Rfk?
Tha
Join Date: 2009-06-05 Member: 67694Members
Join Date: 2009-06-05 Member: 67694Members
<div class="IPBDescription">Its been bugging me</div>With the removal of skulks having to pay for carapace it is too evident that the most basic unit for each side is completely expendable, the only loss realistically is time and abit of map control.(and its fairly neglectible, with pgs and fast alien movement)
now what i've been thinking is how valid the argument of consistent game times and unit timings are.
Isn't that abit blotched as it is anyways? isnt the idea of the game to be dynamic, doesn't holding more harvesters/extractors alter this anyway?(I know maturation/augmentation is an exception)
When I played ns1 i valued my life as a skulk, my life as a marine, now having to run back to the hive and heal is a chore and i'd rather die and respawn with full health and armor, and as a marine calling for meds leaves me in a weaker state than i would if i was to respawn, leaving me armorless so i'd rather just die and phase /sprint back to the frontlines.
I'm not very good at doing points, however i'd just like to leave it as this, why bother playing tactically and trying to stay alive when respawning is just so much more appealing, i'm mainly talking about the base level units here, skulk and lmg marine.
see i think it relates to the fact that we see onos rushes being so appealing is that skulks are just so damn good, and onos are also so good. you dont need to worry about the middle ground lerks and fades would be powerful, but for some reason they just dont hold up to the onos. why are skulks able to fill this gap? because if you die what do you lose? nothing. skulks die often as it is, but they are just played all game as suicide units that can pressure so good.
i love the game, but this issue has been glaring out at me.
From an RTS point of view having basic units that are so powerful and have no cost or loss for dying does not seem like a good mechanic, from an fps perspective i dont feel like a lifeform that values its existence really, rather a pawn that drives forward and dies or else its not doing its part
now what i've been thinking is how valid the argument of consistent game times and unit timings are.
Isn't that abit blotched as it is anyways? isnt the idea of the game to be dynamic, doesn't holding more harvesters/extractors alter this anyway?(I know maturation/augmentation is an exception)
When I played ns1 i valued my life as a skulk, my life as a marine, now having to run back to the hive and heal is a chore and i'd rather die and respawn with full health and armor, and as a marine calling for meds leaves me in a weaker state than i would if i was to respawn, leaving me armorless so i'd rather just die and phase /sprint back to the frontlines.
I'm not very good at doing points, however i'd just like to leave it as this, why bother playing tactically and trying to stay alive when respawning is just so much more appealing, i'm mainly talking about the base level units here, skulk and lmg marine.
see i think it relates to the fact that we see onos rushes being so appealing is that skulks are just so damn good, and onos are also so good. you dont need to worry about the middle ground lerks and fades would be powerful, but for some reason they just dont hold up to the onos. why are skulks able to fill this gap? because if you die what do you lose? nothing. skulks die often as it is, but they are just played all game as suicide units that can pressure so good.
i love the game, but this issue has been glaring out at me.
From an RTS point of view having basic units that are so powerful and have no cost or loss for dying does not seem like a good mechanic, from an fps perspective i dont feel like a lifeform that values its existence really, rather a pawn that drives forward and dies or else its not doing its part
Comments
Second, if you think having 30 less armor prevents you from doing anything useful, you need to re-evaluate what you're actually doing wrong as a player. 30 Armor is measurable, but it is not the end of the world. Furthermore, Aliens regen to full, even if it takes time. While youre regenning you can be doing passive activities that still benefit the team, such as tagging ######, or calling where enemies are going.
The removal of the cost of upgrades does not eliminate the value of the skulk or other classes. I've won games where I just played skulk, but I played intelligently, with guerrilla tactics and precision damage. There's plenty of room for getting better at this game, and you should worry less about the finer points such as 30 armor, and worry more about where you see gains in progress.
Gains such as winning more 1v1's, maybe taking out two marines, or getting multiple undefended res nodes in a single life. These are substantial gains, improved through practice.
edit:i acknowledge that there are losses for dying, just not enough from my pov
By tagging he probably means parasiting players/buildings.
