1.2 Gameplay Changes

[A Spork]

Agreed, Nodes/Eggs + OM/RC should give creds/evos, otherwise there's a lot less incentive to attack the enemy's base.

[temple]

This is feedback.  This is what you say people don't give.

Players should have every reason to attack the enemy.  Anything that rewards the player for doing what they should (attacking the enemy/winning the game) should be rewarded.  The problem is that players, particularly humans, delay the game.  The major problem I have with 1.1 is that games don't close.

Aliens tend to attack more because their base is weak.  They can't camp effectively.  Humans are the usual suspects of delaying games because it is more effective for them to ride turrets and spam. So, I tend to advocate for the alien team more simply because the alien team does the right thing, which is attack.

If aliens have to build forward with eggs or humans build forward more with repeaters....good.  That is the kind of behavior you want. If people advance on the map and kill stuff, good.  Why wouldn't you give them credits for it?  Why wouldn't you reward them and enable to them to keep attacking?  The 'freedom to build forward' sounds more like 'they are afraid to build forward'.  And there is always a risk vs reward when it comes to advancing.  But if you don't give a reward for moving forward, why should be people do it? 

Building forward helps people move forward and when they move forward, it helps them kill bases.  So, if you give credits for killing structures, you reward them for killing bases (the end goal).  However, forward structures might get killed in the process, thus rewarding the enemy team for doing what...moving forward.  So, either way, moving forward and hopefully ending the game is more rewarding than camping.  But the players have to risk something (moving forward).  You can't have fun and risk nothing.   You can't win and risk nothing. 

By not giving evos/credits for destroying structures, you are creating a disincentive for the exact behavior you are trying to encourage. 

[elmo*USA]

it had almost no impact on encouraging people to attack more

QQ here, what changes have been made to encourage people to attack more? and is encouraging people enough?

[Rocinante]

By not giving evos/credits for destroying structures, you are creating a disincentive for the exact behavior you are trying to encourage. 

The issue is if the incentive for killing structures is high enough, then people won't build forward bases for fear of feeding the enemy.  However if the incentive for killing bases is too low, people will prefer to killwhore and leave the base alone.  It's a balance, which can only be discovered from playing a lot of games and gathering data on what things work and what things need work.  I'm too far from a game designer to know what the answer is, only that I liked going after a couple nodes as a basi and getting enough to evolve to a goon and finish off the base before people come back to reload :>

[temple]

By not giving evos/credits for destroying structures, you are creating a disincentive for the exact behavior you are trying to encourage.  

The issue is if the incentive for killing structures is high enough, then people won't build forward bases for fear of feeding the enemy.  However if the incentive for killing bases is too low, people will prefer to killwhore and leave the base alone.  It's a balance, which can only be discovered from playing a lot of games and gathering data on what things work and what things need work.  I'm too far from a game designer to know what the answer is, only that I liked going after a couple nodes as a basi and getting enough to evolve to a goon and finish off the base before people come back to reload :>

They are just going to sit in the base when you go back to finish it off.  8-10 Chainsuits sitting in the base.  The same problem as before.  

The challenge is all on the attacker and none on the defender.  That's why attackers should have ways to get evos/credits outside of just killing players.  Otherwise, you have exactly what you have now.  Without changing something, its just reshuffling the cards.  

You don't have to be a game designer to know this.  All you have to do is play 1.1 long enough.

[David]

IMO it should only give funds for buildings in-range of the OM/RC.
So you get rewarded for attacking, but forward bases aren't feeding.

[UniqPhoeniX]

... I liked going after a couple nodes as a basi and getting enough to evolve to a goon and finish off the base before people come back to reload :>

Me too

[Bissig]

IMO it should only give funds for buildings in-range of the OM/RC.
So you get rewarded for attacking, but forward bases aren't feeding.

This sounds like a smart solution, though it might get cirumvented by maps like Nexus6 where humans can build downstairs below the actual base and it is still powered by the reactor at the default base. So, it is actually spaced apart and remote but still powered as if it where a few feet away.

