After 1 year, is there a 'reason to fight'?

I haven't been playing PS2 for very long, but so far it seems like a half decent sunderer driver keeps the thing going a good while. Moving around the outskirts of bases and such as the battle progresses. I suppose being fairly undetectable to air was an advantage, but from my memory it doesn't feel much different

I was talking more in terms of saying CE prevented rampant ghost capping. As a cool and useful tool, spitfires did have plenty of uses. I remember many a fond time baiting some dude around a corner as an infiltrator to meet my spitfires! I would say that really, from PS1 to PS2 CE is what I miss most. The proximity mines are fun and all, but they don't compare to the fun had with CE in PS1.

As far as darts being OP, I think their, what, 20 second duration balances them pretty well. Playing an infiltrator mostly in PS2, and going against them I have to say I enjoy the dynamic. A couple of opposing infiltrators popping darts around requires me to pick alternate routes and use cover that I normally wouldn't think about. The fact that it also alerts me to their presence is another balancing factor. Too many infiltrators seem to shoot the things at the nearest wall, park in a corner, then run off after it drops.... Can't tell you how many times since I've been playing that I just point my rifle at the doorway of a building with an enemy dart blinking and 10 seconds later BAM shot the idiot who fired it and camped.

As long as there's enough room on a server for factions to cap empty territory without ever needing to contest territory with the enemy, there won't be a reason to fight because path of least resistance encourages cooperative empty base flip dancing, unless you deliberately go out seeking a fight or an alert is going on. Winning alerts is currently the only compelling reason to fight (since faction y can say for certain they beat faction x and z at something), otherwise going where the enemy isn't and flipping their bases is safe cert grinding.

If you're looking for the tagline massive fights on an epic scale, you're going to be waiting until they get around to implementing continental lattice or logging on only when alerts are happening since alerts force the big fights.

To be more specific, if you're looking for persistence and achievement where factions are forced to fight because there's no easy path out, don't bother reinstalling until continental lattice is completed. If you're looking for competitive FPS matches on a big map where there's a definite beginning and end to them, you'll probably enjoy the alerts and it may be worth a shot to schedule your playtime around them. Outside of alerts, yeah, it's like playing, "Whose Base Is It Anyway?" a game where the points don't matter; that's right, the points are like election campaign promises.

The same reason people have been playing Planetside for over a decade...It's fun.
If you don't find it fun (and you obviously didn't) then don't pick it back up.

If you're looking for an actual objective then wait for continental locking, but even then, it may not be what you're looking for.

I hear this too often on this forums.
Lets talk about what a game is.
A game has a goal that the players need to achieve to win it.
Chess has a goal. Checkmate!
Uno has a goal. Uno!
Poker has a goal. Give me your money!
Monopoly has a goal. I rich, you poor.
CoD has a goal. Gamemodes!
BF has a goal. Gamemodes!
TF2 has a goal. Gamemodes!
etc....

The exceptions are some MMOs with persistent worlds.
But even these MMO's have goals. They have boss monsters and such. Players can raid and be boasting about their skills or equipment. The achieving of these goals creates a metagame by the community.
So where does the fun come from? You get the fun on the way of achieving these goals with Teamwork, skill or strategy.
In the competative scene you get the fun with challenging yourself and overcoming the difficulties with research and training.

But PS2 doesn't have any of it. What PS2 has is a persistent world which trusts the players to make their own game. But that's not what we play for. We wanna "play" a game. Games like Minecraft became popular because it presented a platform which the player could use his creativity to create amazing things like computers or monuments!
PS2 is mostly played for kills and kills only. The game is designed with the "carrot on a stick" principle. I personally don't have anything against it. But the successful games that use this principle are not totally reliant on it like PS2 is.
And as long as players continue to praise SOE for whatever and rant about boring stuff like balance the game will never change.
Praising the developer isn't constructive and doesn't improve anything. People are not that weak, that they would cry about everything that others throw at them. When they really love the game then they take the criticism and try to improve the game.
The thing is that SOE never took any real criticism of the community and always made their own thing. The lattice that many wanted for example wasn't implemented as they wanted. Instead we got the SOE version of it which is bad.
When did you listen to Higby and said to one of his plans: "I always wanted this."?

The problem lies in the mindset of SOE. The "famous" Smed gave this comment on the MMO genre:
"MMO's are just like movies that the players watch."

Oh, and to strengthen my post i will do alike
*facepalm*

Nope. Only if you are part of a zerg does the sundy survive. If you park it anywhere else like on the flanks, or if you're outnumbered by just a small amount, then it's destroyed before the 2nd person spawns on it.

PS1 CE is useless to prevent anything unless there's friendlies there, or yourself, to shoot at the enemy. Unlike PS2 mines/claymores where you put them somewhere and 2 hours later you get a lucky kill.

Yeah PS1 CE multiplies your effectiveness, but alone without any players around they are pretty weak. Contrasted with PS2 where they work with or without you around.

They last longer when certed, and get more.

They're OP. One guy fully certed can dart an entire base, indefinitely, from the safety of the spawn room. The only reason you don't see it happening more often is because you don't get XP from it.

