Correct me if I'm wrong, but competitive play takes place with team switching right? That's where each team plays both marines and aliens an equal amount so that their overall winrate would be 50/50 if the teams were evenly matched, even if almost every single win happened with aliens.
Anyway my point here is that if you were to play competitively where the marine team was larger than the aliens that would mean someone would have to sit out on the team playing aliens each round. It would also lead to bringing players who are only good at marines rather than both, and then sitting them for the alien round. It really just doesn't seem like a good idea.
Putting the team sizes to 9 v 7 would be a disaster and result in the win rate drastically skewing in the other direction. Given the tendency of pub players to stay in comm all game, you would effectively be changing the combat sizes to 8 v 6. The player being lost as a result of needing a commander has a dramatically disproportionate impact on the team with less players.
But that's the idea. We *want* to skew the win rate, and it needs to negate a full 20% spread.
Keep in mind my numbers are arbitrary. I mentioned 9 vs 7 as an example. It could be 9 vs 8 instead, with marines getting an extra player. Or on bigger 24 player servers it can flip the other way and give aliens an extra player.
Just being blunt here, but do you how could you possibly think that 6 skulks match up anywhere near favorable against 8 marines?
Easy. First off, speed. Never underestimate the impact alien speed has in this game. It's a HUGE factor. Secondly, aliens are by nature deadlier on an individual basis.
How many times have you been a skulk and assaulted a group of two or three marines and killed them all? (or killed two and seriously wounded a third) Marine pairs are constantly killed by solo skulks. Yet how often do you see solo marines successfully take on more than one skulk? Heck, in a 2 vs 2 battle the skulks usually come out ahead.
The most effective thing you can convince a pub marine commander to do is delay phase gates and rush arms lab/armor upgrades. Armor 3 marines are one of the most obnoxious things in the game for aliens to deal with, and you can get it by 6:30 on 3-4 RTs.
And to hold those RTs you need marines able to respond to attacks. That's a constant problem since skulks move fast and can take out extractors with ease.
I never said this was a magic fix for all the game's woes. What I did say is that in an asymmetric game it shouldn't be an issue for teams to be uneven. To what extent is up for debate, but I guarantee that right now if you took any game and gave marines ONE extra player, it would play more balanced than it does now. Whether two players would bring it closer to the center remains to be seen.
However, the concept (of imbalanced teams) is sound. It's a fundamental means to adjust game balance across the entire spectrum in an incremental fashion.
Anyway my point here is that if you were to play competitively where the marine team was larger than the aliens that would mean someone would have to sit out on the team playing aliens each round.
I covered this already. I've said that this wouldn't really help the competitive gamers, nor is it meant to be an overall 'solution'. It's just one possible way to 'tweak' balance on public servers.
There is nothing wrong with this in theory (e.g. The Faded mod is good evidence that asymmetrical teams can work in a NS2 environment). However, much of the current game has been designed with equal number of players on each side.
I really don't think this is the case. In NS 1 teams were designed to have equal numbers of players but aliens had a whole different economic system to account for the fact that one higher alien lifeform will need multiple marines to take out. In NS 2 they took away that economic difference, giving all the aliens the ability to go higher lifeforms at the same time without making ANY significant changes to the way these lifeforms function.
All of the lifeforms except Skulk have had very significant changes to the way they function. Especially Fades which are far less powerful than they used to be.
Putting the team sizes to 9 v 7 would be a disaster and result in the win rate drastically skewing in the other direction. Given the tendency of pub players to stay in comm all game, you would effectively be changing the combat sizes to 8 v 6. The player being lost as a result of needing a commander has a dramatically disproportionate impact on the team with less players.
But that's the idea. We *want* to skew the win rate, and it needs to negate a full 20% spread.
Keep in mind my numbers are arbitrary. I mentioned 9 vs 7 as an example. It could be 9 vs 8 instead, with marines getting an extra player. Or on bigger 24 player servers it can flip the other way and give aliens an extra player.
Just being blunt here, but do you how could you possibly think that 6 skulks match up anywhere near favorable against 8 marines?
Easy. First off, speed. Never underestimate the impact alien speed has in this game. It's a HUGE factor. Secondly, aliens are by nature deadlier on an individual basis.
