Marines In Public Games...
Zek
Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 7962Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 7962Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
<div class="IPBDescription">Will they ever be more pub-friendly?</div> I'm a huge fan of NS, but I'm starting to play it much less than before because on the pub servers I play on, the Aliens almost always win. Marines need both a good commander and a whole team that listens to the commander and has good aim in order to be successful, and that scenario just does not happen very often in teams of strangers.
I'm not in a clan, but I've also heard that Marines dominate in clan games because they're extremely powerful if they know what they're doing. Maybe Aliens need help in organized games, but the fact is that Aliens are already very hard to beat in your average pub game. IMHO, something needs to be added to Marines to make organization in general easier, in such a way that it doesn't help a team of experienced players that much but helps your average Marines work together. I don't have many suggestions, though I think friendly blips on the minimap would help a bit. For how technologically advanced Marines are supposed to be, it seems odd that they don't have much besides simple voice communication to stay organized.
Will any changes be made in 1.1 or future patches to address this?
I'm not in a clan, but I've also heard that Marines dominate in clan games because they're extremely powerful if they know what they're doing. Maybe Aliens need help in organized games, but the fact is that Aliens are already very hard to beat in your average pub game. IMHO, something needs to be added to Marines to make organization in general easier, in such a way that it doesn't help a team of experienced players that much but helps your average Marines work together. I don't have many suggestions, though I think friendly blips on the minimap would help a bit. For how technologically advanced Marines are supposed to be, it seems odd that they don't have much besides simple voice communication to stay organized.
Will any changes be made in 1.1 or future patches to address this?
Comments
Commmander mode is getting some serious improvements in 1.1, which will make his job a lot easier. Hopefully this will even things out for marines in pubs. There are going to be a LOT of other changes, too.
Is NS a game being made for Clans or for Pubs?
yah this has prolly been talked about a lot already I just never heard what the answer was. prolly cause it's un-answerable... I've always thought build a game for clan play, and the pub play will follow. I'd love to see an 80 team ladder running for NS!
-p
<!--emo&::sentry::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/turret.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='turret.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::sentry::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/turret.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='turret.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::sentry::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/turret.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='turret.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::skulk::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/skulk.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='skulk.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::sentry::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/turret.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='turret.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::sentry::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/turret.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='turret.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::sentry::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/turret.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='turret.gif'><!--endemo-->
<b>Strategic tasks should be simple and intuitive.</b> It should be easy to tech up, build structures, and organize groups to accomplish general strategic goals ("capture resource nodes in this area," "attack this hive," "defend our base and build stuff"). At this level, the commander is mostly dealing with his entire team as a single unit. At worst, he's dealing with an "attacking group" and a "defending group." He's also dealing with the map in terms of four locations: the three hives and the marine spawn.
<b>Tactical tasks should be more complex.</b> It should be more difficult to set up a defensive perimeter, or coordinate multiple, simultaneous offensives. It should be somewhat complex to equip a specific squad with a specific gear set. At this level, the commander is interested in specific soldiers. He's also dealing with specific locations on the map.
At present, it is not possible for a commander to ignore tactical tasks. This is bad, because it means novice commanders can easily get wrapped up micromanaging 1% of their responsibilities, while ignoring the other 99%. I'm in favor of any solution (order forms, rally points, sergeants) which frees up a commander to focus on strategic tasks.
Somewhere in your post, you got turned around and started contradicting yourself. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Somewhere in your post, you got turned around and started contradicting yourself. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
?
My entire post can be reduced down to:
1. Strategic tasks should be easy, and a commander should be required to complete them.
2. Tactical tasks should be difficult, and should be optional for a commander.
This is not the case in NS as it exists now:
1. Some strategic tasks (sending everyone to an empty hive, for example) can be really difficult.
2. Some tactical tasks (equiping specific soldiers with specific equipment) are pretty much mandatory.
Marines win about 25% of the time. But most of the time marines lose is because the lack of a good commander.
Feel Free to come
....
At present, it is not possible for a commander to ignore tactical tasks. This is bad<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Tactical = complex. Should be difficult. Yet you want the comm to be able to ignore them? Doesn't make any sense to me. If you want them difficult, you should require teamwork and coordination -- and that's what the comm is FOR.