When you're dead, you can only call things your teammates can already see (not the things they can't see that you could have if you were alive).
Also, can we pweaseee have:
Focus
Celerity
The rest can wait :D
I was for free upgrades but together with ns1 upgrade system. With the current system it's not really working.
In ns1 you had to choose between three upgrades, so there was some interesting choices going, you could go celerity of silence skulk, introducing some gameplay variety.
Now in NS2 you can only pick up what the comm researched (carapace) so there is no choices or variety going. In addition you can get two upgrades from the same chamber. At this point I think the upgrades should be automatic for everybody, like in the beginning of the beta.
Running back to the Hive to heal is a matter of time efficiency - Is it quicker to run back and heal (travel time + 4-8 seconds healing) or would it be better to get what you can done with the health you've got and respawn later. And for the most part it is more efficient to simply stay until you die, unless you're not very far from the hive.
The main reason for returning to a Hive was because upgrades cost personal resources and so it was more efficient to go heal up as opposed to dying as a carapace skulk.
I agree that Aliens could have a longer spawn time, but because the amount of death varies greatly from a Close Positions game to an Across game it's hard to balance.
As others have said if you can't get things done as a 76-100 health Marine you're clearly not playing correctly - You shouldn't be getting bit twice everytime you enter a fight. You should be with other players anyway and it's better for them to have you at their back with 100 health than it is for them to follow you into the respawn queue because you wanted your 30 armor back.
Sometimes I run back to the Armory, sometimes I don't - Sometimes there is a forward Armory.
I'm happy with Marine respawn, not so happy with Alien respawn.
Taking out extractors, harassing the oppositions base to push them back, etc, etc... the list goes on, and it just takes a while to understand the game.
For instance, I was playing a public yesterday on mineshaft. We won it (as aliens) but the marines did a great job of holding us back with JPs and Flamers in refinery along with a load of turrets.
Instead of listening to me, the commander just kept shouting 'attack refinery', and we kept throwing Onos after Onos at them, but flamers were doing a great job (too good of a job in my opinion) of draining our energy and so it stalemated for around 15 minutes.
If we had all just gone for their main base, the game would have been over.
But I am sure most of you see this on public servers all the time. Inexperienced players getting a rough time just slowly being ground down and pushed back, when instead you should be causing havoc in quiet areas of the map to force the other team back in a 'non-aggressive' approach.
Taking out extractors, harassing the oppositions base to push them back, etc, etc... the list goes on, and it just takes a while to understand the game.
For instance, I was playing a public yesterday on mineshaft. We won it (as aliens) but the marines did a great job of holding us back with JPs and Flamers in refinery along with a load of turrets.
Instead of listening to me, the commander just kept shouting 'attack refinery', and we kept throwing Onos after Onos at them, but flamers were doing a great job (too good of a job in my opinion) of draining our energy and so it stalemated for around 15 minutes.
If we had all just gone for their main base, the game would have been over.
But I am sure most of you see this on public servers all the time. Inexperienced players getting a rough time just slowly being ground down and pushed back, when instead you should be causing havoc in quiet areas of the map to force the other team back in a 'non-aggressive' approach.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Amen
Lets look at sc2 for example and then relate it to an ns2 scenario(different games but from a strategy point it can be relevant)
TVZ
Terran hold an unbuilt resource expansion, army of value 1 defeats zerg army of value 0.5 and the army is of half its capacity to fight, resources lost for that army is half and therfore unreliable. To let that army stay and defend that point possibly in a futile situation would be considered a waste of resources. A another zerg army comes to claim the contested zone but doesnt find the terran army there, they gain the possibility of expansion and terran keep thier army value but lose that point.
Basically
Terran base: north
Zerg base:south
Middle ground expansion:contested
Alien attack force = 0.5
Terran = 1.0
Terran tactically retreat after victory, next zerg attack force unable to defeat them at middle, resources retained for terran, resources lost for aliens. Time also in production.
if the Terran were to stay, they may lose their army and not be able to regroup them with the main force and also lose the middle ground. big repercussions from a strategic standpoint, tactical retreat a preffered option, makes sense aswell not to throw away forces unnecessarily.
