Whoever updated the 'Gate Shield Diffuser' to work on Player made shields, didn't think it through..

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by karlooo, Aug 15, 2019.

  1. karlooo

    I don't remember the 'Gate shield diffuser' working on player made Gate Shields before. Now it works and whoever updated this didn't put much thinking and what effect it will have on PMB designs.

    I'm sorry but this update is like as if some little kid came up it.
    What do you expect the base builders to do against this? Am I supposed to build the Anti-Tank turret inside the base now? Currently I have to pick: Do I want to protect the outside with the AT tower or my inside with the AT turret...
    I can't even add a wall in front of the 'Gate shield' like I used to do in the past because some little kid thought the Gate needed a barrier on the ground, not allowing me to build specifically Ramps or any structure in between.

    Speaking or Ramps might as well delete this structure. Where am I supposed to use this anymore?

    The 'Gate Shield' update was not logical. Can the developers fully main solo construction (not multi, in the real game you will be building solo), and then make updates to it?
  2. TR5L4Y3R


    have a team defending it ... if you are on your own ... well tough ...
    considering how many people spam OS firebases on the map honestly me being on the recieving end would like to take them out as quickly as possible ... and sorry why should pmb bases be now the exception to the shieldgatedefuser? .. it doesn´t matter if you are a minority defending a latticebase or a PMB even if with latticebases having a timer to capture ..

    and as you mentioned you have automated turrets, it´s up to you to construct your base accordingly ..
    if your pmb has value in attacking/deffending a laticebase you are more likely getting reinforcements ... if not ... well tough ..

    better learn to RTS ...
    • Up x 1
  3. karlooo


    How about you main construction and then suggest lol.
    You won't get teammates that will want to do the dirty work for you, they want to construct and see action too.
    The OS does nothing for the team so you won't get support.
    The defenses are too weak, no value in defending.
    • Up x 1
  4. TR5L4Y3R


    i build pmbs during the hivedays and pmbs close to latticebases with less stuff than you may have available and got mates to defend it ... soooo ... lol yourself ...


    what is it with people and typing lol and rofl all the time ... its such a weak expresion of supposedly laughing that it might as well mean nothing ...
  5. karlooo

    No, I meant main it now.
    You can't compare bases which had Shield module bonus HP, shield module powered vehicle gates, Hives, etc...to the current, updated construction.
  6. adamts01

    So just sit there the whole time wondering if someone will attack it? That's the reason no one likes to play AA, there's just nothing to do 99% of the time.

    I've put in quite a bit of time attacking and defending bases. They need help. I think at a minimum the towers should be less specific in their abilities and attack everying. Also, the bases of models need to be redesigned so they can more easily be put together to block foot traffic.
  7. LordKrelas

    Then they need to stop being focused on Weapons of Mass Destruction & map Locks.
    It's doing them no favors, as they're expected to be destroyed quick or everyone suffers past the Builder.
    And their Allies? Either not rewarded or benefiting at all from these bases, even if they defend them.
    And at worst; Mass Murdered by the PMB super-weapon fetish.

    This focus on automations & unleashing 1-man super-weapons, makes them solo-artillery bases to their Allies
    Who defends something that at best, doesn't help but killing, and at worst, will casually Kill them in the process?
    Old PMBs, Builders profited thrice, new PMBs, Builders profit twice.
    If you aren't the Builder, it's not beneficial in the slightest.
    If you are the attacker, it's not rewarding to attack either.

    I do agree on the Towers perhaps being Less centrist.
    As it certainly causes issue, as if AV, they bring Air or AI, etc etc.
    and AI often tends to do AA decently if manned - making it more handy past automated attempt at flak.
  8. adamts01

    Sure. I think they should be integrated in to the lattice somehow. Either that or change how lattices work so opponents have to fight up and down a link and a PMB could be a roadblock.
  9. LordKrelas

    As long as it's not excessive painful - to the point of 'Ah same one-sided grind against an NPC wall' for hours.
    Since PMBs unlike the Lattice, are tooled to discourage wanting to attack them in the slightest, and are built to make it as automated as possible, while also as Glitched, or hellish as can be - with as many automations & death-traps as possible.

    Like getting Spawn-camped with a negative EXP modifier -- since PMBs can also be repeatedly rebuilt fast, and in duplicate.
    While also having it slanted brutally hard, that winning isn't even profitable.

    As in; It is not fun, repeatedly nail a solid wall that has not a single player actually involved, for barely an EXP, and a ton of nanite prices let alone Time, while they rebuild it 40 feet to the left & gain more EXP for every minute of their time.
    Nor if it's built into a cliff-face, half glitched in, while lighting the very ground on fire.
    Which is done whenever possible, by Builders - as it's bright. But dear lord, is it not tolerable to play against.

    Hence why I mention Buffs, so at least the reward is to dispel it - and means it wants to be close, not shoved into a mountain.
    Rather than "Ah now, we can return to the actual assault, assuming another hasn't been built again"
    Which is pretty much OSC's.

