Current game balance and an attempt at avoiding "fixing symptoms"
Tark
Join Date: 2012-11-06 Member: 167600Members
Join Date: 2012-11-06 Member: 167600Members
<div class="IPBDescription">Results of some boring methodical problem solving</div>I originally replied to the balance discussion in the dev blog update thread, but I thought this might merit some comments on its own as that discussion was bogged down in a couple of silly arguments. I did a short root cause analysis excercise around balance by myself because I'm a sucker for some good methodical problem solving, and because I felt that the current balance discussion is very crude and "fix the symptom, not the cause" -like. I ended up with an interesting notion that might or might not be presented before.
In the current metagame the state seems to be that aliens win a lot more games than marines do on public games, and the game is somewhat more balanced in a competitive setting.
Having commanded a few dozen clan games (and a few hundred at top level in NS1), as well as a bunch of pub games, it feels that I have some grip to why this is, and the alien dominance seems to boil down to a few factors.
1) Skulks seem relatively more powerful the less players there are
2) Alien play at lower skill levels works out better in a "chaotic" non commanded fashion. Ie. alien comm mostly just needs to upgrade something to get things rolling, and conversely marine play requires a certain bit of organization to work out
3) In relation to marine play in point 2, marines also need to be the agressors in a game in order to stand a chance to win. Otherwise put, unless marines deal economic damage to the alien side they generally lose. Moreso competitively, but also on pub games
Out of those three, 1) is a numbers game and can be boiled down to the currently prevalent arguments on how many bullets should there be in an LMG clip or how powerful camo should be, etc. This is certainly important, but not perhaps before something is done about 2) or 3). This is because those two are more fundamental gameplay issues and something that developers perhaps want to define as part of how they define the game itself. 1) is dependant on 2) and 3), therefore 2) and 3) should be looked at first.
So we get to my point. Listening to, interviewing some and looking at newbies play it feels like the intuitive thing to do when you boot up NS2 and join the marine team is to be cautious. You spawn on an alien infested space station, hear creepy sounds and don't really know what you're up against. Even after 20 or 100 pub games you might still jump at some of the sounds and your aim is shaky -> your confidence is not very high.
This anxiousness leads to marine players being more cautious, ie. walking out, seeing and/or shooting at some aliens and then maybe going back for a reload. They might see a fade, or they might see someone die, and they turn around and walk back to base. You see this *all the time*. At best some people don't leave base at all because they feel pressure is on them and an attack might happen any time. This is increased because walking into creep infested areas gives the subconcious feeling of walking on "alien territory" and that perhaps aliens somehow have some advantage on creep, which is a perfectly valid assumption.
On the other hand, when I commed some games with green names or otherwise incapable shooters who couldn't win a single 1on1, we still did relatively well when I managed to bribe, threat and whine them into forgetting anything else and just running and gunning their way out of base and into something, anything at all, over and over again. A great way to affect this as a commander is to get earliest possible phase gates and putting them where you want the pressure, because sometimes a shiny blue door is the only way to get people in the right area.
There we get to my original point, that marines generally have to cause economic damage to win. Within the first few minutes of the game the alien comm can spam the whole map full of RTs (4-6 generally) and unless 2-3 of those are taken out aliens get a pretty straightforward win. In clan games the marginals are smaller, aliens go for 2-4 RTs, marines will have to take and keep 1-2 down to get the upper hand. Either way, marines are expected to be the aggressor and will have to reduce alien economy to win. Just holding an equal or slightly higher number of RTs rarely wins you the game.
So there is a fundamental issue in how you intuitively start playing as marine, and how you should play to win. This is also an issue because if you are uncertain or unsure as alien and tend to stand back, all the better - you are meant to be defensive. You intuitively play the right way.
I feel that this is a much bigger issue for new players and pub balance than how much damage the LMG does or whatnot, as if we can make players play roughly similarly (to some degree) in a competitive and non competitive setting, ie. make the game intuitively play "right", then you don't need balance mods, competitive versions, or whatever solutions players like to throw around, at least not as much. That, or the game needs to be balanced around the marines being a more defensive side.
So, comments?
(Why am I not suggesting a more defined solution? Some consults wisdom for you: When your problem is defined well enough, coming up with a solution is childs play. As long as the issue requires discussion, the problem is not defined well enough, so no point in discussing solutions)
In the current metagame the state seems to be that aliens win a lot more games than marines do on public games, and the game is somewhat more balanced in a competitive setting.
Having commanded a few dozen clan games (and a few hundred at top level in NS1), as well as a bunch of pub games, it feels that I have some grip to why this is, and the alien dominance seems to boil down to a few factors.
