Please lower shotgun power

12346»

Comments

  • NeokenNeoken Bruges, Belgium Join Date: 2004-03-20 Member: 27447Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Playtester
    edited May 2013
    Roobubba wrote: »
    amoral wrote: »
    I've gotten a no skill rail kill once. I spammed a corner while my team was building and got a skulk before either of us knew. bwuahhahaha. he probably would have accused me of wall hacks except for the.10 shots before and after that kill. :)

    I think that's what the insurance industry calls an "Act of God." :)

    That's what I call any narrow escape with less than 10 hp left. ^^

    http://www.morethings.com/fan/quentin_tarantino/pulp_fiction/pulp_fiction4290.jpg

    Also, it's kinda hard to properly differentiate between a panic spasm one shot kill and a genuine pro reflex one shot kill. Both tend to overlap a bit in my case. :)
  • TheriusTherius Join Date: 2009-03-06 Member: 66642Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter
    piratedave wrote: »
    Therius wrote: »

    Also, if you carefully read my posts, you can see that I've never said that skulks can effectively compete against shotguns.

    If you lose your higher lifeforms and aren't capable of replacing them, you lose the game.

    I don't see why skulks should be made into capable killing machines just because your team was not capable of keeping their actual combat lifeforms alive.

    Didnt UWE want a player vs player focus and less player vs structure focus ? And here you are trying to say the skulk isnt a combat unit and should be mainly a RT harass unit especially late game ??? Lets try market that to new players, buy NS2 and you will spend 90% of your time either heal spraying or biting structures over and over and over.

    youre living in a bubble

    I don't see anything wrong with that, regardless of what UWE has or hasn't said. I like my bubble. And everybody's invited.
  • piratedavepiratedave Join Date: 2012-03-10 Member: 148561Members
    Skulks are awesome harassers late-game, so I don't see the problem with this role. You're trying not to die = saving res for later lifeforms. Your structure DPS is higher than a Fades/Lerks = Fades and Lerks freed to do important stuff. You don't cost anything, so you can take any kind of risk to try destroy something.

    Yes, it's boring and sucks, but nobody told you to get your Lerk/Fade killed so soon! xP

    Personally, considering how EFFIN' HARD it is to get people to harass RT's instead of fragging, it's a relief to be able to argue that you're SUPPOSED to do it after a certain point.

    seems like poor game design to me

  • piratedavepiratedave Join Date: 2012-03-10 Member: 148561Members
    Therius wrote: »

    I don't see anything wrong with that, regardless of what UWE has or hasn't said. I like my bubble. And everybody's invited.

    your bubble will be a very lonely place after a while. I rather the game have high player retention, that way the community grows rather than shrinks. Perhaps you comp players like your stagnant comp scene, but wont it get boring after a while of playing the same clans over and over with predictable results ? Maybe you guys like to feel like your part of a small elite inner circle within a community ? is that the reason why you like the way things are ?

  • TheriusTherius Join Date: 2009-03-06 Member: 66642Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter
    piratedave wrote: »
    Therius wrote: »

    I don't see anything wrong with that, regardless of what UWE has or hasn't said. I like my bubble. And everybody's invited.

    your bubble will be a very lonely place after a while. I rather the game have high player retention, that way the community grows rather than shrinks. Perhaps you comp players like your stagnant comp scene, but wont it get boring after a while of playing the same clans over and over with predictable results ? Maybe you guys like to feel like your part of a small elite inner circle within a community ? is that the reason why you like the way things are ?

    If you're saying that this is the reason the game is losing players, that there is too much strategic thinking and too little combat in the game, that there are too many roles that don't involve direct combat - then I disagree with you so strongly that I'm not going to waste words that cannot do justice to my disagreement. I'd rather see this game die and play it with a stagnant group of elitists than see it cater exclusively to people who only get satisfaction if they see severed alien willies bouncing off the visor of their space helmet. This game involves too much combat as it is.
  • NeokenNeoken Bruges, Belgium Join Date: 2004-03-20 Member: 27447Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Playtester
    edited May 2013
    piratedave wrote: »
    Skulks are awesome harassers late-game, so I don't see the problem with this role. You're trying not to die = saving res for later lifeforms. Your structure DPS is higher than a Fades/Lerks = Fades and Lerks freed to do important stuff. You don't cost anything, so you can take any kind of risk to try destroy something.

    Yes, it's boring and sucks, but nobody told you to get your Lerk/Fade killed so soon! xP

    Personally, considering how EFFIN' HARD it is to get people to harass RT's instead of fragging, it's a relief to be able to argue that you're SUPPOSED to do it after a certain point.

    seems like poor game design to me

    It's basically the same game design of NS1, one that proved to be quite succesful.

