO it would be much more fun if static defence was replaced with support like structures, so instead of a hydra, the gorge could drop a structure that gave all aliens within the area an advantage (e.g. improved hivesight showing outlines of the marines, improved energy regen etc.). That way it's still encouraging player vs player combat while giving the defending team a small advantage in that area.
I really believe that the game would be much more fun if the best thing to do was always to engage the other team and kill them, rather than building static defence and sitting behind it or running around the enemy and attacking the RTs instead. Those sorts of things should always put you at a disadvantage.
If a team requires static defence to win the game or to defend their base properly then something is fundamentally wrong. IMO the game should be balanced around pure player vs player combat. Even hydras, which have a hard counter (GL) are still a pain in the ass and just slow the gameplay down.
The most fun I have in NS2 is when I'm engaged in combat with the other team. The most frustration I experience is when I'm being constantly limited by where I can go because of static defence and when the other team is just sitting behind a wall of defence and I can't do anything until they come out.
Also if you're playing marine com, please don't mass sentries and drag the game out for hours. It's no fun for either team and everyone just ends up leaving. I'd much rather play 5 quicker games where I'm constantly engaged in fighting with the enemy than 1 long game filled with sentries.
IMO it would be much more fun if static defence was replaced with support like structures, so instead of a hydra, the gorge could drop a structure that gave all aliens within the area an advantage (e.g. improved hivesight showing outlines of the marines, improved energy regen etc.). That way it's still encouraging player vs player combat while giving the defending team a small advantage in that area.
I really believe that the game would be much more fun if the best thing to do was always to engage the other team and kill them, rather than building static defence and sitting behind it or running around the enemy and attacking the RTs instead. Those sorts of things should always put you at a disadvantage.
Comments
Static defense has its purpose serving as a speedbump to keep outposts from getting rolled by 1-2 skulks in seconds. It forces teamwork.
A team that <i>over</i>-uses static D (for example, using it in marine start or trying to turret every single RT) will find itself without the resources necessary research sufficient upgrades to actually win.
All of this is to say that if you don't want the other team building static D, play better and deny them the resources necessary for it. Excessive turreting/walling off of areas is an artifact of low-level public server play. As the population playing the game gets better over time, it becomes less and less an issue (we've already seen this happen with ns1).
I don't think it should always be a viable tactic. I think that if the enemy team do that and then you kill them, that should be a big disadvantage for them. It should be better for them to work together, take out the enemy team and then take down the RTs once the enemy is respawning.
There is a problem if it's better to not engage the enemy and just attack the RTs. That discourages player from battling with each other, which is the fun part of the game.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Static defense has its purpose serving as a speedbump to keep outposts from getting rolled by 1-2 skulks in seconds. It forces teamwork.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If that's the case then just increase the amount of health all buildings have so that you require multiple aliens to take them down in a reasonable amount of time. That way marines can easily defend their buildings against 1-2 skulks in time without the need for static defence. It will become pointless for individual skulks to attack buildings and therefore they will focus more on killing the marines and working as a team.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->A team that over-uses static D (for example, using it in marine start or trying to turret every single RT) will find itself without the resources necessary research sufficient upgrades to actually win.
All of this is to say that if you don't want the other team building static D, play better and deny them the resources necessary for it. Excessive turreting/walling off of areas is an artifact of low-level public server play. As the population playing the game gets better over time, it becomes less and less an issue (we've already seen this happen with ns1).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While I think this is true, it doesn't change the fact that playing against static defence isn't fun in any situation. There will always be players who just turtle up and drag the game out, even if it means they will ultimately lose. Obviously static defence is there for a reason, but I can't think of one good enough to justify the decrease in enjoyment. Removing the defence and AI attacking units and then making changes to the gameplay in order to make players work together and engage the enemy seems like a much better idea to me.
Games with 20 turrets in one room are rarely fun for Kharaa, but cut it down to 2-3 for the smaller rooms and 4-5 for the larger ones, and I find it a perfectly enjoyable game mechanic.
Speak for yourself when you say it isn't fun.
There is a problem if it's better to not engage the enemy and just attack the RTs. That discourages player from battling with each other, which is the fun part of the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is simply untrue. As I just said the feedback thread, if you're attacking an RT, the other team knows. And you know that they know. If the other team allows you to raze all of their RTs unopposed, then they deserve the loss.
Further, both teams know that RTs are prime targets. Routes to and from resource locations should be scouted by both teams, and players moving to attack RTs are inherently moving into territory held by the opponents, meaning contact is likely.
Everything about targeting RTs encourages combat between players.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If that's the case then just increase the amount of health all buildings have so that you require multiple aliens to take them down in a reasonable amount of time. That way marines can easily defend their buildings against 1-2 skulks in time without the need for static defence. It will become pointless for individual skulks to attack buildings and therefore they will focus more on killing the marines and working as a team.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This removes fun, "skilly" decisions from the game. A lone skulk that gets into an outpost with a phasegate can choose to attack the PG, hoping that she'll kill it before the turret kills her or a marine steps through. Just the same with high-value targets in marine start such as the arms lab and observatory.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->While I think this is true, it doesn't change the fact that playing against static defence isn't fun in any situation.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is not a fact and therefore it doesn't need to be changed. I haven't played much ns2 yet, but some of the best fun I've had was working as a fade in concert with a gorge and another fade to take back a room with a couple sentries in it.
Further, one of the elements of fun in the game has always been to be a lone skulk that sneaks into MS or some outpost and finds a place to safely chew on something valuable. The tension of wondering if you'll be able to kill the thing before someone comes to get you is awesome.
You've had some times where static D made stuff crappy. It happens. It's a mistake to generalize from these times to "it should be removed from the game."