1) Skulks seem relatively more powerful the less players there are
2) Alien play at lower skill levels works out better in a "chaotic" non commanded fashion. Ie. alien comm mostly just needs to upgrade something to get things rolling, and conversely marine play requires a certain bit of organization to work out
3) In relation to marine play in point 2, marines also need to be the agressors in a game in order to stand a chance to win. Otherwise put, unless marines deal economic damage to the alien side they generally lose. Moreso competitively, but also on pub games
Out of those three, 1) is a numbers game and can be boiled down to the currently prevalent arguments on how many bullets should there be in an LMG clip or how powerful camo should be, etc. This is certainly important, but not perhaps before something is done about 2) or 3). This is because those two are more fundamental gameplay issues and something that developers perhaps want to define as part of how they define the game itself. 1) is dependant on 2) and 3), therefore 2) and 3) should be looked at first.
So we get to my point. Listening to, interviewing some and looking at newbies play it feels like the intuitive thing to do when you boot up NS2 and join the marine team is to be cautious. You spawn on an alien infested space station, hear creepy sounds and don't really know what you're up against. Even after 20 or 100 pub games you might still jump at some of the sounds and your aim is shaky -> your confidence is not very high.
This anxiousness leads to marine players being more cautious, ie. walking out, seeing and/or shooting at some aliens and then maybe going back for a reload. They might see a fade, or they might see someone die, and they turn around and walk back to base. You see this *all the time*. At best some people don't leave base at all because they feel pressure is on them and an attack might happen any time. This is increased because walking into creep infested areas gives the subconcious feeling of walking on "alien territory" and that perhaps aliens somehow have some advantage on creep, which is a perfectly valid assumption.
On the other hand, when I commed some games with green names or otherwise incapable shooters who couldn't win a single 1on1, we still did relatively well when I managed to bribe, threat and whine them into forgetting anything else and just running and gunning their way out of base and into something, anything at all, over and over again. A great way to affect this as a commander is to get earliest possible phase gates and putting them where you want the pressure, because sometimes a shiny blue door is the only way to get people in the right area.
There we get to my original point, that marines generally have to cause economic damage to win. Within the first few minutes of the game the alien comm can spam the whole map full of RTs (4-6 generally) and unless 2-3 of those are taken out aliens get a pretty straightforward win. In clan games the marginals are smaller, aliens go for 2-4 RTs, marines will have to take and keep 1-2 down to get the upper hand. Either way, marines are expected to be the aggressor and will have to reduce alien economy to win. Just holding an equal or slightly higher number of RTs rarely wins you the game.
So there is a fundamental issue in how you intuitively start playing as marine, and how you should play to win. This is also an issue because if you are uncertain or unsure as alien and tend to stand back, all the better - you are meant to be defensive. You intuitively play the right way.
I feel that this is a much bigger issue for new players and pub balance than how much damage the LMG does or whatnot, as if we can make players play roughly similarly (to some degree) in a competitive and non competitive setting, ie. make the game intuitively play "right", then you don't need balance mods, competitive versions, or whatever solutions players like to throw around, at least not as much. That, or the game needs to be balanced around the marines being a more defensive side.
So, comments?
(Why am I not suggesting a more defined solution? Some consults wisdom for you: When your problem is defined well enough, coming up with a solution is childs play. As long as the issue requires discussion, the problem is not defined well enough, so no point in discussing solutions)
Comments
How do you propose we fix this?
I see this cautiousness all the time, especially on rookie teams. Some of this goes away as players gain experience but for the most part marines always feel like they need to be on the defensive. This leads to the alien team capitalizing on their speed and taking over most of the map within the first 10 minutes of the game. As I am sure most are aware by now:if you let the aliens take three hives, you are going to have a bad time.
With the recent influx of new players I try to comm marines more often as that seems to be the side rookie players are likely to start with. I try and be assertive and get the marines to push out of base and start pressuring the aliens, but it is an uphill battle. I often see new players putting up power nodes in far away corners of the map that currently have no bearing on the game just because they feel like they are doing something important and can do it in a relatively safe way. In general new players seem to just mull around and have to be almost shoved out of the base in order to get them to do anything.
How do we get them to grow some balls?
Right now, aliens need less RTs than marines to win. If we would change this proportion in the opposite, we could achieve what you suggest.
But maybe we shouldn't turn this all around. Maybe we should just equal it out? So aliens would need the same amount of RTs as marines to win.
This could be easily achieved by decreasing the t-res income of the alien team, but increasing the health (or decreasing the cost) of their RTs. Than they would need more RTs to tech up, but could also hold them more easily. With the right numbers, the team with more map control would be in advantage. Not how it is right now, where aliens need to hold less RTs than marines.