    -Marine combat efficiency scales up with W/A upgrades and equipment research. When they die, they lose their equipment and spawn with the default loadout. The W/A upgrades however remain as long as the arms lab is still up.

    -Alien combat efficiency scales up with abilities, hive upgrades and most importantly higher lifeforms. When they die, they lose the lifeform and spawn as the default skulk. The abilities and hive upgrades however remain as long as the hive and upgrade structures are still up.

    Overall, marines tech up more gradually than aliens and retain more of their combat efficiency if they happen to die, but aliens need less resources to keep up economy-wise and can engage/disengage combat more easily due to their mobility. The skulk has some ways to scale up it's combat efficiency (carapace, leap), but it's not supposed to scale up into the mid-late game to be a viable combatant against teched up marines. That's what the higher lifeforms are for. It's asymmetrical like this and always has been.

    Should the shotgun be changed? Maybe, maybe not. But unless you're planning on reinventing NS game design, skulks will always be less effective in combat the further marines go up the tech ladder, so the fact that skulks are more often than not biting the dust against equally skilled but teched up marines is not a valid argument for any marine tech changes.

  • IAMKINGIAMKING Join Date: 2012-09-14 Member: 159328Members
    Neoken wrote: »
    piratedave wrote: »
    Skulks are awesome harassers late-game, so I don't see the problem with this role. You're trying not to die = saving res for later lifeforms. Your structure DPS is higher than a Fades/Lerks = Fades and Lerks freed to do important stuff. You don't cost anything, so you can take any kind of risk to try destroy something.

    Yes, it's boring and sucks, but nobody told you to get your Lerk/Fade killed so soon! xP

    Personally, considering how EFFIN' HARD it is to get people to harass RT's instead of fragging, it's a relief to be able to argue that you're SUPPOSED to do it after a certain point.

    seems like poor game design to me

    It's basically the same game design of NS1, one that proved to be quite succesful.

    -Marine combat efficiency scales up with W/A upgrades and equipment research. When they die, they lose their equipment and spawn with the default loadout. The W/A upgrades however remain as long as the arms lab is still up.

    -Alien combat efficiency scales up with abilities, hive upgrades and most importantly higher lifeforms. When they die, they lose the lifeform and spawn as the default skulk. The abilities and hive upgrades however remain as long as the hive and upgrade structures are still up.

    Overall, marines tech up more gradually than aliens and retain more of their combat efficiency if they happen to die, but aliens need less resources to keep up economy-wise and can engage/disengage combat more easily due to their mobility. The skulk has some ways to scale up it's combat efficiency (carapace, leap), but it's not supposed to scale up into the mid-late game to be a viable combatant against teched up marines. That's what the higher lifeforms are for. It's asymmetrical like this and always has been.

    Should the shotgun be changed? Maybe, maybe not. But unless you're planning on reinventing NS game design, skulks will always be less effective in combat the further marines go up the tech ladder, so the fact that your skulk is biting the dust against a tech up marine is not a valid argument for any marine tech changes.
    Let's be fair: from a game design standpoint, both ns1 and ns2 are pretty bad. And yes I would rework the game from the ground up given the opportunity.

    It's just plain depressing to be a skulk late game. Sometimes this is unavoidable; the best players in the game can and will lose higher lifeforms due to no fault of their own.
  • piratedavepiratedave Join Date: 2012-03-10 Member: 148561Members
    Therius wrote: »


    If you're saying that this is the reason the game is losing players, that there is too much strategic thinking and too little combat in the game, that there are too many roles that don't involve direct combat - then I disagree with you so strongly that I'm not going to waste words that cannot do justice to my disagreement. I'd rather see this game die and play it with a stagnant group of elitists than see it cater exclusively to people who only get satisfaction if they see severed alien willies bouncing off the visor of their space helmet. This game involves too much combat as it is.

    for someone who likes to accuse others of having poor reading comprehension, its amazing you could be so hypocritical. If "too much strategic thinking, too little combat = game losing players" is the understanding you came away with from my post, then maybe you have some issues ? Cognitive dissonance ?

    New players wont pick up the game if its not fun ... you may play to win, but new players play with fun as their motivation, at least until they become more serious about the game at which point they too will play to win. Your placing the cart before the horse expecting new players to be competitive from the get go.


    Neoken wrote: »
    It's basically the same game design of NS1, one that proved to be quite succesful.

    -Marine combat efficiency scales up with W/A upgrades and equipment research. When they die, they lose their equipment and spawn with the default loadout. The W/A upgrades however remain as long as the arms lab is still up.

