"Redeployside 2" Has sucked the fun out of the game

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by NikolaiLev, Mar 17, 2015.

  1. Thostbog

    Exactly.
  2. 00000000000000000000

    Nope, only 21 hours in a scythe and 2 in a Liberator, out of 398 hours played. (5% airtime, my armor is similar but probably closer to 10%, I'm mostly an infantry guy)

    That is why I suggested they fix instant action so it finds the most even fight. Because I am also a solo player and redeploy is essential to finding a fight that I don't have to get super invested into. At the moment Instant action is something of a joke where it drops you in 12 vs 96+ like you are going to win it solo, or even better it drops you on an unattackable base or in the middle of nowhere.

    Instead have it pick the most even battle (50% vs 50%, or rarely 33% vs 33% vs 33%) and drop you there. And take away instant action for grouped players, as they are expected to move with their squad and instant action is something of a random drop.

    So basically people wanting a long term fight use transportation and work with their platoon to move forward.

    Those looking for a quickie before going to work or something use instant action.
  3. 00000000000000000000


    Except redeploy exactly keeps you from doing this. In an ideal situation the enemy forces would have to choose where to defend, or to split up their forces in the hopes of defending multiple places. In Redeployside they simply put all their forces on base A, wipe out the attackers in 1-2 minutes, and then switch to base B and do the same.

    I was in a platoon yesterday and we defended 4 bases simultaneously for about 30 minutes. Attacked by multiple platoons in multiple areas and we still won each time, thanks to simply bringing in larger numbers, with no time for them to get here.

    Basically the game should be "Reinforcements are on the way!" NOT "Reinforcements are o- oh they are already here."
    • Up x 2
  4. wrenched


    Yes, by making redeploying to anywhere you own as easy as possible.


    Then spend 1-2 minutes taking base A back, or take C.
  5. zaspacer

    Most current player tactics (both Solo and Organized Player) in the game discourage even fights from occurring. The game's reward system discourages even fights from occurring. And changing the game by removing or crippling "Redployside" will not change that.

    Removing or crippling "Redployside" will just further derail Solo gameplay, and push Organized Platoons to abuse Air and Beacons more... or make abusing the Size of a Platoon more effective.

    I consistently see Organized Platoon players and Solo players wanting completely different things, and being treated completely different by Devs in terms of in-game tools and Design support. I think it's about time that PS2 does what most games do: segregate the Organized Players and Solo playing into different Servers or different player Areas. PS2 will grow and maintain more players by making a better play experience for each, than it will by forcing play that doesn't work well for anyone. Either separate em, or start giving them the same tools and support, and integrating them better.

    If you just removed Redployside, it would give Attackers a major tactical boost. On the solo players side, Zergs would become even more effective (and fights more Pop uneven). On the Organized Platoon side, it would allow them to hit targets using Air or Beacons and take them with much less resistance. A lot more Ghostcapping, because of distribution problems.

    The Attackers have too much advantage on distribution if you kill Redeployside, but don't also make other changes. For Organized Platoon play, you need to also remove Squad Beacons and lower the Health on Galaxies. For solo players, you need to give (back) non-Max Infantry the ability to destroy or disrupt large Tank/Sunderer swarms from Range.

    In the current system, Redployside is actually something that HELPS boost "even fights" by accelerating the mobilization of Defending forces to field a team at a Base under attack.

    Usually an Organized Platoon will try the same broken tactics to overwhelm a base, and then either succeed or get overwhelmed by sheer numbers of enemies.

    Both the broken tactics and the uneven fights are ugly, but that's what PS2 has become, because:
    1) Most current player tactics (both Solo and Organized Player) in the game discourage even fights from occurring
    2) The game's reward system discourages even fights from occurring.

    Removing Redeployside will boost the use and effectiveness of both Zergs by Soloers and Beacon/Gal insertions by Organized Platoons. And more Ghostcapping.

    Soloers already lack a method to counter this Soloer tactic.

