Now you're misunderstanding me! I'm against enlarging the existing hitbox to cover more than the actual model itself.
I've written several times, that along with me, I'm sure others would be fine with fixing those small areas where the hitbox didn't cover the model. That's improvement.
But instead, they've blown up the hitboxes significantly, because hurr-durr everyone else is doing that, so it must be a good course to take.
EDIT:
I would even understand if they enlarged the hitboxes to reduce the complexity of geometry (I'm assuming that would have a performance bonus, but not sure)
I've written several times, that along with me, I'm sure others would be fine with fixing those small areas where the hitbox didn't cover the model. That's improvement.
That should be the way to go, yes. But of course enlarging everything is easier and faster to do, so why bother with improving the game when it would be more work?
EDIT: @The_Welsh_Wizard laziness may be the first impression, but I'm sure it's not that simple most of the time... so you're also being lazy by not considering their reasons for easy routes But in this case... I just don't understand. Fixing those spots would've been less work as far as i see
OFFTOPIC:
Oh, and @Bicsum in case you want to get rid of that pesky W10 notification:
Understand this: You can not make the hitbox cover every part of the model in every possible angle and every possible animation, unless you enlarge the hitbox or add complexity.
Also, speak for yourself. Most people were asking to revert it or just reduce the model size, which wouldn't solve the problem.
Oh dear... 4 options on an issue like this is obviously not graded enough. But it does give an idea about their "QoL". That's why we are discussing it in text, so we can clarify our opinion
And yes, I understand that hitboxes, by definition, are not the same as models. Otherwise, they would just use the raw models for hit detection.
EDIT:
In hindsight, I should've added two more options: for neutrals and small fix proponents, so sorry about that
I have read every single one of them. The majority is either using balance or skill floors/ceilings/curves as their argument to be against it, which is complete BS.
The old hitbox was flawed. It was perceived as bad hitreg and it seemed like a bug. But instead of fixing it, people want it to stay, because otherwise it kills balance or "decreases the skill ceiling".
How about we balance the whole game soley through the hitbox and call it learning curve? If a life form is too weak, just remove some parts of the hitbox here and there and tell people to aim for the left eye.
@Bicsum and as you see in the comparison, they havent just fixed those bad spots, they also enlarged everything.
Sure, the uncovered spots are gone, so did they fix it? Yes. Did they introduce a bigger problem for the game as a whole? Absolutely
Hitting a skulk now is just trivial. I'm winning engagements against three skulks alone. And I consider myself a bad shot, and also have <30 fps most of the time.
How about we balance the whole game soley through the hitbox and call it learning curve? If a life form is too weak, just remove some parts of the hitbox here and there and tell people to aim for the left eye.
I have read every single one of them. The majority is using either using balance or skill floors/ceilings/curves as their argument to be against it, which is complete BS.
The old hitbox was flawed. It was perceived as bad hitreg and it seemed like a bug. But instead of fixing it, people want it to stay, because otherwise it kills balance or "decreases the skill ceiling".
How about we balance the whole game soley through the hitbox and call it learning curve? If a life form is too weak, just remove some parts of the hitbox here and there and tell people to aim for the left eye.
Whilst the primary goal might have been about how the game "feels", it's beyond stupid to not recognise secondary outcomes and just how bad it actually has been for balance.
Just because something is bugged doesn't mean you should fix it. If a bug adds something to the game, or makes the game better, keep it. As it stands, the old hitboxes were good for balance.
Again I reiterate: If it was all about "feel", why didn't they just reduce the skulk model? It's what people have actually been asking for anyway. It would have killed 2 birds with 1 stone, yay balance and yay "feels".
I have read every single one of them. The majority is using either using balance or skill floors/ceilings/curves as their argument to be against it, which is complete BS.
The old hitbox was flawed. It was perceived as bad hitreg and it seemed like a bug. But instead of fixing it, people want it to stay, because otherwise it kills balance or "decreases the skill ceiling".
