Stop Making New Continents

I would love more Continents but not at the sake of large fights.
Which is large balanced fights.
*The zergs are a different story and can be remedied imo by a enhanced lattice system.

When there is an Alert on Indar I would rather vomit glass than go there.
It is just so stale there.
All the same bases and strat or lack thereof.
Same ol' same ol'.

Only thing that would make it lively is IF people started playing Planetside and not what they are playing now.
I wont go into what I mean cuz its a whole topic of itself.

I would love to get my hands on a Planetside Map Editor.
Just to satisfy my creative map skills.

How many players are on one server? With more continents there will be less big fights, and without the big fights Planetside 2 is not Planetside 2. The only way for them to add on continents is to merge US east and west together.

The continental lattice is intended to handle this issue by controlling availability.


For example, here's Amerish, an NC home continent (they always have access to this continent and can not be pushed off of it completely). There's a rotational limited-duration Geowarp and three other Warpgates. As these are Broadcast Warpgates, they are linked in such a way that their destination is unfixed, but the continental lattice defines a number of fixed connections to Amerish. If the NC capture through Ikanam, Cetan, Qumu, and Onatha, they can head to one of the other locations connected to Amerish, but they must capture one base on the next continent linked from Amerish to continue. Meanwhile, while doing this, the NC will have to have left Cetan, Qumu, and Onatha completely exposed to capture from Tumas, Sungrey, Heyoka, and Verica, respectively. Onatha is also exposed to whatever is on the other side of the Warpgate.

The point is that the NC can push another continent but moving the bulk of their force from Amerish at this juncture is a bad idea. This is a good realm for smaller squads to try and make advances. If the NC as a whole tried to expand rapidly across different continents, they will be leave a lot of flanks exposed. Additionally, capturing Amerish (as a home continent) gives them an important world-wide bonus that all factions have by owning their home continents. It is, therefore, in their best interests and practically vital that the NC control Amerish before looking at places to which Amerish connects.

The distance between (most) bases on this continent, the size of the landscape around bases, and basic spawning limitations make it inconvenient to jump from frontline base to frontline base doing odd jobs to hold the whole of the frontline. Concentration is important and forces commitment, for both attackers and defenders. Even as the number of continents become available to the NC, these same two principles are important in hotspot areas, while smaller squads still have places to try their luck, not only within the confines of where the bulk is acting (secondary objectives) but in places that the bulk is not paying attention.

OP's logic fail is in that he thinks shifting around some boxes on existing bases/continents is somehow adding more diversity than WHOLE ENTIRE NEW CONTINENTS.

Does that count as epic fail?

What part of continent lattice do you not understand?

Why do you ask?
I never said that.

Pretty hard to explain a theory to so many people who understand the words but only have this limited shell of a game to reference. We really need a Planetside University...maybe some of the devs could attend?

You think that more continents means fighting gets spread out across more places, hence lower population in each. Continent lattice doesn't allow you to fight on continents that aren't contested, therefore you will only have 3-4 choices of places to go to, JUST LIKE YOU DO NOW with 3-4 unlocked continents. Population doesn't change.

If you understood that fact about continent lattice, why were you saying "I would love more Continents but not at the sake of large fights." ???

No. I can't see the "32 players" that you refer to however, PS1 could cope with 200 per empire per continent although that limit reduced to 166 then 133. But on the last day before PS2 tech test began we had an event when the limit was raised back up to that original 200.

Yep, PS1 had big battles too.

With that super lattice the dynamics of the battles changed. Instead of 3-ways on the limited number of continents available in PS2 we mostly go 2-way fights on different continents. And also because bases were defendable 60% VS against 40% TR at a base was still a worthwhile contest.

The continent locking in ps2 is rather poor but I suppose without the added features of PS1 it's the best that can be done.

You do realize Koltyr is not a new continent... right? It's a small island where new players learn the game within a focused battle environment. Being only 6 facilities, 1 tech plant, 1 AMP station, and 1 biolab... as well as 3 large facilities with tower layouts. It is by no means intended to draw players back into the game like Hossin. The goal of Koltyr is battle experience, putting new players on a map with a cap of 96 vs 96 vs 96, so that they may learn the basics as well as gain combat prowess through fighting other new players... instead of meeting a squad of BR100s that decimate you around every turn while you have absolutely no clue how to play the game. Simply put, it's designed so new players don't quit the game after that initial drop.

Well yeah I see what you mean.
Noone was talking about Continental Lattice till after my post, that I seen.
I didn't play Planetside 1 with that system.
I am all for more Continents.

I would rather vomit glass than play for more than 15min on Indar.
Hated the dust_2 24/7 crowd.

So If this wasn't enough for you, whatever.
No need to argue over it.

