we have had a little discussion about this topic internally and also a vote out there which was pretty close. I'd love to put this topic up to discussion publicly to get more input before we make a decision on future contests.
Q: What is this topic about?
A: Enforcing "no-close spawn locations" on maps, for example, cross spawn on summit etc
So this could help out balancing the matchups alot, but we'd lose the randomness and all the pros with it. So it's a lesser-evil choice as long as maps aren't balanced out well for different spwans.
I haven't got that much experience but from what I've seen and played, close pos really make for poor games in too many cases. It's one of the reasons why ns_lost wasn't played in NS1 in the first place (except maybe most close pos favour Marines in NS2 while it was less definite in NS1).
If the gameplay and balance stay similar as they currently are, I'm highly in favour of enforcing static spawns (or at least "opposite spawns")
I played the game since long before UWE implemented random spawns on the maps. And I must say I enjoyed the gameplay much more when close spawns weren't in the game.
I really like the randomness that random spawns can bring, but I don't like it at the cost of balance. Maps have to be designed for random spawns in my opinion.
I don't think random spawns is a problem in itself at all, it's the close spawning locations that are the problem in my opinion.
It was very obvious to me that close spawns positions swayed the balance in the game alot. And made cheesy tactics, such as GL timing rush, bilebomb timing rush, carapace timing rush etc., way too powerful due to the short walking distance. It's simply way easier to get all the way to the enemy base with all of your forces, when they are right next to you. Compared to having to travel across the map.
Also, due to the short walking distance, it makes repeated mainbase rushes very easy to perform for either side. Mainbase rushes can be gameending, and you can basicly win the entire game by winning 1-2 engagements on close spawns. Which I dislike alot, it feels very cheap to win games that way. On spawns with long distance in between, you lose way more time performing a baserush, and a failed baserush is punished alot harder, which I like, since baserushes can be gameending.
On close spawns, the closest harvester you can attack is the mainhive harvester, which doesn't make much sense in terms of the gameflow of this game. You should be denying each others expansions instead of streaming into your enemys mainbase because that is your closest target.
Close spawns also make the other side of the map very deserted due to where the reinforcements from both teams are coming from. This causes easy access to a second tech point, since it's at the other side of the map compared to where the opposing team spawned. So, easy hive(tier2 abilities) for aliens for example.
I can't think of any rational reason why anyone would keep close spawns in the league, but alot voted against, so I expect to see some good arguments for it.
No for close spawns, Yes for random, cross spawns. There might be random spawns on summit: Data-Flight and Atrium-Sub as we have only 3 maps to play competetive matches and static spawns would be boring after playing few pcws... Same for ns2_tram, let it be Shipping-Warehouse/Server. Only Warehouse-Server spawn should be forbidden for me..
I agree with you guys. Close spawns makes the game unbalanced for suprise rushes. Either delete close spawns or ask UWE to make some counters that can give more mobility to aliens especially. Sure the gorge tunnel might be good for this but is still a low counter i think.
Close spawns also gives easy access by marines to aliens upgrades and makes each team put one player going to hive / marine base to annoy and scout aswell, which is really frustrating for them, boring and repetitive...
While we all love seeing NS2 based on mobility, map awareness (that includes the occupation of the entire map) and adaptation, close spawns makes the game more static and frozen.
Totally agree for cross spawns only. It brings a random advantage which shouldn't be in competitive matchs based on the real capacities of the teams playing against each other.
Dont personally like close spawn, the games i have played with this ends up with 2 marines constantly rushing for egg-lock/egg killing the whole round..
Cause if they copied veil exactly or more or less exactly then it should be ok(yes pipe probaply not the best but still) right?
I mean basically you would have to actually look at every map and check which spawns make for good games and which do not and just eliminate the ones that really do SUCK. .. Cause i feel it is not bad to have at least 2 possible spawnlocations so the comm cant be sure what the exact best starting tactic might be!
I might be wrong .. but it sounds like they did not a good job with the maps and i feel that should not be to hard to fix in the enxt few months?
Veil works fine and doesn't need changes, it's exactly the same as ns1 as you describe.
It would take us 5 minutes to make new copies of the maps with new starting positions, though it's not possible to just have cross spawns like some people suggest.
You edit the techpoints in the maps, these are the choices:
- Possible marine starting location.
- Possible alien starting location.
- Possible for both teams as starting location. (Causes imbalances due to vents and alienfriendly/marinefriendly spawns imo)
- No one can spawn at this tech point.
The big question in place here is if people want close spawns or not, see ns2_summit and ns2_tram - teams spawning at adjacent tech points with one resnode in between their spawning locations. That resnode is rarely capped in the earlygame.
I think the maps should be played as the designers intended for them to be played. On tram especially 2 teams can have very different opportunities depending on their spawn locations and IMO it often ends up with one team getting an unfair advantage.
I don't see any overwhelmingly compelling reason to remove close spawns. Yes, it's possible to rush close spawn hive/marine base easily, but that's part of the game. Different strategies for different situations. If your scouting fails, and you sent everyone to the opposite side of the map, you deserve to be punished. The disadvantages apply to both sides.
I'd prefer to see more maps before limiting variation.
Note that we have the custom map nightcup coming up in between season 1 and season 2.
That can bring in some custom maps into the season play, which will bring the variation you desire.
