Allied sundies deploying in allie bases

I'm been following and playing this game for years, quite a bit in the past year too, and there's a trend that I keep seeing in each successive patchnotes, a kind of "dumbing down" of the game, pulling PS2 away from a "combined arms massively online sandbox free to play" to a "combined arms online shooter".

I realise you might be wondering what the hell I'm talking about, well that's good cause if you're interested, I'm about to explain!


In the patch notes, we can read this :

Any experienced PS2 player will tell you that sunderers are one of the fundamental pillars of attacking or defending a base. I can't stress this enough, they are, in most cases, absolutely essential, and will, (in most cases) literally mean the difference between winning and losing.

My point of view, what I'm afraid of, is that with this modification, DB is pulling a very important part of the action away from the players (who placed the sundies or who destroyed the enemy ones) in favour of what I'd call "the structure".

In other words, it's a shift from player influence and source of gameplay towards gameside setup. (players can choose where to place sundies towards players must follow game rules)

I'm quite sure this is intended, as I've seen this trend (as I said before) in quite a few patches over the past year or so. So I would just, humbly, like to voice my disagreement on where the game is going (knowing full well it won't make a difference).

In my opinion, it is a mistake to move from player made content towards game-side content or structure, or action, or whatever. Especially considering that the whole fundamental core principle of PS2 was "players are the content" and the way game is made depends hugely on this idea.

PS. I wonder what happened there?

PS2 is the world's most what? You forgot a word there, popular? successful? played? long lasting?

This is not necessarily a bad thing. There are a few bases that kinda need a well placed defensive Sunderer to hold, such as Indar Comm. Array, but most of the time a defensive Sunderer just creates an indestructible* meatgrinder clusterfck, that does not let the game progress until the attackers get bored of being farmed and go elsewhere.

The thing is, people have learned the perfect spots for defensive Sunderers, which frequently leaves no chance for the attackers.

Still, there are many alternatives out there. If you feel the base you are defending will require a defensive Sunderer, you can still put one on an outdoor flank, preferably where it gets a LoS to the attackers' Sunderers. This can help spread out the fights around bases, which can be a good thing when a hivemind zerg steamrolls the continent.

*indestructible, unless you have a well organized elite group, which makes it a hell for those who just want to play; yes, you can call this a slight dumbing down of the game, but it makes the experience more fluid for everyone out there

It's so much easier to defend than attack that I don't think losing this ability will be a game changer.

let me sum up my wall of text ;

"it's taking freedom away from the players" -- freedom that players frequently used in sometimes very creative ways that brought more depth to the gameplay "in favour of more structured, or ordered gameplay".

To me, that's the bad thing. Whether it makes bases this or that are (to me) just details, because the fundamental issue is this never stopping trend that is making the game like an arcade shootem up.

I'm just trying to point out is that with this patch and others, the number of options available to the players, is decreasing, and that's bad.

Yes, it's pretty much irrelevant considering the scope of the game. At some point the base will be overwhelmed with massive imbalance of infantry. The problem is the constant need to 'make it easier/less confusing for new/casual players'. Personally I don't GAF if new players cannot be bothered learning the game and instead go play something else. However I'd bet that DBG don't feel the same way.

Dunno. Bases were designed in some cases to be highly defendable to a certain point. After tipping past that point though the fall of the base becomes inevitable. The spawn point is far from the capture point by design.

Dev knows players are going to get clever with things. You can tell by the design of many bases that vehicles were simply not intended to be in certain places. Yet they are. Clever players.

This seems a bit of a hamfisted way to return to the designed flow of battle in a base.

In some bases I think this may be a net good. In others, it's going to reveal flaws in the base design that players had been compensating for.

TL;DR: I don't like it, but not ready to shake a rage fist. Let's see how this plays out.

Pretty damaging to the defense of the Tech Plant as the tunnels just provide an easy choke point for attackers to shut down. Not to mention that they already pulled the AV cannons from the Battlements. Only plus for this move is the removal of the crappy Sunderer placement underneath the Biolabs that somehow overtake the autospawn location of the spawn room.

as one of the regulars here i usually try to keep things constructive and see things from their perspective aswell as ours.
but don't expect any of that today...

i already warned them not to do this, but they don't listen, they don't care.

VERY NEGATIVE CHANGE, MADE BY INCOMPETENT DEVS.

I've watched them make bad decision after bad decision,
seemingly testing how much damage they can do to the game before it finally dies.
so you can forget getting any bundle purchases from me when you clearly want to kill this game as soon as possible.

what a way to mark the anniversary...

oh, and I'm also cancelling my sub over this.
so congrats DBG.

There are two kinds of people in this game:

1. Those who fight between and for bases, and view bases as outposts of strategic importance
2. Those who fight in and over bases, and view bases as arenas to fight in

This change clearly favors the second group. You are a member of the first group, and so am I, in part. But I don't view this change as harshly as you do. Read on why...

In my opinion, defensive Sunderers are not how bases should be made defensible (for those who belong in the first group). Defensive Sunderers, for 8 out of 10 fights, only create a brutal meatgrinder clusterfck, and nothing more.

They should instead add more progression. Now would be a great idea to look at Assault map design from Unreal Tournament, bases could really use:

• Personnel-blocking shields that need to be overloaded

• Several Aspis (anti-infantry) Phalanx turrets, a special heavy variation that has more HP but slow repair speed, placed right in the primary entry-way, or right on the damn point itself (they need to be exposed to be ultimately limited in max. operation duration, but still do decent damage coverage to attackers)

• More and better generic infantry overlooks, with terminals, that are hard to flank, but once flanked they are no longer useful to the defenders

These additions give several huge advantages to the defenders, but also have them working against the clock, which prevents disproportionately prolonged stalemates while still allows bases to remain defensible. Now of course, fringe bases like Gravel Pass and the like are out of the game for these improvements (although Gravel Pass could use a Phalanx behind the [A] point), but there are many bases that are already ready for these additions straight away.

