Not exactly.. You can only diversify so much so fast. Its also unclear what the cap is on nanites My understanding from previous posts was.. at 60 nanites a minute, an MBT would cost 300 nanites (5minute cost in essence) Also I would ASSUME the cap on nanites is somewhere around 2000, but I am not sure on this (someone quote my post and reply with #'s from test if you could) So.. all the above being said.. unless you are WASTING vehicles/C4 at a ******** rate (or the costs of grenades/medkits are way too high), you should be fine.
So if I lay a lot of tank mines, I can't pull a Scythe? I don't see how the two are remotely related to each other, other than History Channel guy saying "Nanites". I hope you're not reducing the meta game in this game instead of increasing it. Recent history indicates your trend towards simplification and zerginess instead of skilled or tactical or strategic gameplay, which is contrary to your stated goals of, to paraphrase, "going MLG". Schizophrenic development decisions, or PR saying one thing, development doing another?
continent lock. to a lesser extent, facility benefits like the biolab regen, tech plant mbt spawning, and amp station turret cooling... thing. On another note, the amp station benefit needs to be buffed.
Powerlines eminate from the warpgate, filling the power reserves of each base at some Rate/Sec (very high, lets say 6,000 per sec) Each player at a base, or a nearby connected by latice enemy base, gets their nanite refil at 60/min.. eg; 100 players are supported at 60/min If more players, refilled at slower rate ^ thats the final form gist of it. How its going to be implemented in phase 1 is a bit different I would guess. The MAIN point to you is, if you ONLY hold the warpgate, or if you hold 80% of the continent, YOUR resource income is the same. (with potential limiters based on how much pop is in a given hex)
The limit to EARN certs is 10,000. However, you can be *refunded* over 10,000. You simply wont be able to earn more until you spend UNDER the 10,000 limit.
this is just the first step eventually, we'll have stuff like the base you're in supplying nanites, needing to keep a base filled up with nanites with NTUs, draining bases, etc.
SOE..... this RR is awesome..... But PLEASE don't do the Tank and Rocket changes...... they will be bad for the game and even the community united against them in sheer "what the higby are you higbying doing?".
So will we get refunded all acquisition timer certs on everything? Holy moly, that's a lot of certs incoming!
Does this mean the more warpgates you control the more Nanites you will receive? If a faction has 2 continents locked, they own 8 warpgates, while others have only 2 each. That's 4 times more Nanites income than other factions!
It's a good first step and if it is successful in making vehicles less spammable then perhaps their resistance to AV weaponry could be improved. Hopefully the next phase will come soon. ANTs, base power and possibly improved base benefits would help a lot in improving the strategic depth of the game.
Means you'll be one rich son of a... EDIT: ooooh, sorry, I get what you mean now. Well, better empty your certs now and hope you can grab as much of it as you can
This sounds like G-dub's stimulus plan. Everyone excited about $300 tax credit, but a little while later everyone's bit in the *** when the government can't pay its bills. This is a good idea in the version that I've seen proposed. Where meta is increased by the local draining of "nanites" preventing the creation of vehicle/max zergs at the far end of supply lines. Where a sunderer or other vehicle without much self defense can transport "nanites" to restock a drained base. But it sounds like this is another half-***** "initial" implementation, just like continent locking (which we all thought would be much cooler when implemented, even the initial implementation). What are the odds that they get the nanite costs correct, or even close to correct? Either we're going to have tank mines and C4 everywhere, or we'll have vehicles and maxes everywhere with no way to defeat them outside of pulling your own vehicle or max. I find it extremely unlikely that a proper balance will be reached in any reasonable timeframe, even given understandable initial implementation woes for a few days. In short, I have no faith in SoE being able to pull this off given how cut-down this version of the resource revamp seems to be. Its going to be a clusterfrak, but people will initially applaud because of "free" certs. I'd love to be wrong, but I don't like the feel of this partial implementation. Just another way they're removing the more interesting ways we have to kill each other in favor of zergs. A meta-game removal instead of a meta-game addition.
Phase 2… ANTS… Territory actually mattering… SOON™ Edit: Overall, I feel this is a MASSIVE step in the correct direction, provided they follow through soon enough!
Meaning if my vehicle is destroyed I can just pull another one as long as I have nanites? Can someone clarify this?
Let's see how this patch would affect the metagame: Less strategy: 3 independent resources into 1, no resources from controlling territory, no battles of attrition, no resource management. Less variety: Without the 3 independent resources there is no benefit to mixing up your playstyle with infantry, vehicle and aircraft. Less vehicles, aircraft and MAXes: Without the 3 independent resources, pulling these assets depletes resources towards a common cap. Conclusion: SOE is dumbing down PS2 to pander to InfantrySide and COD kids. Think about your comments here, PlanetSide was supposed to be a combined arms game.
