Marking Hive Siege Spots On Overview Maps

StormLiong · February 2003

<div class="IPBDescription">Can someone do it?</div> I think it would be useful if by using the printable overview NS maps that are available, to mark out the areas that are within maximum (furthest..soz dunno if it was maximum/minimum) siege range of a hive.

I myself would find it useful since I always have a hard time trying to figure out whether area X is within reach of the siege range of hive, so i usually go as close as possible to be on teh safe side. I would rather go as far as possible frm the hive but still within siege range so that
1. takes (mayb slightly) longer for the kharaa to come in
2. might be an area that easier to defend

I would do it myself and spread it to the community but i really don;t have the time and nor do i have tht prog thingy that is apparently used to plan out strats.

I posted this also on teh marine start forum cos i was really not sure which forum this shoudl go into.

sej · February 2003

Hmm, i assume you mean a highlighted circle around the hive, on the overview, showing where a siege would be in range of the hive?

Personally i wouldnt like this, because

1) Clutters interface slightly

2) Finding new siege spots, and a siege being out of range, adds to the excitement of the game.

Well for no2 maybe its just me being wierd.

Anyway, siege spots can be learnt over time, and learning, to me, was part of the fun of NS.

Teufel_Eldritch · February 2003

I assume he is talking about the printable overviews that some NS fans have made. Not the Comm overview. Tho I could be mistaken.

Good idea...tho if if a lot of ppl use such a map feature I forsee games becoming nothing but boring siege fests. That prolly wont happen tho as most ppl that play NS dont dl the overviews or even visit these forums.

Bytor · February 2003

I'll consider adding siege range circles to each hive on my maps. I'm holding off on doing additions until I see what maps are accepted for 1.1 at which time I'm going to make new overview maps for the new official maps.

If I do add siege range circles, I'll have to update the maps if any patches change the range, which could be a pain, but maybe worth it.

Talesin · February 2003

Bytor: Please DON'T include siege ranges? Sieging is a skill learned through time as a Comm. If they want to figure it out, they *can* just go and make a LAN game, turn on sv_cheats 1, and have fun getting the feel of siege ranges. 'bigdig' makes buildings build instantly, and 'spawnhive' makes a hive grow. Then just ping the Hive, see if the siege will hit it. If not, 'givepoints' and make another siege gun closer until you've got the minimum range pegged. At least at that point they'll need to do some work to learn it, instead of looking at a quickie-reference, no offense intended.

Bytor · February 2003

No offense taken. However, I don't see why I shouldn't add siege ranges. Sure, people can figure it out on their own and even have fun doing so, but the same could be said about learning the map layouts, locations of hives and nodes, etc. The idea behind these overheads is to save people time and effort in learning the maps.

Talesin · February 2003

Learning the maps tends more toward being able to get around. Siege ranges are about finding the tiny little corners in rooms X, Y and Z that allow you to hit a Hive from an unexpected location that is more easily defended than any of the 'obvious' siege spots. It's about locating double siege-points, holding down two hives from one position. It's not about learning the maps; siege ranges are about learning how to exploit the maps for fullest gain, when the Marines already have huge advantages.

Bytor · February 2003

Can't say that I agree. Learning the siege spots is just one part of learning the maps. The overhead maps I make are intended to help players (commanders included) learn the maps and develop strategies. If including the siege ranges serves that goal, I see no reason not to.

You say that learning how best to siege a given map isn't part of learning the map, but I don't see from where you draw the distinction, or even why. It's all learning. My maps (and everyone else's overhead maps) are a tool to help in that learning.

Terr · February 2003

I'm sorta with Talesin on this one--wouldn't it also ruin the atmosphere a bit? "Just build in the helpfully painted circle on the floor." It's a step towards a map in which you would expect a big arrow to point to every vent with the words: "Skulks may appear here." and where everything is in ****-Tracy primary and secondary colors <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>

Ollj · February 2003

I want to have every dark corner covered with the sign: "<b>Watch out, hiding spot</b>"

Bytor · February 2003

Hrm ... yeah ... better get rid of crosshairs too. Oh, and remove the flashlight. While we're at it, let's get rid of the minimap.

Seriously though, where do you draw the line? If I stop short of adding siege ranges to the maps, why should I even go that far? Why shouldn't I remove the vent locations, hive locations, room names, and node locations? I'll just make it a big empty white box with some text that says "You are here. Somewhere." <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'>

Just remember, you don't have to use the maps.

XCan · February 2003

It's pretty easy actually, just figure out the radius of the siege and then use that to draw a circle and make your mousepointer have this circle and move it around on a overview map. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>

ignot · February 2003

I can't see the problem with adding seige points to a map. If you want to learn them in-game, or by testing in LAN then fine, but not everyone has the time or inclination to do that, and shouldn't be forced to because it's the way some other people did it.

Besides, Bytor is right, why should it be ok to have overheads to make some areas of gameplay easier, but not others?

Talesin · February 2003

Oh, wow... so you want to be able to know every siege point without expending any EFFORT? You want to use one of the more unbalanced structures in the game (admittedly more balanced with the 1.04 LOS restrictions) without having to LEARN it? Just look at a map, and see all the hiding spots that can BARELY reach the hive, and only have one entrance, or only one anywhere near the point being sieged?

