We need bases designed in a more interesting way, with more layers of defense that are useless when the number of people is too small. Imagine you have an enormous castle with 4 successive walls: The inner one will be defended with 12 people, the middle inner one with 24, the middle outer one with 48, and the outer one with 96. Now we have base with an outer wall of 12 people and no inner wall (hence as soon as the "wall" is breached the base is spawn camped) or bases with an outer wall of 96 people (amp stations) and no inner wall, resulting in messes all around as soon as the wall is breached. My suggestion: Add layers of defense, in say, The Crown. Several small walls could be added on the hill around, easy to access for defenders, but not for attackers. A few blockhaus too, that could be accessed by teleporter, but where the teleporter could be disabled simply by capturing a small point around it. Disabled, not captured. If 5 blockhaus were added, with little walls around them on the hill, The crown would be more interesting, as the battles would begin long before being in the buildings around the tower, allowing more people to be fighting without being crammed in 20x20 m2 with 200+ other people. Think about the map overlord (unreal tournament 1) it got the concept right: As soon as the attackers breach a certain point, the defenses of it become inactive. So if 12 people attack the crown, defended by 6 people, the 12 will soon overwhelm the outer defenses and force the defenders to regroup around the capture points, ensuring there's always someone to kill. If 200 people attack the Crown defended by 150, they will have to destroy every single point before reaching the capture points, and will avoid being fighting in tiny rooms. TL;DR: Make bases have more layers of defense, that can not be used when the battle is to small, to ensure that big battles always have room to happen.
I share your sentiment. Revamping bases might be too costly though. Alternative solution is to simply add more control points to bases. Those added control points would only become active when number of people in the region reaches critical threshold.
Bases should be spread out over the entire hex.. The points should be many 100's of meters apart. You should have like 3 or 4 12-24 battles going on in the hex, not one huge blob of 96vs96 in a 100m area... BF3 Caspian boarder as example, think of that map being a hex, that is how this should be. 4-6 points through the hex, each in a different area with its own buildings, all having to be flipped together and held to flip the hex... The game can't handle 96+vs96+, you might see 64 people total.. everything else is culled anyways... Honestly a 96+ battle on here looks like it has less people than a 64player BF3 Caspian boarder server... I know, I know.. "why do I play this?".. "just go back to BF3 scrub".. you know.. more times goes by, the more I wonder why I don't.. My answer before was that I was subbing for this, and if I wasnt playing I would be wasting money, but those days are gone..
Once I'm at the base, I don't want to spend half my short life running to the fight. Large bases are also a nightmare with small pops. I hate playing cat and mouse.
I like playing cat and mouse.. it takes skill and it is fun and dynamic. I would rather cat and mouse at Crux Headquarters than play Op_metro style rocket spam tunnels at kwattee south or SNA.. I don't like playing camp and spam the chokepoint for 2 hours while making no progress, that has gotten really old. Every 96+ is the same, both sides camping a side of a chokepoint, both hoping to kill the noob dumb enough to try to pass.
so you are saying you are after TDM experience with targets conveniently shoved in your face? Are you sure you are in the right game? Large bases with spaced out cap points would also reduce the ghostcapping because it's a lot of legwork to flip the points and most people just wouldn't bother. Isn't ghostcapping considered bad? Numerous, spaced out cap points set up a de facto threshold of minimum assault group size below which there is almost 0 chance of ever capping the base. It is not that different from what many people in the past suggested to fix ghost capping, eg "the game should require X people on point to switch it".
See, while all those people are camping a chokepoint/spawn room/whatever, I run around the side, or take another route, or even find another base to fight at. This isn't metro, there's tons of ways to get around, other things to do other than push for a cap point.
My suggestion was that big bases could be flipped by a small number of people just like today, as a small number of people could not hold the whole base. I think Ciphernine got it right, by suggesting more capture points that become active during a battle when there are enough people.
So it seems I'm not alone... I agree OP, many bases in PS2 are simply not designed to handle 96+ battles which simply makes it "unfun". This is constantly happening on Cobalt. 1st lattice and then merge with Ceres equaled in some...impressive...blobs.
Because you invested in it. A piece of yourself is a part of this game now. That's one of the reasons minecraft or any MMO out there is so addictive.