How about we balance the whole game soley through the hitbox and call it learning curve? If a life form is too weak, just remove some parts of the hitbox here and there and tell people to aim for the left eye.
Whilst the primary goal might have been about how the game "feels", it's beyond stupid to not recognise secondary outcomes and just how bad it actually has been for balance.
I'm 100% sure they knew this would lead to a change of balance, but they have to know how bad it is, BEFORE they make additional changes.
Just because something is bugged doesn't mean you should fix it. If a bug adds something to the game, or makes the game better, keep it. As it stands, the old hitboxes were good for balance.
Really disappointing to read this from you as a comp player..
Again I reiterate: If it was all about "feel", why didn't they just reduce the skulk model? It's what people have actually been asking for anyway. It would have killed 2 birds with 1 stone, yay balance and yay "feels".
Even if they reduced just the model, the hitbox would still not have fitted properly. Some areas would still be more forgiving that others. They had to touch the hitbox in any case.
How about we balance the whole game soley through the hitbox and call it learning curve? If a life form is too weak, just remove some parts of the hitbox here and there and tell people to aim for the left eye.
Nope. As fixing missing spots and blowing up the hitbox are not the same either
EDIT:
Regarding the concealment of the change, I totally agree with them on that too. People would have started playing differently just by knowing about it beforehand. But that doesn't justify the change itself.
I have read every single one of them. The majority is using either using balance or skill floors/ceilings/curves as their argument to be against it, which is complete BS.
The old hitbox was flawed. It was perceived as bad hitreg and it seemed like a bug. But instead of fixing it, people want it to stay, because otherwise it kills balance or "decreases the skill ceiling".
How about we balance the whole game soley through the hitbox and call it learning curve? If a life form is too weak, just remove some parts of the hitbox here and there and tell people to aim for the left eye.
Whilst the primary goal might have been about how the game "feels", it's beyond stupid to not recognise secondary outcomes and just how bad it actually has been for balance.
I'm 100% sure they knew this would lead to a change of balance, but they have to know how bad it is, BEFORE they make additional changes.
Then it was at a completley inappropriate time. Marines were already dominating early game, the buffs should have come first!
Just because something is bugged doesn't mean you should fix it. If a bug adds something to the game, or makes the game better, keep it. As it stands, the old hitboxes were good for balance.
Really disappointing to read this from you as a comp player..
I have read every single one of them. The majority is using either using balance or skill floors/ceilings/curves as their argument to be against it, which is complete BS.
The old hitbox was flawed. It was perceived as bad hitreg and it seemed like a bug. But instead of fixing it, people want it to stay, because otherwise it kills balance or "decreases the skill ceiling".
How about we balance the whole game soley through the hitbox and call it learning curve? If a life form is too weak, just remove some parts of the hitbox here and there and tell people to aim for the left eye.
Whilst the primary goal might have been about how the game "feels", it's beyond stupid to not recognise secondary outcomes and just how bad it actually has been for balance.
I'm 100% sure they knew this would lead to a change of balance, but they have to know how bad it is, BEFORE they make additional changes.
Then it was at a completley inappropriate time. Marines were already dominating early game, the buffs should have come first!
You're right, that probably would've been smarter.
Just because something is bugged doesn't mean you should fix it. If a bug adds something to the game, or makes the game better, keep it. As it stands, the old hitboxes were good for balance.
Really disappointing to read this from you as a comp player..
What? Why?
Because I expect it to be common sense among competitive players that the shooting mechanic should not be limited or balanced through bugs. You should deal damage when you're on the model no matter what.
Just because something is bugged doesn't mean you should fix it. If a bug adds something to the game, or makes the game better, keep it. As it stands, the old hitboxes were good for balance.
Really disappointing to read this from you as a comp player..
What? Why?
Because I expect it to be common sense among competitive players that the shooting mechanic should not be limited or balanced through bugs. You should deal damage when you're on the model no matter what.
