"Redeployside 2" Has sucked the fun out of the game

"Redployside" refers to the extreme frequency of mass redeployment as the predominant strategy among Outfit platoons and even public platoons. The ability to immediately move to a more favorable or vulnerable location to attack, or to an area with a more pressing need of defense is simply too good to pass up.

But while strategically prudent, there is one thing this is not: fun. This playstyle discourages even fights from ever occuring, and reduces most conflicts to stomps one way or the other. This needs to change.

Ideally, what happens is that an organized force like an Outfit Platoon will focus their efforts on a target that is most strategically valuable. The enemy maneuvers to defend, and a pitched battle ensues while the "zerg" (unorganized pub players) attack other tertiary provinces to keep continual pressure on and to open up new possible strategic avenues.

And if the attack is not going well, then the attacking force ought to either 1) change their tactics or 2) make the choice to abandon their efforts, allowing the defending force an opportunity to counter-attack with the previously attacking force unable to return to the initial AO to defend.

Redeployment is a necessary tool to allow players to get into the action quickly. But right now, it's far too easily a bused, resulting in a very stagnant meta that forces players to either constantly change fights or play on their own.

A possible solution to this is a Nanite cost for redeployment. It could be 50% or even 100% of total nanites. This wouldn't necessarily apply to players redeploying for the first time out of their warpgate, and would need to be balanced accordingly. But I feel it's a start to mitigating this endemic issue.

I would actually like to see them do an experiment where for, lets say a week, they remove redeploying entirely (if all Sunderers are destroyed or you lose a base you can respawn at one of the nearby ones on the lattice line). If you choose to redeploy you get the option of the base you are at (or applicable sunderers) OR the warpgate, and nowhere else.

Just try this out for like a week.

Just to see how it feels.



(also if this were ever implemented just fix instant action so it stops dropping me against 96+ enemies, This game has far more confidence in my abilities than it should)

All forms of deploying need the Dev's to sit down and have serious look at them..

Everything from spawn beacons to spawning on vehicles to squad leads need looking at ... A lot could do with a range limit on them ..

More than X meters away = Unable to use that type of option

A small cost for redeploying would be nice, but I would also add the following alternatives:

A: increase the redeploy timer to 30 or 45 seconds

This would slow down max crashes and or redeploy zergs when enemy has nearly capped the point.

OR;

B: Make deploying inside a spawnroom impossible when the enemy has neutralized a cap point (or halfway capped).

This would eliminate redeploy zergs/max crashes and force players to spawn to a nearby spawn point/base to build up the attack for the cap point. It would also create an incentive for squad/ platoon leaders to defend bases instead of "redeploy zerg" it the last couple of seconds as an "defend" tactic.



I would prefer solution B as it would punish or prevent redeploy zergs and reward setting up a good defense on an base with sunderes or retaking the base from an neighbouring base.

it's definitely not fun to play in those platoons, constantly being harassed by the PL to move every 90 seconds for no xp gain or be kicked. you may as well play alone, as you said.

the problem is, however, if you are playing alone you will often be at the fights where the enemy is redeploying en masse and your allies will often just evaporate leaving you to fight 1v4 or worse. so yes, while there is the option to lone wolf, unless you are lone wolfing or low-manning a vehicle or squad tactic (lib/esf, battle bus, vehicle squad, AA/AV nest) then you really have no place in the game.

and as far as a new player experience i have no doubt that it sucks. it's just unhealthy for the game to have people play like this, the same as it was unhealthy to abuse other forms of redeploy from the past.

while i mostly agree with what you're saying, i am not sure that resource penalties will change anything. PL's don't care about the soldiers resources. they just want free infantry spawns flooding the point of a different base every 90 seconds for no actual gain in the game or to the players. i think the real change that is needed is with the squad deploy system. if PL's want to abuse deployment tactics they need to at least organize beacons, sunderers, or other squad deployable hard points that can be countered by enemy units.