I've said this before, but I think a lot of the problem lies with the Armory's armor healing. As you mentioned, pub marines are timid and afraid to be away from base in less than peak condition. They also have low confidence in their teammates to weld them on the field(for good reason since they usually won't). The armor healing is an extremely powerful incentive for marines to return frequently to base, which contributes to the aforementioned problems in two ways:
1. It doesn't encourage teamwork on the field and instead teaches marines to return to base individually whenever they get hurt. This splits up squads and reduces the team's overall coordination.
2. It effectively leashes marines to their base/phase gate, creating a very conservative play style that makes it difficult for them to venture far enough out into the map to control alien expansion.
My proposed solution was to remove the Armory's armor healing entirely, and instead provide permanent welders to all marines as an upgrade(like hand grenades in NS1). This intuitively encourages proper play by teaching marines that going back to base can't help them, but sticking with teammates can.
It's not really too late, since it's just a matter of increasing how quickly tres is gained for Marines. Marines need their team to make themselves vulnerable for extended periods of time and the Commander can't do anything without Marines, so it would make sense to not force them to spread out in order to remain competitive; while the Khammander is self-sufficient and the Alien team can do whatever they want, pretty much. So they can always be on the offensive; with the Khamm occasionally jumping out of the seat to join in an attack while the Comm can't do that.
It wasnt a problem in beta, we just need to have a way of match making to appropriate skill levels. In beta pretty much everyone knew how to play and what to do, now most dont.
As for the points
1) Yes, this is obvious. Aliens simply do not scale with numbers as well as marines.
2) Organisation? Not really, the start of the game all you need is 1 guy to build the armoury+obs and all others to run to your 2 close RTs. During that you have more than enough time to tell your team whats up
3) Your point? Wasnt a problem in beta, marines need to learn that with an axe you can run upto an RT and kill it very easily. Often before people can even respond. Let alone you do that in a small group (shock horror).
Effectively it boils down to poor player skill currently. Thats in turn a result of 2 things
1) There is no tutorial, but there wasnt in beta either
2) The density of properly good players to bad is so very low so that you arent pushed into learning by proxy any more, even worse than that there are people who 'think' they know whats up and talk alot but actually arent very good. The sort of people who build an arc factory at minuet 1 for sentries.
<!--quoteo(post=2050889:date=Dec 24 2012, 11:38 PM:name=Kopikat)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kopikat @ Dec 24 2012, 11:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2050889"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've said this from day 1. Gameplay should be swapped, with Marines needing to turtle in order to build enough upgrades while Aliens are constantly on the attack instead of Marines needing to force the Aliens on the defense 100% of the time in order to have a chance to win.
It's not really too late, since it's just a matter of increasing how quickly tres is gained for Marines. Marines need their team to make themselves vulnerable for extended periods of time and the Commander can't do anything without Marines, so it would make sense to not force them to spread out in order to remain competitive; while the Khammander is self-sufficient and the Alien team can do whatever they want, pretty much. So they can always be on the offensive; with the Khamm occasionally jumping out of the seat to join in an attack while the Comm can't do that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dumb idea, marines can already turtle forever.
Khamm cant make an alien invincible, with medpack spam and nanoshield a com can.
Khamm cant destroy entire bases through walls
etc etc. Saying khamm can do X is a meaningless point in an assymetric game. The khamm being able to jump out is a key piece of the balancing of the game at high levels, watch a competitive match and count the amount of time someone is actually sat in the khamm chair, it rarely happens. You jump in to build, jump out an do stuff whilst its happening.
Khamm cant make an alien invincible, with medpack spam and nanoshield a com can.
Khamm cant destroy entire bases through walls
etc etc. Saying khamm can do X is a meaningless point in an assymetric game. The khamm being able to jump out is a key piece of the balancing of the game at high levels, watch a competitive match and count the amount of time someone is actually sat in the khamm chair, it rarely happens. You jump in to build, jump out an do stuff whilst its happening.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NS2 stats shows that competitive games favor Aliens even more than pub games, so yeah. It's a problem.
<!--quoteo(post=2050891:date=Dec 24 2012, 04:03 PM:name=Zek)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zek @ Dec 24 2012, 04:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2050891"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Marines having to leave their comfort zone and go on the offensive is the whole point of the game. Giving them the ability to win through defense would be awful, just like the endgame already is when they've decided to hole up in base.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not at all intuitive. The game mechanics don't relate well to it (Marines aren't able to expand very heavily otherwise their connecting outposts will be destroyed by the Kharaa, putting up their buildings leaves the Marines vulnerable and takes some time, Marines need to physically be present to defend most of their equipment because sentries are terrible and Mines are disposable/worthless vs higher lifeforms, etc). Aliens get the good static defenses while being offense-oriented. Marines get moderately good to crappy static defenses while being defense oriented, but are also forced to constantly be on the offensive in order to have a chance at winning. It's a problem.
I'm sorry, but I got to ask, what is this "good static defense" that you speak of? Clogs? Drifters? Whips? <i>Hydras</i>????