This is a mistake commonly made by players, though, so it's not surprising.
Teir 1 Lifeforms Static defences deny areas to lifeforms
Teir 2 Lifeforms Static defences cause trouble for lifeforms
Teir 3 Lifeforms What defences!
Static defences won't stop an Onos or Exo suit unless there are players also teched in those locations.
The fact that the developers didn't feel like stopping and and addressing your feelings personally in no way means they don't care. They probably read your opinion, indexed it with all the other gameplay opinions they've received on the topic, and gave the overall sentiment a thought the next time they were designing something related.
Unless one of the NS2 team dropped into the thread and told you he couldn't give two biscuits about your woes, I see no reason to assume they didn't care. They have other things to do than respond to every post or comment on the forums (though they're doing a damn good job of breaking 33%)
Static defences won't stop an Onos or Exo suit unless there are players in those locations.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They don't stop skulks and gorges either, just slow them down and make it riskier. The later tier stuff simply clears it out faster and/or in the face of determined opposition.
No offence dude but maybe you should go play NS2 before commenting on it. The sentries are currently ridiculous and a good marine team can hold out forever with just 1 base.
Of course it's just my opinion, I never claimed to be speaking for anyone else. I personally think getting rid of static defence would be a much better way forward for the game. Even if they get nerfed to hell, I'd rather they just remove them completely and then make other gameplay changes to balance it out. I find it much more fun fighting against other players and trying to outplay them, rather than shooting buildings.
I have no doubt that they will eventually balance it out and aliens will get more ways of destroying sentries and it will be a bad decision economically to spam static defence. Yet, I still think that removing them completely would be a better option and improve the gameplay overall.
You would assume so but back in NS1 I have seen marine start spammed with enough turrets to stop and onos.
The only thing I consistently find sentries useful for is alerting me something is coming down the hallway. It is not hard to find a blind spot in a room full of sentries. Chew on one sentry and the blind spot only gets bigger. (or chew on your more important target) If you need to, have one person rush in and draw their fire while the other slips into the blind spot.
Marines don't hold out forever due to anything except teamwork and good shooting. Or the aliens could just suck.
Instead of saying to remove it completely why don't you suggest a way to make it work.
Like turret factories, lerk umbra, fade acid launchers. All are great against sieging marine bases. And the onos will arrive soon to disrupt their structures.
Also some people find non pvp elements of a game fun as well. Like engineer roles in battlefield and tf2. Repairing your vehicles and helping your team fight the good fight.
Hydras need a bigger/better hitbox. Maybe its a problem with the animation system, but its almost impossible to damage hydras from range.
I totally agree with everything you've said paella, but static defense as implemented ingame currently doesn't match up with how it should be.
You ignored my larger post to respond to this and you're still making strange assertions. I haven't played any NS since I stopped playing before, I think 3.0 (i.e.: I'm awful), and found taking out unattended sentries as a lone skulk trivially easy. Just stay on the opposite side of it from the one that bullets come out of.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I totally agree with everything you've said paella, but static defense as implemented ingame currently doesn't match up with how it should be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This could very well be, I have no opinion on specific balance stuff. :)
A team that builds lots of SD suffer in other areas.
-1
However, I personally feel it will not be such a big issue moving forward, especially once tier3 is added. Commanders will eventually turret spam less and less. I think the biggest effect on this will be after balancing the marine team so they are more powerful. Once they have the ability to be more aggressive, they will use it more!
There have already been plenty of ideas on how to restrict the amount of statics but without the ability to see how they turn out in late game its kinda useless to implement something that will (most likely) be changed anyway once Onos and Exos are in the game.
Siege canons > Aliens structures.
Umbra+Fade > Turret farm.
Personally I dislike turrets and also think they should go, maybe temporary (until late game stuff are put in). I don't have too much problems with hydras.
>Running around the enemy and attacking the RTs instead. Those sorts of things should always put you at a disadvantage.
Running around, counters, base trades and such are a core element of rts games (and in some sports) and shouldn't be discouraged. It shouldn't always be the best tactic however.
--Cory
It's a costly resource decision that you put static defense down. At all times you should have pretty much zero resources available to be playing optimally. NS2 hasn't evolved enough yet for there to be perfect build orders or such, like in SC1 and 2.
Also, I think a lerk with good upgrades can take out one turret in two sessions (as in attack, heal, attack), even through the turret is shooting constantly at the lerk, and vice versa. They don't feel at all that OP to me.
1 mac can repair the turret faster than the lerk can damage it.
One lerk can kill the mac faster than the turret can kill the lerk.
and the turret cant reach the Lerk, they are now infiniate range on spikes, turrets are NOT infinate range. If you want to kill turrets, just go lerk and stay OoR
Well, the point is that if the lerk needs to fly away and heal the sentry can easily be healed in time. There's a reason you don't see the alien team killing off sentry farms with lerks, it doesn't work. If you want to argue otherwise and think sentries are okay then go ahead - I disagree.
I didn't expect UW to read this and remove static defence. I was just posting my opinion on them. I don't think removing them completely is extreme if it improves the fun of the game. Of course they will be balanced eventually and right now there are problems with aliens not having enough ways to destroy sentries and the hydra hitboxes being really small and therefore difficult to hit with the LMG. Even when they are balanced though, I just can't see them adding anything to the game. I am sure there are other ways to tackle the problem of defending your RTs on large maps.
You were hoping that the majority of players agreed with you and were asking for them to be removed, otherwise you would not have made the thread with topic 'Please remove static defence'.
Just because the player base and the devs didn't agree with you, don't mean you should then try to back track on what you were requesting.
And increasing the health of buildings is untenable; it's already laborious enough to take down an undefended RT as a skulk.
--Scythe--