as it stands "adapting to the meta" to counter the flood from the spawn room means increasing the need to suppress/camp spawns. and that's always been a terrible problem in this game even without redeployment meta.

honestly, what was wrong with Old Crown Meta? with the hex system gone and the resource by territory gone, why can't we just have the Old Crown and that type of battle flow on every map? if you really examine it with an open mind it was everything else in the system at that time that made Old Crown awkward. and it was the Devs being lazy that lead to them giving it the axe (to almost everyone's protest) in a typical thoughtless overnerf. then they came through and removed all the other conflicting systems and we're left with a stupid mess that no one is happy with.

to be totally honest i'd rather have the old tech plants back from late 2012 as well. epic fights with lots of chances to run in and die/get kills made for the best new player experience and getting better, or getting new upgrades/unlocks for those fights made it fun to progress. now i don't even know what new players think. they probably think it sucks because they're either getting steamrolled or standing around competing with 90 guys for 12 enemies that are just running out doing suicide tactics for score per hour.

this thread has sparked a bit of interest in the whole nature of the Planetside battlefield (not to be confused with a competing fps) and the nature of moving troops to different conflicts...so I'm gonna throw out some ideas...

First problem with planetside redeployment is...what kind of game do we WANT planetside 2 to play like? some people want giant battles, some people want exposable small bases with small-unit battles, some people want giant 3-way battles, some people want all of the above, some people hate ghostcapping, some people hate lone-wolf-ing, etc...etc...

Planetside 2 was built around the concept of being able to provide larger, more active battlefields than any competing game at the time. It also *implied* that these larger battles would support massive-scale combined arms warfare, although I'm not sure if the game *explicitly* stated that 2nd idea...

so...lets admit to ourselves that making large (48v48 and upwards) scale battles ought to be a foundational ability for the game. We want large parties of people to be able to get to hotspots, we want them to be able to get there *reasonably* easily.

On the flip side, most people have noticed that sometimes it's just too many people - too many ha's with rockets destroy tanks, too many tanks farm infantry, too many air...um...attract too many maxes with AA...whatever air does these days...

so, I'm thinking, why don't we *START* our redeploy redesign around making 48v48v48 and up to 96v96v96 battles our *target* for key points on the map - you already know the major bases - the biolabs, the tech plants, the amp stations - so we use those as our targets for big battles - which, quite frankly, I think the PS2 dev team has already done

problem is, we want to start encouraging (without putting any hard caps) people to STOP at a certain level of population so the battle is reasonably fun and balanced while not becoming a stomp or a farm. We also want to find some way to encourage people to respond quickly to developing hotzones, while still making use of troop transports and travel routes, so that they're not getting to these new hotzones INSTANTLY, but instead have to kinda travel there like sci-fi troops kinda oughta.

Ideally, we'd make the way to travel to one spot or another targetable by other squads in other zones - that lattice system is a great way to start - so that people can intercept travel and supply routes (something I seem to remember hearing was in the works already) as part of the larger strategy of Planetside 2.

and then, finally, we need to find a way to reward people for all these various activities, so that there's incentive to actually do them...

most of the above has just been me gathering my thoughts - lets see what I can come up with as some possible solutions...

Redeploying is a problem because it kills a good portion of strategy by eliminating concepts of time and space.

Just imagine a chess game where you could move any piece to any place on the map at any time (even when it's not your turn). That's chess with "redeployside", and it would suck. It would dumb down the game so much that there wouldn't be a whole lot of meaning left.

Yes, at times in chess you're totally screwed because you put your rook on this side of the map when the enemy was attacking on the other side. But it works both ways, where you can trick your enemy into deploying and concentrating their forces on the part of the board that is not actually where you will launch your offensive. Then the enemy can only slowly trickle in one at a time, when they're handily destroyed by your concentrated forces.

That's strategy, which is clearly missing from PS2 altogether.