Other than that, I somewhat agree with what Zek mentioned regarding removal of the armor healing property from armories. The bigger issue we are seeing, though, is <i>why</i> people don't weld one another right now. I think part of it has to do with the way scoring system works. As it is right now, there really isn't any incentive (besides winning, obviously) for a new player to weld his buddy or for a gorge to heal higher lifeforms. The scoring system is dumb and not really a good indicator for your team contribution a lot of times, but it's the only thing you got to go by if you are new. If you give a +1 score for everytime a marine tops off a felow marine's armor or everytime a gorge heals a teammate, I think it would encourage this behavior you speak of without the need to permanently give every marine a welder.
<!--quoteo(post=2050866:date=Dec 24 2012, 07:26 PM:name=Tark)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tark @ Dec 24 2012, 07:26 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2050866"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1) Skulks seem relatively more powerful the less players there are]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->That might be true to a limited extent, but to be fair the game was primarily balanced for 8v8. However, putting that aside, skulks are more powerful in principle simply because of their speed. When you consider that territorial control comprises a large chunk of gameplay, that speed becomes a significant factor that the marines can't match on foot.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2) Alien play at lower skill levels works out better in a "chaotic" non commanded fashion. Ie. alien comm mostly just needs to upgrade something to get things rolling, and conversely marine play requires a certain bit of organization to work out<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is interesting since in NS1 it was the opposite. Aliens needed more coordination because there was no commander, and people needed to coordinate who would go gorge and do what etc. Now that they have a commander it has actually given the aliens back the 'collective mentality' that the developers designed them to have. From the beginning the Kharaa were supposed to be only a loose-knit group. Working for a common-cause, but not necessarily doing so with too much coordination. I would agree this 'hive mentality' actually does make it easier on new players, since unless they go commander they aren't really going to be criticized for their gameplay. (yet most new players don't know that)
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->3) In relation to marine play in point 2, marines also need to be the agressors in a game in order to stand a chance to win.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is where I disagree in the sense that it's really not supposed to be that way. The Kharaa are designed around the need to capture more map area, since their abilities are tied to three different hives. (while marines only need two) This is also evident in the increased speed of the aliens. They are supposed to have more map control. Heck, in NS1 marines never needed to have a second command chair at all.
However, I agree with you from the perspective that marines do have to go above and beyond in order to survive in the <b>current </b>state of the game. Right now it's the alien's game to lose. So the marines really do need to play for a 'come from behind victory' from the very beginning with significant aggressiveness and high risk.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So we get to my point. ... You spawn on an alien infested space station, hear creepy sounds and don't really know what you're up against. Even after 20 or 100 pub games you might still jump at some of the sounds and your aim is shaky -> your confidence is not very high. This anxiousness leads to marine players being more cautious<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->It's interesting since I was saying something similar in the second development thread.
<i><b>"How you design the game to be played, and how the game is played, are often two very different animals."</b></i>
While the game may not have been designed to have marines play so defensively, that's what's happening - partially by virtue of how quickly they get eaten when they leave base.
Part of the problem, in my opinion, comes from the lack of any meaningful 'interactive training' simulator. You get people who walk onto a marine team and think "just another FPS" - when it is anything but. So you end up with commanders pulling their hair out trying to get marines to do what is needed. The problem is that we really can't do anything about this. No training simulator is planned, and by the time it would be finished the players that really need it will have learned on their own or moved on.
One thing I was pondering was the long forgotten 'guide program'. We've seen in TF2 how they implemented a 'coaching' system, I think something like that could really fill in the gap. If experienced players could be 'in the ear' of a player while he plays and gives him tips and tactics, this could quickly speed up the speed at which new players are learning the game.
NS1 marines felt more defensive and NS1 aliens felt more offensive
I think the reason why these roles were reversed was because
A) Maps in NS2 are smaller
B) Marines have sprint and are much faster than in NS1
C) Sentry guns are vastly less important
D) Marines have to secure tech points
E) Aliens have cyst chains that are vulnerable
F) Aliens have this egg spawning system thats vulnerable to egg lock
G) Aliens have 1 less player than in NS1 (the commander)
The khammander basically needs
15 res Shift Hive upgrade
10 res Spur
15 res Celerity upgrade
to get his team a mobility advantage that they may not even really need. Shifts for forwarded bases are a different approach but aren't as costly either, depending on how many eggs you need.
The marine commander on the other hand needs
10 res Armory
15 res Observatory
15 res Phase Technology upgrade
15 res Phase Gate in base
15 res Phase Gate in forward location
to get mobility for his troops that is limited to two locations at that time.
