Overly Chatty Penguins
The Ready Room => General => Topic started by: Lightning Blue on December 15, 2003, 10:06:52 AM
-
The current incarnation of NS:Combat is not very enjoyable I have found, and I am considering not running it.
However, I'd like Lunixmonster to be fun for all, so we are going to try this vote.
Please vote, and explain why you voted.
Note there is not a I don't Care option, if you don't care don't bother to post! You have been warned!
Of course, my view on this is subject to get more positive (or negative) as we move towards release, so stay tuned! ^^
-
Remember not to judge a final product by it's beta builds...that said, it depends on whether the stalemate problem can be fixed somehow. Assuming it is, I'd prefer a seperate NS:C server, because IMO combat gets more and more fun as the number of players goes up, and having the map change to regular NS just when you've got enough players for a really good game of combat would be a little frustrating.
[Edit]: Actually, I don't really mind the map switching to NS, I mind it doing it automatically based on number of players. Therefore I'm going to vote for the option he added when I was making this post :p
-
I think it should be left with all maps in cycle. With 3.0's ability to votemap, if everyone on the server gets fed up with playing NS:C, they can just vote to a normal NS map, and vice versa.
Oh yeah, add co_dawn to the cycle. :D
-
I wish there were an 'other' button so I could post my earlier suggestion, where admins can turn ns:c on and off with a command, like admin_nsc.
All it would have to do is switch the mapcycle files.
That, in combination with the player limit, would be the best solution imo.
-
Well I dont like the idea of having a seperate Comabt only server because I dont want to draw people away from the original LM, even if it is LM: Combat :D. So I would put them in the mapsycle but can only be changed by Admins or votes.
-
I would personally love to see both modes played alternatively on the same server. It's a refreshing break and it gives everybody a "guaranteed" knowledge of map cycle.
If joe pubber is playing NS classic and after a round gets sick of it, you can play a map of ns combat easily. Same goes visa-versa.
Having 2 servers would be a seperate option, but then you'd get the problem of splitting the playerbase of the server. If Player A says "Let's play combat. I'm going to the combat server" and half the people go, but half remain, you end up in getting some pretty unenjoyable games. I have to say combat is quite fun with large player groups, as is NS.
That being said, my vote is cast for mapcycling running both types of game alternatively. Once 3.0 is public, people are going to come to Lunixmonster for the name and for the playerbase. But they're also going to want to play Combat probably more than anything. I say if you give them even doses of each game before making a set decision, you're good to go.
-
I voted to leave all maps in the mapcycle. I don't like the idea of having to switch between servers, it's the same game nonetheless. I have faith that the stalemates will be fixed by the time it gets released.
-
Well, I would say leave all the maps in the same cycle because I would think everyone would want to play Combat mode also, and I don't think that they would really like to go to another server just to play Combat mode. If you do run all maps on the same server, you should do it NS mode, then Combat mode, then NS mode, and so forth, so everyone can get a taste of Combat, then NS and see how it goes from there. Those are just my thoughts anyways. o_O
-
Combat is kinda fun, I like the fast pace it is, it is a nice change from NS:C despite all the obvious problems with it that can make it unfun fast ;p my vote stands with keep them in the mapcycle
-
yes keep them in map cycle with a nice mix maybe 2 combat maps then 2 regular ones blah blah blah......
but i think the biggest thing will be a auto vote that pops up 5mins to the map finish giving 2 combat maps and 2 reg maps to pick from. seems like a happy medium to me.
-
I think that we should first test it out to see how much we even like it and if it has a lasting quality. If not, well that problem is solved. If we like it, then there should be two servers (if it's feasible) or just have the over 6v6, regular NS and under, NS: Combat.
-
#2 gets my vote. This way we get to try out a diverse mix of Combat and Standard NS. In any case, after having played Combat for a little while (a week or two maybe?), we should have this discussion again, to see how our views have changed.
-
I like the idea of switching maps so that you can play NS:C with large amounts or small amounts.
-
I agree that we should test it out first, and test it a little while after all the hyperness and commotion of a new release. For the moment, however, I am voting on running all maps together on the same cycle. I like the idea of having separate servers to go to to play Combat or normal NS, depending on my mood, but there is a chance that that might cause one of the servers to be less populated than usual. I am still leaning to that idea however, as being able to stay with regulars on an LM server, either in a game of NS or C, is more appealing.
-
Well I wouldnt want it to be based on players, because I have had fun games of ns that were 3v3, infact many many fun games. I myself cannot stick to a decision 100% because I havent even played ns:c yet, and we will just have to test it :). My vote was two servers though.
-
i say try 2 servers and if the community gets annoyed from server switching (dont see why they would tho) then scratch it, im pretty sure itll go well tho
-
I think we shoudl test it out , but i will like the mapcycle option and not 2 seperate servers
-
My vote: Run all maps in the mapcycle at all times.
No need to spend extra bucks on an extra server that you don't need. That's just my opinion. Let it run by how the default/map cycle settings are.