    Edit: also, so less motive to hide the things into the glitchest as spots.
    Since you aren't hunting for the best glitchest spot in the hex.
    You're hunting for the place to best affect your allied frontline instead.
    • Up x 1
  10. TR5L4Y3R


    apples and oranges ..

    aa is easily fixed by allowing it to be capable fighting nonairthreats ...

    pmb´s have a HUGE variety .. they are not one single weaponplatform but a complex for various uses ...
    you already have a alarmmodule that warns you if your pmb is under attack .. otherwise maybe something like a radar would be more useful that warns you if vehicle or airthreats are aproaching visible to the builder/s and the squad or platoon they are in ..
    i mean i mentioned in various threats that i would like more inteltools ..

    if it is a base to bring reinforcements potentionaly faster than a laticebase is it not in your interest to keep it alive?
    if it´s a firebase that offers support or supressionfire in the form of a flail or os .. is it not in your interest to keep it alive?

    the general problem of pmb´s admitedly is how fast you can raise them up or rebuilt them to the next goal, and how close they can be build to the next core base ..
    the other issue is, that not only the builder/s themselves understand the value of the pmb but also the combatants being affected by it .. in that case if a couple few enemies understand the danger of your pmb and as such decide to take it down while your allies simply stay within the laticebase ... well this is a teamgame after all ... you need to communicate and strategise somehow ...

    xp/certwise not ... but depending on its purpose i would say that it can very well benefit the nonbuilders and/or the faction ...
    though yes dbg needs to make attacking/defending pmb´s worthwhile both xp/certwise and to what impact a pmb has/ should have ..
  11. ObiVanuKenobi

    Tank mines.
    GSD has worked with player base shields forever. It would be inconsistent if it didn't.
  12. adamts01

    How many PMBs do you actually attack? Get an AP/Halberd MBT backed up by a rep Sundy and inch out of cover to take out 1 turret at a time. If they're responding with infantry then it's only fair that you should respond with equal numbers. Even the worst PMBs are easily defeated with a gal drop, with Maxes if it's heavily guarded. And new construction is very weak as it's being built. Expanding bases just don't work if you're attacking with an equal and appropriate force.

    As for glitches hives in terrain, I honestly haven't seen much of that lately. But if they were incorporated in to the lattice somehow then the condition should be that they're built on roads.


    That's a HUGE part of fixing AA. But the flak mechanic is still broken. It's not that easy to fix. But that's a different topic.

    Reinforcements don't matter as long as PMBs are pointless. They have to be a serious roadblock that's also fun to fight at.

    I thi k they should add generic buildings such as double stacks and such to construction, and let points be in those buildings. Each building would need a no-build zone around it so that they can't be made impenetrable. These large buildings would also mean these PMBs would be in the open and couldn't be glitches in to mountains. These kinds of fights would draw players.
  13. LordKrelas

    I used to have attack Connery VS PMB's, and they were constant.
    If they actually were outside the walls, it was usually Liberators, ESFs , or Infantry, but tons of ********.

    When a base is rapidly built, delivers bad EXP for destruction, and be automated, the time-sink of killing the thing while they're out there Nuking is absurd.
    Hence my focus of PMBs not being around Artillery but buffs, ones that encourage the PMB to be near allies, not in holes;
    Which means, they can get better durability - as they aren't motivated to glitch the thing, nor near as many easy glitch holes.

    Not to mention; When I have to drop out of an expensive aircraft, let alone with MAXes, the enemy just made thousands of nanites, for a 200 nanite expense & a few orange rocks.

    HIVEs aren't locking Maps down by themselves, so they aren't used like the most hellish crap as much
    As they aren't the Golden Brick of ******** no more, thanks to that - and thank **** for that.
    Win the engagement & take out the asset? Here's a death, thanks to a massive suicidal explosion for victory.

    As long as PMBs, are basically code for "Automate & Kill without retaliation" OSC, Flail & Pain-field messes..
    They aren't going to be all that friendly, nor encouraging to defend.
    Do you defend the tank that intentionally fires AOE near your head, just to sink a kill?

    I like the idea that a PMB actually helps, not by being hell-on-earth for the sod dealing with it, being bombed by it, or Not being Friendly-fire Killed by it.
    But by actually boosting the front-line.
    -- And for your road idea:
    They would have to build slower; Or we'd have one on every single base if not two -- which makes them worth more than lattice.
    (as actually defensible)
    And they'd have to be buffed a lot durability - since for once they'd not be using terrain walls with a lot of exposure.
    But If they not being sodding artillery hiding in a cliff, that's better than what they are not; So I can't see why not.
  14. adamts01

    I think most people are on the same page. Even watching Wrel's videos, he argues that bases should be big fights with vehicles and infantry in both sides. Moving away from a skyshield covering a crater is critical.

    I really think incorporating some regular buildings is critical. Maybe those buildings could provide the durability buff to other objects, so the base would have to be fought over and not just bombarded from render range? But it would also have to be open enough so enemy vehicles and tanks could roll through it, hence the no-build zones around the buildings.

    I'm with you though. Hiveside was possibly the darkest time for PS2. And go figure, it was all VS who was cheesing it... That faction is why we can't have nice things.
    • Up x 1