Lattice link = Battles on a rail

So I've been playing PS2 since beta and it's been a great trip but I recently cancelled my monthly sub due to some decisions that have been made. Lattice link pretty much did it in for me. It's basically put a system in place that has battles on a rail.

Battles are basically focused now within 3 larger battles over a concentrated zone or two each instead of some big battles and skirmishes anywhere anytime, I might as well go play battlefield 3. Yes the maps are large but the game doesn't feel so big now. This is what it feels like now. Battle grounds are too predictable there is no element of surprise with the battles anymore. Who goes to war knowing what the other might or might not do. The art of war is learning your enemy and trying to predict their actions on the battlefield. We are being shown what to expect via the lattice links you've basically limited choice to the player within the confines of these huge maps

Control C you can cap A go to A and cap A you can now cap B and D but they can't cap C until they control A so you stay and defend to no end because you know the enemy cannot flank you but the reality of it there is terrain there buildings there to cap but you can't because the dev's said you can't and not because the enemy has a large enough force to counter your flank.

Seriously my only suggestion to the developers I understand the idea of getting a community involved with the decisions on what get's implemented or not. But a bad idea is still a bad idea and executive decision should be made and not bend over to every whim of the consumer. I honestly don't think the best course of action for PS2 is simplification of the game mechanics. You only enable the users to not have to think or learn so you are reducing their cognitive reasoning and thinking abilities by enabling the users with over simplification and limiting the play style of the users. COD type games (emphasis on type as there are other enablers that one is just the most popular) have made a generation of gamers who do not understand the concept of skill over time and relying on instant gratifications and mechanics that are basically everything on a silver platter.


P.S.
I understand not everyone has the same "OPINION" but it does not give you the right to come into my thread here and bash me if you can counter point why Lattice link is better by all means please tell me in a respectable manner so I can understand your point of view and not your rhetorical BS.

Totally agree, strategy has largely been removed from the game in favor of the mindless herding of giant zergs. People will reply to this post saying that oh well now flanking and sundy placement is important, which first of all is tactics not strategy. Secondly, the lattice system did not introduce the importance of tactics, that was already there, but it definitely did remove strategy.

i was going to post your PS here, but you beat me to it.
agreed

The game feels the largest I ever felt it to be to me. Almost every battle there's opposition, and help. A lot more larger tank zergs. And it feels now that every base capture actually matters on a continent wide scale. Don't see what the problem is with it being predictable, I'd rather have consistent good fights than the possibility of having good fights. And flanking is still possible, it just requires more effort now.

So yeah, totally disagree.

That's a fair opinion to have, but the real question here is why did PS1 succeed with a lattice when so many people in PS2 hate it?

The reason is we don't have enough continents.

With more continents, and home continents, we should see less three-way battles which causes this battle-on-a-rail problem. With a two-way battle over a continent, as an invading empire you have a lot more choice about the direction you take and more opportunities for outfits to go on spec ops missions around the enemy.

I would suggest coming back with Hossin or wait until Searhus.

It's not just the lattice that will improve with more continents, it's the whole darn game that will improve. Right now it feels no better than CoD or Battlefield with the same old three-way fights causing repetitive gameplay.

The game has been reduced to a contest of who has the biggest zerg, pretty boring if you ask me. If you want a game that artificially forces high player density, rather then let commanders and players make it happen, maybe an MMOFPS isn't for you. It sounds like you're looking for a battlefield 3 type of game.

Thank you for being polite in your point of view. While I agree the battles are huge you can easily get that feeling with a 32 vs 32 battlefield 3 map that is large and epic but it's concentrated and focused and predictable and boring which is equal to one hex in this game... War in RL is not focused or predictable. There is a objective but how you go about that objective is in a variation of ways and is thought out. The battles are basically grinds now.

If it goes all lattice I will be joining you in leaving the game.

PS1 succeeded for a bit, then it failed quickly, wonder why?

Me too actually.

OP, do you understand and acknowledge WHY lattice was put in place in the first hand? The answer is not : to cater to the CoD crowd.
It was because there was an issue
1) The Hex system permits to easily avoid the confontration
2) The Hex system permits to easily chose your fighting ground to always have the advantage of numbers

These 2 points led to entire big or less big groups moving around, avoiding each others, and capturing territory without too much opposition.
And it was the best tactical choice to gain ground. So it was not a rare occurence. Ofc, battles occured. But also a big, big amount of no-fight hex capture. Hence why a large portion of Indar was played around the Crown where you were SURE to find a fight, instead of taking your chance by joining a platoon running around, hoping for it to encounter a fight.
Remember all the occurences of your group shelling the ennemy spawn room non stop until the hex was yours. And the opposite, with you inside the spawns.