How many times have you been a skulk and assaulted a group of two or three marines and killed them all? (or killed two and seriously wounded a third) Marine pairs are constantly killed by solo skulks. Yet how often do you see solo marines successfully take on more than one skulk? Heck, in a 2 vs 2 battle the skulks usually come out ahead.
The most effective thing you can convince a pub marine commander to do is delay phase gates and rush arms lab/armor upgrades. Armor 3 marines are one of the most obnoxious things in the game for aliens to deal with, and you can get it by 6:30 on 3-4 RTs.
And to hold those RTs you need marines able to respond to attacks. That's a constant problem since skulks move fast and can take out extractors with ease.
I never said this was a magic fix for all the game's woes. What I did say is that in an asymmetric game it shouldn't be an issue for teams to be uneven. To what extent is up for debate, but I guarantee that right now if you took any game and gave marines ONE extra player, it would play more balanced than it does now. Whether two players would bring it closer to the center remains to be seen.
However, the concept (of imbalanced teams) is sound. It's a fundamental means to adjust game balance across the entire spectrum in an incremental fashion.
It wouldn't just negate the 20% spread right now. It'd set the spread to 60-70% marine over 30% alien. It would be that bad.
And no, even on ultimate derpfest teams, it's not that common for a skulk to win 1v2s (or 1v3s). Terrible marines lose in equal numbers, but the flipside is that they usually win convincingly if they have any sort of substantial number advantage. Trying to setup pubs to be an effective 8 v 6 for combat purposes would be awful and cause far, far more harm than good. 6 skulks against 8 marines is not something aliens can win with any sort of regularity.
It wouldn't just negate the 20% spread right now. It'd set the spread to 60-70% marine over 30% alien. It would be that bad.
Sorry, but I'll respectfully have to disagree with you here. I find it exceptionally hard to believe that ONE marine player would be able to swing game balance by 15% on a 16 player server.
Like I said, we have this imbalance NOW and I've played on marine teams that had one extra player and we STILL lost. That's happened many times. One player doesn't change squat for marines. Especially when skulks move like the wind to take out extractors and a single Onos can kill 4 marines without breaking a sweat.
Let's look at your numbers. You say an imbalance of two players would change marine wins from 40% to 70%, or a variable of 15% per player. As such, you are effectively suggesting that an imbalance of ONE marine player would give marines a 55% win rate. I'm sorry but that is just not credible. If it was, we could make that change NOW and have a game that had a 10% less imbalance spread. (55/45 is better than 60/40, regardless of which way it swings.)
And no, even on ultimate derpfest teams, it's not that common for a skulk to win 1v2s (or 1v3s). Terrible marines lose in equal numbers, but the flipside is that they usually win convincingly if they have any sort of substantial number advantage.
Perhaps you're playing on teams with lacklustre aliens, but on the teams I have played on if a skulk can't take on two marines (especially early game when they are two bite kills) then there is something seriously wrong. With a 75 damage bite, if a skulk gets a jump on a pair of marines they should be dead. Both of them.
Aliens HAVE to outkill marines by nature of the spawn system. Marines can add an IP, aliens can not. If they were dying as often as marines (IE a 1-to-1 kill-to-death ratio or less) then they're gonna be sitting in the spawn queue a lot and the aliens will lose.
Instead of partitioning player counts to balance the system, they should just balance the system to not require partitioning of players.
If only it was that easy.
Even with the next balance patch (whenever that is) there is no guarantee that balance will improve. If you give a team an extra player you artificially give them an advantage, so you are guaranteed to lower the game imbalance. Like I said, this isn't a solution, it's a 'fix' that can help to give people a more balanced game until a balance patch is applied that fixes the game.
Aliens HAVE to outkill marines by nature of the spawn system. Marines can add an IP, aliens can not. If they were dying as often as marines (IE a 1-to-1 kill-to-death ratio or less) then they're gonna be sitting in the spawn queue a lot and the aliens will lose.
No, aliens merely have to die at a rate less than the egg respawn rate.