    Organized Platoon counters to each other will be what?
    * Set up a Base Defense ahead of time on key targets? Not likely. Enemy can mouseover and see their numbers and just Attack with the size needed or move to other targets, while the Defender is just dead weight.
    * Set up a Massive Air Force to control the skies and prevent attackers from being able to mobilize (and ensuring your own Attackers can moblize)? Possibly. Who wants that?

    Organized Platoon don't want even fights. They don't deploy even forces to existing fights, and they don't want to meet resistance when they try for a target: even fights are not good tactics. Soloers who are grinding don't want even fights, and most soloers who want an even fight for "fun" don't have a way to do it outside of Redeployside.

    If you remove Redeployside, this "constantly changing fights" will not change. Instead of being told to use Redeploy, you will simply be told to use Squad Beacon or get in a Gal or Valk. The power of fast redeploying does not change, you will just bump down the next tier of redeployment speed and have more downtime spent traveling.
  6. KnightCole

    Its alot more then Redeploysdie sucking the fun out of PS2.....

    Sure, its about Large fights, but oddly, its those large fights and the cont locking and lattice lanes that actually suck the fun out of the game. Redeployside really is just icing on the **** cake that has become PS2's gameplay experience.

    It used to be where one could take a tank from base to base, and hell, at times, run there, or take a flash, or a car....I used to spawn at the Warpgate, grab a tank and drive clear across indar or esamir and arrive to do something. Game was just worlds better. Now, I spawn a tank, frive out the gate, within less then a minute, atleast 1 or 2 planes will show up and blow it to bits.....or if I drive a bit, some glitchy terrain will blow it up. Then, once it gets into combat, the tank gun has been nerfed such that its crap anyway.

    And even if the gun was good, game performance in battle has degraded so much its no fun anyway....laggy, stuttery, non-rendering, poor hit detect ****....

    but yes, lets blame redeployside. THen, the entire point of playing is gone...to kill people...so you blow up 15 sunderers, there is 20 more to replace it...so you cap a cont, so you defend....no epic to this game anymore. Used to be an epic feeling to running 300m across a field, sneaking up on a row of infils and mowing them down, while cleaverly diving between the rocks to avoid getting shot....cant do that anymore...hit detect will ensure that doesnt happen...
  7. FateJH

    That's not splitting up. Splitting up is when Fred goes off with Daphne and Velma in one direction and Scooby and Shaggy go off in another, and they don't meet back up until the plot says Scooby is allowed to accidentally stumble upon a clue.

    And exactly how is this fair to the people attacking and routed from base A (twice)?
    (I am not accepting "they can do the same." If you have the urge to answer that, please try harder to convince me.)
    • Up x 1
  8. Renuse

    Redeploying across the continent should not be an option. At all.

    The squad leaders spawn is cool. But not the "redeploy across the map". Maybe squads have a larger redeploy radius based off the squad leader. The smaller the squads the farther the redeploy, the larger, the shorter the redeploy distance. But over all cut it down to a range, not a hex/pop based thing, and throw that in, I think we would get good results. Mebe.
  9. NikolaiLev

    This is far from the point made in the original post and I would like to invite everyone participating in the discussion to take the thirty seconds needed to actually read it.

    To summarize: the optimal way to play for outfit platoons is to exploit redeploy to rapidly change avenues of attack to ensure the most one-sided confrontation possible. This is not fun, because one-sided conflicts are foregone conclusions and offer little room for evenly matched fights to go on.
  10. Bonom Denej

    Even if my post could be interepreted like I play lonewolf, I play in squad with the FRC. And even then, I don't want to have to sit in a sundy everytime we want to change front. I often don't play for more than an hour and my argument still stand. Squad play or lonewolf.
  11. Copasetic

    There's nothing wrong with redeploying as long as it's cut off at 50% pop. That takes a steamroll or a ghost cap and turns it into an even fight, whether it's 12v12 or 96v96. Awesome. And since it only works on defense you still need vehicles and logistics to mount attacks. And it gives people a way to stay in constant action if that's the kind of game they want.