NS2 has an unforgiving skill envelope with a hard falloff. When side biting was removed it made me personally completely ineffective at the game, stuck around for the people but the shooting and biting wasn't fun at all. Besides that, shooters can't completely avoid prediction and hitreg issues and the NS2 engine probably still has a couple bonus ones.
With the Turbo mod SCC played around with something functionally similar (larger bullets, side biting) and it made the game more satisfying to play, at least for me personally. Just pushing the game slightly more towards arcade-y, get shots to feel a bit more meaty. It went a bit to far, naturally, and would've required balancing in respawn/cost department, but just having decreased glancing damage would help people ease into the game.
Optionally, why not have a toggle for veteran servers?
Optionally, why not have a toggle for veteran servers?
What would be the criteria for a player to be considered veteran? Played hours clearly doesn't matter, and hiveskill can be a bit misleading.
I'm below 1:1 KD and fluctuate around 1500-1600, because I usually command or support... Would I be a veteran? If not, because the limit is 2000, veteran servers would probably miss me because noone wants to command
From what I understand the 75 bite damage cone was increased at the expense of removing the 25 and 50 cones. You should have improved.
In theory perhaps. It and many other small changes turned me into nothing but a 10 damage dealing meat shield for teammates, even in a superior position. Think I just swapped to grenades for a few weeks as those could actually guarantee more damage. Vanilla rifle and skulk biting certainly needed some work.
Talking specifically shooting experience, it's just crazy that I can murder at a game like Depth and suck so much at NS2. I'm far from the best aim sure, but enough hours in FPS games and familiar with NS2 strats to expect at least a bit of efficacy. Happy to see this changed, even if it will take some tweaking. there's plenty of games (to borrow from) that provide a great experience for the 80th percentile without overpowering the crack shots.
Just because something is bugged doesn't mean you should fix it. If a bug adds something to the game, or makes the game better, keep it. As it stands, the old hitboxes were good for balance.
Disagree with this on all fronts.
1) Bugs should be squashed. Adjust from there
2) The bug didn't "add" something to the game, it removed something from it. It doesn't feel good to feel like your obvious hits are absorbed into nothingness. Fixing the bug added something and makes it feel better.
3) The old hitboxes weren't good for balance, they were unreliable and felt bad. It's just that the game was balanced around the bug. And it can be balanced around the fix, as well.
Just because something is bugged doesn't mean you should fix it. If a bug adds something to the game, or makes the game better, keep it. As it stands, the old hitboxes were good for balance.
Disagree with this on all fronts.
1) Bugs should be squashed. Adjust from there
2) The bug didn't "add" something to the game, it removed something from it. It doesn't feel good to feel like your obvious hits are absorbed into nothingness. Fixing the bug added something and makes it feel better.
3) The old hitboxes weren't good for balance, they were unreliable and felt bad. It's just that the game was balanced around the bug. And it can be balanced around the fix, as well.
Comments
I've written several times, that along with me, I'm sure others would be fine with fixing those small areas where the hitbox didn't cover the model. That's improvement.
But instead, they've blown up the hitboxes significantly, because hurr-durr everyone else is doing that, so it must be a good course to take.
EDIT:
I would even understand if they enlarged the hitboxes to reduce the complexity of geometry (I'm assuming that would have a performance bonus, but not sure)
@The_Welsh_Wizard laziness may be the first impression, but I'm sure it's not that simple most of the time... so you're also being lazy by not considering their reasons for easy routes
OFFTOPIC:
Oh, and @Bicsum in case you want to get rid of that pesky W10 notification:
PM Sent.
Also, speak for yourself. Most people were asking to revert it or just reduce the model size, which wouldn't solve the problem.
And yes, I understand that hitboxes, by definition, are not the same as models. Otherwise, they would just use the raw models for hit detection.
EDIT:
In hindsight, I should've added two more options: for neutrals and small fix proponents, so sorry about that
EDIT:
Anyway, I foresee the devs fixing the fade scythe and that's all. The rest of the arguments will be ignored yet again
The old hitbox was flawed. It was perceived as bad hitreg and it seemed like a bug. But instead of fixing it, people want it to stay, because otherwise it kills balance or "decreases the skill ceiling".
