The state of PS2 and what I feel must change.

So how do I manage then? Am I some sort of godly player who on the busiest server in the game as frontline infantry hardly ever dies to grenades, explosives etc (at least not enough to get annoyed by it).

Just something for people to keep in mind. Though I'm sure most people know better. 7/10 of the first 10 people on OPs "Like" list hardly ever post. This is probably a sign that he has ordered his outfit membership to give him "Likes."
Keep in mind, I didn't go too in depth, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume that's more correct than wrong.

You know, kinda like the 4 pocket medics and pocket engineer he orders to keep his ratio up when he isn't in a vehicle.

Point being, he brings up the correct issues. However, his suggestions are merely biased suggestions which will benefit his outfit, and by volume, zergfits in general. What's "Best" for the game is what is gonna be utilitarian for outfits in general, not what will benefit the larger outfits over the smaller ones.

Luckily, this isn't a democracy, so as much as his fanbois might push this thread, a good portion of what's being said in here won't be implemented to begin with. And what is implemented in the near term, he had absolutely nothing to do with, though he will no doubt claim otherwise.

Rather than hiding from everything I shoot back at it. Hiding from vehicles is why Liberators get free reign most of the time.

This isn't some big conspiracy theory. Buzz is being objective and stating what he truly thinks will better the game. How does reducing flinch benefit Buzz? If anything it would hinder his outfits play because they are TR and have the fasted ROF(or at least they should). How does getting rid of annhilators benefit him? It doesn't. So if you have a problem with his post then I suggest you state your reasoning in relation to the game rather than offering nothing constructive.

How terribly presumptive of you. There's 21 pages of good information exchange happening and you cast it all off for what reason? More than half the posts in here agree with some parts of BCP's diatribe but have serious disagreements with other parts of it. There is actually debate taking place and instead of taking part in it you have stooped to the point of ad hominem. Shame on you.

Not to detract from a discussion on the merits of Flak Armor (of which there are many) but that is a more micro change in the face of the macro problems facing the game.

At this moment there seems to be a philosophical difference that I can see and I understand the mindset.

That lattice system would implement a directed flow of combat that any player could look at and understand what fight happens next. There are very few places (but there are places) in the current iteration of PS2 where the flow of combat can be easily observed, but generally by veterans. I know that if one side takes Quartz Ridge Camp, their next likely objective is Hvar Tech. I know that if one team starts capturing territory around a biolab, they're likely about to attack that biolab.

Those are visibly apparent, and generally more obvious to people who have been playing longer. Those instances of flow are fine, they're understood and useful. The ability to open up a second front on an enemy defense is imperative in spreading out and weakening a fortified location. No one will argue those differences.

By using the lattice system concept image posted earlier in this thread, I can see that the ability to open multi-pronged attacks would still exist and that this concern about combat corridors on a massive scale is misplaced. How would that combat corridor be avoided? Base design. If the corridor is 300-700 meters wide and the base is simply in the middle(ish) of the corridor, both sides must perform some maneuvering and there is plenty of room for vehicles to get actively involved in that amount of space. Then there is the fightinside the base that people loathe and love, which is also about maneuver and skill.

My biggest concern with regards to this treasure trove of information and idea exchange is that the developers will simply give lip service and tweet attention with very little interest in doing anything. I understand the concept that it is easier to complain about changes than it is to enact changes, but one happens before the other, similar to a lattice systems flow of combat, one action happens before another.

He's hardly being objective, his proposals re flak armor and cloak sundies clearly benefit infantry play signification. His an infantry outfit, is a fairly clear case of bias.

Let me guess, you aren't playing Engineers (the "get out into the field and keep our people supplied with ammo and our MAXes and tanks alive; then think about your own survival, then - maybe - shoot someone" kind, not the "Look ma, I got my lolpods now too!" kind) much if at all, right?

Are you playing the same game as us? Flak armor is pretty much mandatory and making it standard only benefits the game. I don't have any statistics but I would wager most people primarily play infantry. The only ones who mainly play aircraft/vehicles are those who have spent money on unlocks and certifications. And as we all know only 10 percent of the player base actually spends money. So I don't see how any of that doesn't benefit the average player and won't bring in more players.

Salojin, 4 messages member since friday. member of...oh look TE.
http://www.planetside-universe.com/character.php?stats=salojin

But thank you for proving my presumption. I'm merely saying the PR game OP is playing isn't going to work as the wheels of change are already in motion. They've been in motion for the past few weeks. Certainly not communicated well, for a good reason, but they've been moving. I'm not privvy to all the details, but any changes that do occur in the near future, aren't a result of this thread.

Could you expand as to how this would likely be the case and thus, allay my fears. As I'm not seeing much development of the possible counters to issues beyond 'it'll be fine - chill'.

