Would you perfer continent shrinking instead of continent locking?

Indar, it's either that battle, the Crown, or barely anything at all for a fight.

On Esamir, it's always around the Tech Plant, and the crap bases.

Either a pointless and endless slug fest with no ground gained in any practical sense... or jack ****.
Remove continent lock, and it's Always Indar or Esmair (if that) if you want reasonable numbers... or any reinforcements.
And it also removes any motive to finish a fight.
Why bother capping the bases, if the Endless slug fest is worth more certs, and achieves the same.

So it's either stay in the Slug match of uselessness or barely any game-play at all.

The only reason you get every situation, is there is a motive to actually fight beyond fighting itself.
And it's a bare-bones one at that.

If the map were smaller, we would be forced to redeploy across continents constantly to try find the best fight and for ie. tank player you would be forced into areas where tank battles are useless.

I say find a different solution.

This is just stealing the shrinking map idea from Battle Royale but it doesn't suite this kind of game. What if World of Warcraft's map were to shrink as the player base drops? NO THANKS.

Also some spawns, ie Indar SE spawn is by far best for hive construction. A faction forced into a bad spawn on a small map might have absolutely NO chance of ever establishing a competitive hive (especially if territory % are close to equal). NO THANKS.

If you want constant large fights then you should probably be playing on USA server because EU becomes quiet after midnight, shrinking the maps after this time MIGHT only benefit some players with certain play styles.

I feel like a shrinking map will have far too large an impact on the dynamics and vastness of the game, which are, in my opinion, the "selling points" for PS2.

My final thought is; PS2 is an already complex game for your average gamer, some players struggle to keep track of a static circle shrinking in PUBG, for players to learn a complex shrinking pattern across 4 large zones with a-symmetric region design is totally outrageous. I have 500+ hours and I still find areas in PS2 which I don't know, let alone the names and locations of all the zones and which zones they connect to.

Just some thoughts and opinions, I'm not saying my word is rule.

PS. My PC (2 years old) already struggles staying above 60fps in a 96+ area, unless DBG is willing to optimize their graphics engine for 500 vs 500 battles I don't see it ever happening (though I believe their engine is already much better than most other multiplayer games) as I feel like 50% of the player-base won't be able to take part in some of the final fights as the planet reaches it's minimum size and fps.

Regards
WORSTgamerEU

No. (hell no, more accurately)

Go play battlefield if you want such shenanigans.

Ok, first off, sorry.

Let me give a less jerk of a response.

What you're after is this: maintain a high density of play and battle. Right?

The way this is supposed to be accomplished is by shrinking the *planet*, not by shrinking the continent. The reason it doesn't seem to work quite right is because we do not have enough continents. This is what the continents are supposed to be like (from Planetside 1):

https://videogamegeek.com/camo/c9e6...1705f4c6174746963652e6a70677e6f726967696e616c

The game right now is too far into it's life for more major content to appear. A stopgap would be to recycle Koltyr into "battle islands" that can allow a continent to be wholy conquered by one faction but not actually *locked*. To reach it again one must push into it from the warpgate on another connected continent (or battle island).

I think that it is better to reduce branching than reducing active areas.
When the number of players is small, it's not preferable that there are a lot of front-line bases.

It's to maintain player density, like current CL. Your link doesn't work but I assume you talk about continent lattice. Wrel said it might had been a good idea 4 years ago.

Yes, modify the lattice by getting rid of the it..... then there can actually be some strategy instead of constant zerg zerg zerg .. the only way to win period..