    The problems don't start until platoons bypass that pop cap. The solutions are pretty simple:
    • Change "spawn on squad leader" to "spawn near squad leader". Have it drop you at the nearest uncontested base.
    • Change spawn beacons to work only in the current hex. Make them a respawn option, not a way to redeploy.
    • Improve the population check on reinforcements spawns to update in real time instead of every x seconds
    Notice even with these changes a platoon can still send a squad into a 12v24 fight through redeploying and reinforcements needed. ONE SQUAD. And now you have a nice even fight there. If they want to send more they'll have to pull Galaxies or Sunderers and actually travel to that base.

    No nanite costs, no complicated distance system, just a few tweaks and this teleporting steamroll BS is shut down without ruining redeploy for everyone else.
  12. OldMaster80

    You don't want to sit in a sundy every time you change front? Great then spawn a Valkyrie or a Galaxy. Or send your SL to drop a spawn beacon.

    The biggest added value ps2 has is the huge map and the big scale of conflict that forces squads to take some choices about which lane and which target. Since devs gave players the opportunity to teleport to distant bases (See feb2014 patch notes) it's just not possible to outmaneuver the enemy because people just keep teleporting back and forward. Big outfits are exploiting this all day.
    It's not rocket science: ina game where numbers and territory control matter so much giving everyone a free mass teleporter is total idiocy.
  13. Gorganov

    Redeployside only sucks because people think bases matter? News flash, they really don't, not since the lattice was introduced. And the whole point of the current lattice is to force fights to happen. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT.

    We need something between the good ol hex and lattice. Group territories together to make region groups (Remember how facilities had satellites? Basically that), and then lattice region groups together. Territory 2.0 man, it's the only way.
  14. Dowlphin

    I just participated in my first platoon op of this kind, and I have to agree. It basically felt as if the PL was using people to fulfill their personal superiority desires. I hardly had anything to do because stuff went to quickly, and they really sometimes redeployed again, having people's CP wasted, because, oops, we need to be somewhere else now.
    Now I also understand some of the puzzling and frustrating experiences I have had so far, about having just landed a great victory and a minute later we're all dead and I wonder why.

    So as I understand, the game used to be better, focusing more on what it's actually supposed to be. It's really frustrating to see so many things get worse, lose their spirit. This is just one of so many examples I have seen and experienced. (Likely a symptom of the ever-tightening grip of bankster-created scarcity in the world.)
  15. Bonom Denej

    Redeploy to defend, beacon/sundy/gal to attack. I like that and I don't want it changed. I can see why people think it's annoying, but having to drive/fly/beacon to a base you own to defend it is silly to me. And with the current system, when lonewolfing or even in squad, sometime you can't even deploy in a friendly base.
    Anyway, I'm fine with the game right now and I'm pretty sure most people are. To me, this is one of those "vocal minorities" subject.
  16. FateJH

    Bases always mattered if they always mattered and if they never mattered then that wasn't the fault of the lattice. Even under the pure hex system, bases really didn't matter - that's my assertion. There still is no inherent difference between small base A and small base B, given a base that once provided 5 mechanized income and another base that provided 5 mechanized income, except how exposed the capture point is and how small the spawn room is. You're just deluding yourself to thinking bases mattered back then. Bases mattered so much that players would frequently eschewed the rest of the map and let themselves be waylaid defending the Crown forever against absolutely stupid attacks.
    That's a necessary manifestation. The point of the lattice is to make the front line something you could actually wrap your head around from a defensive standpoint. And redeployside definitely existed back then - that was the only way to possibly try to manage that many exposed hexes. The combination of expansive possibilities, constant movement, and being juked frequently, made it an exhausting system. The problem is that we retained and then expanded the redeployment options that allow the lattice to be too powerful as a defensive tool.
    This I agree with, however. We also need things to do in the major bases on the same lane that are not directly conductive to capturing the said base, but still affects the front line that might be a few bases further up the lane.
  17. stalkish

    Just drop the whole thing.
    Redeploy is here to stay since modern gamers a lazy self obsessed ******** simple as that.
    All they want to do is hold W + RMB nothing else, dont want to drive a vehicle because theyd have to learn something new, dont want to learn logistical tactics or develop their fast reponse skills since that would be too hard, they just want to click 1 button then be in the fight.
    Kinda sad realy, the FPS genre used to contain some gem games, now it contains boring re-makes of the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over again, with a cherry of k/d ratio and other stats popped on top.
    Anyone who actualy promotes this kind of lame gameplay must have a very inactive brain, probably wernt stimulated enough as a child.