    -Alien combat efficiency scales up with abilities, hive upgrades and most importantly higher lifeforms. When they die, they lose the lifeform and spawn as the default skulk. The abilities and hive upgrades however remain as long as the hive and upgrade structures are still up.

    Overall, marines tech up more gradually than aliens and retain more of their combat efficiency if they happen to die, but aliens need less resources to keep up economy-wise and can engage/disengage combat more easily due to their mobility. The skulk has some ways to scale up it's combat efficiency (carapace, leap), but it's not supposed to scale up into the mid-late game to be a viable combatant against teched up marines. That's what the higher lifeforms are for. It's asymmetrical like this and always has been.

    Should the shotgun be changed? Maybe, maybe not. But unless you're planning on reinventing NS game design, skulks will always be less effective in combat the further marines go up the tech ladder, so the fact that skulks are more often than not biting the dust against equally skilled but teched up marines is not a valid argument for any marine tech changes.

    I think its quite obvious from the BT mod that some game redesign is being attempted/looked into. Lifeform accessibility and alien scaling needs to be done right, at least to improve the new player experience.

    As far as the shotgun is concerned, nobody likes being 1 shotted. In counterstrike teams were symmetrical so it was frustrating but fair, and the rail exo has its down sides and the shot needs to be charged up. I have a feeling the shotgun will have to change anyway if they are going to change the fade based on what ive seen from the BT mod.

  • kespeckespec Join Date: 2012-11-18 Member: 172279Members
    edited May 2013
    Roobubba wrote: »
    kespec wrote: »
    Roobubba wrote: »
    kespec wrote: »

    that will prevent no-skill random oneshots, that is the most disgusting one.

    There's no such thing as a no skill one shot kill. Even herpaderps can sometimes land a shot they were trying to. Whether they usually get accurate shots or not, doesn't mean that the shot they killed you with wasn't skilful. It did hit, after all ;) in those cases where you walked in front of a shotgun that killed you 'accidentally', you can't really blame the shotgunner...!

    trying is one thing, being capable enough to be more successfull at your attempts is another. that is called skill, that what diffrentiates a noob from a pro

    everyone tries to aim at a lighting speed skulk with rifle but only few can hit such a skulk. because rifle is highly dependant on your aiming skills.

    the noober you are, the less bullets hit the target. thats why a noob stands no chance against a veteran skulk who is capable of evasive movement.

    thats not the case with the shotgun, there is a huge circle of death and anything gets within is doomed. success of one attempt with shotgun gives the marine overall success . while success of one attempt with rifle is only a 1 bullet "10 dmg" and a single part of overall success.

    by saying there is no accidental kills AT ALL you are just lying to yourself. and less credible you get with each sentence you write.

    Wait, you're comparing the time it takes to shoot 1 bullet against the time it takes to shoot 1 shotgun shell, and you're calling me not credible? The bottom line is that a well aimed shot with a shotgun, or a burst of 10 shots from a well aimed rifle have about the same cooldown to shoot. To say that someone who achieves either of those things doesn't deserve it because they're but good enough a player in your view just smacks of poor loser syndrome.

    If you're trying to tell me that a veteran skulk against a noob lmger always leads to the skulk win, but once the noob has a shotgun the vet has no chance (which is what you wrote), then you're just exaggerating to convince yourself that you have a valid argument. You do have a valid argument buried in there, which is that you don't find it fun to play against shotgunners. I'm not trying to deny you that point, as it's your right to hold that opinion. I just don't happen to share it myself, that's all.

    i don't know where you get those wild ideas but i didnt mention such things.

    rifles skill dependance makes sure that the weak is eliminated. you can't lay a lucky burst on an enemy who is as fast as a walljumping, celerity, leap skulk. what you are trying to imply is just absurd. your "chance to hit" has to be high and consistent for you to prevail, and this can be only achieved my lots of gamehours which is called skill.

    in short; a skilled skulk, will always defeat a noob rifleman.

    shotgun on the other hand does not need a high and consistent "chance to hit" to destroy the enemy, one well placed shot and even the godly skulks lays dead before you. even a toddler can spam the mouse and has a ,lets say, 000.1% chance to hit the enemy. that is the "random no skill shot" i am talking about. since shotgun tends the destroy opposing skulk with one shot.

    i can give my game experience as an example if you care to read. i have no problem early game fetching kills defending a perimeter especially when the opposing team are noobs. but when shotguns arrive, i back up, become more passive as a skulk. guess why? even noobs with shotguns force me to become more passive. if i wasted 1010 hours in this game, i sure would like to see the fruits of my dedication. but a bad design kills all the fun for me.

    in short; a noob with shotgun has always a chance to defeat a skilled skulk.

    if this is correct, hell yes. then we can safely say that the game is not balanced for skill.

