Why Random start locations in MP are going to decide multiplayer matches

from Sins Forums

2 titans beat 1 titan.  This isn't a matter of skill, its just a fact.  I faced two ragnarovs the other day...let me tell you how impossible of a situation this is...

This is going to make many random game setups largely determine the outcomes of conflicts.  Where a player used to be able to get fed and stay alive in the suicide spot (sometimes), with titans this becomes an impossibility.  There isn't any skill in this.  This also gives far more importance to the economic players then we have seen previously.  Since these players are chosen at random very memorable strategic games will become a rare experience, something that I personally am not looking forward to. 

The simple truth is(based upon the SoaSE target audience), that the bigger choices a player makes in the game, the more fun they will have playing it.  The longer you play, the more choices you make, meaning the more memorable this game will be.  Long games are NOT a bad thing, no matter what blizzard's pocketbook may look like.  This really just says more about human nature, and yes you can make a lot of money if you capitalize on human nature.  Yet stardock and ironclad are also building their brand names, so they have to compete with a better idea.  I hope that these companies never do too well so as to stagnate like blizzard is, that is to satisfy their leadership with loads of cash and inflate their egos so that god complexes emerge to screw everything up.

In diplomacy we have a nice balance for a 2v1 situation, the hardest thing to balance for in this game.  In diplomacy a skilled player can actually hold on if they get in the suicide spot, or at least survive with enough relevance in the game to still have fun.  With the addition of titans, the game becomes EVEN MORE centered around the economic player(because of the high cost of titans).  The problem is that the economic player is randomly chosen.  So if you happen to have the last player picked in your eco spot, you can be really screwed, especially if the other team has a well practiced economic player(being screwed means for a shorter game, yet this is NOT fun at all).  Not having any player control to actually balance the game based upon the human aspect of different skill levels results in less memorable, shorter sins games.  This isn't starcraft, where good games are forgotten in 2 seconds because there isn't nearly as many important player CHOICES, just more player actions/second.  Sins won't ever be able to compete with starcraft in this way, unless the developers cut up the soul of the game and change the fundamental idea behind the game (please don't, i'd have to find another game!).  

There are a limited number of patterns that the 5v5 randomizer can create for an initial startup, and each one of these has to be well known by all players involved in a team to achieve victory.  If one new player doesn't recognize these patterns (like the standard 3 allies bunched together with 2 suicide spots) and the strategy required, then the team is already losing. 

The randomizer needs a LOT of work to allow players the power of choice of starting postition if they so desire.  Keep the choice to have a purely random match as well (what we already have).  In this way you increase options and you won't have to have huge balance issues that could be fixed by adding a simple choice that would occur before the game starts. 

7,031 views 10 replies
Reply #1 from Sins Forums Top

Well if Rebellion is as successful as they hope, I wouldn't be surprised if the 5v5 random games popular know get eclipsed by smaller, more frequent games, due to all the new players who aren't used to that kind of thing. Or even if all you say is correct, that will probably be the result, as 2v2s and 3v3s can't or rarely will have eco spots. And IMO smaller games probably aren't a bad thing.

 

Reply #2 from Sins Forums Top

I agree, it would be nice for rebellion to sell a lot of copies so that more games could go on.  Then again, large games are the most fun because they offer the greatest number of variables. 

1v1's are the easiest to master because you just have to play perfectly against 1 opponent.  It would be a tragedy if sins was totally balanced around a 1v1 situation.

Sins outshines other related games by the scope of its large scale team fights.  Also, the game is largely balanced around these larger games.  Balancing for smaller games takes a bit of intelligent setting up the game conditions before the match, I for one don't like playing games smaller then a 3v3 because they start to become a clickfest. 

Siege of Centauri
Reply #3 from Sins Forums Top

I have to agree on this issue- its going to turn into a "feed for titans race" and the game ends shortly afterwards. 

 

 

Reply #4 from Sins Forums Top

It's an interesting issue.  How will this affect players in the suicide spot and what kind of additional demands will it create on players in eco spots?

In some cases where a member of Team A is in a suicide spot, Team B often does not have a dedicated eco.  It might thus be possible that with enough feed, the player on Team A in the suicide spot can produce a titan before either of the two guys who are doubling him can.  Then what?

One solution to this problem might be if people would learn how to play custom Galaxy Forge-made maps or if they will auto-download.  So far my custom maps work on the Rebellion Beta and the Beta uses the same folder for custom maps that earlier versions used.  To get the latest version of my custom map pack, go to:  http://TinyURL.com/Sins14

Reply #5 from Sins Forums Top

I have a suggestion, make it possible to disable Titans in the game/map setup options. Not sure exactly how one could go about doing this, but it would allow for people to pick between a more "typical" Diplomacy/Entrenchment style game and a faster game with Titans.

Reply #6 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Lavo_2, reply 5
I have a suggestion, make it possible to disable Titans in the game/map setup options. Not sure exactly how one could go about doing this, but it would allow for people to pick between a more "typical" Diplomacy/Entrenchment style game and a faster game with Titans.

I do not think this would work. For Vasari Loyalists their Titan is pretty much shaping their gameplay, everything is built around its ability to be capital world and mobile base. You disable Titans and all their new shiny unique tech, including the stripping of planets is pretty much useless.