Are you stupid? A new continent is going to be the same thing. Everything will just look the same. But if you change the layout and the architecture of buildings, players will have more fun. When Hossin came out it was good because all the facilities looked difference than the old ones. Look at Indar. Back in 2013 all facilities of the same type looked the same. Then they changed how the facilities look and each facility is different now. So XYX watch tower will be different from ABC watchtower even thought they are both watchtowers. They need to focus on doing more of that than adding new continents. And no one answered my questions yet: if there are new continents, then it means less player per continent, which means less big fights. And that brings Planetside 2 closer to your average FPS game. The reason that Planetside 2 is still alive with such **** servers is that it is one of a kind, no other game offers massive fights and huge maps like planetside does. If we reduce the number of players per fight then Planetside will die off.

I'd rather have better factions than continents. But if neither is planned, then AT LEAST they should work on unique weapons. If they're not working on that either, don't expect anything from the devs. They have more important things to do.

I hate posting same things over and over. Also absolutely adore talking to people that begin their comments with insults.

Which part of continent lattice do you not understand???

Here's why I ask... you said and I quote "If we reduce the number of players per fight then Planetside will die off.". Continents will only be added with continent lattice. In continent lattice only 3-4 continents are open to fight on. SAME AS IT IS NOW. There is no change in population per fight.

I should probably repeat that in caps. THERE IS NO CHANGE IN POPULATION PER FIGHT. If you still don't understand why adding more continents does not spread out population, please let me know I'll try to explain further.

You obviously weren't around when you could do that all that happened was fighting on1 continent ( Indar )and ghost capping on the other ones on Briggs .

They need to advertise this game more.
More players means more income, more income means an actual dev team instead of the current 5 guys and a monkey with a rock they seem to have now.
(No offense to the current devs, there just needs to be WAY WAY more people working on this game so that it doesn't take +2 years to make a new continent.)

Continent locking ensured continents all benefit from populated battles... but i hate them... even though their purpose is clear i find them to be the crappiest experience... id rather have a continent lock preventing my faction from taking land but still allowing me to attack/defend then this bullcrap in the game now... when continent locking was first introduced it was intended that the winning faction actually take 75% or more of the continent... now they just need to win an alert witch is easy to do when your pop is twice that of the other two factions combined. also sense players jump factions to the winning side... or just give up when one faction takes a minor lead... its really difficult to keep morale up.

I have been on what was Mattherson and Jaeger since Dec 2012. Quite frankly, the many, many, small 8v8, 12v12, 4v4 and other various small skirmishes was alot more fun then the current 3 big 200v200 laggy zerg fests over 1 or 2 spots on 1 maybe 2 conts......

In the instance where it was a 24v24 or something, then cool, it was fun for a minute, fight for a bit in one then go to a smaller fight else where. Now its just 3 fights on just as many conts as we had before. Now we have what? 4 continents? And we can fight on what? 2 at a time? GUess what? That is exactly how many conts we used to have....2 steps forward 6 steps back.

Cont locking is supposed to be in a scale like PS1, where there is still 20 other planets to fight on while the few ones are locked, but in PS2, where there is 4 conts and half of them are locked......its pointless......SoE put the cart before the horse on this one, and it really needs to be canned until this game has like 12 continents. Let those 700 people stuffed into 1 cont spread about on 4. SO people hung out on indar? Big deal. Let people fight where they want. One thing I always liked about PS2 was its openness, go where ever, do whatever mentality and playstyle it had. Lattice lanes and cont locking really wrecked that.....made the game feel alot more closed and limited.......but then they go and make vehicles unlimited....go figure...

Dude 700 stuffed on a continent . these places are huge 700 is not stuffed .

Clearly you don't play much if you think 700 is stuffed , all will happen if you open 4 continents is 3 will be ghost capped same as before meaning no real battles the thing you been complaining about and the fighting will be on 1 continent .

Lol, 700 is stuffed when you can only attack down 1 or 2 lanes on the Lattice.....when it was no lattice, then no, 700 isnt stuffed, but it did allow for several smaller battles all over the place, over 2 battles on 2 lanes happening on 2 of hte 4 conts.

And before cont locking and lattice, I never had much issue finding a place to fight. After cont locking? Yeah, its 2 massive fights and nothing else.....I choose not to fight in those cuz they are boring lag fests....

And me playing? I did so for over a year almost every day. Had lots of fun and never had an issue with finding a fight. I typically would be in the base being ghost capped, holding it 1 on 6 for half an hour before finally being swarmed. In fact, there was almost always a pair of small group of people in many, many, many locations,finding a fight was actually hella easier, since everyone had freedom of movement. Now PS2 is just like Battlefield, where its just a instanced fight until one side quits or wins....I always like PS2's mass openness...Lattice and cont lock removed that.

I find the smaller 1-12 or 12-24 fights alot more fun. Room to move, lag didnt suck totally, hit detect didnt go full ******, just enough guys to make it fun, but not so few you couldnt find a target. Yeah, good times. now its just lame...