In ns2
Marine spawn:sub
Alien, atrium
Contested zone = crossroads
Marine force enters with a combat value of 1
Alien force attacks with value of 0.5 and gets defeated
Loss of aliens = time factor, another wave can be reproduced within 17 seconds
If marines retreat, heal up/regroup all the ground or fighting they did mean nothing, aliens will reclaim the territory with minimal loss(mobility of kharaa is fast
If marines stay great chance they will die, why bother going back though or the fight you did will mean nothing, fortifying the position is risky with a half effective force when an equally free effective alien force may take it down. A more probable solution is to wait for combat effectiveness to resume to full before fortifying or else push forward and attempt economy damage.
The thing is that in sc2 economy damage is often invested in with resources, economy damage in ns2 by free units is a problem. Maybe not free units but there should be repercussions beyond a small timer to failing to deal damage, especially if whilst doing damage you hindered enemy movements througout the map. harassing skulks that pick out harvesters are so damn effective because they can effectively take marines out of the fight and barley suffer consequences for it
Sorry for bringing a reference from another game ,its just that strategically it seems that staying untill death is just the best option, a life is just not as valued as it should be.
Btw i strongly believe respawn times are not the solution, ns1 had fairly short respawn times provided the entire team didnt just blow up 5 seconds after spawning, the build times of tier 0 units should be small, but as ive stated, their should be some repercussion for losing them
to sum up,
* a life is simply not worth enough
* encourages a very death match like playstyle where tactics and strategy simply exist in combat rather than grand scale aswell
* Harassment can often tie up players to defense whilst offering very little reward for killing a free unit.
You do not run back to your base, if you managed to kill 2 skulks in crossroads. You will run to crevice / reactor core to kill the rt. It does not matter if you get killed afterwards, as long as you killed a resource tower. If you do not kill the rt, because you keep running back to your base, you will eventually lose the game.
Also, you cannot compare SC2 to NS2, because technically a marine with 1 hp could solo an onos.
I dunno man ultralisks are pretty bad...
Especially if they dont attack.
I must say that I do not like how mobile marines have become with sprint, in NS1 one of their main characteristics is that they were very slow compared to aliens. This combined with the smaller price of death (especially if you are defending, when it becomes essentially free unless all of you die and you loose the room) reduces the incentive for marines to stick together and work as a team not to mention makes mass suicide pushes to take out an RT or two too viable. The speed also reduces the actual cost of death because it becomes that much quicker to regain your previous positions.
Reminds me of an encounter with one and doing a ring around the pillar while shooting him with me @ 20hp, after which he had to run, with me on his tail screaming for ammo and meds and downing the bugger after chasing him down across the map :P
now what i've been thinking is how valid the argument of consistent game times and unit timings are.
Isn't that abit blotched as it is anyways? isnt the idea of the game to be dynamic, doesn't holding more harvesters/extractors alter this anyway?(I know maturation/augmentation is an exception)
When I played ns1 i valued my life as a skulk, my life as a marine, now having to run back to the hive and heal is a chore and i'd rather die and respawn with full health and armor, and as a marine calling for meds leaves me in a weaker state than i would if i was to respawn, leaving me armorless so i'd rather just die and phase /sprint back to the frontlines.
I'm not very good at doing points, however i'd just like to leave it as this, why bother playing tactically and trying to stay alive when respawning is just so much more appealing, i'm mainly talking about the base level units here, skulk and lmg marine.
see i think it relates to the fact that we see onos rushes being so appealing is that skulks are just so damn good, and onos are also so good. you dont need to worry about the middle ground lerks and fades would be powerful, but for some reason they just dont hold up to the onos. why are skulks able to fill this gap? because if you die what do you lose? nothing. skulks die often as it is, but they are just played all game as suicide units that can pressure so good.
i love the game, but this issue has been glaring out at me.