    Ive got to say i also enjoy reading all the wannabe generals in here supporting the redeploy mechanic, you guys seriously think your good leaders. Makes me laugh till it hurts. The simplicity of what your doing must be mind numbing, it must be, although i suppose it boosts your own ego so thats why you do it.

    The game is far to broken and has gone too far down this road to turn around now, just do what i do and have some fun blowing **** up until it becomes boring and then log.
    • Up x 1
  18. Gorganov


    Never gonna 'drop it' until the devs finally understand how their own game works. Redeployside itself isn't bad... we just gotta balance the flow around expecting it to happen.
  19. Slamz

    Reployside is a fundamental problem with PS2 game design and cannot be fixed.


    There are two fundamental problems that won't be solved without making a new game:
    * Maps are too small and too quick to travel across.
    Even if you got rid of redeployment, people would just use aircraft or vehicles do to the same thing and it wouldn't be that much slower. Instead of relocating in 15 seconds it might take 3 minutes for large distances. You might get to cap a base before the zerg shows up but ultimately you have the same problem which is that hordes of people are able to shift from one side of the map to the other very fast.

    If maps were literally 10x as big, the difference between redeploy speed and Galaxy speed would be significant but at present speeds and map sizes, I don't think it would solve the complaint.

    * The game lacks personal attachment and strategic depth.
    Do you remember exactly what bases you fought for last night? I don't. Why should I? It doesn't matter now and they were "just some bases". I went where the action was good. There is a little bit of map strategy but it's shallow. After taking this base I have no personal investment in hanging out in that area. I redeploy somewhere else because I just don't care about any particular location.

    I don't even know how we'd fix that except for inventing massive new game systems and mechanics that make the world have more depth and make certain areas actually matter. At this point we're talking about a whole new game.


    This is why "Planetside is flawed". It's fun. I enjoy it. But flaws like this cannot be fixed in a patch. Just gotta live with it.
  20. OldMaster80

    A few comments:
    • No one says redeploy has to disappear from the game. The problem is instead with the so called "cross continent reinforcement system" that was introduced in February 2014. That's the system that makes you disappear from Howling Checkpass and pop up in the Coramed Labs 10 seconds later.
    • There is a huge difference between redeploy and using vehicles, besides the first is clearly faster: when you redeploy you start the battle from the spawn room. If you have to resecure using vehicles it means that you have spawn and deploy your own sunderer, or find a spot for a spawn beacon, that you might be intercepted and destroyed, and the enemy might have established a defensive perimeter with turrets, landmines, hacked base turrets etc. to prevent you from resecuring. In other words using vehicles involves a much higher number of variables to take in consideration. It requires more coordination and more strategy. Redeployers just have to sit in the spawn room and wait until they overpop the territory, then swarm out and they're likely to win the battle.
    • Having to spend 3 minutes to get across the map instead of 10 is a huge difference from the strategic point of view. For instance if your Galaxy does not arrive in time to save the base, then the battle is likely to take place between bases, instead of being another spawn room battle.
    Briefly: removing the cross continent reinforcement system would make to move to another side of the continent EXTREMELY relevant from the tactical point of view. Attacking an underdefended territory might cause a zerg elsewhere to split, and make it more vulnerable. Since February 2014 forzing a zerg to split is no longer possible: the zerg telerports, resecure, and 2 minutes later is back to the first territory.

    It's time someone in the devs team acknowledges this redeploy is a huge game design mistake.
    • Up x 1