Squad Deploy nerf exposes the horrible base design

I do think that AV and AA should be stronger, but not in the way you may expect.

AV and AA play (IMO), would be much better if damage was based on hit location instead of hit points.

I think people are starting to figure out how not to spawn into camps. I see more and more people getting out into the fields, or spawning at sundys placed behind the camp.

I think the best thing to do is to educate those that don't know, not make it easier on them.

My solution does address the actual issue, and for one reason that none of us can do anything about: in online PvP, camping is a natural result of driving the bad guy back to his spawn. The only way to avoid being driven back to your spawn is to fight for the approach.

that is your opinion. It is not the opinion of people that don't fight at the spawn.

I know its hard to learn that you are a campee/camper. I found out on my own, but wished someone had told me beforehand how bad that scene is. The best thing you can do is listen when a player comes in to tell you there's more to the game.

Making the game simpler, and excluding specific sources of grief while offering concessions that wreck the game for another group of people is not improvement. It is foolishness. Compounded by a lack of research/insight into consequences both intended and unintended is stupid.

What are you going to do when they still get camped (they are)?

NOW YOU'RE GETTING IT!

SOE is flopping all over the place because there is no satisfying the entitlement crowd. It doesn't make sense to you because it does nothing for the screaming you hear on TS. Its supposed to fix everything right? It didn't fix anything.

Wanna get it? Stop looking to the game to give you soft pats on the butt, and make the game something that comes from yourself. Yeah, you'll probably need a new group of friends, but judging by what I've seen here, you'll come to that determination in time anyway.

Which would be a bit difficult given that the it's largely pot luck, given client side hit detection and that facing is determined by drawing a straight line between the firer and target (not model hit location).

There's a few issues with that.

A sunderer parked near a camped spawn is going to last about 60 seconds (30 seconds if there are MBT. Harrassers, ESFs and Libs camping the spawn, all you can really hope for there is a few kills before the Zerg squashes you.

But the point about being spawn camped is that is isn't about being spawn camped, it is about making it so that spawn camping isn't a sensible thing to do.

If you could reset the capture entirely that would move the emphasis off spawn camping (because lone infiltrators would be constantly recaping - and adding more exits and tunnels only helps this).

But also doing stuff like sticking the spawn room before the capture point, but making it directy destroyable help too.

Varierty of these options in different bases would make things more interesting.

However changing bases to make it easier to spawn camp (as they have in Biolabs) is simply a DAFT idea (intended or not).

Base design is good

Like I said. It would be good. But, I'm not crying for it.

I don't think you understand me.

Have you gone outside the bases? There's a ton of open ground and varied terrain that you can use to stop the enemy before they even get to your spawn. What you need to do is get with guys that play in that environment. Hang out with base fighters, and you'll see very little of the game and its possibilities.

Neither jak or I are arguing the point that spawn camping is the natural conclusion of a fight, that's a given. What we're saying is that PS2 still leaves a lot to be desired in the build up to that point. If you jump back a staggering 30 pages, you'll see that this whole thing is about the influence vehicles currently have on every fight that doesn't take place in a bio lab.

PS1 had a natural progression in its large fights. Take the tower, often with a mixture of hotdroppers from the air and infantry pushing the bottom floor. Then vehicles push the courtyard with infantry support. Then the fight progresses indoors where infantry actually hack the control point. It's the whole combined arms thing everyone loves to spout off about. The problem is in PS2 you can basically just show up with a few vehicles and boom, fight over, immediate spawn camping. The progression of fights allowed time for defenders to set up actual defenses, which made defending much more enjoyable. Are there things the players could do to improve their odds on defense? Of course. But the devs could also facilitate much better gameplay with slightly better base designs.

Do not try to leave the spawn. That's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth: there is no spawn. Welfare or Hardcore, opinion or belief. It matters not. Self-believe-delusion-faustism is all that matters...... or not. Capture the base in your mind and you will have won...... no matter what the game says.

No, I broke the mold months ago I now only play PS2 as a non-combative self-fuliment, I love my enemies until I become them.

How is encouraging other forms of play than spawn camping making the game simpler?

It is making the came more complex.

What would that matter they were less so before the changes.

Ah..... "entitlement" that really is a full house and complete Gortezu's Law! (As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving entitlement approaches 1) Nice.

But again it has nothing to do with whatever you hear on teamspeak (I really don't want to know whatever it is, it seem to upset you too much), it's about retaining players.