Strategic tasks should be the ones a comm doesn't have to worry about much. The commander shouldn't have to worry as much about building and other routine tasks. He's a commander, not a workman.
BTW, you may want to read the upcoming changes to the commander mode including things like request queues, group assignments, etc.
Yes.
Let's imagine a hypothetical version of the commander interface, which incorporates three new features. Note that I'm not advocating these features, I'm just using them as examples:
1. Marines can request TFs, turrets, and RTs. The commander simply has to approve the request.
2. Marines can buy any available weapon from the armory.
3. Marines can be assigned to a squad. The commander can select a squad leader. The squad leader can set waypoints/rally points for squad members.
Someone stepping into the chair for the first time could now ignore placing structures, handing out equipment, and setting waypoints.
After a game or two, our newb comm thinks "people keep asking for structures in stupid places. I'm going to turn off marine requests, and figure out where to place stuff myself."
After a few more games, he thinks "man, these marines keep wasting all my resources on shotguns. I'm going to turn the auto-buy feature off. If someone wants a weapon, I'll stop what I'm doing and give them one."
Eventually, he thinks "the squad leaders are nice, but my strategies are getting so complex that I can't afford to have another layer of command between me and my troops. I'm just not going to appoint any squad leaders next game."
The idea is that you make micromanagement advantageous (to reward experienced commanders) but you don't make it required.
Edit: As an addendum, I've seen the new commandermode features. The game is moving in the right direction here, I just think it's going to take a lot of work (and experimentation) to make the commander role accessible (but not overpowering).
More confusing then just having them say "TF here please" IMO.
2. Marines can buy any available weapon from the armory.
Removes commander control, allows for llamas to ruin game, kills ability of comm to save for upgrades, outfitting whole team.
3. Marines can be assigned to a squad. The commander can select a squad leader. The squad leader can set waypoints/rally points for squad members.
Now you want MORE commanders. In a game that is balanced with 8 players per side, sub-commanders aren't needed.
Basically, it looks like you want to either play in huge servers or remove the need for a comm. Your marine team is sounding more and more like a human version of the kharaa. What is the comm doing if the team is choosing where to build and setting their own waypoints?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Someone stepping into the chair for the first time could now ignore placing structures, handing out equipment, and setting waypoints.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The first *2* are "strategic" tasks according to your definition while the last *1* is "tactical". Yet you say you want to remove tactical tasks from the commanders workload.
<!--QuoteBegin--Deacon+Feb 25 2003, 11:42 PM PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Deacon @ Feb 25 2003, 11:42 PM PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Note that I'm not advocating these features, I'm just using them as examples:<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess I should have put that in bold or something.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Basically, it looks like you want to either play in huge servers or remove the need for a comm. Your marine team is sounding more and more like a human version of the kharaa. What is the comm doing if the team is choosing where to build and setting their own waypoints?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Providing high-level guidance, like "we should attack cargo hive" or "we need to capture more resources." Determining what tech should be researched, and how resources should be divided. Selecting people to delegate leadership roles to, and monitoring their performance. <b>Note that this is the role of a brand new commander, who is new to the role. More experienced commanders should be able to expand their role to include all the capabilities of the current NS commander. I am NOT saying "let's nerf the commander."</b>
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The first *2* are "strategic" tasks according to your definition while the last *1* is "tactical". Yet you say you want to remove tactical tasks from the commanders workload.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think assigning specific waypoints for marines qualifies as "At this level, the commander is interested in specific soldiers. He's also dealing with specific locations on the map."
Edit: stupid typos.
Also, marines in general on pubs could use some aiming lessons...
1. Never give up hope! A lesson learned from the two towers =)
2. Concentrate all your attention and be recourceful in this game. I know that some of the commanders are slightly distracted by real life. You don't want to have a 1/2 afk commander. Even when you think you are thinking hard, think harder you can do more things then you can possibly imagine.
3. Be friendly, your marines will love you. Adding comments like good job or way to go, will surely win their heart in battle.