Sure, the marines get other advantages from Obs and Armory too, but just for the mobility's sake are those investments already required. Aliens can easily establish map control and mobility with their starting budget of 40(?) res; marines rely on holding their first RTs long enough to pay for themselves and to afford those expenses that they need to secure anything that is about the walk to the next tech point away from their base.
Until these things start rolling, marines are pretty vulnerable early game while the aliens can expand and harass as their like. And because it takes a while to get this mobility, marines may subconsciously already get used to playing defensive around the range of their base and defend their primary RTs instead of pushing out further.
Maybe lowering the cost for the Phase Tech upgrade would make a good start in helping marines out of this situation?
Marines used to be defense oriented, with effective turrets and phasegates that didnt have any knockback requiring a man in the room (hence the nickname "Meatgrinders") etc..
This slowly changed in the later patches, almost going unnoticed, and i actually liked where it was heading: to homogeneity
I love NS2 for it's asymmetrical qualities but if playing a certain team meant your strategies were limited to a certain set for fear of going outside of your team's "role" .. well <i>thats unnecessarily limiting and predictable?</i> i.e. usually not very engaging past a few rounds.
The only thing that should be asymmetrical in NS2, imo, is playstyles, i.e. the difference between a GL marine and a lerk. Beyond that, everything else should be symmetrical and as homogenous as possible for a) perceived equality b) ease in balancing
Some things CAN'T be asymmetrical like the time it takes for either team to reach certain resource towers, since aliens are faster they'd gather and protect resources quicker and they'd have the advantage in the name of asymmetry, so timings are taken into account and thus the resource towers are moved to accommodate the playstyle asymmetry. Other things can get by but have subtle side effects (no alien commander in NS1)
Note: in a game, the further you stray from a homogeneous <i>anything </i>the harder it is to balance, if at all sometimes. The large public call for requiring marines to have multiple command chairs as a tech requirement to ease that asymmetric gap between tier 3 tech on aliens is a great example of where asymmetry works best when implemented in style or gameplay but not in such fundamental designs such as resource models or tech paths.
So, yes marines have come closer to the offensive side of things, but this is far superior to a predictable role, and again closes that asymmetrical gap slightly for sake of
a) number of available strategies and choices
b) symptomatic turtling
c) ease of balance in all things such as map design and dmg numbers
Both teams should be easily able to play offensively or defensively with equal success.
The asymmetry should come in the gameplay and style - not strategy or resource models.
1) Skulks seem relatively more powerful the less players there are
2) Alien play at lower skill levels works out better in a "chaotic" non commanded fashion. Ie. alien comm mostly just needs to upgrade something to get things rolling, and conversely marine play requires a certain bit of organization to work out
3) In relation to marine play in point 2, marines also need to be the agressors in a game in order to stand a chance to win. Otherwise put, unless marines deal economic damage to the alien side they generally lose. Moreso competitively, but also on pub games<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To expand upon what I stated in my earlier post. This is the heart of your argument. Ok, there are 2 separate issues here.
The first claim I have a problem with: "and the alien dominance seems to boil down to a few factors... 1) 2) 3)"
No, it doesn't. These factors have very little to do with the alien dominence in the game. The reason why Aliens are dominant in NS2 currently are very easy to discern.
1) X percentage of games that marines are at an advantage, they just suddenly lose to a powernode rush. Aliens don't have that type of dice roll loss condition. To beat aliens marines must outplay them for the lifespan of the games. To beat marines, aliens simply need to be wherever the IPs are for 1 minute while marines are not there. The game is more balanced than the statistics indicate if we discount all the power node rushes as valid games.
2) Onos are "overpowered". Purely looking at statistics, there's a CLEAR trend towards games being won by aliens at the time range at which p-res onos first arrive on the map. The thing responsible for the majority of alien wins is the Onos, and there doesn't seem to be a strategical solution to this problem aside from "win the game before then" (which can either mean actually kill all the hives before then, or just do enough damage to the alien economy that the advantage of onos can't offset the advantage the marines already secured)
Those are the factors that alien dominance "boils down to"
Ok, now, after that, lets talk about your 3 points. I do recognize that you're identifying real issues with the game, and in a lot of ways the issues you're razing our things that exacerbate one of the two primiary factors I'm pointing out. However, I really think it's doing the primary causes a disservice to blame other things for causing the causes. My causes are valid on their own, other things contribute to them, but the other things that contribute to them aren't exclusively the things you list, and balance points for tweaking my causes are also not exclusively in your 3 points.