People have been playing Diablo2 for decades, not PS1. PS1 was dead by 2005, 1 years after it was out. Before BFR's, and it was killed by the CommandRank and CUD cheats.

The CommandRank/CUD was a direct and only nerf to the PS1 cloaking AMS, and PS1 CE. 90% of OS's hit the AMS, all EMP blasts hit CE.

What we have here in PS2 is what PS1 played like after everyone got their I-win buttons, and guess what nobody defends and the map means nothing other than what zergs rolling base after base. The CUD cheats negates the PS1 AMS/CE.

First 6 months PS1 was out, it was pure awesomeness.

We play for purple medalz

everything is pointless. i grow weary of this world.

pretty much this.


ALTHOUGH, i have to say that the implementation of the continental lattice and resource revamp will add some more reasons to fight.

that reason is total capture and domination of the continents.

Well, the responses regarding the state of the game after more than a year are disheartening. I honestly thought 14 months would bring some positive changes in the 'meta'.

Well, I've decided to install to poke around a bit and have something to kill some time in between other games. First thing I noticed: All low pop servers with 1 medium. Sure, it's 2 a.m., but.........this is worse than 1 year ago, and that's after the server merge!

Even pre-merge at 2 a.m. it was better than this. Not a lot, but better. Now, after the merge, it's worse? Wow.

So, what's the low down? Is this game losing players? Is it stable? Will they be doing further merges? Also, did they reduce the max player count per server?

My entire outfit stopped playing PS2. We used to have two 2 platoons a night. Now we are split between Day Z and WoT. It's not that we wanted to look for new games, its because we've done the same thing a thousand times over in PS2. It gets old when you cap a base and end up an hour later having to recap it. You ask yourself, well why did we cap it in the first place?

I hear you, and that's sad. It's so frustrating to keep going in circles for no good reason.

I also started playing WoT about the same time I started PS2 in beta. I've spent $120 over the last year in WoT. That money could have, and should have, gone to PS2, but I don't want to pay money to go in circles. If they genuinely improve the meta, I'll pay money, but for me, that almost certainly means base lockouts to solidify forward progress, but......perhaps the new lattice will resolve that concern for me.

This level of deconstructionism could take down just about any game out there.

Civilization-series? "Is there a reason to play other than to see little city icons get bigger and with a larger population number as you try to stem the increase of such icons and numbers with your neighbors?"

Flight sims? "Is there a reason to take off from the runway and not crash except to see how long you can fly?"

Minecraft-clones? "Is there a reason to build things?"

MOBA clones? "survival" zombie clones? List goes on and on.

This is a shooter and we shoot in it because we shoot things in a shooter. Adding additional things is neat and enhances replay value. Yet expecting some existential epiphany from some holy "metagame added" miracle isn't going to happen.

It's sort of like a sand box, but instead of sand it has wet mud. Sure you can do whatever you want without objectives, but what is there to do besides kill people, cap bases, and collect certs? Compare to EVE a game I have almost no experience with however their are a lot of things you can do mining, trading, exploring, manufacturing, etc.

People say set your own goals because this is a sandbox and no ones telling you what to do well guess what. Your not told because the only thing to do is fight or sit in the warp gate. Whoa so deep! I feel like I'm making really important choices. Either I can have fun or I can choose not too. Hey it's freedom of choice though I guess I can't complain that I'm being forced to do something.

DeadAlive99:

No, there are no base lock-outs. They tried it with a shorter time limit and it was a disaster. Lock-outs stagnate the game by preventing counter offensives from gaining ground. You push back the enemy tide, fight all the way back to their base and what do you get, a long wait for the timer to run out. In the mean time, you farm spawns. The current lattice system is much better, allowing for true back-and-forth seesaw battles.

Tons of improvements have been made. From your post, I don't think you'd care about any of them.

No. In fact, I doubt the game will ever be what you want it to be.

The game is as it was, only what you make of it. By that measure, I doubt you would enjoy it.

In some cases they have refunded Cert Points for changed items. In other cases, no they have not. The difference is if the item was "Retooled in its core functionality" (Cert Refund) or if it was "Balance Tweaked" (No Refund).

Shockwave44:

Each Territory in Planetside is equivalent to a Round in BF or COD. The "so what?" is exactly the same: You won! Good job!

I never find myself with nothing to do. If the base cap is going to take too long, I just push on and start softening up the next base. You get a lot of extra action that way.

Scale may not matter to you, but I love the scale of the world and the fights. There's nothing like it anywhere else.

Please DON'T, and I'll tell you why. A "Win Condition" implies 2 things: First, you can't have a "Win Condition" without a "Lose Condition". That means on the Meta-Level someone is going to get railroaded, pushed not only into a corner, but out of existence. "Gee, I'd like to play some Planetside today"...oh, I can't because my empire was beaten and we have no place to spawn anymore. Great for the victors, a load of steaming crud for the losers. The second is a "Reset Condition", in which one Empire wins and the server has to be reset. That goes against the notion of a "Persistent Online World". Right now we have warpgate rotations, and that's bad already. Hopefully, that will be done away with once more continents come online. Resets and WG Rotations break any sense of ownership an Empire has over their territory. That's why "Win Conditions" are bad for Planetside.