4. Be strict, if your marines don't listen to you, demand, and if they still don't listen pay less attention to them!
Average marine pubs prolly have h4x0r-strike installed and are playing it all the time....so you're marines wont be anything more than CT's without their precious M4's. Dont expect them to listen or be able to perform for you when you need something done. Sad but true...
However, when I play on the marine team in pubs, it sickens me. There is just SO LITTLE teamwork, that the game is just not fun.
The problem is not with the commander either. As much as the commander may be good, you can be the BEST commander in the world and you will lose if your team doesn't listen.
So the marine problem is not with pubs themselves, but the MENTALITY of the majority of players on the pubs. Let's be honest here. There are not many mods that put THIS much of an emphasis on teamwork to the extent that teamwork is essential to winning.
On CS pubs (OMG he said the CS word!! <!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'><!--endemo--> ) you don't really NEED teamwork. Individuals that are highly talented can make up for lesser talented individuals. It's the same with many other mods.
However on NS teamwork is the cornerstone of the marine team. Without it, you lose. Period.
My observations has seen that many marine players on pubs just do not understand that you MUST work as a team. They do their own thing regardless of any suggestions by people to do otherwise.
Look at the facts though. Aside from 'winning', is there any INCENTIVE for marine players to work together? Let's keep in mind that many players are selfish. If there is no DIRECT benefit to working together then they won't bother.
What I think we need to do is provide a DIRECT yet INTANGIBLE benefit to the marines. To me I think the best way would be through the scoreboard. This is not what you think though.
By using the scoreboard, we can appeal to the egos of the marine players. I know the devs don't want the scoreboard to be used, but I would rather use the scoreboard since it is a 'free' way to reward marines. I would rather do this instead of providing an 'in game' benefit. (which they don't really need)
Possible scoreboard alternative: (pub servers only)
Give kill credits for: (positive)
-Team hive kills: A group of 3+ marines that kill a hive with GUNS get +5 kills
-Base defence kills: A marine gets a +1 credit for a kill if he is in range of an active TF or CC (even if alone)
-Teamwork kills: A marine gets a +1 credit for a kill if he is in a group of 3 or more
Give NO credit for: (neutral)
-Kills in groups of 2 or when alone
-Kills by mines
-Kills by welder
Give negative credit for: (negative)
-punish incompetence: Should a marine with a 'good' weapon (HMG etc) die WITHOUT a kill, they get a -1 kill credit
-punish rambos: For each death when ALONE give the marine a -1 kill credit
As a potential option, you could even 'punish' those with really bad scores (-10 or more) by increasing their spawn time. If a player with a -10 score dies, they are LAST to spawn. All other players with a positive score would spawn ahead of him, even if they died afterwards.
This is just a basic idea, but I think you get my drift. If you had a scoring system like this I guarantee that people would be falling over one another to go out in groups of three or more. Also, with a negative score you would find that rambos would QUICKLY learn to stay together. It would also give commander the chance to see who is a 'team player' and who isn't.
Anyway, I know we don't want to get into kill boards, but I think a board that only records kills for TEAMWORK would encourage teamwork.
My 2 cents anyway...
Regards,
Savant
I gave them ALL HA/HMG/Welder AND Lev 2 both, and they managed to get themselves butchered by Fades.
No, I don't think Fades are overpowered. I think my marines were ramboing idiots.
You get punished if you rush out and die alone, yes. That's the idea.
Tell me this folks... Would you be MORE or LESS likely to go out alone if you knew dying alone would give you a -1 kill?
Methinks people would AVOID going out alone and would wait and go out in groups.
Isn't that what we WANT?
Regards,
Savant
And you missed the point of that post. Hiding in base while fades spam your spawn is the worst thing to do yet many marines do it. Sometimes you have to rush out, even if alone, in order to kill the fades/show the rest of your team what it means to "grow a pair".
the current res model is so unbalanced that the marines can only lose on these servers if they are clueless.
but dunno, sounds like the situation is different in america - in aus, and on the servers i usually play on (Gamearena), its not uncommon for 90%+ of the players to be clanners or hard-core regulars, and complaints about marines being underpowered make no sense at all in that situation.