However, if we move away from the issue of "alien dominance" I feel your three points become more interesting.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->1) Skulks seem relatively more powerful the less players there are<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is definitely true. However, the fact that this is true says absolutely nothing about how much aliens are winning, or weather this is good or bad. Aliens are also dominating in 24 player servers, and they are also dominating in competitive play (6 v 6). Heck, aliens generally dominate in 1v1 as well, because their structures are more powerful and easy to use against the marines automated options generally speaking. Furthermore, this isn't a fixable problem. This isn't fixable any more than marines getting stronger vs zerglings in higher numbers is fixable in StarCraft2. It's just a fundamental aspect of how ranged vs melee combat works. So while this is true, and while it potentially causes issues, this is a balance point that has to be worked around, it's not a balance point that can be changed itself directly without erasing the asymmetry of the game.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->2) Alien play at lower skill levels works out better in a "chaotic" non commanded fashion. Ie. alien comm mostly just needs to upgrade something to get things rolling, and conversely marine play requires a certain bit of organization to work out<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->This feels true to me, but we know this isn't the source of alien dominance because if this is the case aliens would not be so dominant in competitive play. However, they are equally dominant in competitive play, therefore we know the problem doesn't just come down to alien comm being so much easier to play than marine comm is. If that were the case than skilled marine comms would close the gap.
Now, that being said, I don't want to say this is not a real issue. The khamm tres model is a MESS they are absolutely STARVED for res in the early game, and suddenly you hit critical mass and it's almost impossible to use all the res you have without tons of spending that would have previously been considered wasteful. You have to start either dropping whips or eggs. The alien comm needs more late game things that draw from his res pool, and his early game things need to be more affordable. The build orders should be more challanging and divergent for the khamm. Not because aliens would be less dominating then, it wouldn't necessarily change much at all in terms of dominance. But the game would be a lot more rewarding to play as khamm then.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->3) In relation to marine play in point 2, marines also need to be the agressors in a game in order to stand a chance to win. Otherwise put, unless marines deal economic damage to the alien side they generally lose. Moreso competitively, but also on pub games<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Once again. This is potentially a real issue... but it's not the source of alien dominance. Once again, if this were the source of alien dominance the competitive meta gaming would have "solved" this problem already. Without the issue of Onos overpowerment, this issue actually goes away entirely. The reason marines have to be so aggressive early game, is so that the late game doesn't happen, and you don't have to hit the onos brick wall. This mechanic doesn't come from the khamm being too easy to play, it VERY strictly comes from the timer the marine team is put on to not go into the late game. This isn't a problem in and of itself, and this ALSO isn't something you can "tweak". It's not a balance point. This issue is a symptom of a more fundimental design choice. So while this is a real thing, and while it potentially damages game play, this isn't the "cause" of alien dominance. At best it's corollary to the issue of alien dominance, in that both of those things are caused by the onos.
However, having cool stuff to do is important to people who enjoy playing a game. Having exciting and interesting experiences in a game is very fun. It is very emotionally impacting.
Satisfaction and fun aren't the same thing (I'm being imprecise I know but the distinction is useful here). One is much more about the mind than the other which is about the emotions.
I agree that balance has to be attended to but a lot of balance is based on how people play. Many people who don't find a game an interesting or engaging experience aren't going to play very well and they aren't going to be all that enthusiastic about getting good.
This is what the OP is actually touching upon. The Marine experience of being cautious and scared contradicts the Marine's perfected gameplay style of aggression and aimbot ramboing in groups. Having an emotionally enjoyable game of turtling and slow pushing on an hostile alien controlled environment does not involve the powerful aggressive Marine play required by the game right now.
***
In all honesty, I think a new way forward has to be pioneered. The current Starcraft 2-esque meme of easy human aggression through overwhelming firepower and mobility (i.e. 40k Space Marines Advance!) has some serious flaws which are becoming apparent in games which adopt them. It's predictable that in an age of American-dominated warfare that you could see this kind of thinking hit the gaming industry but its being implemented in contexts where it doesn't fit.
The issue is that for Shock and Awe to work you need to be so beyond your opponent that you couldn't sit down to a 6v6 game and expect them to have a chance. It is the doctrine of an unequal fight and produces unequal gameplay in the games that are using it.
I appreciate how 'cool' it feels to see in action but the reality is it is quite boring for the other side who gets 'Shock and Awed'. The over-development of the Zerg, Alien and other non-Human sides strengths is a natural result of it being boring to be owned by endless Bolter (Gauss/LMG/whatever) fire where everything is solved by just stutter shooting it more (the way games have so far implemented the notion). The problem is 'Shock and Awe' in these games doesn't work when the other side doesn't just die to endless bolter fire hence the little balance problem that has appeared in NS2.
***
As a side-note, the 80s movies like 'Aliens' where NS came from were a post-Vietnam war thing. It is why 'close in fighting between asymetrical sides' was the meme of the day and many games are based off it, especially the humans vs aliens type contests. The superior vs the inferior equalised out by the environment (are you noticing the basic design principle of NS here?) was fun and worked in movies and games for the most part. The more popular breakout titles like Rambo and Aliens mixed the superior and inferior elements giving the concept more depth (Marines have guns but are physically weaker for instance, Marines are superior individually but inferior in another way due to low numbers).
