Redeploying is dumb

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Darkwulf, Jul 11, 2014.

  1. Alarox

    This is definitely one of those things that the community thinks they like, but if the developers went along with this then there would be an even bigger backlash.

    Yeah, having to drive from with warpgate with flashes/sunderers is fun... the first one or two times. Then it becomes tedious. Having to use a Galaxy to move your squad around is fun... until you start doing it after every single fight to get to the next one. Hardcore logistics sound super cool... until you realize that it means driving 5m for every 1m you're fighting. Etc.

    There are definitely compromises we could make between having more logistics while retaining convenience, except people don't care. They either want to drive around doing nothing all the time or they want to redeploy at any base at any time instantly.
    • Up x 1
  2. UberBonisseur


    SOE has always prioritized convenience over depth.

    For example, if you add tank spawns at every base, everybody is happy.
    But if you remove vehicle spawns from small outposts, you'll face a lot of hate and anger.


    The first option makes strategic choices irrelevant and saves you 40 seconds of driving, the second creates logistics and points of interest.
    Guess which one they chose
  3. Nikushimi



    Umm PS1 had droppods. They had a better design to them such as not being steerable and once you land you had a delay before you could exit the pod. You also could not just access them from anywhere, you had to wait on the HART shuttle at sanct. However you could select a pinpoint drop location anywhere on the map (as long as it was outside a bases area of influence)
  4. NC supporter

    Half of the players in the game haven't even played planetside 1 yet. The age of old games like planetside one has passed a long time ago. Change happens and it doesn't treat the old timers well.
  5. DatVanuMan

    May I ask you something: Is it worth spending resources to take such a DAMNED long time to get to a place, instead of wasting none at all getting there quickly? Think about that. Redeploying IS useful, as it allows you to go to any facility or Sunderer on the map, or something like that. That way, there are better ways to plan an attack, a defense, a vehicle zerg. Instead of nerfing the redeploy system, how about making vehicle pulling and convoys more rewarding?
  6. DatVanuMan

    So you're saying that tryhards are ALWAYS better than casual gamers who just want to have fun? Because that's not always the case;)
  7. Llamar

    Defending is ridiculously easy to do.
  8. Marxsbeard

    From my experience, a lot of the ps2 base are in their 30s with jobs and families, and some money to spend. I know I generally have 1-2 hours to play at a time, tops. I want to shoot some people between playing with my kids and getting laid. I'm not too interested in realism or logistics. I hope they never roll out the resource revamp, let alone this stupid idea. Downtime = something better I can spend my time on.
  9. Goden


    If your attackers consist of maybe 3 people, sure.
    • Up x 2
  10. Llamar

    Wow, people actually have difficulty defending?
  11. doombro

    PS1 did indeed have drop pods, but not for instant action. The point I was making was that the drop pod element of instant action in PS2 makes it very unreliable and that the system should be changed to the PS1 format.
  12. Goden


    I do when my cap point is 260 meters away and there are no defensive positions, structures, or assets.

    Aka most new bases
  13. Astriania

    Redeploying somewhere near the front is good. Being able to redeploy into a losing fight is not good - it's either a spawn camp or abused for 'redeployside' saves.
  14. WorldOfForms

    Except the HART had a timer that you had to wait for, and you had to redeploy to Sanctuary first. And you had to run from the spawn building into the HART building.

    Also, the HART drop pods didn't let you drop wherever you wanted - you couldn't drop inside the sphere or influence of any base - enemy or friendly. It actually had a lot of restrictions.
  15. TheBossPro1

    It will just turn into battlefield i guess
  16. dasichri

    I really dont like this current generation of gamers and how companies try to make their games appeal to as many people as possible and designing their games certain ways to appease the WANT IT NOW mentality.

    You just end up with a watered down product that could be so much greater and epic than it is.
    • Up x 1
  17. Goden


    PS2 has to appeal to many players because it needs thousands of players online at all times to function properly.

    If you want to turn this game into something really niche then go ahead but say goodbye to the big battles with many people.
  18. Llamar

    It's funny because it didn't attract the huge playerbase that it wanted and drove away the niche playerbase it had.
  19. Llamar

    It's funny because that's in very few bases. Almost all of them are an easy defend you just need to push a little earlier than 20 second away from cap like most Indar bases.
  20. FABIIK

    BS comparison because Chess is a perfectly balanced game (I'll concede that white has the advantage but since opponents usually switch sides...)

    PS2 fights are all but balanced.
    Server pops are not balanced.
    Continent pops are not balanced.
    Area populations are not balanced.