Deeply worried about the amount of walls...

They are great for defenders because of their position and the layout of the landscape. If you dont have landscape to block you take walls.

Im all for better dependable bases, but i dont like the dome idea they want to implement. I think you could improve a lot of the base defense by better palcing the turrets

Battle flow doesn't mean "Everyone 'flows' straight into the base from all directions at the same time." What they mean by "flow" is where you get a flow of one faction attacking in a logical manner, with lots of direction. Basically it means you work more as a team with your faction instead of running around as an individual on your own in a base.

Again... people seeing failure everywhere because of a dozen of screenshots.
Yes, we saw walls.
But we have no idea about how many gates, doors, tunnels and jump pads will lead us into these bases. So what? We cant say anything about the base layout until it's pushed to the Test Server.
And if some bases are more protected than others, who cares? We have Galaxies, respawn beacons and holy s**t, we have jet troopers! (that often complain because they say their class has no purpose!!!!).

Relax and chins up man!

For the record - I am opposed to "Defensible bases". Sticking walls around military installations hasn't worked for four hundred years. Ever since they invented Cannons static defenses and fortresses have been death traps - If you try to build a fort you'll get artillery camped as the attackers knock your castle down on your head.

Defense means defeating the attacker the field. If they overrun your position you fall back and counter attack, not dig in to a bunker and somehow expect to fight your way out.

This is not a game of 13th century siege warfare and I really don't want to see it turn in to one. And frankly - Y'all need to read up on the history of warfare. Elastic defense. Learn it. Live it. Use it to lure your enemies into ambushes and beat them to death.

Right up until I saw the last FNO my general impression of Planetside 2 was:
"This is a good investment of time and money, since this game is steadily getting better"

Now my impression is:
"I really hope something else like this comes along that has the balls to stay true to its combined arms creed since the PS2 devs seem to have given up on it."

Misspost

I am stating my concerns not only because of the screenshots that are available in the other thread. My knowledge comes from:

• The actual Friday Night Ops video, where I have seen devs actually running through those bases (and I haven't seen many doors there)
• The changes they already deployed on Indar. In some bases I already feel that there are too many impassable walls and I already run in circles on some occasions.

If I take all those walls on Indar (which I find just mildly disturbing), but I multiply it tenfold - then I get deeply concerned.

I am perfectly fine if there will be one or 2 heavily fortified bases (e.g. Amp Stations) But if I see more and more bases that look basically like a square with few holes here and there - than it is going to get disruptive and boring.

Yes, I really hope I am mistaken

Personally I'm happy they're improving defenses: some bases' layout is quite arguable, some are more like deadly traps than defensible structures... and we often need to prevent vehicles from surrounding the spawn room too quickly because then the battle is over.

i had a laugh at all these walls, i mean they really think that this will solve spawn camping, because we know only Libs and Tanks Spawn Camp.... oh well when they gotta redesign all the continents again in 3 - 4 months big smile

now this is just crazy imagine lets say zurvan, with the second spawn and a tunnel connecting that spawn and 4 additional tunnel exits that were actually alot faster and more efficient to use than running out of the spawn room, would you still run out of the spawn room into that wall of tanks?

that would make 10 possible spawn exits making the spawns room 1 single choice, and if the enemy has 10 guys on all 10 points (ie 2 plattoons) and and they outnumber you to the point where you cant send 30+ guys out fo one exit, you have lost the base anyway and its over

Are all these walls a problem? Not for Light Assault

Yeah this needs to be revisited. More walls is only the answer to part of the problem.

In theory there should be three stages to taking a facility like Zurvan Amp Station if both sides have large numbers and the attacking force barely squeezes a victory.

I. Outside the Base

Most of the fighting is done on the open field. Mid range combat is mainly displayed here, but long range snipers still have their place. The attacking force needs take down the defending sundie to push them back to the walls.

II. At the Walls

Most of the fighting is done by attackers on the walls manning turrets to destroy enemy armor. Infantry fights aren't as important. Most engagements are mid-long range between turrets and vehicles and infantry and vehicles. The attacking force needs to take down the gens to get in.

III. Inside the Base.

Nearly all combat is CQC. The attacking force needs to get to the control point to take the base.

All that's theory and the game tries to do this but rarely succeeds. I've seen it happen but not all that much.

Solution

I. Outside the base.

Sunderers need to be able to take a couple more hits, not a ton more but a couple. So that six engi repairing a sundie aren't outmatched by one AT lightning.