I'm of the firm opinion the problem lies more with power node vulnerability coupled with things such as lack of alert on being attacked and concentrated gorge/onos attack. Yes, marines can focus fire on a hive as well, but you just don't see that carried out as effectively, in terms of what equates to one entire team needing to act in concert versus a few opportunistic members of one team completely swaying a match. That question must be answered, and I believe if it is, you'll see a big improvement. Not the huge one some people clamor for, but the one that is needed.
I'm not saying altering team sizes is a horrible idea, but it's certainly not one I'd prefer. It doesn't feel natural, no pun intended, and almost as a desperate attempt (no offense intended either) to fix a problem.
This is something that I have been pondering for the last little while as a stopgap measure until balance changes are made. (and if changes don't improve balance, this could also be considered until balance is reached.)
A basic factor in team balance that hasn't really been considered has been player count. While we have a team balance function to keep the teams even, should we be doing that?
In other words, if we have marines only winning 40% of the time, why not make 'balanced teams' on a 16 player server 9 marines and 7 aliens? If those player counts made it so marines won 48% of the time, why not try it as an interim measure? Since this is an asymmetrical game, player counts don't necessarily have to be exactly the same so long as both sides have an equal chance to win.
Again, this is just a random thought, so don't flip out over it folks. I just thought that it would be painfully easy to implement and adjust player counts while waiting for things to get more balanced.
Overall win rates I would think would be secondary to experience and skill of players actually in the active game.
The risk I see if the difference 1 player makes is too big if your on a 6v6 game (they make up 20% in the field) but will work better as the game scales up.
The issue is how to you quantify how skilled or influential a player is?
High K:D ratio means nothing if they cant follow orders or build things or have "game smarts".
Experienced comms must count for more but less so on aliens (if alien team is more expereinced)....
Would be good to see done as would be the key to successful matchmaking and allowing for more interesting combinations.
Though would mean taking away some RR aspects or have it restrict what players can join a side based on the players already on each team (to spread experience/skill)...but the idea in itself has a good base.
When marines miss a shot with their lmg, the bullet should ricochet off the wall for another attempt at hitting something
This will be the assymetrical marine version of glancing bites
This way we have solved the no 'marine version of glancing bite' issue' the 'aliens win rate' issue, as well as 'marines not knowing how to aim and so spray and pray' issue all in one go.
When marines miss a shot with their lmg, the bullet should ricochet off the wall for another attempt at hitting something
This will be the assymetrical marine version of glancing bites
This way we have solved the no 'marine version of glancing bite' issue' the 'aliens win rate' issue, as well as 'marines not knowing how to aim and so spray and pray' issue all in one go.
Marine version of glancing bite is not hitting with every bullet fired.
I'm of the firm opinion the problem lies more with power node vulnerability coupled with things such as lack of alert on being attacked and concentrated gorge/onos attack. Yes, marines can focus fire on a hive as well, but you just don't see that carried out as effectively, in terms of what equates to one entire team needing to act in concert versus a few opportunistic members of one team completely swaying a match. That question must be answered, and I believe if it is, you'll see a big improvement. Not the huge one some people clamor for, but the one that is needed.
I'm not saying altering team sizes is a horrible idea, but it's certainly not one I'd prefer. It doesn't feel natural, no pun intended, and almost as a desperate attempt (no offense intended either) to fix a problem.
I have to agree here.
Simple suggestion: Double the power node HP and see what happens.
Good players will attack obs/pg anyway so it should not have much impactin that regard. But I bet it would help standard pub ply ALOT
Comments
Anyway my point here is that if you were to play competitively where the marine team was larger than the aliens that would mean someone would have to sit out on the team playing aliens each round. It would also lead to bringing players who are only good at marines rather than both, and then sitting them for the alien round. It really just doesn't seem like a good idea.
Keep in mind my numbers are arbitrary. I mentioned 9 vs 7 as an example. It could be 9 vs 8 instead, with marines getting an extra player. Or on bigger 24 player servers it can flip the other way and give aliens an extra player.
Easy. First off, speed. Never underestimate the impact alien speed has in this game. It's a HUGE factor. Secondly, aliens are by nature deadlier on an individual basis.