How about we balance the whole game soley through the hitbox and call it learning curve? If a life form is too weak, just remove some parts of the hitbox here and there and tell people to aim for the left eye.
Sure, the uncovered spots are gone, so did they fix it? Yes. Did they introduce a bigger problem for the game as a whole? Absolutely
Hitting a skulk now is just trivial. I'm winning engagements against three skulks alone. And I consider myself a bad shot, and also have <30 fps most of the time.
Now thats hyperbole
Whilst the primary goal might have been about how the game "feels", it's beyond stupid to not recognise secondary outcomes and just how bad it actually has been for balance.
Just because something is bugged doesn't mean you should fix it. If a bug adds something to the game, or makes the game better, keep it. As it stands, the old hitboxes were good for balance.
Again I reiterate: If it was all about "feel", why didn't they just reduce the skulk model? It's what people have actually been asking for anyway. It would have killed 2 birds with 1 stone, yay balance and yay "feels".
Now we have a ripple effect to contain, GG WP.
I'm 100% sure they knew this would lead to a change of balance, but they have to know how bad it is, BEFORE they make additional changes.
Really disappointing to read this from you as a comp player..
Even if they reduced just the model, the hitbox would still not have fitted properly. Some areas would still be more forgiving that others. They had to touch the hitbox in any case.
No, it's the same logic!
I have to agree on that. They did have a contingency plan by increasing bite area, which SORT OF worked.
Nope. As fixing missing spots and blowing up the hitbox are not the same either
EDIT:
Regarding the concealment of the change, I totally agree with them on that too. People would have started playing differently just by knowing about it beforehand. But that doesn't justify the change itself.
Then it was at a completley inappropriate time. Marines were already dominating early game, the buffs should have come first!
What? Why?
...and not deal any damage when you're not, no matter what :]
(again, within reason, because a hitbox will be less complex than a model)
That's a very naive dogmatic approach...
With the Turbo mod SCC played around with something functionally similar (larger bullets, side biting) and it made the game more satisfying to play, at least for me personally. Just pushing the game slightly more towards arcade-y, get shots to feel a bit more meaty. It went a bit to far, naturally, and would've required balancing in respawn/cost department, but just having decreased glancing damage would help people ease into the game.
Optionally, why not have a toggle for veteran servers?
What would be the criteria for a player to be considered veteran? Played hours clearly doesn't matter, and hiveskill can be a bit misleading.
I'm below 1:1 KD and fluctuate around 1500-1600, because I usually command or support... Would I be a veteran? If not, because the limit is 2000, veteran servers would probably miss me because noone wants to command
From what I understand the 75 bite damage cone was increased at the expense of removing the 25 and 50 cones. You should have improved.
In theory perhaps. It and many other small changes turned me into nothing but a 10 damage dealing meat shield for teammates, even in a superior position. Think I just swapped to grenades for a few weeks as those could actually guarantee more damage. Vanilla rifle and skulk biting certainly needed some work.
Talking specifically shooting experience, it's just crazy that I can murder at a game like Depth and suck so much at NS2. I'm far from the best aim sure, but enough hours in FPS games and familiar with NS2 strats to expect at least a bit of efficacy. Happy to see this changed, even if it will take some tweaking. there's plenty of games (to borrow from) that provide a great experience for the 80th percentile without overpowering the crack shots.
1) Bugs should be squashed. Adjust from there
2) The bug didn't "add" something to the game, it removed something from it. It doesn't feel good to feel like your obvious hits are absorbed into nothingness. Fixing the bug added something and makes it feel better.
3) The old hitboxes weren't good for balance, they were unreliable and felt bad. It's just that the game was balanced around the bug. And it can be balanced around the fix, as well.
What bug? Was something confirmed to be a bug?
Queued jumps from b250.