Research Group idea

**Card AKA Karrd** · 10-24-2005 09:43 PM

I 've had this bouncing around my head for a bit more than a week now, and figured I should post to get opinions. I've been thinking about the fact that there doesn't seem to be any groups out there just trying to come up with new ways to play NS. I'm not talking about Mods, I'm talking about actions. An example, awhile back I had the idea (it wasn't original, but I didn't know that at the time) for a field commander/leader for the marines. It was something I'd never seen used and wanted to try, but the problem with it was there was no one to try it with. It was too complicated to try to explain to a random team, in the middle of a game. What I'm wanting to try to put together would be a group of people who would be willing to come up with, and try out, ideas like that (as well as other ideas such as little tactical manuevers, or even mine placements). Before I take the idea any farther, I was wanting to see how many people would be interested in something like that.

**Tawnee** · 10-25-2005 11:35 AM

I'm not very experienced with advanced NS tactics... however, I'm certainly interested i helping try stuff out. I probably won't be much help initially for new idea, but I'll give input as best I can.

**Wyzcrak** · 10-25-2005 11:46 AM

One could argue that our "move for the exits" tactic is one that we've all learned in response to the power of fades. I like tactics. I like tactics that solve problems and become automatic when practiced enough (phasing after a beacon; exits with a fade; building when the seige cannon hits the ground), as it's "automatic" tactics like that which, plainly stated, often implement the strategies which win games.

I would enjoy taking time to practice this sort of thing.

**nix249** · 10-26-2005 01:30 PM

Trying a new tactic is always fun, but even with a pre-game discussion in a captains game, good planning is rarely done. We should work out ways to further development of tactics.

That being said, I'd love to see a way to review game afterwards. For instance, when I command, things go wrong. Part of it is a communications issue, another parts are weak tactics, and then there is bad luck. For me, the biggest frustration of the situation is that I can't get feedback. I never find out if people were having an off day, if they couldn't hear my voice comm properly, if I didn't make a clear explanation of what to do, if I was too slow in reacting to assitance. While I'm commanding I rarely hear anything during gameplay that is on topic and on time. Sometimes after we've lost the momentum to carry on, I hear someone adking for a specific upgrade, but by then it's too late.

Commenting about a field commander, I read a forum post somewhere a long time ago, as a guide to clan play. The leader would run around the map, and his second in command would be in the comm chair. There would be a couple luitenants who would do seperate tasks on their own.

I try to act as a luitenant whenever I'm on rines. I keep an eye on the map, I try to figure out the comms strategy, and I try to find something not being done. (I think motion tracking is one of the best upgrades for this, as it let's players manage parts of the map for you.) If I notice there are no marines and no aliens on one side of the map, I try to ninja a hive. If I see that a red dot is moving to a vacant sector of the map, I investigate. If I see RT's start to go down, and no one else is capping, I try to go cap. The key point is I find a hole in the gameplay, and I try to do something different.

--Nix

**Card AKA Karrd** · 10-26-2005 02:29 PM

Ok, it doesn't look like there are as many people as I'd hoped who would be willing to do this. I'll have to think on that.

The key to getting a group like this to work is having enough people involved with the process of creating and analyzing the ideas. That way when testing them they know what to do and why they are doing it. This allows you to on the fly change something if an unexpected problem happens. And, it gives you more people to analyze what happens.

Ideally, the group would be doing three things at all times:

1) Study- not the funnest part, but by understand how games are going, not just the win/lose but also what made a difference, what tactics did each team use, how did each team respond to actions, what situations favored what teams. The less tangible things would also need to be looked at, psychology (what were peoples expectations, perceptions), strategy (what did each team try to get done) and random luck (what situations are too chaotic to predict, some will want to avoid them, others will embrace them [chaos can be fun, if not always profitable]). Only a small part of the research groups has to be involved, but those involved must have a good understanding. There are a number of people on TG that could easily do this, if they spent the time.

2) Creative- now that you know what is happening, come up with ways to change it. Then talk it over, have at least one person think of counters. Everyone should be involved in this part of the process, and personally I find that type of discussion fun. I would recommend that this portion be kept secret to those not in the group (until an idea is tested) so that when testing the idea you are playing against regular players using regular play styles (instead of people who know what you are doing and how to counter it).

3) Testing- We'd need at least 8 people to be a part of this. Not every idea would need all of them, but some obviously would. Testing shouldn't normally be done against others of the group, your trying to come up with new ideas for regular people to use, not just as counters to tactics you create (otherwise you will almost certainly end up in a seperated cycle, playing your own style of NS, instead of the normal). TG would be a good place and adequate to test smaller things, but for larger changes you'll want to join multipul servers.

**Card AKA Karrd** · 10-26-2005 04:14 PM

I'm not talking Plans, I'm talking tactics. Have A do this, so that B can do that. From a narrow point of view, planning isn't useful becuase of the dynamic nature of battles. But history and practice have long proven the usefulness of established doctrines, tactics, strategys and ethos. NS so far has had these introduced occasionally, but not becuase people were trying to create them, instead they have appeared as people have Needed them. And I think that you'll find it much more interesting to play when both sides have a large library in thier arsenal. That is what the group would be trying to create, giving everyone more to use then the standard 3-4 strategies modified to fit each map, plus a few minor tactics and tricks. Think about it, after playing the game for awhile, how often do you have no clue what the other team is trying to do? Rarely do teams do anything innovative, and most of those innovations are small. I'd like to change that.

**ReK_** · 10-26-2005 08:55 PM

There really are no squads in NS, even in cal teams. You have your pressure and capping, or some combination thereof, but there is no designated leader, who is in which team completely depends on timing, location, situation, etc.

A team with good enough teamwork (ex: terror) doesn't need a squad leader. Having each member know exactly what is best to do and then do it without communication is much more effective.

That said, very few teams have that level of cooperation.

Now, after my long and pointless rant, I'd like to state that I'd definitely like to try this out.

**Card AKA Karrd** · 10-29-2005 10:03 PM

I'm thinking about trying out a part of it on a smaller scale. Maybe creating a topic in this section for maybe once a week doing an analysis of 3 games: one hard fought game, one easily won game, and then a third notable game. Get the HLTV data for them, then discuss why they turn out the way they do. That wouldn't really require that many people to participate (I could do it all by myself, but it would be best to have several viewpoints). If enough are interested in that, we could start trying to put together the research group.

For the analysis topic, I'd need someone to point me to where the HLTV data is stored (I've never gotten it off the server before), I'd like permission to create such a long term thread (and if possible I'd like it to be stickied if it starts to show promise), but most of all I'd need people spotting for me during the week looking for games worth analysing. The first 3 should be fairly typical games, it's better to figure out what is normal before you start considering what is odd.

Thread: Research Group idea

Thread Tools

Display

Research Group idea

Re: Research Group idea

Re: Research Group idea

Re: Research Group idea

Re: Research Group idea

Re: Research Group idea

Re: Research Group idea

Re: Research Group idea

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions