Shutting Off the phase gates

2»

Comments

  • Legend_BossLegend_Boss UK Join Date: 2014-02-27 Member: 194394Members
    My point regarding this being available for experience commanders is in response to the claim that it adds to an already complex and hard to learn game.

    People should stop going around saying NS2 is complex or hard to learn. I see it on the forums and recently on comments part of the YouTube Polaris Civil war comments saying not to bother playing due to the high learning curve. ppl just keep banging on about it being difficult. It's not difficult, ppl just need to use some common sense.

    If you are having to hotkey 2 PGs recycle and cancel the recycle, that's time you aren't spending supporting your team as you have to make sure to cancel in time.

    The frequency would be optional and it allows a commander to make dormant a phase gate. You may not see the change but others may. And they may see the benefit of having control on the direction of where a PG goes to instead of being forced to rely on the order the PG are built.

    In your example of having two PG in nano. If for example you had a PG going marine start > Nano > Sub > Nano > back to marine start...
    1. Marines would have to phase twice to reach sub which could lead to marines getting in each others way - something i mentioned previously.
    2. If you lost Sub PG but kept Sub, and wanted to build another PG there you PG system would be Marine start > Nano > Nano > Sub > Marine start.
    You would have a not very useful second pg in nano so you would have to sell it and repurchase a PG to keep your two PG in nano. Previously it was possible to change the order when recycling/cancelling the PG but now there is no control, something the frequency will bring back.

    I suppose that because i usually command on the Playground server where there is 42 players I am use to a faster pace of gameplay and don't really have time to be wasting making sure i cancel the recycle PG on time.
  • 2cough2cough Rocky Mountain High Join Date: 2013-03-14 Member: 183952Members, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Supporter
    edited November 2015
    Automatically dismissing something that comes from siege just because its from siege makes you come across as petty and as if you have a vendetta against siege, but that's besides the point.

    I didn't try to hide it. Said I feel that it's a rookie trap. And I do not enjoy it. I dont see anything wrong w/ my saying that, as I also did not just dismiss it. I said I didn't like the idea. Then I thought about the idea. And I still don't like it.

    Also, commanding is not complex? No learning curve? What?
    I suppose that because i usually command on the Playground server where there is 42 players I am use to a faster pace of gameplay and don't really have time to be wasting making sure i cancel the recycle PG on time.

    Oh, so it is too difficult for you to keep up with? That's the POINT. To be attentive. 42 player servers... rookie traps.

    People should stop going around saying NS2 is complex or hard to learn. I see it on the forums and recently on comments part of the YouTube Polaris Civil war comments saying not to bother playing due to the high learning curve. ppl just keep banging on about it being difficult. It's not difficult, ppl just need to use some common sense.

    Right so if a new player picks it up, is turned off by it's difficulty, they shouldn't say it's hard? Becuase that's why people say it. It IS hard. Not to shoot, but to know what you're doing. more than 8 players on each team creates a crutch, and gameplay is totally different. Another reason I think this would not make sense for standard ns2 play. The mechanics are already there. The skill factor - knowing when and why to recycle and when to cancel - is what makes the difference between a competent commander and an excellent commander. This idea really seems to lower the ceiling.
  • DC_DarklingDC_Darkling Join Date: 2003-07-10 Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
    I still think a on/off button would not only be helpful, but the most simple and practical solution.
  • MaxAmusMaxAmus UK Join Date: 2003-12-26 Member: 24779Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Reinforced - Shadow
    This could be a good idea, but also not so good:

    Marines on Tram - PG in base another in Hub Freq 1 - 3rd PG in hub > Ore Freq 2, 5th PG in ore - another location on map. That could be fun i guess? massive head fuck, and wouldnt be viable at all. But it could work for 2 Freq any more and it just would be to much as maps are not big enough to do any more than 3 pg (with this you could perhaps do the 4th?)

    So yea. Massive Head fuck.
  • KalabalanaKalabalana Join Date: 2003-11-14 Member: 22859Members
    Over 4 years later, and still nothing.
    I don't think PGs are going to change guys.
    So many easy options, intuitive, simple, but in the end, if nobody will implement, it's pointless even to imagine.

    -Turn off PGs
    -Set a primary PG
    -Give users a rotary menu to select PG

    Combinations, etc.
  • YojimboYojimbo England Join Date: 2009-03-19 Member: 66806Members, NS2 Playtester, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Silver, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited November 2015
    Kalabalana wrote: »
    Over 4 years later, and still nothing.
    I don't think PGs are going to change guys.
    So many easy options, intuitive, simple, but in the end, if nobody will implement, it's pointless even to imagine.

    -Turn off PGs
    -Set a primary PG
    -Give users a rotary menu to select PG

    Combinations, etc.

    This is because it has been discussed to death already, I also enquired about it a long time ago and the balance implications are just too great, it would make hive rushes and base rush defence too easy for marines. What's to stop marines having phase gates in every single room and if it gets attacked, simply turn a few of the others off... The current implementation means the commander has to strategically plan where the placement of his phase gates as everybody knows, having more than 3 PG's is impractical.

    It wouldn't be worth rebalancing the whole game based on one feature when there are more important things to worry about e.g. low / high skill gap, player retention, broken hive and the tutorial experience to name but a few.

    Fix the game at its core first, worry about the niggly bits later.
  • MuckyMcFlyMuckyMcFly Join Date: 2012-03-19 Member: 148982Members, Reinforced - Supporter, Reinforced - Shadow
    Is the current implementation of phase gates that broken it needs a switching/linking system? Most games I play if you get three gates up you're a lucky team more than three is overkill.
  • NovoReiNovoRei US Join Date: 2014-11-18 Member: 199718Members
    Any balacing issues is easily solved by adding a delay (30 seconds or more) to power up the phase gate.
  • FrozenFrozen New York, NY Join Date: 2010-07-02 Member: 72228Members, Constellation
    I think it's a great idea to have "frequency" so you can control how your gates work. This game is extremely unfortunately unreliant on commander creativity as it could and should be. So options like this that higher level commanders can use to more efficiently utilize their equipment should be there..

    I don't think aliens need such things, as the commander is out of the chair over 50% of the time in general even matched, well-played games of any decent skill.

    Things like limiting weapons would be great to, so that a commander could control his troops purchases, there's plenty of times where I've accidentally purchased something and lost it just before i needed the res for a specific push that I had missed a call about. It's understandable that low-skill shouldn't have something like that, but it only adds depth to the game when skill increases.
Sign In or Register to comment.