More emphasis on mid-long range combat. When you cert out any class long range is an option, but with stock weapons the average Joe doesn't get a battle rifle or scout rifle, and not everyone like infiltrator. We need better stock-esque long range options for most classes.

Make armor a bit more rare. There are several approaches to this and they have their different pros and cons. In short armor should be a little bit more powerful and a little bit more rare.

II. At the walls.

I like the idea of automated turrets. Maybe some anti-infantry automated turrets that would discourage all those light assaults from trying to hop the fence they call a wall would be good.

Right now I think the game handles this part really well if its between two large forces. I just think that light assaults shouldn't get a free ride over every wall.

III. Inside the walls.

This is where the game can really shine but doesn't.

Tunnels. They need to be revisited. Add tunnels all around the inside of the base that BOTH sides have access to but obviously favor the defender.

More cap points. Tech Plants and Amp Stations suffer from having only one cap point. Once an attacking zerg takes the point its almost impossible to take back no matter the numbers you have. Give each Tech Plant and Amp Station three cap points on different levels of the building like one on the top floor, one on the bottom and one is the tunnels.

Those are some of my ideas that would make defense easier, encourage combat and not camping, and not shut the attacker down too much. Anyway, thoughts?

Why don't they just shoot the other faction's spawn facilities in orbit?
How is Auraxis even suitable for human life?
Why do VS lasers make sounds?
How do infantry turn invisible 400 meters away?
Why do air vehicles defy physics?
How do nanites even work?
Why do future super soldiers wear palm tree shirts?

SOE please explain these BLATANT plot holes. Honestly, at this point I'm starting to think that Planetside 2 isn't trying to be an ultra realistic portrayal of imaginary future space warfare.....

You seem to be upset that there are limited entrances but I am rather pleased about this. I think it helps a lot with battle flow. I'm unsure why you've formed this opinion.

As I said: I formed my opinion because

• when you end up on the wrong side of the wall, it may take quite long, running in circles, trying to find that damn entrance.
• A "hard" wall edge makes the inner compound sustain a fixed amount of players. If less players are present, people end up running & searching for each other instead of fighting. If more players are present, it ends up in spam fest. It works the same as if it was a separate, small map from other non-massive online shooters.
• Too many walls completely separate interior from exterior, making the shooter feel less as a "massive" and more as an "ordinary" shooter.
• Too few entrances mean that everyone will camp at those entrances. To some degree it is good as it creates a stable combat situation, but at some point it ends up being a plain meatgrinder. Biolabs are good examples.
• A shield above a base means that you won't be able to shoot at incoming air, especially full galaxies which are about to drop and change the situation in your combat area.
• Finally - gray, rectangular walls, which all look alike are boring. This is not Wolfenstein or ROTT era!

NEw bases change are AWSOME i have no word to describe how happy iam about these change

1: Infantry battle over base Ps1 style of bases on steroides ' better cover , better design , better graphics trees on esamir <3

2: Aircraft will now have more significant dogfigths and have more air combat purpose and anti tanks purpose intead of farming ingfantry and ruining awesome figth

3: the Between bases will be rules by tanks , vehicules and aircraft all the figths going on between bases will be vehicular and all the figth into the base will be infantry figths and this is simply awesome

Galaxy drop Ps1 style will be back and NOW damned usefull , you can pass over the dome shield with infantry so basically youll see much more efficient and cool GAL drop wich as made Ps1

so yeah your concern is not a concern to me its back to ps roots

The following bundle of suggestions points towards basecapturing and open field engagements.
I will give reasons to the suggestions at the end of the post.

Open field Engagement (2 suggestions)
a.)
To strengthen the role of ground and air vehicles i would like to see infantry movement outside a certain
radius around a base decreased. It should present a challenge to get from one point to another without
driving or being a passenger of any kind of vehicle. This should make clashes of mechanized forces
and therefor open field engagements happening more often. Instant action and deploying should get a
higher timer, lets say for example 3-5mins for deploying.
b.)
Add a new type of base, a mine, where ressources are gathered. Due to surface mining this would be
an open field base environment, without many cover against air and vehicle attacks.
Mines should represent the ressources gathered from an area, while outposts should represent the
military influence and supply capabilities needed to take further steps into enemy territory.
In the scenario of a mine i could also think of capture points for vehicles, representing superior
strategic positions.