    same happens in lots of the games. most importantly in call of duty franchise.

    grenade launchers and rockets.

    normally a noob stands no chance against skilled cod player. but thanks to grenade and rocket launchers, noobs have a chance to stand against the most skilled player.

    you know what they call grenade launchers? noob tubes.

    some iw developer said in an interview that the noob tubes purposely remains in the game to give casual gamers a way to have fun by actually killing people without being familiar with the game, maybe this is why cod is so popular and hated at the same time?

    cod's target market is casual gamers

    whats the excuse of natural selection 2?



    lets put the fade from faded mode into original game and balance the game around it, would you like that? you wouldn't like that.we have seen indestructible onoses and 2 hive onos rushes in this game and still some people defended such a silly design. all got nerfed eventually

    shotgun will be nerfed too. lets wait and see


  • RoobubbaRoobubba Who you gonna call? Join Date: 2003-01-06 Member: 11930Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
    What you describe that was nerfed were overpowered, and obviously so. I'm arguing that the sg is not op. It's just not comparable: a LOT of shotguns get dropped and lost. Why? Because they are not the 100% kill guarantee you're making out.
    A skilled skulk can take down a newbie shotgunner, who had invested 20 pres in that weapon. The risk is commensurate with the reward (waste 20 res).
  • FuleFule Join Date: 2009-06-04 Member: 67683Members
    edited May 2013
    . *snip * Removed inciting flame bait - Ironhorse
  • ResRes Join Date: 2003-08-27 Member: 20245Members
    whether it's overpowered or not doesn't really matter, what really matters is that shotgun + jp is the only viable option to stay competitive for marines.

    That alone means something should change. Marines shouldn't be a one-hit wonder with only 1 viable option in comp play.
  • peregrinusperegrinus Join Date: 2010-07-16 Member: 72445Members
  • amoralamoral Join Date: 2013-01-03 Member: 177250Members
    balance is different from accessibility. you balance for higher skill, because to do otherwise is to sacrifice depth. if you balance predominantly for.casual players yourisk making a casual game with no room for growth. accessibility can be solved without touching core mechanics. matchmaking/ranking systems. shotgun wouldn't need to be touched if people played other players in their weight class.
  • NeokenNeoken Bruges, Belgium Join Date: 2004-03-20 Member: 27447Members, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Silver, Subnautica Playtester
    piratedave wrote: »
    Neoken wrote: »
    It's basically the same game design of NS1, one that proved to be quite succesful.

    -Marine combat efficiency scales up with W/A upgrades and equipment research. When they die, they lose their equipment and spawn with the default loadout. The W/A upgrades however remain as long as the arms lab is still up.

    -Alien combat efficiency scales up with abilities, hive upgrades and most importantly higher lifeforms. When they die, they lose the lifeform and spawn as the default skulk. The abilities and hive upgrades however remain as long as the hive and upgrade structures are still up.

    Overall, marines tech up more gradually than aliens and retain more of their combat efficiency if they happen to die, but aliens need less resources to keep up economy-wise and can engage/disengage combat more easily due to their mobility. The skulk has some ways to scale up it's combat efficiency (carapace, leap), but it's not supposed to scale up into the mid-late game to be a viable combatant against teched up marines. That's what the higher lifeforms are for. It's asymmetrical like this and always has been.

    Should the shotgun be changed? Maybe, maybe not. But unless you're planning on reinventing NS game design, skulks will always be less effective in combat the further marines go up the tech ladder, so the fact that skulks are more often than not biting the dust against equally skilled but teched up marines is not a valid argument for any marine tech changes.

    I think its quite obvious from the BT mod that some game redesign is being attempted/looked into. Lifeform accessibility and alien scaling needs to be done right, at least to improve the new player experience.

    As far as the shotgun is concerned, nobody likes being 1 shotted. In counterstrike teams were symmetrical so it was frustrating but fair, and the rail exo has its down sides and the shot needs to be charged up. I have a feeling the shotgun will have to change anyway if they are going to change the fade based on what ive seen from the BT mod.

    Sure, there is always room for improvement, and I'm keeping a close eye on the BT mod myself. But even the BT mod doesn't change much in this regard. The way for aliens to scale up is still primarily with their higher lifeforms. You can include more ways for the lifeforms to scale through abilities and hive upgrades, and try to make them more fun to play in general, but again, nonetheless, in the matter of combat efficiency the skulk will always start lagging behind, as it should.

