1v1v1 is a game ruiner. What's its purpose?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by karlooo, Apr 28, 2021.

  1. karlooo

    (Generalized topic: population, territory advantages, vehicles/tanks, outfit assets)

    What is the purpose of continent population balance if in every single war, the third losing faction determines the winner?
    Each war in PS2 is the same: Two winning factions fighting over victory and the third losing one, basically determines, chooses the winner.
    Ruining the competition between the first 2 factions, ruining the game.
    In an extreme case the battle can turn into 2v1. A war with a pop 2:1 and there is nothing you can do, like you cannot defend.
    So, why do we have continent pop balance? Why even have a third faction if there is pop balance?
    The game cannot be competitive with a third faction.

    You may say that the strategy is to stagnate and not push too far into enemy territory....Well wtf is that? We should be getting rewarded for capturing territory. This is a hideous game design.


    The outfit assets were a super addition but it can't become better if the game doesn't receive a redesign.

    Everything other than infantry: construction, tanks, air, are all part of their own minigame. All these roles should get implemented into the real game finally, BUT, they can't because they can and will be spammed.....Well this is were outfit assets will shine.
    Why give every single player access to the most powerful weapons? The players should be the pawns. The outfits, leaders, the pillar of this game should determine who gets the weapons, they are the ones who determine the flow of the battle.

    And in the end remove Orbital Strikes and the Bastion Fleet Carrier. They annihilate the game with their cancer design.
  2. karlooo

    How will this stop tank spam? Some top outfits may decide to spam vehicles. Well, simply with numbers, there could be a tank storage limit.
    They need to be crafted but, here is another concept:

    After getting destroyed why do vehicles instantly fly away like as if they have a 1 ton bombed strapped to the bottom and instantly disappear?
    Why do they disappear? What would happen if the destroyed vehicle model didn't disappear, and didn't fly away (instead it would just quickly break)?
    In alleys it would form an obstruction on the road. Causing the tanks to become stuck if the attacks andor ambushers target the convoy that way....A new strategy to counter vehicle zergs.


    And I guess the ANT can be used to clean up the vehicle ruins for Cortium or maybe something else.
  3. TR5L4Y3R

    so you are saying a RTS FFA match can not be competitive because of a third player ?
    or a FPS arena FFA match can´t be competitive because there is a third party in some way?

    yea i disagree on this one


    PS2s problem is not that of having a third faction
    its problem is that EVERY player of ANY skill and aim level gets thrown toghether that isn´t ranked or regulated in any way on a giant continent were each and everone can be everywhere .. even if you go and remove one faction that wouldn´t make PS2 be any more competitive without being regulated/ranked on a per player basis ...


    also seriously your threadtitle is just horribly bad in relation to what your OP is about ... comes of way too much like a baittitle
  4. JustGotSuspended

    This game never was and likely never will be competitive - and not just because of the third faction. And there's no issue with that.

    However as you mention the pop balance queues often worsen the situation and leave a faction unable to defend itself against the other two. They should've never been added and should've been removed a long time ago.

    Removing the bastions and orbitals would be cool as well.

    The lore of vehicles disintegrating is that the nanites are being called back to the nearest antennas or whatever of that empire's base as nanites can never be lost and will just be recycled.

    I like your idea, a delay would be cool and serve as obstacles to be removed by ants. Maybe add the same vehicle disintegration timer as when the vehicle is left unmanned (unless an ant removes them before). That way different vehicles become different barriers and disappear eventually, so we don't have debris in random places no one will look for.
  5. Knjaz136

    Since when it's an extreme case? Last i checked, it's the norm on Cobalt.

    Edit: Not saying it's a good thing, quite the opposite. Just, it happens more often than not.
    • Up x 1
  6. Demigan

    It's purpose is being a superior choice over 1v1.

    You say the third faction determines who wins. But the thing is that who that third faction is can be any faction. You have convinced yourself that only the weakest faction can determine the outcome, but only if the other two have already made their choice and stick to it to a fault. The third faction then has to collectively choose a direction and stick to it as well.

    In reality all 3 factions consist out of hundreds of individuals who all make their own choices. For example a popular thing that happens on the live servers is that the first two factions seek territory that is easy to capture to ensure they win. This means the weakest faction gets double-teamed as they offer the least resistance and lose all their territory.

    There's also a large amount of players that choose to look for the MMOFPS experience instead and stick to persistent fights like biolabs. These players take themselves out of the equation for which faction wins (although you can argue that they tie up enemy numbers just as easily).

    Contrast this to a 1v1 combat where if one faction happens to have the biggest pop it could start a steamroll of the other faction, completely killing any enjoyable battle. We already see on some servers that players will prefer to stick with a faction that mostly wins there. You can also see on any server that when one faction is winning, people start leaving the other two factions (and those numbers don't appear on the winning faction).

    I've proposed it before, we should actually be going to more factions rather than less. Splitting each faction into two warring sub-factions could actually help as more fronts open up and strategy becomes a bit deeper when you need to consider the actions of other factions. It also means that if 2 factions gang up on one faction, a fourth (and maybe fifth and sixth) faction will have ample of opportunity to steal territory of them forcing them to defend and stabilizing who attacks who.
  7. Bonemiser

    Three factions guarantees that no matter how strong or how overpowered a faction is, the other two factions have the power to defeat them. That's literally *THE* reason, and for an MMOFPS to work you need that kind of failsafe.
    • Up x 2
  8. RabidIBM

    This is just the nature of how Planetside is and always has been. There are plenty of 1v1 style games out there, Planetside went a different route. Is it quirky? Does it come with its own problems? Yes, absolutely. But I think that you might be just a little bit to late to the discussion on whether or not such a basic function should be in the game.

    That said, by the time the 3rd faction are playing king makers, other mistakes have been made. There is an issue with incentives, that two factions get into a race to see who can carve the most out of the third. This puts the third in a no win situation, and then they pick someone to lose. There is also a problem of a large portion of the player base simply not caring about alerts. I think a lot of this comes down to the current meta being stale.

    I'm not denying that problems exist, but "Should 1v1v1 be a thing?" Is a ship that sailed some time during PlanetSide 1's development.
  9. karlooo

    Basically most of you guys are saying that this 1v1v1 stops the game from having a certain winner. So, the game can never be fair, really.
    Maybe that's why the devs are adding these RPG style updates, but what I don't understand is why even have continent pop balance making each team equal if often it turns into a 2v1, why even try creating these Outfit Wars?


    The third faction determines the winner, it's as simple as that...The other topics follow up on this main one, to make the thread more interesting:
    -Everybody knows that the winning team gets double teamed. I mentioned in this topic that maybe the rewards aren't good enough for capturing territories/bases. You put all this effort for what? To get decimated with a pop of 2:1?
    -Outfit assets, perfect concept but unfinished IMO.
    OS, battle ruiner, which is currently necessary cause of the absolute CLUSTERFUK battles. Why are the battles a mess? Because the lattice links point and compresses the population to a base that's too small. I talked about this in a different thread.
    Bastion, terrible design, everything what the players complained about in terms of vehicle spawn camp, the Bastion goes to the next, next level, with only one counter, outfit only Colossus.
    The other outfit items just increase the ability to spam certain vehicles more and this is not where the game should be heading to, the spam should and must be terminated.

    -Then the topic moves on talking about the players having access to tanks, should all players have access to vehicles in this state of the game, were everybody knows that the team that spams the most overpowers the enemy, it's all about numbers, little strategy.

    -And lastly, why should outfits hold all the power? Because they are the pillar of the game.



    ...Just read, so I won't have to repeat myself like a moron!