Play standard NS and then off to some Combat to let off some steam and do whatever. Or do more so of whatever in Combat than in NS :p
-
Im standing somewhere between "2 servers" and "every map in the map cycle". Both is goodie, But the first option i think i would dislike.
Note: i didnt vote in the poll, since im split between 2 of the options.
-
I would have voted for one of the first two options if I hadn't accidentally voted null.
I love Combat and don't want to see it gone, and I also don't want a second server for it dividing the playerbase.
NS's default method might work, though I think it was more complicated than LB said above. This is how I thought it worked:
1) Time for map change
2) Is there a Combat map next?
3) If yes to 2, check if the playercount is right for combat
4) If yes to 3, change to scheduled combat map
5) If no to 3, skip combat map until next non-combat map in rotation
6) If no to 2, continue normally.
But if it's merely a simple play-combat-only-if-playercount-under-12, I'd vote for keep normal map rotation.
-
Even though running more than one server makes more work for the admin, it is more enjoyable for the players. It is a personal choice based upon what you like (and what mood you are in at the time) which mode that you want to play.
Thats why I vote for two, sperate servers.
-
Keep in mind more servers costs money...
That is unless LB goes in like a ninja and steals server space and totally flips out and wails awesomely hard on a guitar at the same time.
-
Keep in mind more servers costs money...
That is unless LB goes in like a ninja and steals server space and totally flips out and wails awesomely hard on a guitar at the same time.
Uhh
A bit off topic, but that sounds like Furi Kuri (FLCL) :D
lol
-
Thou shalt now have your ugh, baleeted lashed 88 times with a 2x4 for speaking of that.
(BTW: I hate that show... :p)
-
Thou shalt now have your just noticed - baleeted here too lashed 88 times with a 2x4 for speaking of that.
(BTW: I hate that show... :p)
Furi Kuri > Uranium - 235
:lol:
-
seconded
-
You know.. I acctually want to change the vote to make it if there is less then 10 People in the server it should be NS:Combat, and If there is more there should be NS. Because It is really hard to play NS with only 10 players. And most of the time, You have a Marine on the team which is either afk or an idiot, and you have the commander, and on the Alien side you usually have atleast 2 Gorges, so it is very hard. And most of the time the Marines get stomped easily by Aliens in small games.. They just cant keep up with the speed of the skulkys and the amount of Gorges that the Aliens can have at one single time. Also, in 3.0 the Gorges spit damage will be increased and the Heal Spray will be decreased. Atleast that's what I heard in the NS forums..
-
And also I was just thinking about this after I voted for #1, How would this work? Because people usually always leave at the end of a map, and come back to the server. I think this would be kind of confusing for the server to work out..
-
I don't find it that incredibly hard to play 5v5 games. Of course 8v8 is better, but it's not too bad with 5v5.
-
Combat is turning out (as of build 3.0d) to be a a great game with 3v3+ 2v2 I haven't tried and 1v1 is nice for waiting for people to join up. I say if it gets run at all It need to be a different server. If anyone has any questions about 3.0/ Combat I'll help you... :)
-
either default or everymap would pwn
-
I say leave all maps in the mapcycle, but the idea of the mode being based on the server population is also good. I'd say that i'm happy with either!
-
I would like what others have mentioned of alternating in the cycle, 2 co_, 2 ns_, 2 co_, etc...
-
Well LB, Iv'e voted for the separate boxes. It eliminates the whining that the admins will come up against tbh. My personal pref are NS maps, NS:C atm is fun but gets boring & repetative (much like CS has become to me). Don't get me wrong even after 3 years of playing CS I still go back to it, same as NS:C. Separate servers would be idealistic. We are (if we decide to run NS:C) going to run separate boxes, less hassle and easyer to manage (plugins etc).
-
Nothing personal LaYkE, but you haven't played NS:C for three years yet; you've played CS for three years by now, and you still keep coming back for more, yet you fear that NS:C gets boring? I'm sorry, but for your reasoning is confusing at best. Can you explain?
-
Nothing personal LaYkE, but you haven't played NS:C for three years yet; you've played CS for three years by now, and you still keep coming back for more, yet you fear that NS:C gets boring? I'm sorry, but for your reasoning is confusing at best. Can you explain?
Thats what I said, CS for 3 years :lol:
Sorry for being unclear. It's like this ::
CS has become very same old same old however I keep coming back to it.... actually no I don't I keep going back to the one server where my old clan hang out and have a laff with them. I don't go to any other CS servers, it's really the people/community that keep me there, good laff.
NS:C on the other hand is new but at the same time very repetitive and does get boring.... it lacks an edge imo. CS had it's hiding in buildings sniping, buying a para for the laff). While the NS tech tree you follow is an original idea and (quite novel if I do say so myself) I still find the oh lets go straight down a hallway and shoot aliens, if were lucky we'll make it to the hive. There is very little strat involved just shooting skills. Then again the Alien side is a little better in this aspect.
I guess what I mean is that NS maps rather then CO maps will be the big cheese. NS:C is great if you want a quick game straight into action but I can't see any major pull towards it in all fairness. I have found (and judging) from playing most people play a round or two at most then drop.
It's all down to a preference and mine's NS only :) Who knows maybe Flayra will release an excellent V1.0 with all the bells and whistles, it is only beta atm.
-
Ah, I see.
I'm starting to get a little annoyed with the testers (not their fault I hasten to add). Not because it really bothers me much that they have access and I don't, but because I believe that a lot of our votes against Combat (at least Combat on LM) come from those people. So I'll say it now:
I don't care if Combat is not so hot. I don't give a damn if Combat gets boring after a while. I want to play Combat, and I want to play it with the Lunix crew! I don't vote for, I demand:
Combat on the Lunixmonster!
This I demand. I fully support starting a thread "Combat on the Lunixmonster Revisited" two weeks' time after 3.0 is out, but until then I want to play this hot new mode, and I don't want to switch the server for it. Especially since a big part of NS is who you play it with: When I want to play Combat, I want to do it with the people I'm playing with right now. Unless I can convince everyone to switch to the server I want to play on, that's not gonna happen.
You testers have to understand: I've never played Combat. You may think it ain't that great now, but tell me that you weren't hyped and I'll tell you that you lie. You may not even have liked it after playing it once, but tell me that you weren't anxious to try it and I'll tell you that you lie. Heck, some of the CMs paid up just to play 2.1 early (yes, a lot of people donated to Constellation out of charity. Some people, though, just paid for the beta. I'm not pointing fingers at anyone in specific, but we all know that some people did. Hey, so what?). How can you vote to take that from me? How can you vote to keep the goods out of my hands? How can you vote something that means that I'll never have a chance to try what you found boring after a while?
Think about it: When you're saying "Combat gets boring for a while", you're also saying "Combat was fun for a while". Why not let me play it for a while then?
People, I compell you: End this madness! Let the masses have what the masses want! Together, let us chant our demand:
Combat on the Lunixmonster!
And now I'll go and add that to my signature.
*ahem*
...
I wish I could start a poll that didn't allow PTs, Vets or CMs to vote, just for comparison...
-
Well lolfighter I have to say that NS:C is starting to grow on me. I did for a while find it a bit boring but I seem to be getting more into it. I'm still in favour for server segrigation as I don't believe NS & NS:C will work well together. Looking at the server stats more people are playing NS:C then NS atm so obviously people do like it.
Hehe I can't wait for public release, anything special planned LB? Like a reg server lockdown?
-
I like the idea of the server automatically doing combat when there's very few players, but 6vs6? Thats enough to easily have a good game of NS. If you can lower that to about 3vs3, then I would say go for it. Otherwise, #4 gets my vote.
-
Hello, I am new here. I play on the Lunixmonster server quite a bit. I love the server! The admins are alwasy cool, and very fair. Anyway, I think that the combat should be on a seperate server.. when you get tired of playing that, then just go to the other server, and play normal ns.
-
I'm with sancho here. Either a very low number for NS combat maps, or else don't put it on the server at all. I'm betting it will be fun at first to try out combat, but in the end it just becomes another deathmatch game and will probably wear rather quickly. Maybe we could start with alternating co and ns maps until it starts to get tiring, then switch to the player number mode instead.
-
I'm with sancho here. Either a very low number for NS combat maps, or else don't put it on the server at all. I'm betting it will be fun at first to try out combat, but in the end it just becomes another deathmatch game and will probably wear rather quickly. Maybe we could start with alternating co and ns maps until it starts to get tiring, then switch to the player number mode instead.
I agree
Is it too late to change my vote? :p
-
i also believe leaving it in default mode is a good approach and if it comes to it change the number of players (if you can) to determine whether to play ns:c or regular ns
-
Worked like a charm last night. At the end of one ns map, everyone but 4 people parted. The server then ran 2 or 3 combat games in a row and by the end of this the server was full again :D
-
i like having a mix of both on the same serv,
so we can play some combat then some ns.
gives it some diversity and same people to play with :)
-
I say have a mixture. Both are fun. I'd also go for one normal NS map ( which should last long), and then two combat maps, since most go a little bit over 15 minutes and then the map switches.
As for 6 vs 6, I think that's too low of a number. Combat is a lot more fun with more players, and when have you ever seen LM not be over 12?
-
I say have a mixture. Both are fun. I'd also go for one normal NS map ( which should last long), and then two combat maps, since most go a little bit over 15 minutes and then the map switches.
As for 6 vs 6, I think that's too low of a number. Combat is a lot more fun with more players, and when have you ever seen LM not be over 12?
LM? with less than 12 ppl in it? You must be hallucinating...
I think I'm addicted to Combat...
I'd like to see a map rotation going ns_, ns_, co_, co_ or even just one combat, but the whole thing with the map depending on how many people is in there, combat is more fun with a lot of people, not just minigames.
-
9, less doesnt switch to co_anymore, i think lb mightve removed co_ entierly or its bugged
-
Closed, no longer needed.