That's the reason of existence of Lattice. Well, one of the reasons. You also have the fact that multiple continent are coming, where we won't have a constant 3-way battle, and devs must prepare the game for this.

Scrap it completely, and deal with the consequences. Crown 24/24, issues when the population dilutes because of multiple continents.

I think they should go back to old hex system via influence but territories that are 2 hex's away take triple time to cap and no influence till you control an adjacent territory this would discourage the ghost capping or keep it to a strategic minimal value and keep the not able to take shields down in the big bases unless you control at least one adjacent territory and that way you would not have to follow the lines on the floor to your next objective and add back a little element of surprise keep the battles from being front line only battles at all times.... Just a though

"Strategy" (which seems to mean capping empty enemy bases to a lot of people) may be just wonderful and all, but it's not fun. Before the lattice, it was a struggle whenever I played to find a good fight instead of a tank zerg rolling over and spawncamping a few tired defenders. When I did find one, it would last until the base was taken, then the defenders would spawn in various territories nearby, trying to guess where the attackers would go. The attackers would all zerg to one base, and the vast majority of the time it would turn into a ghostcapping zerg again.

With the lattice, I can easily find a big fight, and when we lose the base (I generally try to defend), we know exactly where the attackers are going next. While strategists complain about this, because they can't "outsmart" their enemy, it causes an awesome defensive fight, with people manning the walls and pushing back waves of attackers, and often even turning the tides and starting to attack themselves. This is good.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's silly to complain about huge fights that last hours, because that's the point of Planetside. And if you complain that that means there's nothing for your squad to do, then you haven't tried thinking. You have to fight creatively (even in a giant fight, a 12 MAX Gal drop on a point does wonders, or 6 upgraded, fully manned MBTs working together).

PS2 was successful for a bit, but is now failing rapidly, hmmmm, wonder what the issues are, there seem to be tons and tons of threads poping up with lots of people unhappy with a certain new development, hackers are also a very large problem for early exodus.

We had a system like this, lettucers lobbied against it, for lettuce.

For your point number 2), if everyone can do it it is not an advantage to anyone.

Yup, exactly as I said, acting like previously the game was either zerging or ghosting with absolutely in between, then talking about how they just started to use tactics cause of the lattice system, as if the lattice system introduced a need for tactics (it did not). Tactics were always there.

• Lack of advertising, this was a massive problem for the vets, and the newbie free access didn't help (hackers)
• The rise of Battlefield and CoD with lower TTKs, PS1 had massively high TTKs that don't cater for ADHD types
• Non-lattice related changes e.g. BFRs
• Dated game engine
• A subscription that was never reduced as the years went by
• Development ceased
• Xbox 360 and PS3 put a dent into PC gaming which has now recovered

I can think of loads of reasons (which you will now call excuses and deny each of them), but the main point is more likely the lack of advertising and the requirement to pay monthly. I was part of a large outfit on Werner, it died out because they all got bored of FPS games and went to play WoW.

Even if the lattice was a contributing factor, it comes way, way, deep down in the list. I wasn't around for PS1 release (I started 2004), but I understand that didn't have a lattice and it sucked. The lattice saved PS1 in it's early years.

There was also another reason, one in which there is much public outcry I wonder if these people will leave the game for other FPSer's when there is lettuce everywhere, I'm pretty sure they will, maybe the solution is lettuce servers and hex servers, like MMORPGS have RP and PVP servers, and other shooters with other game modes, I like this idea, and I like some continents have lettuce, and some have hex.

I understand it's hard thing to balance. And I understand what they have in plan for the future and the 2 points you put up. Do you know why it is like that because it's in our human nature to avoid confrontation unless absolutely necessary and instant gratification (ie: Crown cert farming).

Anyway the developers are trying to condition us to do things a certain way and taking away our ability to do what we want how we want within the confines of their world. Reminds me of work were you are constantly being condition for your corporate overlords and when you are not happy you quit or find another job. I love the idea and scope of this game and I will hold off from uninstalling until I see the new maps and see if the game tanks after the fact but as the days weeks go by I can't help but feel the developers are trying to guide the battles instead of letting them happen the way people act it out in the game.

Ghost capping in PS2 = D-Day WWII allied forces dropped behind **** enemy lines to take control of territory to cut off resources and force the surrender of the enemy. What most people hate was one of the most successful strategies and turned the tide of WW II in RL.