Reason:
To avoid a feeling of usefulness to dedicated pilots and drivers considering the upcoming walls and the
following suggestions, there need to be a playground for these players too, albeit that it should be fun.


Basecapturing
a.)
To strengthen fun and tactical gameplay get rid off the current base design of outposts and remove the capturepoints and the spawnrooms in their current shapes.
b.)
Replace them by the following mechanics:

In order to capture a base you need to do it in the following order:
base perimeter->base infrasturcture->base functionality->base core

base functionality and base core should be CQC, any other stage
towards the perimeter of the base could be a combined arms area

Surveillance Control Room/AI (base perimeter)
Can be captured by any class, lattice connection not required
The owning fraction will get surveillance of the base working as a permanent radar within the base
structures. Time to hack 2-3 mins.
Defense Grid Control Room/AI (base perimeter)
Can be captured by any class, lattice connection not required
The owning fraction will get control over the base defences(turrets,...)
Once caputred base infrastructure can be attacked.
Time to hack 3-5 mins.

Shield Control Room/AI/Generator (base infrastructure)
Can be captured by infiltrator or engineer class, no lattice connection required
The owning fraction will get an buff on shield strength and regeneration inside
the base structures as long as the point is hold.
Bullets can pass through shields guarding base core areas.
When hold by the attacking force defenders from outside the region the base is
located can't deploy anymore.
Once captured , attacking forces may enter base functionality areas.
Time to hack 3-5 mins.

Nanite Control Room/AI (base functionality)
Can be captured by medic or engineer class, lattice connection required
The owning fraction will gett an buff on health and regeneration inside the base
structures as long as the point is hold.
Enemy forces will slowly loose health outside a certain radius from an engineer
or medic.
When hold by the attacking force defenders from inside the base can't deploy/spawn
anymore. Once captured, attacking forces may enter base core areas.
Time to hack 3-5 mins.

Warpgatelink Control Room/AI/Generator (base core)

Once captured and the device is hacked, or the generator destroyed and rebuild,
the base is captured.


At least basefuntionality and base core areas should be inside a large building
to prevent vehicles from disturbing the final stages of the battle. Times to hack
definitly need to be changed, these are just examples.

c.)
Make some bases faction style, for example vanu archives something alienlike.

d.)
At large bases there should be capture points for vehicles.
Example:
The brigde at the crown containing point b, once this strategic point is captured by an enemy,
the owner of the crown can't attack the neighbouring region of that road/lane, if the neighbouring
region is also owned by the same faction as the crown, players from that region can'T deploy to
the crown.
i hope u understand what i'm willing to say here, the intention is important here, not the specific
example.

e.) To capture/hold a point should require some people/vehicles staying in a certain radius around
the point, getting a time based xp-reward, should be buffed for defenders to make defending more
rewarding compared to now.


Resons:
To cut a long story short, spawncamping is a game killer. It's boring for both sides
and a crappy way to waste time otherwise spend better in fighting for something.
Ampstations, Biolabs and techplants are fun most of the time, but even there
spawncamping is pointless.No fun for either side. Once you are locked down you
have obviously lost the base, because i've never seen anyone making a successful sally.

To take or defend a base should be an ongoing fight from beginning to the end
for both sides and not sitting and waiting three or more minutes until the clock
hits zero. The presented suggestion should ensure this and also allow small
squad action in precapturing 60% of a base behind the front lines.


If you like or hate this suggestion disucss: https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/battlefield-improvement.129272/

I think walls and domeshields will be a fine addition to the game, but they won't solve the majority of the current
problems with capturing base, cause you still can spawn camp with masses of infantry and still have to wait
4-10 minutes without having any fun for both sides. i think base capturing should be more stage-like and once
you acomplished the cap of the last stage the base is yours.

Nice observation in terms of open-field engagement. However, in order to encourage people to use more vehicles between the bases, one could simply increase the average distance between the bases.
On the other hand, infantry will always appear somewhere. If you take a seat in a Sunderer, you can always jump out at any moment.

On the other hand, I do like when a battle emerges somewhere between the bases.

I don't like however, how you come and hijack this thread, TothAval. Most of your suggestions are off-topic. You may as well have left just a link to your ideas in the other thread and keeping just a short abstract over here.

Yep. This and the lattice has really made me question whether I can even be bothered to carry on. The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that there is nothing else like PS2.

... and there is reason for this: It is damn difficult to make a balanced combined-arms game!