From an RTS point of view having basic units that are so powerful and have no cost or loss for dying does not seem like a good mechanic, from an fps perspective i dont feel like a lifeform that values its existence really, rather a pawn that drives forward and dies or else its not doing its part<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1937914:date=May 21 2012, 03:20 PM:name=Tha)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tha @ May 21 2012, 03:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1937914"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Hmm, Jayaris you do present a good point. But you then state what my fair is, it is more efficient to die fighting then to tactically retreat and fight another day.
Lets look at sc2 for example and then relate it to an ns2 scenario(different games but from a strategy point it can be relevant)
TVZ
Terran hold an unbuilt resource expansion, army of value 1 defeats zerg army of value 0.5 and the army is of half its capacity to fight, resources lost for that army is half and therfore unreliable. To let that army stay and defend that point possibly in a futile situation would be considered a waste of resources. A another zerg army comes to claim the contested zone but doesnt find the terran army there, they gain the possibility of expansion and terran keep thier army value but lose that point.
Basically
Terran base: north
Zerg base:south
Middle ground expansion:contested
Alien attack force = 0.5
Terran = 1.0
Terran tactically retreat after victory, next zerg attack force unable to defeat them at middle, resources retained for terran, resources lost for aliens. Time also in production.
if the Terran were to stay, they may lose their army and not be able to regroup them with the main force and also lose the middle ground. big repercussions from a strategic standpoint, tactical retreat a preffered option, makes sense aswell not to throw away forces unnecessarily.
In ns2
Marine spawn:sub
Alien, atrium
Contested zone = crossroads
Marine force enters with a combat value of 1
Alien force attacks with value of 0.5 and gets defeated
Loss of aliens = time factor, another wave can be reproduced within 17 seconds
If marines retreat, heal up/regroup all the ground or fighting they did mean nothing, aliens will reclaim the territory with minimal loss(mobility of kharaa is fast
If marines stay great chance they will die, why bother going back though or the fight you did will mean nothing, fortifying the position is risky with a half effective force when an equally free effective alien force may take it down. A more probable solution is to wait for combat effectiveness to resume to full before fortifying or else push forward and attempt economy damage.
The thing is that in sc2 economy damage is often invested in with resources, economy damage in ns2 by free units is a problem. Maybe not free units but there should be repercussions beyond a small timer to failing to deal damage, especially if whilst doing damage you hindered enemy movements througout the map. harassing skulks that pick out harvesters are so damn effective because they can effectively take marines out of the fight and barley suffer consequences for it
Sorry for bringing a reference from another game ,its just that strategically it seems that staying untill death is just the best option, a life is just not as valued as it should be.
Btw i strongly believe respawn times are not the solution, ns1 had fairly short respawn times provided the entire team didnt just blow up 5 seconds after spawning, the build times of tier 0 units should be small, but as ive stated, their should be some repercussion for losing them
to sum up,
* a life is simply not worth enough
* encourages a very death match like playstyle where tactics and strategy simply exist in combat rather than grand scale aswell
* Harassment can often tie up players to defense whilst offering very little reward for killing a free unit.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I completely agree with OP, there's no punishment for reckless play. No tradeoff.
Respawn is NOT NEARLY enough punishment.
Here's my idea on RFK:
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=117830" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/in...howtopic=117830</a>
IMO, the game now is more combat than classic, you rush into action and die. There's only action action action. No big incentive for consideration or teamplay.
But this is probably more familiar to the console generation kiddies who wouldn't like to take a pause and think in a game...
If, as a skulk, you run into a marine, you generally have to commit to the fight otherwise you'll just get gunned down as you retreat. Contrast this with a lerk or fade, where if they find themselves on the losing end of a battle, can pretty easily get away.
Also, RFK is problematic because it can lead to serious anti-new player biases, who have a tendency to die a lot and 'feed' the enemy team resources.
Not if the upgrades are more impactful - then you will see a bigger trade off and more risk with pulling that stunt, that would lead to a vulnerable early and middle game alien team that might not make it to onos.