[Suggestion] What's wrong with Planetside 2 in detail. Constructive remedies we all agree on.

I am very much in favor of SOE doing a terrain revamp in order to make vehicles more situational. Walls around the outskirts of a base are a possibility, but even something as simple as more trees would make a world of difference. I don't care if there are a lot of vehicles in the game. As infantry, I would just like to have more cover, going from tree to tree, rock to rock, or whatever.

Edit to add I like the AMS Cloaking as well.

Indeed, I did invite you in. I also said CONSTRUCTIVE remedies. I did snap a little, my bad. But if we can't all agree on what the game needs, at least 75% of us... The game is going to die soon.

It's known that you can't please everybody and what I want to do is try to get a large majority that plays the game to agree on something... Other than Render distance being broken, there really isn't anything in the meta-game everyone agrees on that needs to be changed.

Vehicle spam doesnt happen in real life wars, they're won by boots on the ground

If anything there are even less vehicles in real life due to logistical problems and limited resources

You dont 'spam tanks' in real life.

Neither of the things you suggested are metagame-related. Your vehicle spam solution is just a base design change. Your "metagame" solutions are an increase in minimum number of players at control points (not metagame), a cloak for the AMS (not metagame), and putting an LLU in (not metagame, except in the sense that players could potentially use faction spies to locate the LLU, except that you want it to appear on the map).

I do thank you for providing further evidence of what I said though

Oh really?

That photo looks fake....

Though compare how many guys are hanging out on top of the tanks, no tank should be 1 man only, Lightnings should be at least 2, and MBT 3 people

Which would help cut down the spam if you needed at least two people to run a tank, maybe even 2 people to a fighter

You're very welcome.

So the fact it takes more individuals to capture a facility doesn't change the flow of battle? If being captured and blinking on the big map, other players will automatically know that 12 enemy players are at that specific location and I'm willing to bet someone will come to resecure when they know there will be more than one kill invovled. hmmm, that sounds like a battle flow change? meta-game.

A cloak for the AMS being TRUE meta-game is hard to fight as it is entirely speculative. You have to admit though, an invisible spawn truck would be far more effective and allow a battle to last exponentially longer than a vehicle visible from the air at 2000 meters away, right?

Saying that adding an LLU is not meta-game is asinine. No offense intended. Adding this mechanic to the game would be a game-altering mechanic. It would allow for battles to take place in far more locations, it would give all three factions a "REASON" to fight and the victor would feel accomplishment. Not to mention the ENTIRE battle's flow would be constantly changing and evolving over this little golden ball... How can you say that is not meta-game?

In Planetside 1 the Lightning was a lightly armored fast attack tank and the Magrider/Vanguard was a two man tank while the Prowler was a three man tank. This worked really well and you always had a squad mate, or hell, even a zergling to hop in and gun for you. It would work for Planetside 2 as well.

Edit: I could definitely see the complaints of people who certified into the tank main-gun though... Whew wouldn't that be a whopper.

I don't see the issue with vehicles, only players running around thinking they can stop 20 tanks with a pistol.

There are plenty of areas on the map where too many tanks are a problem, and entire zergs take thier ball and go home. These "choke points", as you call them, that you want right at the bases already exist in the terrain between bases. Entire tank columns have been stopped with organization and well placed mines after the first several vehicles are blown up or critically injured, then the defending air force finishes off the rest.

The problem is unfamiliarity with the maps (which is understandable for a new game), extreme disorganization, and most of all, the players who dance in and out of the spawn room of a doomed facility trying to get a shot at a tank rather than falling back to a better position.

I totally understand that there are problems with the game, but changing the game will not alter player behaviour. The game can be changed however you think, unfortunatly FOTM players in MMO's (which is what this is) will always take the path of least resistance, in this case, KDR stats padding. Nerf the liberator, or even take it away, and those types of people will simply gravitate to whatever else they find will pad thier stats, they won't care about tactics or strategy.

I would add map design as one part of the problem, if not the primary. That is, the lack of infantry cover and areas that only infantry can access.
Right now, the game is extremely open, even in bases and towers, where tanks and aircraft can shoot at infantry, as though some buildings were designed to be shelled upon.

The game currently lacks pillboxes, tunnels, trenches, caves, protected windows, doors, rivers, lakes, chasms, and valleys. The manmade structures mentioned would allow infantry to move relatively safe from point A to point B, while making towers and buildings safer. The natural geography I've brought up would help to create terrain where infantry could have some advantages over vehicles, or to simply make continents and battles more interesting. All of this was in Planetside 1, and not only were infantry very formidable against vehicles, but they were the core aspect of it. Vehicles fought between bases, while overall serving to help infantry, not dominate infantry. With Planetside 2, however, it's "Fly, Drive, or Die". Infantry should have its situational advantages and disadvantages, while being what everything focuses on in the end, and not something that's a tier below everything else.

I also think that vehicles have some sort of issue. Not with against infantry, but that all fights involving the ground devolve into "MBTs shooting each other at range". Currently, tanks are overall fragile on all sides, and lack options(although the VS can snipe with the Saron, and Prowlers can CQC with the Vulcan).

One reason is that while the front and sides take less damage, only infantry need to worry about the angle of attack, as damage is very similar on all sides. Tanks would be more encouraged to move about if front and side armor took significantly less damage from explosives.

Alternatively, the MBTs are rather homogenized, save for the Magrider's movement nuances and main cannon. The Prowler is just a Sega Genesis-shaped version of the Vanguard, with only a 10kph difference. TR is supposed provide either speed or dakka, while NC should have armor and raw firepower. With such concepts in mind, the VS should receive customization options that focus on either mobility or weapon versatility, TR should either opt for speed or outgunning the enemy, while the NC should have customization featuring damage or armor. The same should apply to infantry weapons, as rather than letting the attachments determine the slight changes and differences between players, the slight differences are created by gun variants. Imo, I'd remove all the guns but a few, but retain their unique looks and models, and bring those pieces back as attachments for the 2-3 carbines, rifles, etc. that would remain in the game.