    If you want to change the shotgun because you feel getting one shotted is no fun, I understand. I just don't understand the argument to nerf marine tech just because the basic alien lifeform cannot compete in combat mid-late game.
  • TheriusTherius Join Date: 2009-03-06 Member: 66642Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter
    piratedave wrote: »
    for someone who likes to accuse others of having poor reading comprehension, its amazing you could be so hypocritical. If "too much strategic thinking, too little combat = game losing players" is the understanding you came away with from my post, then maybe you have some issues ? Cognitive dissonance ?

    New players wont pick up the game if its not fun ... you may play to win, but new players play with fun as their motivation, at least until they become more serious about the game at which point they too will play to win. Your placing the cart before the horse expecting new players to be competitive from the get go.

    If I misunderstood you, I apologise. Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on your meaning, because I still think that was what you were saying. That new players won't find the game fun because from time to time you have to play a role that doesn't involve killing other players. If this isn't what you meant, then could you please explain yourself without having to go into insults.

    You made the claim that the game cannot sell if it's marketed with "buy NS2 and you will spend 90% of your time either heal spraying or biting structures over and over and over", which, taking out the hyperbole, means that the game cannot sell if it focuses on something other than combat. Correct? My entire point is that why is this true. Why couldn't the game sell with points like "sneak behind the enemy lines", "destroy the enemy infrastructure and avoid the defenders"? NS2 is by far not like this, since only a fraction (instead of your claimed 90%) of the game involves non-combat activities, but why are things like these automatically something that cannot be fun for new players? I know I find these aspects of the game infinitely more interesting than, for example, marine vs. skulk duels.

    Now, I know I personally do not represent the core audience, but what makes NS2 (and NS1) unique is the depth of gameplay, and certainly not the fighting mechanics. There are loads of better shooters around there. This discussion began because a skulk cannot compete effectively with a shotgun marine. If we start taking things like this out of the game, and having every lifeform able to compete with every marine, we make the game as combat focused as to lose a lot of depth. You do not have to play as smart as you had to (of course combat still needs smarts, but you know what I mean), and the game boils down to who controls the shooter mechanics better, something that the game already does too much, in my opinion. You say that non-combative roles are the reason for bad player retention. How do you know this? I could easily imagine even more players being turned off if the game went closer to a combat mod with resource nodes added, since the combat mechanics just aren't good and engaging enough. I do not know this, but I'm not the one waving around assumptions as facts.

    It seems like the low player retention is a popular and valid argument against anything one doesn't like about the game.
  • hakenspithakenspit Join Date: 2010-11-26 Member: 75300Members
    amoral wrote: »
    balance is different from accessibility. you balance for higher skill, because to do otherwise is to sacrifice depth. if you balance predominantly for.casual players yourisk making a casual game with no room for growth. accessibility can be solved without touching core mechanics. matchmaking/ranking systems. shotgun wouldn't need to be touched if people played other players in their weight class.

    If you balance based on higher skill you create a game that appeals to a small portion of society who play for a challenge.
    Games in the early eighties had a similar approach (no save points, one death meants starting over...great challenge...crappy design) but it was soon recognised that this put a game beyond the level of most people and save points where put in.
    No one is saying you cant have a high skill ceiling...you just need to ensure the floor is low enough that you attract new players and have them hang around.
    Using comp games for a balance perspective is flawed...the game plays totally different at 6v6 compared to 12v12...anyone who says otherwise is burying their head in the sand.
    People play on higher population servers due to the fact they have become expectant of a game supporting higher player counts...and because more people does equal more fun.
    Higher player counts also mean 1 good player is less influentual on the gaming experience for the rest of the server.
    Then there is the fact that UWE intended for NS2 to be played with higher player counts than NS1...so trying to balance based on a comp scene thats still playing with NS1 server sizes is detrimental to the gaming expereince for most people/

    Matchmaking/ranking hits a bit of a problem when you have two so different game play styles between each team.
    I know some people who are great aims...but cant play melee to save their lives.
    The creates a problem as when they join the server are you going to restrict them to playing only on one side? If you place them with newer players and they go marines then they will destroy the other side...but if you put them on a server with experienced players and they go aliens then they will have their arses handed to them.

    The SG (and other 1 shot weapons) compound the issue of marines base lifeform scaling but aliens not.
    As an alien if your out of res you are stuck with the skulk...as a marine you still have weapons and armour upgrades along with the option of picking up dropped weapons.