DBG had already destroyed everything else that made bases defensible,
i don't see them randomly changing their attitude and adding back any way to defend bases,
a defensive sundy might not have been the best way, but it was the very last defensive tool that they had yet to ruin,
and now that they've done so, zergfits will have no obstacles whatsoever.

i would like the tools that you mentioned, but it won't happen.
i've lost all faith in these incompetent devs after this patch.

Sundies in base have never mattered on me as attacker. I can understand defenders too, that if have allie sundie nearby cap against zerg. That is good thing to get some defend against huge enemy. Also it is also a challenge to get rid of those sundies.

If it really matter, why you don't siege around base and artillery focus that sundy? There are high ground around all bases that can shoot those sundies in basement.

I look at this from attacker perspective. No-deploy zone is shared betwen attacker and deffender now and it stayed the same as it was.
First, most big bases still allow you to basically put your Sunderr on cap point or very close. It requires some terrain knowledge and driving skills, sure, but it is not that bad. It is quite simple, put your (defending) Sunderrer where you would usually place it if you were attacking. People got so accustomed to typical defender/attacker parking spots it is really funny when you deny them this possibility. I had the most interesting fights when defending Sundy was placed where the typical attacker one would show up.
Second, this will help spread the fights. I was kinda on the fence when I thought about Tech Plants but from little time I managed to play yesterday (crashes) I noticed the fights around Tech Plants are even more interesting and fun and not limited to main hangar anymore!

yep no deploy Zone for own sundy is gamebreak.

you can`t Support anymore your faction, With preparation for defense.
@ tech plant you can deploy Enemy sundy closer than Spawnroom is, Major disadvantage. because they are allready in the Building, but you Need to runn from 1 Building to other.
imporsant bases are easy to take now, and the only what you can do now (for ever) just sitting in spawnroom.

Yes this game is getting better, quite sure.
Never see a **** gameplay like These days.

I do not agree. As I mentioned above you can deny attackers placing their Sunderrers in typical parking spots either by parking your own Sundy there or putting some mines. Also, what do you mean by important bases? Take Crown, you can basically put your Sundy near or over any cap point. We can all agree that Crown is an important base, right. If we look at TI, sure you cannot park Sundy in a relatively safe spot near A but you can park them all around it effectively blocking attacker paths.

I think this change will have the biggest impact on Tech Plants and Amp Stations fights, mostly Tech plants.

ok i want to see you park a sundy at an imposing spot outside the base, against a zerg rolling on top of you. It's not about parking the sundy anywhere on the map. It's about defending a decent defense against overwhelming power and that's just what Sundy owns. I also want to see how you on tech where a zerg rolls over it, pull a sundy, even bring out and then station outside protected zones.

Tech Plants may be problematic but I think that's why they put Logistic Specialist Implant into the pool. You can put multiple Vehicles (not only Sunderrers but also Flashes) at various spots inside any building now and spawn your squad members there. Also, they lifted the range limit on spawn beacons. You know, focus on the squad play they talked so much about. Sure it's not for everyone but most people try to play in squads anyway.

IMO the main reason of this change was to prevent putting a Sundy inside shielded room like in Amp Stations, bottom level of Bio Labs and such.
Again, the no-deploy zones are full of holes. Some bases allow you to park almost at cap points, especially the larger ones. We can agree what putting a Sundy on a cap point in a small base like Construction Sites on Hossin is bit over the top, right?

Anyway, it's more of a problem with base designs now than no-deploy zones. If it is zerged, a well placed Sundy could help a bit at best but it was lost anyway. IMO along with this change they should revise all bases and change those which require defenders to run across whole base to reach cap point.

After being frustrated while playing this game, I thought about how it could be useful to not have sundys being able to spawn in ally territory. It will require coordination and participation from the defending base. Ways that it could be easier to defend is to have vehicles inside the base to be able to provide fire support, like you often see a offensive blockaide sundy suppressing the spawn room. Often the players defending the base are too tunneled into being killed trying to get to the A point to realize a flank sundy is available to matter any. The approach of this game has become Zerg play style. If the players are on A point the flank sundy wont even matter because it takes available population away to get unto A point to flip. I remember last time they patched this game to not allow defensive sundys, I used my status to have it be removed. I didn't mind being against defensive sundys, I always found a way to destroy them singlehandedly, and just as well, I am that player who knows all the good spots to place a sundy. This game is bound to destroy itself.
Daybreak Games is not SOE Games <<

Not the Base

designs are the Problem, because they exist now hole game time, the no deloy Zone ist a Problem.

They maked it with no Idea, just a no deploy Zone, that all and fine, but it sucks now and it becomes a Problem.

Agree here. The no-deploy zones are:
- not consistent along the bases (some bases are covered fully, some not)
- full of holes
- not in synergy with base designs (sometimes atackers can place a Sundy closer to cap point than spawn room is)

Solution: adapt. The patch notes say its new meta. Meta, in another words Metagame is any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game. We need to adapt, change how we played till now and who knows, maybe the game will be more fun.
Surely we will see less old-school sieges and more fights in the open but IMO it's good. After all, this game is 5 years old and we need something fresh.

Could be worse...

Adapt, I agree BartasRS. Could it be developed into something different, yes. Could we see all the bases being changed into something else that could challenge our gameplay, yes. No-deploy zones can be manipulated, but as for right now it can only be decreased in radius. Could there be a zone around points, and around the spawn, yes. It could very well be an angry player who decides to make changes because he lost, relentlessly. More likely not the named individual presented here.
Daybreak Games is not SOE Games <<