The Modern Spring player, for better or worse / Autobalance

[YokoZar]

The Question: Why do I bother spending hours making these things if noone has the patience to wait 5 mins for everyone to download them.
The Answer: Tbh I don't anymore, the only new map I've seen semi-succeed in the last year has been Nuclear Winter, and even that has much the same gameplay to DSD due to it's size and layout

So, the NOTA players in this community are in luck, they'll be getting the dedication to all my new maps, at least they're willing to try them!

1) Thanks for making new maps
2) Most people will not play a random map they've never played before, since most maps suck
3) The exception is when someone else tells them it's good and gets a decent game started.

So, I feel that if your sample games didn't crash ( ) your map very well may have gotten bootstrapped.

[JohannesH]

2) Most people will not play a random map they've never played before, since most maps suck

Do they? Compare to dsd 8v8

[Wartender]

Well i'll be the first to admit that, though i have played online over 100 hours, i still pretty much suck at spring. But i love playing any map other than dsd, and i agree with Gota's (second) idea. i'd love to see some new maps out there. i've decided to play on smaller games anyway, i hope i'll get better :).

p.s.: building an adv solar asap is bad? D:

[YokoZar]

2) Most people will not play a random map they've never played before, since most maps suck

Do they? Compare to dsd 8v8

DSD 8v8 is a great map and I enjoy games I play on it.

I keep learning new strategies with it as well. Some of them require cooperation between 2 or more players, ideally in coop mode, but this is a team game and we should expect any viable team strategy to use more than 8 people doing their own thing.

Some examples:
- Making an early feint attack up top to provoke them into porcing heavily, then redirecting the high metal/energy from up top into the bowl
- Having the back players feed the front entirely, sharing a lab, so they can get a very early tank assault
- Making a feint attack in the bowl with lots of scouts and LLTs to slow them down while 2 back players rush t2 to make a single goliath before going up in econ. This one goliath then takes out most of the t1 units
- Building t1 bombers/early bertha to take down teching players lab

All of this is emergent gameplay, and makes each DSD game different. The game itself also changes as it progresses: it's not just more tanks and more resources until someone finally has more numbers. Instead there's a constant balance between attacking here, defending there, teching, econing, and the different kinds of units/counters (tanks, artillery, bombers, bertha, nukes, fast attack). That's what makes Balanced Annihilation fun in big games, and it's why people keep coming back to the same kind of map.

[Nixa]

That's what makes Balanced Annihilation fun in big games, and it's why people keep coming back to the same kind of map.

That's also why everyone can nolonger play smaller game, because anything more the 3 mexes per person requires too much micro

Also, have you ever spent any actual effort trying become better at small games? You never know you might just like it... no wait... why play small games when theres a DSD 8v8 open ^^

[JohannesH]

All of this is emergent gameplay, and makes each DSD game different. The game itself also changes as it progresses: it's not just more tanks and more resources until someone finally has more numbers. Instead there's a constant balance between attacking here, defending there, teching, econing, and the different kinds of units/counters (tanks, artillery, bombers, bertha, nukes, fast attack). That's what makes Balanced Annihilation fun in big games, and it's why people keep coming back to the same kind of map.

WTF

Smaller games are not about attacking, defending, ecoing, and different kinds of units? Just somehow getting more tanks than the opponent.

And you really really cannot expect those 8 ppl to coordinate, that never ever happens. If you have a nice stack on your side you can disregard the retards in your team and proceed to win on a strategy of choice, in tighter games the retards just make the game too unpredictable and therefore frustrating. Ok sometimes it can be fun to just mess around too, doing some stupid thing you came up with. ...Thats my experience about those games.

[YokoZar]

All of this is emergent gameplay, and makes each DSD game different. The game itself also changes as it progresses: it's not just more tanks and more resources until someone finally has more numbers. Instead there's a constant balance between attacking here, defending there, teching, econing, and the different kinds of units/counters (tanks, artillery, bombers, bertha, nukes, fast attack). That's what makes Balanced Annihilation fun in big games, and it's why people keep coming back to the same kind of map.

WTF

Smaller games are not about attacking, defending, ecoing, and different kinds of units? Just somehow getting more tanks than the opponent.

The comparison wasn't against small games, but against the rather abusrd claim that DSD is neither fun nor strategically interesting. DSD brings out a fun aspect of BA, and many maps don't. Very small ones where teching is almost never a good idea, for instance.

And you really really cannot expect those 8 ppl to coordinate, that never ever happens. If you have a nice stack on your side you can disregard the retards in your team and proceed to win on a strategy of choice, in tighter games the retards just make the game too unpredictable and therefore frustrating. Ok sometimes it can be fun to just mess around too, doing some stupid thing you came up with. ...Thats my experience about those games.

There is something intrinsically fun about playing in a large game as well. I have no idea why, but its there.

[Nixa]

I do agree with Yoko here, although that argument has changed. Small maps offer different gameplay yes and it's probably the best type of gameplay to start spring playing. Large maps offer a different aspect of both fighting and teching. Long narrow maps offer Sim Base. Clearly most people are here to play Sim Base ^^

[Molloy]

Large games are more 'instrinsically fun' because they allow you to play more lazily.