    @neoken the skulk not competing mid-late game is very much impacted by the SG...early game SG's dont 1 shot a skulk...they do by mid-late game.
    So encountering a SG early in the game is less of a concern than mid-late (when even carpace wont save you).
    Why should a skulk be less viable late game than a marine with his lmg? Both are free units and require 0 res investment.
    Marines argue for the ability to "dodge" around aliens who have managed to get into melee range because its un-fun to die just because you made 1 mistake and allowed the skulk to get into melee range...yet aliens dont get given the same graces.
    The problem is when you have a mechanic in the game that results in 0 forgiveness new players will rage, leave and not return.
    The alien economy is unforgiving enough with losing the res for higher lifeforms...but when you have multiple mechanics like GL and SG that 1 shot the base lifeform your asking too much of people.
    Avoiding conflict late game is hardly mechanics that attract players, who are going to need to spend a fair bit of time learning to play each life-form (and as an extrapolation will spend even more time as a skulk)...its like going to the pub and avoiding drinking....some might claim its fun...but most of us would rather go to the movies or something fun instead.
  • kespeckespec Join Date: 2012-11-18 Member: 172279Members
    edited May 2013
    Roobubba wrote: »
    What you describe that was nerfed were overpowered, and obviously so. I'm arguing that the sg is not op. It's just not comparable: a LOT of shotguns get dropped and lost. Why? Because they are not the 100% kill guarantee you're making out.
    A skilled skulk can take down a newbie shotgunner, who had invested 20 pres in that weapon. The risk is commensurate with the reward (waste 20 res).


    i have never said its a kill gurantee weapon, the whole idea behind all this commotion is IT ONE SHOTS PEOPLE.

    a weapon that has no downsides.( no range is not acceptable in a close to medium range environment against enemies has to close their distance to become a threat.)
    tends to oneshot people.
    so multipurpose that it steals the "intended" roles of other weapons

    a ridicilous design in short


    and its outright broken as a balance tool, so was onos and 2 base onos rushes.
  • BobRossTheBossBobRossTheBoss Join Date: 2012-12-31 Member: 176824Members
    The only thing I would change about the shotgun would be to widen the spread a little so it is less effective over a distance. I can take out 2/3s of a skulk's hp from 15 yards away with a shotgun. All the people bitching about the shotgun against skulks also need to realize that the shotgun's burst damage is almost a requirement against higher lifeforms like fades due to their hit and run nature. Maybe when aliens can no longer pick their battles and retreat at will the marines can have a toned down shotgun.
  • Apollo10000Apollo10000 Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183582Members
    The only thing I would change about the shotgun would be to widen the spread a little so it is less effective over a distance. I can take out 2/3s of a skulk's hp from 15 yards away with a shotgun. All the people bitching about the shotgun against skulks also need to realize that the shotgun's burst damage is almost a requirement against higher lifeforms like fades due to their hit and run nature. Maybe when aliens can no longer pick their battles and retreat at will the marines can have a toned down shotgun.

    Got it in one, every tried to play a game without a shotgun and watch the Lerks and lifeforms above it destroy you, you're unable to play the game properly, because you can not harass or attack, because higher lifeforms destroy LMG uses. Lowering the shotguns power would mean lowering the health of the lifeforms to balance it, and we'll be back where we started.

    Also the Skulk is meant to die quickly late-game, part of the ethos of the game.
  • bizbiz Join Date: 2012-11-05 Member: 167386Members
    edited May 2013
    @ all people who want the skulk to be more viable late-game:

    pick TWO:
    - rounds that actually finish
    - "fair" scaling of player abilities
    - objective-based gameplay

    stop trying to do the impossible...
  • gnoarchgnoarch Join Date: 2012-08-29 Member: 156802Members, Reinforced - Gold
    edited May 2013
    The only thing I would change about the shotgun would be to widen the spread a little so it is less effective over a distance. I can take out 2/3s of a skulk's hp from 15 yards away with a shotgun. All the people bitching about the shotgun against skulks also need to realize that the shotgun's burst damage is almost a requirement against higher lifeforms like fades due to their hit and run nature. Maybe when aliens can no longer pick their battles and retreat at will the marines can have a toned down shotgun.

    Got it in one, every tried to play a game without a shotgun and watch the Lerks and lifeforms above it destroy you, you're unable to play the game properly, because you can not harass or attack, because higher lifeforms destroy LMG uses. Lowering the shotguns power would mean lowering the health of the lifeforms to balance it, and we'll be back where we started.

    Also the Skulk is meant to die quickly late-game, part of the ethos of the game.

    For your first point: Thats why in the middle ages of gaming someone invented armor classes.

    For your second point: If hitting the wall with your head was part of the ethos of the game... would you still defend it?

    For my part the low skulk survivability probably is the reason why I mostly quit playing NS2 and just read the forums from time to time.
    It's not like Skulks die fast in lategame, it's more like Skulks die easy all the time and in lategame are just frustrating.

    In NS1 the maps were way larger so you did not have to fight so often and it was easier to evade enemies plus you had focus which gave you at least a fighting chance.
    When I duel a marine with armor ups and bite him 4 or 5 times and he still stands this might be important for balance and BLABLABLA but it just makes me ALT+F4 the game. When I get one-shot by a shotgun this might be important for balance but it just makes me ALT+F4.