Else: good idea.

[Plague Bringer]

IMO it should only give funds for buildings in-range of the OM/RC.
So you get rewarded for attacking, but forward bases aren't feeding.

This sounds like a smart solution, though it might get cirumvented by maps like Nexus6 where humans can build downstairs below the actual base and it is still powered by the reactor at the default base. So, it is actually spaced apart and remote but still powered as if it where a few feet away.

Else: good idea.

That could be fixed by having power or creep spread for the same distance, but form a sphere, rather than an infinitely tall cylinder, around the home building.

Unless, of course, those turrets are really just a few feet (vertically) from the reactor, which they very well may be. I've never examined the geometry of the map.

p.s. I love that base.

[UniqPhoeniX]

That could be fixed by having power or creep spread for the same distance, but form a sphere, rather than an infinitely tall cylinder, around the home building.

It is a sphere already, 1000gu radius iirc. BUT try building reactor in Niveus plant room behind 1st set of barrels (or on left side of middle path if u dare take the risk) and you can build in more then half the map, including: 1 room in 4 doors, top and bottom of large stairs, top floor from near stairs to right above OM, behind OM, human default base back entrance, path from there to near 4 doors, the corner of the wide path from human base front entrance, the corner between glass window and ledge, both rooms behind doors from stairs. That only leaves window room for aliens.

[benmachine]

In my opinion, given that killing telenodes comes in handy for, you know, winning the game, it's not that often that you really need more encouragement to kill one.

[Rocinante]

You don't have to be a game designer to know this.  All you have to do is play 1.1 long enough.

Ahh, but better would be to play 1.2(beta) long enough, and see if the problem persists.  Changes to balance other than credits for structures have also happened, which can affect the kind of situation you describe.

I agree that if everything else was the same, and credits just removed for structures, that wouldn't be a change for the better.  But that's not the only change.

[Vector_Matt]

What does "projectile volume 5 (against entities but not map architecture)" mean in the weapon descriptions?

Also, I'm really looking forward to the Flamethrower changes, I didn't like how very easy it was to roast yourself.

Edit: Oh, the builder changes for humans sound pretty fun too.

[Norfenstein]

What does "projectile volume 5 (against entities but not map architecture)" mean in the weapon descriptions?

It means, basically, that the projectile has a volume of 1 unit cubed with respect to walls and floors, but of 5 units cubed with respect to players and structures. So you can shoot through 1-unit wide hole in a wall, but when shooting between a wall and a dretch that's up to 5 units away from the wall, you will hit the dretch.

Dragoons should not be able to bite when pouncing, they're already overpowered in my opinion.

Allow me to explain this. In 1.1 you could bite while pouncing, but doing so would cancel the pounce damage. So you could do one or the other but not both, and there was no indication what was happening. I felt this was unacceptably unintuitive, but even if it were obvious it's a false choice anyway: it's always be better to do a flying head-chomp than to just deal the pounce damage (unless you're pouncing into a structure). I'm sure there are people that would rather lose the pounce damage and keep the flying bite, but I think this way is more fun, more accessible, and more interesting (bite is for close range, pounce is for long).

[temple]

Norf, let me throw this at you.

Dragoons are the workhorses of the Alien team.  They have to provide the heavy infantry role or elite soldier role.  They have substantial health, damage, and mobility.  This is necessary because they cover not 1 but 2 stages, in 1.1.  

The problem with goons (as with a lot of things in 1.1) is that they require a minimum of skill to use but can easily exploit inexperienced players.  Basically, slightly experienced players can dominate slightly experienced players to an unfair extent because pounce damage is so high and stage 1 humans are so weak.  

Why not lower pounce damage significantly but allow 'flying headchomps' (chomping while pouncing) to compensate?  

My belief is that headchomps take more skill and is a desired skill to encourage over simply pouncing naked humans to death.  By weakening pounce, inexperienced or unarmed humans aren't goon fodder.  On the contrary, novice players using goons would have to step up their abilities in order to dominate with the class.  Skilled players would be able adapt and obviously gain more use from the class.  But the skilled players are already deadly with the goon.  By stepping down pounce damage and allowing a pounce+bit combination, it is just forces the exploitative players to earn their kills.