1 - start assigning "supportable populations" to each particular point of conflict (base, hex, whatever). As the zone is underpopulated, there's an excess of available supplies (we'll start with nanites) - nanites, lets say, regenerate faster as the local population is under the support limit, allowing small squads to play with lots more nanite cost toys, allowing them (ideally) to have a much more robust battle with only a few people.

2 - as the population increased, the local amount of nanite regen slows down - now, one side has the advantage of more people with fewer expendable supplies, the other side has fewer people with more expendable supplies - I can't guarantee that it's "balanced", and eventually I can guarantee that someone will find just the right numbers and gear setups to exploit the system, but in general, it might keep even small scale battles fun, dynamic, and reasonably better balanced than sheer pop #'s can allow

3 - let's do the same thing with XP rewards - larger scale xp rewards for a zone that scales BOTH to A - if one side is out-popped and B - if that side is under the supported pop limit.

So, what this means, is that if the NC biolab with 24 nc is being attacked by 48 TR (lets call it a 96 pop zone), the nc are getting 4x xp, the tr are getting 2x xp, the nc are getting 4x nanite regen, the tr are getting 2x nanit regen (these are just random numbers to demonstrate a possible system) - still not FAIR by any stretch of the imagination, but the NC are getting wicked fast nanite regen allowing them to spawn tanks willy nilly, or maxes, or whatever they need.

Now, as NC start seeing that there's A - a vulnerable major base and B - a lot of bonus xp to be had, they start swarming in - at some point, they reach 48, and now it's only double xp and nanites, but they're now even with the TR. Now, the incentive to keep joining is reduced, so hopefully the swarm to the biolab will slow down a bit, and keep pace with whatever tr reinforcements want to show up.

not perfect, I know - but it IS a way to control the pace of people showing up at the zone.

4 - Now, as far as the mechanics of redeploying to a zone. Lets say...what if we could make the lattice into a travel zone. Redeploying is no longer limited to a range from where you die - lets say that key bases (maybe we make a new base type, like a spawn base) - you can only spawn at a spawn base (always at least your warpgate), OR in a spawn vehicle or squad leader, but any base along the lattice will also have...we can make it a physical tube (like the ones in the amp stations for example), or transporters to the adjoining points on the lattice.

means a lot of footwork, yes, but less than if you had to drive or walk physically from one location to another.

Now, all these intervening bases and their transporters can be attacked, maybe even messed with to one degree or another, by enemy forces. Maybe they can't *capture* the base, but if they can control...I dunno, a power generator or two, they can shut down that link in the transporter. Now, they can only shut down *that* link, so, if you still have connection through other links, you can bypass that shutdown (now giving us decent reasons to control more versatile territory, and maybe redesign the lattice and hexes so that there are some key "crossroads" points for the transport lattice).

Further, that makes ANY base a potential key hotzone - armies could be able to cut off reinforcements by quick transport by sending some small teams to sabotage the incoming links. This *could* mean that surrounding territories around a major zerg are also key fight zones for smaller teams...etc, etc...


Now, these are just the first few ideas that popped into my head while I wait out the clock at work - I'm absolutely certain that of the first four people that manage to read all of this, at least 2 will come up with reasons why the mindset of general PS2 players will make this fail - but I'm flexible, and willing to hash out some more ideas

after all, i've still got an hour of work to kill

One of my suggestion would be you can only redeploy to a major facility.Tech plant, biolab and amp station plus the warpgate.These are supposed to be high value area anyway and as it stand with the exception of having MBTs they are no more value than any other base.They all have access to transportation and are spaced out to allow you to get around fairly quickly.This would also promote large scale battles at these facilities which would reduce the 96+ fights at bases that are not meant for such numbers.Would probably need to redesign or eliminate lattice but that would not be that hard to do.

Remove redeploy and let us spawn at any controlled base.

Time gets wasted joining and leaving squads to find one with a spawn in the area I want to go to.