    These things might work out on paper but in reality they suck suck suck.

    And to be honest you guys really can say all you want but every time I end up starting the game on a boring sunday afternoon I see that I'm right here. People dont like Aliens and stack marines if they can. The reason simply is that skulk gameplay sucks even if you are good at it, Onos gameplay is lame and Fade/lerk require silly amounts of skill which a normal player will *never* achieve. No sane person with normal frustration-bearing capabilities will ever amount enough game time with Fade/Lerk because getting instagibbed and loosing 30/50 res is even less fun than getting instagibbed as skulk. I myself have >300 hrs of gametime and I would be very surprised if I had more than 1 hour as fade.

    The Shotgun plays a hughe role in making Alien gameplay less enjoyable and should be changed. The HMG also did silly amounts of damage, but it was not nearly as random and unpredictable so at least for me it was more fun to fight against a JP/HMG marine having focus myself than fighting against a JP/SG marine in NS2
  • Apollo10000Apollo10000 Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183582Members
    edited May 2013
    gnoarch wrote: »
    The only thing I would change about the shotgun would be to widen the spread a little so it is less effective over a distance. I can take out 2/3s of a skulk's hp from 15 yards away with a shotgun. All the people bitching about the shotgun against skulks also need to realize that the shotgun's burst damage is almost a requirement against higher lifeforms like fades due to their hit and run nature. Maybe when aliens can no longer pick their battles and retreat at will the marines can have a toned down shotgun.

    Got it in one, every tried to play a game without a shotgun and watch the Lerks and lifeforms above it destroy you, you're unable to play the game properly, because you can not harass or attack, because higher lifeforms destroy LMG uses. Lowering the shotguns power would mean lowering the health of the lifeforms to balance it, and we'll be back where we started.

    Also the Skulk is meant to die quickly late-game, part of the ethos of the game.

    For your first point: Thats why in the middle ages of gaming someone invented armor classes.

    For your second point: If hitting the wall with your head was part of the ethos of the game... would you still defend it?

    For my part the low skulk survivability probably is the reason why I mostly quit playing NS2 and just read the forums from time to time.
    It's not like Skulks die fast in lategame, it's more like Skulks die easy all the time and in lategame are just frustrating.

    In NS1 the maps were way larger so you did not have to fight so often and it was easier to evade enemies plus you had focus which gave you at least a fighting chance.
    When I duel a marine with armor ups and bite him 4 or 5 times and he still stands this might be important for balance and BLABLABLA but it just makes me ALT+F4 the game. When I get one-shot by a shotgun this might be important for balance but it just makes me ALT+F4.

    These things might work out on paper but in reality they suck suck suck.

    And to be honest you guys really can say all you want but every time I end up starting the game on a boring sunday afternoon I see that I'm right here. People dont like Aliens and stack marines if they can. The reason simply is that skulk gameplay sucks even if you are good at it, Onos gameplay is lame and Fade/lerk require silly amounts of skill which a normal player will *never* achieve. No sane person with normal frustration-bearing capabilities will ever amount enough game time with Fade/Lerk because getting instagibbed and loosing 30/50 res is even less fun than getting instagibbed as skulk. I myself have >300 hrs of gametime and I would be very surprised if I had more than 1 hour as fade.

    The Shotgun plays a hughe role in making Alien gameplay less enjoyable and should be changed. The HMG also did silly amounts of damage, but it was not nearly as random and unpredictable so at least for me it was more fun to fight against a JP/HMG marine having focus myself than fighting against a JP/SG marine in NS2

    Your counter point is so very weak, even a fully upgraded Marine still loses against a fade with similar skill, even a Lerk has a greater chance of winning, which makes the Shotgun the only option against higher lifeforms.

    Your second counter point is a pointless attempt to make your point look meaningful, which it isn't. I play the game how the devs want it to be, if I didn't like I wouldn't play it, vision and integrity should always come before pandering to people, similar to "build it and they will come".

    I would rather NS2 die, staying true to its ethos, then trying to appease a set group of people. most in-game don't even moan about it, they accept the Skulk is weak late game.

    I find the Skulk play fine, at best functional it's the utility life form, can attack and defend, hit be-hide the line and harass all its wants, it's the jack of all trades, master of none.... I guess people are used to a class being strong at something, well the Skulk is just built for all round stuff, but being not the best at anything.

    You can not be instantly killed as Fade or Lerk, please stick to facts or not be taking seriously.

    Nearly half my Alien game-play has either been Lerk or Fade, rarely lose my higher lifeforms.