I can revive my mod where you could exclude combinations of spawns (ie. leave tram as is, but make warehouse v server never happen). So that's another option.
Cool suggestion.
However, due to both teams starting at same locations causing imbalances because of vents and alienfriendly/marinefriendly spawns, I personally don't like it too much.
I think vent entrances leading into marine bases is an imbalance. It makes base harassment/rushing way too easy for aliens. Combined with close spawns, this is even worse. Take FC(a) vs Sub(m) as an example, aliens can jump the vent into sub before marines reach comp lab, forcing them to walk back to save base.
The only reason there is a vent entrance in Sub Access on summit now, is because they implemented random spawns, and it's a bad hive for aliens. That was UWE's way of "fixing" that.
It is easily fixable though, just closing the vent entrance into sub should be no problem to do in a few minutes if we decide on "no close spawns".
The vent leading into sub access is a non-issue. There are mines and observatories.
I also prefer defending sub hive as an alien instead of atrium. If that is what gets decided there's no issue with the vent either.
-
On tram, I like the idea of having warehouse/server room/shipping as avaliable start locations, without the possibility for close warehouse - server room spawn.
-
Like Danny said, close spawn usually ends up with marines rushing hive for egg/harassment all round long.
There are no mines or observatories in the first 30-40 seconds of the game. So it surely is an issue on close spawns at least. Also, one gorge (and a skulk to cover him from marines entering the vent) in the vent can clear the mines, and be a massive harassment for very little risk/cost later in the game when bilebomb is up. Another reason why I don't like vents in marine spawns. I've used this tactic in several games, and it feels very cheap compared to the damage you can do with it. It isn't as much of a problem when the gorge is bilebombing from a corridor, when he is doing that he is an easy kill.
I don't know if it's a good idea to have rules specific to a given map just because of a vent. I think in the case of this vent, the appropriate response would be to get in touch with the mapper directly.
Removing a vent entrance in a marine spawn is not really a rule, more like a balance change to the map.
As far as I'm told, this was also something that was done by ENSL on at least one NS1 map.
For sure, we are gonna use mendasp's mod in any case, else we will be forced to make new versions of the maps every time there is a patch for ns2. However, I don't think it's viable to have both teams be able to spawn at the same locations due to vent systems and biased areas, as I mentioned earlier. It simply gives too much of an advantage/disadvantage depending on the location and race.
It's good if the spawn and areas around it are biased for the race spawning in that location. But when both races can spawn at that location, you suddenly have a spawn that's biased for the opposing race, I don't think that is good for map balance.
Mendasp is the current official mapper of ns2_summit, but every official change he makes have to be confirmed by UWE as far as I know. And removing the vent entrance will make sub an even worse spawn for aliens on random spawns. Random spawns will still be played on public servers in ns2, so a change like that will hurt public play, and probably not gonna happen just for our sake.
UWE are pretty persistent about completely random spawns and close spawns, so I don't expect them to do anything about these issues.
They even stated that they would rather have the community do competetive versions of the maps if the community feels the maps are imbalanced due to random spawns.
SO they focus on the public players a bit more cause they are ofc more ppl .. WHORES much? !
I think i just read between the lines of your last post swalk that rines do not have a fixed Spawnlocation either? .. or did i misread that? CAUSE WHAT??
Marines are also spawning randomly in ns2 by default, at least on some maps, though veil is exactly the same as ns1.
But summit is a circle map with 5 tech points. One tech point in the middle, no one can spawn there, but else both teams spawn completely randomly on all the other 4 tech points(north/south/east/west).
That means both teams can spawn at the same positions in different rounds, which obviously causes imbalances, especially when the map was designed to have aliens in the north and marines in the south. And the last 3 tech points (east/west/middle) was designed as expansion points.
At least they started to listen to some of the feedback competetive players have given them, and they have awknowledged that "lifeform/weapon explosions" (due to personal res(marine side) and alien commander(alien side)) is a problem. To explain this a little bit further, the marine commander researches shotguns for example, and then ALL marines can buy them instantly from gamestart with their personal resources if they want. And due to not having people use their personal resources for harvesters/chambers etc. you can easily have 4-5 fades pop at the same time in ns2.
They want to adress that, they just don't know how.
I made a suggestion to fix that about 6 months ago, but they didn't seem to like that.
It was something like the cost of lifeforms/weapons would increase by % of the team already having that specific weapon or lifeform(dropped weapons should obviously still count to the % so you cant abuse it by dropping your weapon while your teammate is buying another). You could call it some kind of lifeform/weapon upkeep. The extra "upkeep cost" could easily be shown on the buy menus.
That would scale with player numbers and work well with both 6v6 and 16v16 etc.(not that 16v16 is currently possible due to performance atm.)
Dont worry bout going offtopic .. i need to know those things so i can start flaming the second i start playing this game XD ! All i need for my new PC is the case now . god damn it everything arrived but the Case .. GOD IS CRUEL ! XD !
The way i see it NS2 will be like NS1 Subject to ALOT of change even though it is alrdy released!
Maybe in a few years the game will actually be good XD !
If close spawns are random I am against them. Especially if aliens get subspacethey are SEVERElY disadvantaged. Also if the Marines are in Warehouse and aliens are in server that's a problem too, though not as bad. But subspace is just unplayable imo. So if it's all or nothing I can't support close spawns. Someteams will lose some rounds because of them this weekend.