Vietnam was the last big challenge for America and has dominated its literary notions of 'what is cool' in warfare for quite some time. What is going on in SC2, NS2 and many games is that the Vietnam meme is being updated for a generation that doesn't know anything but 'America owns everyone in the world effortlessly.' It's why 'what is cool to people' isn't often making for fun games anymore.
A grab bag of ideas (take or leave as many as desired):
<b>A. Deaths do not appear on scoreboard until end of round.</b> Also, the scoreboard from the previous round persists in the Ready Room because, well...it obviously should. (And for bonus points track basic stats client-side to be displayed during the load screen TF2-style. For extra bonus points, sync these stats to the cloud.)
<b>B. Improve score as a stat.</b> The simple way would be for damage to yield score. One step better is there's a score multiplier on each object so you get zero damage score for killing cysts but a 10x score-damage multiplier for shooting the hive. Two steps better would be that that you only earn this score upon the death/destruction of the thing being damaged.
<b>C. Amp up important scoring events.</b> When you kill an Extractor it shouldn't be a simple "+15" text, but feel rewarding like an achievement unlock (without crossing the line where it's distracting.) This makes it clearer to players -- especially new ones -- that they've done something of value, and reinforces the behavior. A few Planetside 2 players have mentioned enjoying the multi-tiered blips of +x XP notifications which tally up your reward after doing something.
<b>D. Increase player knowledge of node count.</b> Every player's personal resource tick should show a count of "Harvesters: 3" which appears directly above the resource income, which ties the concept together for new players.
<b>E. Provide better guidance for attacking.</b> This is a more open suggestion challenging the devs to come up with ease-of-use tools for the commander to manage players. Perhaps there's an "Even Dispersal" button which automatically figures out my main base and assigns each player an auto-waypoint to the next point along that side of the map that needs pressure/attacking. There are a lot of clever ideas here which could help shape player expectations and break the idea that marines should sit around in their bases which invariably leads to death.
But you can't disregard that the "defensive gameplay" is exactly what many new and casual players are looking for as Marines. They want to be the Starship Troopers, fighting off waves of ugly stuff, they want to be Hudson and yell "GAME OVER MAN GAME OVER" when their team gets overrun. This even stays true back to NS1 which suffered from nearly the same issues in public play but offered alternatives for players that catered exactly to that kind of gameplay: siege maps
Siege maps are the distilled proof of Marines just wanting to play an "last stand" type of game with all the goodies unlocked and in unlimited supply. When you got annoyed with the 12. round in a row of being Marine with a retarded comm, being stuck in Marinestart for 15 minutes with no upgrades and toys, siege maps offered a good alternative.
Siege map layouts had been simple and easy to memorize, the goodies (JP, HA, Weapons) had been plenty, so players actually used them and experimented with them, taking away the conservatism these tools usually require in vanilla ns_ rounds due to their high cost. In essence siege maps had been the "learning mode" for a lot of people even before co_ came around.
It ain't helping that the game is complex at hell for new people and there is barely anything to ease them into the learning curve. When a Marine is only able to get a jetpack/exo every lucky 15. round and dies after 2 minutes of using it, he will have a very difficult time getting better with these kinds of things as the chances of actually using them are so rare.
As such the vanilla ns_ gamemode suffers from the same problem as it did in NS1, it's brutal learning curve and very different gameplay dynamics depending on team sizes. A round of 6vs6 has VERY different dynamics than an 12vs12 round has, that's the other issue that's making a singular solution for all this very unlikely. Let's also not forget: You can't change the players, you can only change the game and how it approaches them. So blaming the players for "playing the game wrong" (when they are just playing in a way that's fun to them) is not helping anybody at all.
There is no state of perfect balance that's gonna be equally good for comp. 6v6 rounds and massive public 12v12 rounds. Both of them need to be looked at on their own, because both of them work in their own ways.
Oh... and fix performance and hitreg, that ought a help Marines in pubs a little bit, especially on big servers.
The issue is that for Shock and Awe to work you need to be so beyond your opponent that you couldn't sit down to a 6v6 game and expect them to have a chance. It is the doctrine of an unequal fight and produces unequal gameplay in the games that are using it.
I appreciate how 'cool' it feels to see in action but the reality is it is quite boring for the other side who gets 'Shock and Awed'. The over-development of the Zerg, Alien and other non-Human sides strengths is a natural result of it being boring to be owned by endless Bolter (Gauss/LMG/whatever) fire where everything is solved by just stutter shooting it more (the way games have so far implemented the notion). The problem is 'Shock and Awe' in these games doesn't work when the other side doesn't just die to endless bolter fire hence the little balance problem that has appeared in NS2.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you're giving Flayra a bit too much credit here. As if somehow his subconscious desire to make marines bad asses magically resulted in the requirement for them to be aggressive early in order to win the game. In reality it's actually the result of subsystems put into the game because they were "cool" and "interesting" interacting in a destructive and probably unintended way that results in that type of gameplay being demanded.