How many times have you been a skulk and assaulted a group of two or three marines and killed them all? (or killed two and seriously wounded a third) Marine pairs are constantly killed by solo skulks. Yet how often do you see solo marines successfully take on more than one skulk? Heck, in a 2 vs 2 battle the skulks usually come out ahead.
And to hold those RTs you need marines able to respond to attacks. That's a constant problem since skulks move fast and can take out extractors with ease.
I never said this was a magic fix for all the game's woes. What I did say is that in an asymmetric game it shouldn't be an issue for teams to be uneven. To what extent is up for debate, but I guarantee that right now if you took any game and gave marines ONE extra player, it would play more balanced than it does now. Whether two players would bring it closer to the center remains to be seen.
However, the concept (of imbalanced teams) is sound. It's a fundamental means to adjust game balance across the entire spectrum in an incremental fashion.
All of the lifeforms except Skulk have had very significant changes to the way they function. Especially Fades which are far less powerful than they used to be.
It wouldn't just negate the 20% spread right now. It'd set the spread to 60-70% marine over 30% alien. It would be that bad.
And no, even on ultimate derpfest teams, it's not that common for a skulk to win 1v2s (or 1v3s). Terrible marines lose in equal numbers, but the flipside is that they usually win convincingly if they have any sort of substantial number advantage. Trying to setup pubs to be an effective 8 v 6 for combat purposes would be awful and cause far, far more harm than good. 6 skulks against 8 marines is not something aliens can win with any sort of regularity.
Like I said, we have this imbalance NOW and I've played on marine teams that had one extra player and we STILL lost. That's happened many times. One player doesn't change squat for marines. Especially when skulks move like the wind to take out extractors and a single Onos can kill 4 marines without breaking a sweat.
Let's look at your numbers. You say an imbalance of two players would change marine wins from 40% to 70%, or a variable of 15% per player. As such, you are effectively suggesting that an imbalance of ONE marine player would give marines a 55% win rate. I'm sorry but that is just not credible. If it was, we could make that change NOW and have a game that had a 10% less imbalance spread. (55/45 is better than 60/40, regardless of which way it swings.)
Perhaps you're playing on teams with lacklustre aliens, but on the teams I have played on if a skulk can't take on two marines (especially early game when they are two bite kills) then there is something seriously wrong. With a 75 damage bite, if a skulk gets a jump on a pair of marines they should be dead. Both of them.
Aliens HAVE to outkill marines by nature of the spawn system. Marines can add an IP, aliens can not. If they were dying as often as marines (IE a 1-to-1 kill-to-death ratio or less) then they're gonna be sitting in the spawn queue a lot and the aliens will lose.
Even with the next balance patch (whenever that is) there is no guarantee that balance will improve. If you give a team an extra player you artificially give them an advantage, so you are guaranteed to lower the game imbalance. Like I said, this isn't a solution, it's a 'fix' that can help to give people a more balanced game until a balance patch is applied that fixes the game.
No, aliens merely have to die at a rate less than the egg respawn rate.
I'm not saying altering team sizes is a horrible idea, but it's certainly not one I'd prefer. It doesn't feel natural, no pun intended, and almost as a desperate attempt (no offense intended either) to fix a problem.
Overall win rates I would think would be secondary to experience and skill of players actually in the active game.
The risk I see if the difference 1 player makes is too big if your on a 6v6 game (they make up 20% in the field) but will work better as the game scales up.
The issue is how to you quantify how skilled or influential a player is?
High K:D ratio means nothing if they cant follow orders or build things or have "game smarts".
Experienced comms must count for more but less so on aliens (if alien team is more expereinced)....
Would be good to see done as would be the key to successful matchmaking and allowing for more interesting combinations.
Though would mean taking away some RR aspects or have it restrict what players can join a side based on the players already on each team (to spread experience/skill)...but the idea in itself has a good base.
This will be the assymetrical marine version of glancing bites
This way we have solved the no 'marine version of glancing bite' issue' the 'aliens win rate' issue, as well as 'marines not knowing how to aim and so spray and pray' issue all in one go.
Marine version of glancing bite is not hitting with every bullet fired.
I have to agree here.
Simple suggestion: Double the power node HP and see what happens.
Good players will attack obs/pg anyway so it should not have much impactin that regard. But I bet it would help standard pub ply ALOT