The lactice system may allow for some action on the flanks, in my outfits case, it used to do a lot of sabotating behind enemy lines bases. It did not allow for anything other than an 'open' base to be capped in linear progression. As things stand, not protecting your flanks can loose you half the map or more. This is how I contest, it should be.

And again, the real issue here comes down to server population, not game mechanics. I keep making that point over and over, it keeps getting skipped over, despite not even the OP contesting it.

PS2, does not need to be turned into a corridor shooter to be involving, Miller proves that.

It would limit tactical innovation and scope merely to the local level of the next 'open to attack' objective.

Bring on the server merges!

Yes, I am. Please PSU me if thou wishes. And I roll Nano-weave most days. I also listen to the Bestie Boys to buff my courage by +50.

I'd wager most people play what the situation demands. I think people who play exclusively one thing are in minority, but I can only speak anecdotally.

That a sort of statement known as universal disjunction. In all cases, either people play infantry, or people play vehicles and pay.

I know people who do either or, in quite a large number and as above, your statement here simply does not hold.

But your really just setting it up for the below.

Your chain of reasoning, as demostrated above is faulty and the conclusion it secured a justified pro-infantry combat bias. Would be a silly thing to argue for in a combined arms game anyway.

Well that's what I meant. I hide first, and then when/if I have the opportunity take shots I take them (or I run to a turret etc etc) i.e. I play with some semblance of tactics and or intelligence. I don't just run around in the open without a clue.

Ok, but can you atleast agree with him that capturing a base needs to be changed or re-built from the ground up?

Really, when spawn camping is not only a legitimate strategy, but an essential one, somethings wrong.

This. Miller would be RUBBISH with lattice. I hate the idea of funnelling gameplay.

Camping is a big part of combined arms warfare IRL.

IF your looking for a fair fight 100% of the time, I think this game will never provide that for you.

And as i've noted, moving it away from the spawns, whilst moving to a more linear system of the 'lattice'. Certaintly will not reduce the over all levels of camping.

Hell every travel line on the map that involves moving from one objective in the lattice to the next around a blind corner, will be camped. to ****. Why people will naturally camp every travel line which people can reliably be expected to use, for the same reasons people gank in general. It works.

A couple of points to the OP's posts, although i agree with most of them as far as creating a more strategic and tactical game.

First while i enjoy big battles as much as the next person, the current game play mostly boils down to players being lazy, and only bothering to shoot the other guy, without regard of any kind for the overall map or war effort. Currently, if a smaller force decides to flank the larger force, the larger force just ignores them. PS2 should not be just about big zergfest battles, it needs to promote a wide range of game play, from spec ops teams, to skirmishes, to big battles. Creating a game about only big battles, will just prolong the boring mindless game we have now, where its a hex based team deathmatch, with players refusing to bother to do anything beyond shooting the other guy in the face. i would argue that the lattice system wont solve the problem of players ignoring the map, more needs to be done. PS2 is billed as a large scale war, and it needs to be set up to encourage that in all aspects.

All you have to do is look at NC on matherson since the warp gate change, and the influx of 4th empire players. All cohesion has been lost, and majority of these people only sit on a biolab, or other big base 99.9% of the time.

Ghost hacking or backcapping needs to be in the game more so then it is now. i realize most people dislike this aspect, but that is because again the majority of players always group up on the smallest area possible, and ignore anything resembling strategy or tactics in regard to the map. This can be argued that it is due to the map being meaningless, but it can also be argued that its because players refuse to bother with anything beyond a bare minimum of effort. I see no reason to reward players who refuse to defend territory, and things like air drops to disrupt front lines will be needed if the changes you suggest are put in place.

Reading your posts made me sad because it made me think of what PS2 could be... then I realised how it is now.

Again, I want to restate, whilst I appreciate the game si frustrating and getting quite stale for people not on Miller. I simply do not think the solution to what is fundamentally a problem of population distribution not being at critical level on most servers to regularly have large fights outside of one location on one map. Is to change the game mechanics, so there will only ever be big fights at a few locations per map. The game heavily penalizing to the point of making pointless all other forms of play.

that's whats on the table ladies (lol, not rly) and gents.

Wish more people would give it some thought before going /signrozed.

I totally approve this post. On all terms.

But first for the lattice system and the front lines experience. We want more big battles. We want more defense possibilities. A few walls wont do the trick.

Please reconsidere using rivers, lakes and water in the maps. Expend the maps and add rivers, bridges, lakes.
Those natural barriers are definitly very usefull for the way how battles front lines moves.
It also gives a new way of considering moving with sunderers or galaxies.

I know PS2 is a total new game.
But please, trust us, the game mechanics of PS1 were just perfect.
You couldnt just launch a new PS1 with better graphics, and so you did with an all new game, but then calling it PS2 was not appropriate. I've been fooled here. And this makes me sad.
Bring back PS1 mechanics, please. PLEASE.

And then just add new mechnics ON TOP of PS1 mechanics.

Thanks you !