Marines can't allow onos to hit the late game with enough res to field a bunch of onos quickly and efficiently. This is because the onos is designed such that he HAS to be powerful, and P-Res is designed such that normally a bunch of players hit the same peak at the same time. These two things interact to put marines on a timer. They must do enough damage before that timer elapses that either the onos push is crippled and can be rode out, or the onos push never happens because the marines won before that point.
The issue is there's really no realistic late game counter to onos that marines have the alternative of working towards, so the metagame for "beating" onos is "don't let onos get out".
The phenomena wasn't intentionally crafted, it's simply the result of other subsystems interacting. The opposite was mostly true in NS1, because marines could camp on 2 bases for ages and suddenly win instantly with JP/HMG pushes.
IMO there's a relatively easy fix, nerf the alien economy model. The conservative play inherent to marine nature should be A LOT less destructive to a marine team chance's of winning. What we are seeing currently is pretty much the first 5 - 10 min of the game being all-decing over whether or not the marine team will continue standing a chance, if they do not do well in those first minutes they are essentially doomed as even if they slowly tech up, they will be at a hopeless disadvantage.
NS 1 is a good example of a better economy model, marines didn't have to mindlessly rush in somewhere to harm the alien economy because they felt they would otherwise not have a chance of winning as the mid game approached. Instead, they could slowly and deliberately expand themselves, with the aliens being the need-to-be-aggressive side.
To avoid drawn out games where both teams basically just sit around and tech up and stalemate, it is necessary to give at least one side a powerful incentive to be aggressive. Since melee vs. ranged inherently gives the ranged side a huge defensive advantage, it is preferable that the marines are incentivized to be aggressive. (melee vs. ranged also have other implications which necessitate forcing marines to be aggressive, but too many words for this iphone keyboard...)
That is why the current "marines have to be aggressive"-gameplay is actually just the way it should be.
Aliens dont have to build, their buildings build them selves.
marines have to build and go back and protect their stuff
on top of this aliens seem to be fast enough to zip in and out to take out res points while being able to make it back to theirs. so i find myself having to lose 1-2 people to protect res points on marines(if they die to 2 or more skulks, good bye 1-2 res points). This slows down marine progression hard, and if marines go on the offensive, as aliens i go and hunt down res points.
Really think they need to bring back electrified respoints, intention to prevent skulks only.
that or buildings on marines build themselves slowly :)...
Early on someone mentioned marine players being overly cautious, I was and still am somewhat. The reason for that I think has more to do with how different the game is from anything I've played before. I had watched a number of videos and read a review or two but even still I had absolutely no idea how the game worked or what I should be doing and it was very intimidating. What I did and still do is simply follow someone else because I still don't know what's going on and I still feel I have absolutely no impact on the game whatsoever no matter what I do, my team either wins or loses and I felt all I did was die or tag along. I've felt more useful in 64p games.
What I think would be helpful is some kind of squad system. The commander can set up squads and name them and players can join them, maybe the commander can set limits on the number per squad. This would help give new/cautious players purpose.
The other issue someone mentioned was how quickly a match is decided. I've probably played 10 matches now and in every one it was either a complete pushover or a lost cause. Not even the slight beginning of hope for one of the teams. It was more than just the team as well; the teams were always incredibly lopsided and stacked. In one of the games I played the top 5 players looked like this (kills/deaths) (there were no greens either just for the record):
Marine - Alien
33/10___10/22
30/6____14/25
40/6____5/13
32/10___1/6
20/12___1/4
Kharaa didn't even have a hope of doing anything but dying that round. Every game I played looked like that. I'm sorry, but when I see that kind of thing I just quit. There is no point; it's not fun. I think others seem to be doing the same thing, if you look at the kills/deaths from that match it's clear there should be a lot more deaths for aliens. I've seen people ditch a match before when things don't look so good, but NS2 seems to be quite an extreme case.
6v6 works fine, it just greatly increases the importance of the engagements compared to a 10v10, which compliments competetive play.
To avoid drawn out games where both teams basically just sit around and tech up and stalemate, it is necessary to give at least one side a powerful incentive to be aggressive. Since melee vs. ranged inherently gives the ranged side a huge defensive advantage, it is preferable that the marines are incentivized to be aggressive. (melee vs. ranged also have other implications which necessitate forcing marines to be aggressive, but too many words for this iphone keyboard...)
That is why the current "marines have to be aggressive"-gameplay is actually just the way it should be.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
nice