That's the exact opposite of fixing the problem.

The redeploy meta is really, really boring. I've played doing it and I've played against it; it is no fun from either side. This game is at its absolute best when you have a giant wave of enemies on the ground from two sides battling back and forth across an entire large base; tank shells flying over head, airstrikes landing, rockets sailing this way and that, tracers zipping by. It feels great then; the heavy duty defense at a tower base or an Amp Station against a vast number of enemies; using flanking entry tactics with airdrops to get past chokepoints when on the attack, all of this.

But the redeployside meta game kills this completely; the idea that within 20 seconds or so anyone anywhere on the map can suddenly BE anywhere in any numbers means that these kinds of fun giant battles happen less and less. We are hitting a point in prime time that most battles seem to consist of a circular dance between 3 point bases in a race to see who can redeploy slightly faster. It is horribly boring.

Further, it utterly invalidates the usefulness of most of the transport options in the game; I cannot remember the last time I saw a Sunderer or Valkyrie actually used to transport people; hell, Galaxies are only occasionally used and far more often do the close air support thing. Which is stupid.

You can't stop people from going where they want to go. At the moment you get stuck in one area (with the zerg) and have to redeploy to move. It's like starcraft 2 games vs broodwar: instead of lot's of little fights, the game forces players into blobs.

Let us pick and fight anywhere on the front line.

I don't know about the proposed solution by OP of nanite costs: I never seem to run out of nanites.

That's fine, but you're getting wherever using physical transport.

And you'll always be able to afford it.

Then let everyone pick any base to spawn in but remove half the bases.

You can't have it both ways. Right now you want everyone to spawn together and move together using physical transport. That's a blob.

Just because you can't see the blob admist the ethereal nanites does not mean the blob is absent. And not still moving together.

In fact, that's besides the point. The blob is fine, but, if it wants to go anywhere that isn't down the road, it needs to take the long and hazardous route. That's the meat of this matter. The real question has always been how spawning accommodations are allotted and how to avoid those accommodated spawns from being used as abusively in a way that actually detracts from the larger game.

You are completely missing the point.

What we are talking about is Making troop logistics a thing. Both ways end up with "blobs" as you put it. The difference being whether that blob can teleport across the continent to instantly overpop fights or not.

See Val's and Gal's used as Transport .. But mostly in the sense that they transport Squad leads who then just suddenly pull deploying squads out their backsides ..

All forms of deployment need to be looked at .. Because it can be just as bad having platoons of attackers appear out of thin air due to all the deploy options, as it is to suddenly have the spawn room bulging from redeployside ..

You think it would be more fun if it was harder to get to fights in the first place?

You think redeploy actually reduces the number of fights? No, redeploy is the reason we have so many fights. Otherwise it would be offensive zergs capping bases down a lane uncontested because of how much effort it takes to get people over to the base to defend.

I think the game would be even more fun if redeploying was easier and if people embraced the redeploy mechanic.

If you make it a chore for me to play the game then I just won't play it.

If you're wondering why the developers haven't changed redeploy it's because they want to keep people like me. And people like me don't dumb the game down. People like me just want to enjoy the game without going through a hassle every time we log in. You can make the game strategic without making it frustrating to play.

If the developers listened to you then there would be significantly less good fights to choose from, and getting to the remaining good fights would take substantially more time than it does now. In essence you're just making the game less enjoyable for everyone else so that you can pretend that the game has strategic depth.

When I read title like this, I see that people really have a different definition of fun. If some would like to spend half of their time playing the game in a vehicle of some sort and call that fun, good for them. It's not the case for others tho. Even tho, from time to time I enjoy quality time involving Galaxies and Sundies, redeploying is still the cleanest and fastest way to get into a battle and, you know, kill stuff and actually have fun. When I play one hour, I don't want to spend a good chunk of that hour in a transport where I could be instead killing mans.