Only a well designed game does so.

Except it wouldn't work..... so good other than that.

I understand you, but do you understand Barry?

Honestly all I really want to see now is some video of you stoping a Zerg the vastly outnumbers you (somehow) between bases.

Although that would, of course, let out the secret of how you do it, which would rather spoil everything!

Somehow I can't shake the feeling that your secret plan involves using marigolds in ways that would shock Vanu itself!


(alternatively you don't stop Zergs mysteriously inbetween bases, no matter your claims)

Like I said, you're hanging with the wrong crowd, or perhaps the wrong server or faction, I don't' know.

However, if you don't know of the huge battles that go on outside the bases, you gotta switch up one of those or you'll miss the most awesome parts of this game.

Exactly. So, why encourage paly around the spawn by these suggestions.

LOL I was thinking the same thing. When I was 11, the cops came through the neighborhood picked up the at-risk kids, and threw us into sports programs. There was one kid that was pure bastage...never followed rules, always in trouble. I think he ended up being killed in a motorcycle chase with police. I remember overhearing a conversation between the social workers: "so-and-so is my favorite because he needs us the most!"

A real trip the way this world works...

If you keep on hearing the same thing,a nd realize a certain segment of people are OK with it, you amy be conditioned ot be OK with it too. Dangerous.

Yes, and back to that. So, a well designed game in whose eyes?

I don't disagree that battle take place away from spawns and away from bases (and I've absolutely no idea why you'd think I would).

But I do disagree that you can do anything in this game by NEVER going near a spawn (to camp it or be camped in it), nevermind by NEVER going near a base no matter what you claim (without providing even a basic skeleton idea of how that actually could work).




However that's largely irrelevent to this thread.

What is relevent to this thread is a simple question:

Do you think it is better to allow fire lanes to clear spawn (and more ways out of spawn) or to further constrict spawns and provide camping choke points that don't allow the defender any firelanes to clear them?

So you both accepted welfare and played by the rules?

Retaining players isn't good? I don't think you'll condition me to that somehow.

Mostly the players that have tried it and left, that's where the money is (and where SOE wants to be), in getting them to NOT leave.

They aren't encouraging play around the spawn, it is the exact opposite.

What suggestions are you talking about exactly?

I don't think it needs to be touched at all. Being camped is a nasty business, and what rally needs to happen is gamers need to own their experience and figure out how not to be camped on their own.

SOE doesn't have limitless resources. Chasing their tails for folks that can't get out of a spawn is the last thing they should allocate resources to.

If I had my druthers, spawns would have no protection at all. The only way to cure campaholism is to let campaholics hit rock bottom.

Daily reminder that forums user TheFamilyGhost has perhaps 25 kills as a tank or vehicle, and is attempting to tell people how inter-base combat works in this game.

Yeah, I was hungry. They fed us too.

Retaining what kind of players? I don't shoot at spawns, so I don't see any reason to keep spawnwarriors.

Boycott is one way to get what one wants, but not a good way.

How can it be opposite? The whole thread has been about these no tank zones so that people can break camps, and no-infantry zones so that the tanks won't feel lonely!

The OP's suggestions, such as they are.

I'd have thought you'd have lived by your own rules and sorted yourself out, after all you were using up limited resources.

All kinds of players, they are the best kind for any game.

Who is boycotting what? How can you boycott players that have left the game?

I don't think there should be no tank zones (and I can't see any mentioning no-infantry zones), but I do think better design moves spawns away from being directly campable by tanks and aircraft.

In PS1 the spawn tubes were simply destroyed, but then in PS2 all people would need to do is roll a couple of tanks, harrassers or ESF in (fly in their case) and spam them and there'd be no counter.

But I can't understand your defeatist attitude, instead of improving the game you want people to accept what you agree is bad design.

What a sad self-indictment. You have a lot of time to play video games, do ya? From behind the base walls you think inter-base combat is vehicle-centric? Ouch. You need to go out there and take a look.

I agree it is bad design only insomuch as it has conditioned players to want more.

Bad design? You bet. Clear all spawns of all walls, and pay the real price for your campaholic ways.

I have 83 kills in a Sunderer, 883 in a Lightning, 1069 in a Magrider, 846 in a Scythe, 302 in a Liberator, 100 in a Galaxy, and 642 in a Harasser. And I use way, way fewer vehicles than the average player.

But please, tell me about vehicles in this game, oh master of vehicular combat with three whole Prowler kills.