[Norfenstein]

Basically, slightly experienced players can dominate slightly experienced[sic] players to an unfair extent because pounce damage is so high and stage 1 humans are so weak.

My belief is that headchomps take more skill

Why not lower pounce damage significantly but allow 'flying headchomps' (chomping while pouncing) to compensate?   

How significantly? Because -- since head-biting does more damage than pouncing -- you'd have to make it negative twenty to balance out their combined damage. And I agree that it takes more skill to headchomp than to pounce, so it sounds like your suggestion would precisely exacerbate the problem it's supposed to solve.

And if you mean that biting should cancel pounce damage like in 1.1, and that pounce damage should be lowered, then there would truly be no reason to ever use the pounce damage. Everyone would learn to bite during pounces, and everyone with enough skill to pull it off would do more damage during pounces than they do now.

[temple]

What problem is there with pounce, other than it takes relatively no skill to kill naked humans?  

I don't see how forcing players to rely on headchomps for the lethal damage to be exacerbating any problems.  The problem is that a stage 1 human team can be held hostage by a player that figured out how to hold right mouse button.  The problem is that everyone doesn't rely on headchomps and everyone can't use goons skillfully (but still accumulate a respectable share of kills).

I'm not trying to tell you how the game works.  I'm trying to tell you are fixing the wrong problem with a solution that is watering down the game.  1.1, goons are the cavalry and rants are the siege.  But 1.2, goons are just slightly smaller and acrobatic rants.

[Grape]

i disagree! 1 goon can be very easily taken out by 2 or 3 s1 humans.

[Norfenstein]

There were some minor changes made last week that I forgot to mention here:

• Pounce time scaled back to 800ms.
• cg_sprintToggle - changes the behavior of +button8 to toggle sprinting. Works better than the old behavior of 'boost' (you don't have to press sprint again if you stop moving) and obsoletes putting sprint on movement keys.
• Evolving no longer resets your velocity.
• Apparently stamina was broken - you could no longer black out from sprinting too much. That's been fixed, and its behavior slightly altered: in 1.1 you could continue sprinting into negative stamina (when your view starts to bob and you begin blacking out), but thereafter couldn't begin sprinting again (or to start with, if you jumped into negative stamina). This was a little unintuitive and unnecessary, so now you can begin sprinting whenever you have any amount of usable stamina.
  

[temple]

i disagree! 1 goon can be very easily taken out by 2 or 3 s1 humans.

I hope you are being sarcastic.

Imagine if you have more than 1 goon, how many humans would it take then?

[jaypee]

Tremulous 1.1 is:

S1: Aliens Overpowered
S2: Humans Overpowered
S3: Humans camping at Base, Aliens Pushing, then, it can happen two things:

1ºAliens push, push, them win
2º3 Humans with Lucy, with 1 Bs with Chain attack allien base, they die, but destroy all eggs. Humans win.

[David]

i disagree! 1 goon can be very easily taken out by 2 or 3 s1 humans.

I hope you are being sarcastic.

Imagine if you have more than 1 goon, how many humans would it take then?

If the just have rifles then lots, but the goon cost 3 evo's, so should be better than 0-cost hummies.
A human with larmour + a gun can take out a goon.

[Mario]

Make chaingun spin first before firing and it's gg

[KamikOzzy]

• Evolving no longer resets your velocity.

Good moves

[Plague Bringer]

Make chaingun spin first before firing and it's gg

They already raped the damage.

[Senor Bobbers]

They already raped the damage.

but reduced the spread

[Plague Bringer]

They already raped the damage.

but reduced the spread

It's noticeably suckier.

[A Spork]

yeah, I prefer the old Chaingun better...

[ReapDaWrapper]

They should make the chaingun so it takes a few seconds to start the barrel and it needs a deeper, louder sound.

[Paradox]

Go ahead and make it