In my opinion they utilized the map wrong. They have this beautiful Hex System and they threw the best qualities of it away by missing the inherent function.

Everything is tied to bases in a Lattice system. No one can use the land for anything but taking another base. Beyond that they made too many bases. What is it, 70 on Indar alone? 35-40 on Amerish? Know why you cannot find the fight? Because there are a ton of bases. Why do people run around ghost capping? Because there is always more bases to take after that one.

Think about Indar. 70 bases for what? To guard.. the other bases or something? There are no towns. No mining equipment or resource pools to guard. Just bases and bases, and more bases.

If I was designing this game I would scrap most of those bases.

1. 10-12 is all any map would ever have. 10-12 bases that were focal points that those PS1 guys want. Own a base? you get to spawn vehicles, infantry and air assets from it. You get to have a booster for hex influence mechanic. Make those bases bigger if need be.. but the size of Tech Plants, Biolabs with the surrounding satelites, and Amp Stations are a good size as it stands.

2. Places between the bases? Different mining areas for a special 'resource gathering' Sunderer unlock. That deploys like an AMS.

-Different areas, different resources. Different sizes dependent on base proximity or land textures. Areo, mech and Inf resources.

3. Knock down the resource gain we have by 2/3rds. Make the cap 1000 for each. Make resource gathering on every modified Sunderer faction wide. Leave the resource gain rate the same as currently.

4. Give us entrenchment tools and deployables to support our land use. Limited 1 man Pill boxes, tank traps, sand bags, shields...

5. Make it so you do not have to own a base to own Hexes. Make it so that people can squat every Hex with troops and vehicles. So Just because one faction owns that base, does not mean he owns the land around it if he is sieged. The base may make it so it takes longer to grab the hex, but it does not dominate the hexes like they do now.


Then we will use those Hexes like they should be used. We will pick different places to mine from and create ad hoc battles. We will fight over the limited number of bases more because they are then funnel points. People will set up and be invested in defense of places. The battles will change in every place but the funneling bases.

On those Sunderers, heck make it so people do not have to be around them if they don't want to. Have your outfit place 20 of them on a field. Yer gonna protect them. Let them park them side by side even. Now we have something to attack, they have something they invested their own pool of resources to get and place.. so they are more inclined to defend them. Put some fields next to bases. Then those guys can have a sundy mining block out there past the walls that changes the bases into something new.

Anyways.. that is what I would do. I mainly use it as an example of there being options outside of the box..

http://i47.tinypic.com/2vcib20.png

This isn't vehicle spam, this is fun.

You're just upset you can't rambo your way in the open field.

I agree with the metagame issue though, but I'm sure SOE are actively working on that and I'm looking forward to the 6 month plan.

Yes, indeed. But infantry on open field? Sorry, this is asking for trouble. Infantry in urban settings? Very different thing.

No, wars are won by air superiority. You USA guys should know this. Things might be different if there is enough cover for guerilla attack style. See Vietnam war.

And I'm sure everyone we've fought is going "Nerf air!"

Fortunately, SoE hasn't designed our world. Real world > SoE base design

Wars are won by superior technology and strategy, to be exact. I'm not well informed, but it was more that the VC had weak, technologically inferior anti-air, while the US simply had better gear overall on their side. While aircraft dealt a great deal of damage and moreso today, it's not like AA is just a sidearm used when all your guns are spent. If someone tried to hit the US with aircraft, the only things keeping those aircraft alive from AA are the element of surprise, anyone given the order to take out the AA from the ground, and the possibility of said aircraft being technologically superior.

Simply put, nobody tries to fight far in wars, and the only time anyone, even and especially air, has ever fought equally, is when they're forced to. Fortunately for the Vietcong, they had geography on their side.

I'm more concerned with infantry spam than vehicle spam

Why does infantry get to respawn every 10 seconds while I gotta wait 15 minutes on my vehicle?

It's ridiculous!

I can say those aren't metagame because they're not, in fact, part of a metagame. Everything you described there is in-game mechanics and information. Changing the flow of battle based on in-game information and indicators is not part of a metagame. That's just the game.

As I said earlier:

Metagame evolution is a function of three things: persistence and flexibility.

This game has no meaningful persistence - player actions are largely pointless and easily reversed.

This game has little flexibility - for all of the loadouts, mods, and vehicular options, there's very little flexibility in how they're used.

As a result, the metagame for Planetside 2 is, and will continue to be, extremely shallow until one or both of those factors change. Right now the closest thing we have to a metagame in PS2 is the knowledge of tactics of certain outfits via spies or observation, and that's really about the deepest metagame that the current implementation of Planetside 2 can offer. I'm not arguing against the need for that to happen, and I do think that what you've proposed are useful changes that will enhance the game. I'm just pointing out that they really aren't in any way metagame related.

I think you misunderstand how battles work - armor and air do the fighting - infantry is support in open fields.

PS to all of you talking about metagame - it exists. It exists in almost every multiplayer game and will continue to do so due to the nature of choice in multiplayer games. For instance: when NC on Indar takes Tawrich techplant back they are almost always going to push into Broken Arch Road and after that into Crossroads where their push will probably be halted or they will start fighting with TR. Or the fact that there's always a fight at the Crown. The problem isn't that it doesn't exist: the problem is that it isn't meaningful. There is no "winning" in the continent war, which means that using that knowledge for anything doesn't provide meaningful results.

Hell, even if you "won" once you capped a continent that would pretty much mean nothing - on my server nobody has captured Indar for a good month now.