Here you go: http://wiki.planetside-universe.com/ps/Lore_Archive

That's not technically true. The possibility exists for you to create (or join) an Outfit with the manpower to hold territory indefinitely. All you need is round-the-clock manpower and organization. It's certainly not easy, but it is there. Future Crew likes to demonstrate this on a regular basis by crushing attempts to capture certain bases.

Winning a base in Planetisde is the equivalent of winning rounds in both Counter-Strike AND Battlefield at the same time. You gain additional resources, which allows you to purchase "disposables" just like purchasing weapons for the next Counter-Strike round, and it nets you Cert Points which is the equivalent of ranking into new equipment in Battlefield. It's the best of both. So, indeed, Planetside DOES top that. In addition, you don't have to wait through a loading screen to start the next match. That next round has already begun the second you win. On top of that, now you sometimes get to transition into vehicle warfare (if you choose) which act as a action shift in between rounds of infantry combat. Planetside even gives you a round leaderboard if you want to see it. I'd say Planetide is whipping the pants off of BF and CoD in all respects.

That's not really true anymore. The lattice system prevents most back capping. The enemy may shift to a different lane, but that's where strategy comes in.

It's not that BF or CoD are bad, it's that they aren't any better. The point is that people like yourself want to hold Planetside to an unfair and unobtainable standard. This goes all the way back to the Beta of Planetside 1. People had the exact same complaint then as you do now. I'm sorry you can't be happy with winning bases, that's what this game is. There are plenty of round-based FPSs out there for you to enjoy. There are plenty of single-player story-driven FPSs out there for you to enjoy. This game isn't those. You can take it or leave it. Frankly, after living through the BFR debacle, I'd be ecstatic if Planetisde 2 was exactly the same in 3 years.

It can absolutely be that if that's what you make it. Get a better Server, get a better Continent, and get a better Outfit. Or don't. You're welcome to sit there and stew about it. That's your choice.

Since you are being intentionally dense, I'll spell it out: He's saying that if YOU aren't having fun, then don't play. You need to learn to read through a quote chain to get the gist of a conversation.

You're welcome to your opinion, but remember, it is only your opinion - not a fact. Here's a FACT: Not everyone feels the same way about this game as you do.

Consider yourself counted out. I'll say this, you are working awfully hard at being unhappy. If you put half as much effort into playing the game, you might have found it more enjoyable. But one thing is for sure, it'll never be the game you want it to be. So you can go ahead and go find something that matches your tastes better. Check out Star Citizen. They have high aspirations.

Why do we fight?

To protect home, and family.
To preserve balance, and bring harmony.

Really? Approximately when was this, I'd like to read some opinions at the time on it. If it failed that badly, then that immediately tells me that it wasn't implemented properly.

The problem with any idea, is that it has to be done.....properly. You can't just slap in a timer and declare it DOA, although there's nothing wrong with experimenting. I posted multiple ways of implementing it back then that would have aleviated the issues you mentioned. I'd have to dig up my old posts as I don't recall the details now, but I factored in your concerns into my idea so that counter strikes would still be viable.

Just once, I'd like to have the reigns. Base lock outs could be made to work, but people reject it thinking that the only way it could be applied is in a 'one size fits all' approach. There are a hundred ways it could be done. Literally. You just tweak it to fit.

Base Timers were removed in the Sept 7, 2012 Beta Patch. The only reference I can find to it is here: http://themittani.com/features/alpha-squad-and-beta-patches

That's likely due to the fact that the PS2 Beta Forums were locked and hidden after the game went live.

I'm a bit confused. You asked when that was and then say you posted about it "back then". Either you were there and saw the problems with it first hand or you weren't - I don't see middle ground there.

Furthermore, 5 minute timers were bad enough. I can't imagine how making the 30~60 minutes long could be anything but bad.

Experimenting is fine in Beta, but this game is live now and the core mechanics are in place. I highly doubt the dev team is interested in revisiting mechanics that they've already ruled out when they have the Sony Executives breathing down their necks to get the product ready to ship on the PS4 (a deadline they already missed, btw) and the vast majority of the player base hounding them for new content.

Monday Morning Quarterbacking is easy. Captaining the helm of a product this big is not. Your idea, while great in your mind, is sure to alienate and instill ire in a vast number of players. I'm reminded of the movie quote from 'War Games': "The only winning move is not to play." That is the unenviable position the dev team find themselves in. No matter what they do, there will always be someone like you who thinks they are doing it wrong and want to dictate a better way.

I'll tell you this about your idea. I don't like it because it is unnecessarily complicated. A different timer for each base? That sounds terrible and confusing for new players. It also sounds like it would stagnate the battle lines cause a lot of waiting around for bases to become available, and then massive zerg rushes as a base become vulnerable.

It won't make a difference. At the end of the day, the only real point there is to a shooter is to kill your enemy.

Threads like these bum me out.
QUIT RUINING MY FUN!