Lazy. LAZY Marine.

ignot · February 2003

The same could be said for anyone using the overheads to learn the map layouts, without any EFFORT.
What about looking up the tech tree on a website, no EFFORT there. Heaven forbid people would read about other peoples strats without expending the EFFORT to LEARN them themselves.

Your argument is flawed, it's an all or nothing situation as far as I see it.

Driftwood · February 2003

I'm with Bytor. NS is played also by the less enthusiastic people who would just like their siege to work without them learning the right places by fooling around in a lan game by themselves. It helps marines and aliens both as everyone has the same knowledge. If maps are built correctly, there are no exploit spots to siege from. With clear overhead maps, marines know the possible places to siege and aliens know the places to guard for sieging. No more, "OMG! Can you siege Hive X from the place Y?!" A game shouldn't leave the player in the dark. "This is a siege cannon. It is powerful and has a long range. Test it yourself."

Bytor · February 2003

That's a good point -Driftwood- ... I hadn't even considered the equalization factor. Like you said, not everyone wants to spend time learning every little nook and crannie in every map, looking for potential siege points.

Talesin · February 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (ignot @ Feb 18 2003, 06:18 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> The same could be said for anyone using the overheads to learn the map layouts, without any EFFORT.
What about looking up the tech tree on a website, no EFFORT there. Heaven forbid people would read about other peoples strats without expending the EFFORT to LEARN them themselves.

Your argument is flawed, it's an all or nothing situation as far as I see it.  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Ooh. Sorry, I didn't realize that it was a black-or-white issue.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
I'm with Bytor. NS is played also by the less enthusiastic people who would just like their siege to work without them learning the right places by fooling around in a lan game by themselves. It helps marines and aliens both as everyone has the same knowledge. If maps are built correctly, there are no exploit spots to siege from. With clear overhead maps, marines know the possible places to siege and aliens know the places to guard for sieging. No more, "OMG! Can you siege Hive X from the place Y?!" A game shouldn't leave the player in the dark. "This is a siege cannon. It is powerful and has a long range. Test it yourself."
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Which is why there is only one Comm. If you're getting in the chair, you should be pretty experienced, and have a handle on how to play. In 1.0, only newbies were available. You wanted to get in, and get going with it. That feeling persists now. However, you now have Comms who *can* find their hindquarters with both hands. If you aren't willing to expend the effort to learn the siege ranges in a <b>LAN game</b>, why the heck should I pay attention? It takes more time to think about strategies to use, than it does to make a private server, turn on cheats, turn on bigdig, spawn a hive, givepoints, and work your way around the map, figuring out what Hives can be sieged from what points.
With an overhead with circles, people just look and 'ooh! Double-siege point!' where they overlap.

If you aren't going to put out the effort, you don't belong in the CC. If you aren't in the CC, you don't belong giving orders to the one who IS.

eaglec · February 2003

actually, some bloke released a Strategy Planner for marines a few weeks back that was very helpful at finding double siege points and good potential siege locations. StratPlan I think it was called, run server, choose map, drag and drop building and see ranges...

ignot · February 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Ooh. Sorry, I didn't realize that it was a black-or-white issue.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

I can't see any shades of grey.

You say that if you look up seige points on an overhead, you are a lazy commander.
By the same logic, using any external information about NS to improve your game is lazy and wrong (I use the term wrong due to your opposition to the idea, I doubt you are playing the Devils advocate).

There has been no argument to say why looking up seige points isn't ok, and using overheads to get an idea of the hive locations is. Why are they different? Why is one ok, but the other not?

As Bytor said:
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Seriously though, where do you draw the line? If I stop short of adding siege ranges to the maps, why should I even go that far? Why shouldn't I remove the vent locations, hive locations, room names, and node locations? I'll just make it a big empty white box with some text that says "You are here. Somewhere." </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

That's why I stated "it's an all or nothing situation as far as I see it."

I hope now that you do realise it is a black or white issue.

I could be wrong, but I doubt it <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'>

Driftwood · February 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Talesin @ Feb 18 2003, 08:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> If you aren't going to put out the effort, you don't belong in the CC. If you aren't in the CC, you don't belong giving orders to the one who IS. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
Are you suggesting that every commander should learn every siegepoint in every map before he is qualified to command? And that this can't be done by looking at an overhead map or using strat planner, because it is too easy that way? I repeat myself, double siege spots have nothing to do with the issue. They shouldn't exist and if they do exist, they should be fixed. They are in my opinion more guaranteed to be fixed if they are widely known of.

This kind of talk makes it harder and harder for newbies to join in. Game mechanics should be easy to understand and intuitive. It isn't intuitive to learn the range of your siege cannon by fooling around with it in a lan game. I would actually like to see a commander help in the game itself that would show the range at which each hive can be sieged.

Making the player guess things and hunt for the information he needs isn't a sign of good game design. Good game design is that things are easy to learn and understand, but hard to pull off successfully. The game interface or player's lack of knowledge about its mechanics should never be a deciding factor between success and defeat.

There is nothing wrong about things being easy. Knowledge is good for all players. Every NS player should know the siege range around each hive and an important room. It's not supposed to be somekind of secret knowledge only available to those who test every spot of every map by themselves. It should be knowledge obtained in a simple and easy manner i.e. overhead maps with siege ranges on them.

Marking Hive Siege Spots On Overview Maps

Comments