I thought lock continent would be a good thing!

I never said I wasn't having fun while on Esamir, just that I dislike the continent compared to Hossin. The fighting is still great and everything else; it's just the colors and lack of scaffolding on the walls that is off-putting. I just understand that territory control and denial is a necessary core mechanic of Planetside 2 because this game can't base itself off the shallow mechanics of other fpses for its survival and longevity. I think the problem doesn't lie in the game in this instance, but rather the generation of players we have today that aren't accustomed to real consequences as part of "fun" gameplay.

This game is being changed from the game that it was on release, and that is a good thing; because the game on release was not the game it should have been.

But the motivation is perverted by the ability to fourth faction and the fact that 'my team' may not be in the best position to accomplish the goal in question. If my objective is to open Continent X and doing so requires locking Continent A, B, or C, then why would I fight for anyone other than the most dominating faction on the most dominated continent?

No. Ever considered why Indar was one of the few continents locked in the first place? Because none of the tactical outfits gave a **** about that continent that just wasted resources and men alike.

I was in Emerald's TR Command chat today and we all agreed (majority) agreed on one thing. We had to figure out which continent would be the Primary continent we will fight for and the Secondary continent. It went along the lines of this for priority.

Hossin > Amerish > Esamir > Indar.

And seeing how the VS on Emerald had NO trouble taking Indar away from the NC/TR (as I myself observed the few fights there in small squad scales) and how when the Indar Alert happened, most of everyone in TR Command said "**** Indar", I'll say that no - A good portion of players don't enjoy playing in Indar. Because if they did, they wouldn't allow it to be capped, period.

If you have a problem with continent locking, try rallying your faction's command to the continent's cause. If they decided that Indar blows and isn't worth their time, then you've proven yourself wrong that the "zombie zerg enjoys Indar", which for being on PlanetSide 2 for as long as I have, already figured (at least this applies for Waterson and now Emerald).

People complain that Amerish isn't for tanking and I would disagree. You're right in some sense. Amerish isn't meant for tanking for new players who couldn't figure out every crevice of the continent. However once you learn that, you'll see that Amerish was damn well designed and even a Sunderer can fit/drive up in the most ridiculous of places.

No, the main reason people play on Indar is that it always had at least 2 fights going on. People follow the action, if it's not on Indar, they'll follow it to where it is.

God, these people moaning about "Waaah, I can't play Indarside anymore" just remind me of the same people who only ever wanted to play Blood Gulch on Halo and Dust on Counterstrike.

"WE'RE AFRAID OF CHANGE!!!"

Interesting.. considering how popular this game was until a portion of the players convinced SOE to start making sweeping changes to the game to make players to play differently last summer. Some big outfit leaders just hated the fact people could go have fun in small groups and accomplish things on the smaller scale without them. Then, after they got what they cried for and found that it didn't really matter, they quit themselves.

People posting against the continent reworks, the silly alert system, cont locking didn't say "maybe this game is not for you" when the same people on the forums whined over and over about wanting certain game mechanics that weren't planned. Now a year+ later when you have these silly mechanics and people are voicing their opinions against them you say "this game is not for you."

After the novelty of Hossin and locking wears out in a week or two, why should we even care about locking a cont any more that capping some crap little base on Indar? Much like after alerts were introduced, I know that 20 minutes after I log off everything I fought for could be reversed on a whim. The idea that locking brings some grand global strategy to the game is an illusion, ...or delusion.

Yes, yesterday was just like the first few days following the Esamir and Amerish re-releases.

Just like how people always follow the action back to Indar right after an Esamir/Amerish alert ends.

Continent locking worst Idea ever with only four continents but I have a paid sub so the Q's for Hossin don't inconvenience me.

i imagined that one continent would be locked at a time - and for only a few hours.

we're being forced to play on maps because of ghost cappers now.

Indarside or forced variation.

Yeah, and I spent the last 2 years hating that Indar was the only place to fight on.

I'll take forced variation for 2000 Alex.
*BUZZER*
"What is a fair way to deal with people preferring different continents to fight on in Planetside 2?"

Esamir is good for tanking...

just not really farming infantry as a tank.

Tanks are still required to secure and hold spawn logistics directly outside a base though.

I disagree on Esamir being good for tanking.

Decent. Maybe. The whole 1 tech plant isn't doing it any favours either.

The locking rules are actually somewhat reasonable. I expected the system to be much worse. But as it stands it seems like a nice locking testing feature. I'm quite sure the thing will change... eventually.

For the most part this locking system is not even close to proper one. Just the same way as continent gets locked, people rush off to alerts without the locking. Nothing really changed, since it's still threeway battles only, except Indarside is now present simple, rather than continuous.

Hell, if this is a reaction to this change, I wonder what's it's gonna be like if devs finally implement a possibility for a twoway battle on any given continent. I predict something like:

For tanking, Indar reigns supreme because of the open space and semi level terrain, then Amerish, then Hossin.
Esimar since the high wall update, not very tank friendly and not because it prevent shelling spawn rooms, but because it channels tanks into death valleys.

At this point, I'm going to say that it's more of a tank design philosophy problem than a level design problem.
Think about it, Higby and Kevmo expressly said that tanks are force multipliers. for me, that means they will NEVER be able to get the objective, and until that's 'fixed', no more continents will be designed with tanks and tankers in mind.

It doesn't matter WHO, what faction, locks my favorite continent.. once its locked.. I can't play there anymore...

I can't even fight out of the warpgate to try and get one puny little base back.. b/c i can't go there at all.

it does not provide more fun --- it limits the number of areas in which I can have fun

True, lack of tech to go around causes some issues with MBT availability

We need loadstars so we can bring MBT's to the front from WG

64 square kilometers and you still complain about "lacking variety"... Could it be that this variety doesn't relate to the amount continents even the slightest?

that's silly... there are no 64 square kilometers of battles going on.. only a tiny fraction is ever in battle ..