    Though I find the Shotgun a decent challenge and should be kept the same, but who should they listen to, a player who's still playing or person that isn't?

  • gnoarchgnoarch Join Date: 2012-08-29 Member: 156802Members, Reinforced - Gold
    well, probably your just a better player than me. And 90% of the people who bought the game.

    And it is a fact that as Fade or lerk you can be killed instantly. I never said a single marine can kill a fade in 1 shot but that it can happen that you enter a room one second and the next second you are dead because there were 3 or 4 marines. A good fade like you maybe wouldn't do that but this is what makes becoming a good fade/lerk for new/casual players very very hard and frustrating.

    And to be quite honest I think it doesnt *really* matter anymore who the devs listen to because the game already lost most players. Just tried to look it up in the statistics, its not even on the top 100 anymore. And of course "All game loose most players on the first week" and all that but when a game that sold >140k copies on first week has less than 685 Players (thats how many "little Inferno" has on place 100) on a saturday this indicates that something is very wrong.

    From the getgo there were people saying that several aspects of the game are extremely unfriendly to casual players. At the time I myself was not a casual player but played like 3 or 4 hrs a day. I have to admit that e.g. in the camo discussion I said things quite similar to what you are saying here. But when I got my first real job and had less and less time I realized that for a casual player(even a experienced one like me) this game makes enjoying it really really hard.
    So to answer your question: The Devs should not have listened to people like me or you after release but to these people frustrated by a game that is not fun for casual players.

    Now they really should not listen to anybodyanymore but analyze what was the reason why so many people left really hard and then start working on NS3 or whatever the next project is.
  • Apollo10000Apollo10000 Join Date: 2013-03-02 Member: 183582Members
    edited June 2013
    gnoarch wrote: »
    well, probably your just a better player than me. And 90% of the people who bought the game.

    And it is a fact that as Fade or lerk you can be killed instantly. I never said a single marine can kill a fade in 1 shot but that it can happen that you enter a room one second and the next second you are dead because there were 3 or 4 marines. A good fade like you maybe wouldn't do that but this is what makes becoming a good fade/lerk for new/casual players very very hard and frustrating.

    And to be quite honest I think it doesnt *really* matter anymore who the devs listen to because the game already lost most players. Just tried to look it up in the statistics, its not even on the top 100 anymore. And of course "All game loose most players on the first week" and all that but when a game that sold >140k copies on first week has less than 685 Players (thats how many "little Inferno" has on place 100) on a saturday this indicates that something is very wrong.

    From the getgo there were people saying that several aspects of the game are extremely unfriendly to casual players. At the time I myself was not a casual player but played like 3 or 4 hrs a day. I have to admit that e.g. in the camo discussion I said things quite similar to what you are saying here. But when I got my first real job and had less and less time I realized that for a casual player(even a experienced one like me) this game makes enjoying it really really hard.
    So to answer your question: The Devs should not have listened to people like me or you after release but to these people frustrated by a game that is not fun for casual players.

    Now they really should not listen to anybodyanymore but analyze what was the reason why so many people left really hard and then start working on NS3 or whatever the next project is.

    I will not be so arrogant to say I'm better then the most, I just I think I understand the game more from an RTS prospective a number game of sought.

    When I play Fade or Lerk, my attention isn't to kill my opponent, but to deny and disrupt their economy, as Lerk I will fly in spike, maybe go for a couple of bites then leave, trying to stop them expanding or stop any pesky intruders, but while doing this I'm calculating whether or not I can win the engagement or not, because as I said my main goal is to cause damage, unlike a deathmatch style of thinking.

    As Fade, you can be a bit more robust, get be-hide them, above them and quite frankly any direction, also much better at claiming more map and defending more of the map, see... this is where I'm seem to do better I believe, I play the game much in the vain of an RTS, where I only engage when it's in my favor, but I understand quite a few come from a FPS side, when it's more who has the better K/D, so for most of the match they'll chase that.

    I believe removing the K/D and replacing it with team K/D, and economic damage per-person, this will foster a more team orientated goal, then trying to boost ones ego, because to look good the team has to look good.

    I'm casual player not so long had a job 13-14 hours a day, but came back, played like an hour, because all you doing is sitting down, and went to bed.

    I just believe in general games have been made too easy, I remember when games were just generally hard, that most played on easy, because that's like today's normal/hard.

    Though if NS2 fails completely, there won't be a NS3, or any other project, NS2 is a masterpiece(in idea, just the physical probably needs more skilled people, no offence) of game, but like most masterpiece isn't appreciated until gone.... very few games try to do what NS2 has done, but I understand why, most unique games don't sell well, hence why we have tonnes of generic crap.
Sign In or Register to comment.