In a 1vs1 the game ends quickly, with 'whoever has the most tanks', if the players aren't evenly matched. If they are evenly matched then they have the same number of tanks, they tech up or change strategy and the game continues.

I'm a firm believer that if two people are playing each other and one of them is better than the other, the game should end quickly. What's the point in building crap for 40 minutes, only for the better player to outproduce the other guy and smash him to pieces. The game should end after 10 or 15 minutes tops, if the players aren't evenly matched.

If a new player starts out playing lots of 1vs1 games they get good quickly. They learn how to survive the first 5 minutes, then they learn to survive 10 minutes. Then they learn how to last 15 minutes etc.

If they play lots of 8vs8 games they don't get killed straight away because they might be teamed with an experienced player. Plus, they've got very little 'front' to defend. You can't play defensive in 1vs1 but you can get away with it in big team matches because there's no room to expand into. Instead of worrying about how to survive the next 5 minutes newbies are thinking about the super weapon they're going to have ready in 50 minutes, and doing it horribly slowly because they haven't honed their economic and building techniques with hundreds of 10 minute games.

As I said earlier in the thread the problem is choice. If people are given the easy option where they don't have to think then they'll pick it every time. They'll never bang their head against a wall losing again, and again, and again until they learn the basics and can learn to PROPERLY appreciate the game.

With regards the maps I think a good way to maybe train people into have a bit more taste, and an appreciation for variety is to have 5 or 10 of them in the Spring download. If they have to be ugly to keep the file size down then let them be ugly. But there need to be a selection of default official maps that are varied, and ideally have a hardcoded player limit. Small, medium and large land. An island hopping one. A metal one. etc.

Some sort of 'Moderators Choice' recommended map list would be good as well. Get some of the top players to nominate 3 different maps every month and encourage people to download the 'August Map Pack'.

[Gota]

The installer with maps issue is under work and will be available soon.
I have already released a list of the maps that will be included in it.
I still think newbies need to be restricted to 4v4 or 5v5 and as their ranks slowly grows they are allowed to join bigger games.

Edit:
Such an installer is now available.

[NOiZE]

If the server could force it, i would say only allow 1v1 for a month ^^ or ofc DSD 16v16 ^^

[Nixa]

If the server could force it, i would say only allow 1v1

+1

[pintle]

1v1 is infinitely more challenging and intimidating to new/less experienced players. I know a fair number of springers who never play BA DSD, and have a decent grasp of the game, but do not want to play 1v1.

I think what is really needed is more player hosts, with a good variety of maps.

[Regret]

ITT: mapper raging that his map is not played and wanting to force players to play it.

[Molloy]

More small games is a good thing for keeping the playing community active too. You could have 4 games running 1vs1 instead of a single 4vs4 game. Less time waiting for matches to start. Shorter matches so new games starting more frequently. When you don't have a particularly huge community it helps.

2vs2's are pretty useful from a learning standpoint too, assuming the map isn't porcing heaven. But I think it'd improve the communities health alot, not to mention improve the playability if some way could be found to encourage smaller matches and discourage very large ones. The mods that people play are based on Total Annihilation, which really wasn't designed for huge teams games. They don't work that well in Supreme Commander either. Maybe RTS just makes more sense with less people.

[FLOZi]

OMG, Molloy!

[Super Mario]

(Me rants how there isn't any good campaigns to teach and improve the new players skills.)

[Molloy]

Hi Flozi!

Single player campaigns don't have any learning value really. You'd learn more from a single multiplayer game than months of playing in isolation. A few patient experts can teach hordes of newbs to play quite respectably in no time, assuming both parties have some patience with each other and the newbs aren't know-all shithead.

I think there could be alot done to make the game simpler as well. Mods like Balance Annihilation have far too many units. There are a hundred more than even stand alone OTA, which already has too many redundant units for people to get their heads around very quickly. Too many units with similar roles, or that are only useful in very specialised circumstances. It's just another symptom of 'more' culture we've got in this game. More players on the map, more units, longer games, more explosions. Sometimes toning things down a little bit is the wiser approach to make things cleaner and more accessible.

There are other needless complications like resource view/standard view. Metal deposit style should be obvious on the standard view. If it isn't the map is shite and nobody should play it. This bodge to make bad maps more understandable just muddys the water further.

[Gota]

An automatic way of showing newbies they are doing wrong is by having a mod option that when a host turns on will show players ratios of unit counts,economy value and other or maybe different things.
The point is to make a system of several stats that indicate a newbie where his ratio is bad in comparison to higher tier players. like if he has no attacking units or no economy etc..
In different situation it can give him tips like "buildmore units your allies need your support" or you need more metal build more mexes and expand or reclaim ...etc..
you will only need a dozen such tips.

this systme can be enabled in a teach the noob game where good players play with newbies but without the good players actually having to literally tell and teach the newbies what to do.
A system that helps newbies deduct what is useless faster and without human help thus not making it a choir for good players.
In some cases the system might be a bit wrong like telling the newbie to reclaim more and get more mexes when there are no wreckage but it will definitely be bale to steer them more towards the right kind of gameplay.

[Carpenter]

Deleted reply due to my dead brain.