Reply #7 from Sins Forums Top


In diplomacy we have a nice balance for a 2v1 situation, the hardest thing to balance for in this game.  In diplomacy a skilled player can actually hold on if they get in the suicide spot, or at least survive with enough relevance in the game to still have fun.  With the addition of titans, the game becomes EVEN MORE centered around the economic player(because of the high cost of titans).  The problem is that the economic player is randomly chosen.  So if you happen to have the last player picked in your eco spot, you can be really screwed, especially if the other team has a well practiced economic player(being screwed means for a shorter game, yet this is NOT fun at all).  Not having any player control to actually balance the game based upon the human aspect of different skill levels results in less memorable, shorter sins games.  This isn't starcraft, where good games are forgotten in 2 seconds because there isn't nearly as many important player CHOICES, just more player actions/second.  Sins won't ever be able to compete with starcraft in this way, unless the developers cut up the soul of the game and change the fundamental idea behind the game (please don't, i'd have to find another game!). 

1)Your impression of Starcraft seems to be informed by only Starcraft 2 and the development of the game during the beta. Starcraft BW or current SC2 has just as many meaningful choices at high level play in terms of 1v1 only. Your comparison of apples to oranges is pretty uninformed.

2)Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't a skilled suicide player use his titan with starbases, support, and decent tactics to "survive with enough relevance in the game to still have fun?"

Your point needs to be articulated without ignorant SC bashing and actually consider how it works now rather than turning it into a binary failstate.

Reply #8 from Sins Forums Top

I've said it before, I'll say it again; balancing for 5v5 games is a waste of time and energy.  You simply cannot judge Titan balance when someone is fed by a player who doesn't have to do anything but spam trade ports.  Of course 5v5 is going to be worse in Rebellion when there's a clear shift towards making super weapons and units a bigger part of the game; things that are still hard to get in smaller games.

As GoaFan77 said, with Rebellion hopefully getting more exposure and a bigger playerbase than Sins got, the multiplayer focus is going to shift to 1v1 to 3v3 games at most.  If there's an actual ladder and ranking system, people definitely aren't going to focus on anything more than that.  Huge 5v5 games will still be there if you want them, but you can't expect the game to be balanced around that game size.  No RTS can.  Your 5v5 games are still the 'mode of choice' because only the old diehards pre-ordered for the beta.  Basically the old ICO community is the beta ICO community right now.

That said, should the placement randomizer be fixed to give fairer start locations?  Absolutely!  Is that going to fix the feeding Titan rush problem in huge games?  No.

Reply #9 from Sins Forums Top

@ redtide

1)You fail to really realize what i'm comparing.  I'm comparing the user experience between the two games.  Sins doesn't burn your brain out after a few games like an intense match of SC, SCBW or SC2 does. 

I've played plenty of starcraft, SCBW and SC2, against very good min/maxing opponents.  You do have far fewer long term choices in SC, which is the lack of "CHOICES" that I talk about. The logistics of the game are very simple, build more buildings to increase unit production.  In the long term the map runs out of resources so you have to make do with what you have, the game is in essence over at that point. 

Starcraft is centered around unit tactics to achieve victory, and fine tuned player control of these units.  It really becomes a micro clickfest, when it is compared to sins. 

Starcraft has set maps, no randomization, so players who know how to min/max the map through hours of study and research have a higher resource use efficiency then other players to help them win the game.

Imo this is the biggest reason the game stays repetative, the main reason why i gave starcraft up. 

2)  A player with early feed in the suicide spot WILL be able to hold out fine in a 1v1 situation.  When your opponents get their two titans online though, you WILL NOT be able to hold out, even with your starbase.  This is because large swarms of LRF are relatively useless because of titans, so you won't be able to chase them out of your grav well fast enough.  If you don't spam lots of fleet you will get overrun easily by your opponents.  In diplomacy you had more of a chance, you were still fighting an uphill battle, yet you had more of a chance to "skill" your way out of it.  Vasari will still be able to defend their Gravity wells easily enough in a 2v1 because their starbases are still going to be relevant in fleet fights.

Two titans come in, snipe/grind down fleet and starbase, support fleets assist in the eventual destruction of the planet.  Your fleet has to either stay and face attrition losses, or retreat to another location on the map.  Your strategy will largely depend upon how much feed your eco spot guy can provide you.  From experience you mostly don't get the eco feed you need to build up all the expensive toys you desire, so you will be running.

My point is that you will be running far earlier with far less then you would be in diplomacy.  And what you run with will be irrelevant in the long term game anyways, because the guys double teaming you will have titans, and you will have titan fodder.

Thus you are relatively irrelevant, and more so then you would have been in diplomacy.

It all comes back to 1 titan is beaten by 2 titans.

@lbgsloan

Hmm, you are just plain wrong about balance.  What you say is impossible has already been done before in this game. My proposed solution is simple and elegant, give players the option to control start locations if they so desire to help balance larger games themselves.  Most RTS's allow you to do this anyways, and since everyone has to agree upon the settings before the game starts, there aren't many people feeling cheated.  This will also save the developers a large headache trying to rebalance the game in small incremental ways that might be the entirely wrong approach to the problem.

As it stands, long term replayability will over time stagnate because these limited number of random patterns will predict game outcomes even more then they ever did before.

because 2 titans beat 1 titan.

 

@ dirtysanchezz

Yes this is another viable option, it requires people to be manufacturing new maps frequently to ensure that there is still a "new" feel to the maps.  The same issues stated above can occur if a map becomes popular, and starting locations will mean everything to the course of the game.  Allowing players to make the "starting location" choice would be very important in the eventual super popular Dirtysanchezz map of awesome.  :)

 

 

Reply #10 from Sins Forums Top

Quoting Lavo_2, reply 5
I have a suggestion, make it possible to disable Titans in the game/map setup options. Not sure exactly how one could go about doing this, but it would allow for people to pick between a more "typical" Diplomacy/Entrenchment style game and a faster game with Titans.

I agree.  I'm all for a "No Titans" setting option along with a "No Corvettes" option.