Alpha - Bases Weren't Always Poorly Laid Out

Every time I read this my mouth waters at the thought of logical designs...

Preach on OP, preach on!

These two always amaze me that they where not in/ are in from the beginning, the first is an obvious defensive idea, to simple to be thought of apparently. The second is just plain sloppy design and stupid, don't get me started on that one.

It's almost like they where so afraid to anger vehicle (air and ground) players that they decided to **** with the heart of any FPS population, infantry players.

This is a pretty valid concern in regards to revamping base design -- moving to the other extreme. Instead of vehicle meatgrinders, you get endless corridor fighting, which is just as bad if not worse.

My guess is this is why they are so hesistant to do anything with base design, anything drastic at least, which is understandable. Last thing you want to do is make the game worse because of kneejerk design changes, and changing base layout on a large scale is a big deal. I'm sure it's something they are looking at, but I can't blame them for being cautious.

Either way there are a lot of good suggestions in here, and it does need to change eventually, so I hope they are reading this.

If higby wants an esport, he should create a continent specifically for that (not trash all of them). An battlefield instance where 2 opposing outfits can fight it out with say 3 bases in a smaller environment. 3platoons on each side and allow pubbers to queue for them also.

Now that would be epic fun.!!!!

Man i would love to have some fights like that

Are the walls big enough to have an enclosed level inside them (on the 'ground floor')?

The wall is pretty wide because they slope outwards as they reach to the ground. Just picture a corridor as wide as the walkway on top of the wall. There would be room enough for crates and boxes and small defensive walls like you see on the Amp station walkways. It would be very linear, but the doorway in the mid-point opening onto the courtyard would make it less linear.

well that base just look great...
They have to bring bases like this back into the game... make bases more different and more defenseable...

I don't remember there being that much of an issue with corridor fighting in PS1. A good MAX push could often break things up enough for the enemy to get in.

Of course PS2's MAX units are ridiculously fragile.

I want you guys to notice something on this picture. See how the main base has cover walkways/hallways that lead to the main facility form the walls, while the walls are covered and closed? PERFECT. All the need to do is widen that hallway, add some ways to get in from the bottom (mostly closed off but open on the inside), and add a second hallway that branches off from each one and makes a "V" type shape and feeds back into the main hallway so attackers don't get bottleneck and viola. Perfect amp station.

I guess I should be more clear. Old tech plant were somewhat "ok" for the sole reason that there were other means to get inside. Maybe the back doors could have been slightly change but their nerf was just purely idiotic. The tech lab already cannot be hold from outside the main building.

There is also that once you force through the back door, the actual gameplay change. Sure grenade and explosive still exist but gameplay wise, the interior combat, while very short, is different from the 2 little back door. What some people are asking and I was trying to show, is that you won't just get small very specific meatgrinder section while ALSO having other means inside, it will ONLY BE tunnel meatgrinder fight. The shield breaker for example, is quite safe until it reach the inside. And every shielded area is actually quite open making kill zone way way harder to achieve. It is also more unpredictable and so, higher chance of little defense on that side. Mine are a simple defense but there are technic to counter that.

As for the BF3 excuse, no. Grenade did refill but actually had a way longer timer than simple magazines. Setting a S-AMS next to an entrance will pretty much give the exact same result. Tech plant's back doors were spam with grenades. Why would it be any different underground?

EDIT:

I don't know about you but "MAX crash or die" sound terribly close to something people keep complaining about. Airside or die... Tankside or die... I would go and say it is ironic to complain about vehicule spam than tell people MAX crash fix all meatgrinder problem. Exactly how those vehicules do it.

Why do we need infantry exactly? May has well just have MAX, TANK and AIR fighting if they are always suppose to have the last word in every encounter.

I dare say this thread is getting long enough that someone might take notice.

My OP alone has like 60 likes now. That's great.

one more liek! we need those bases hghghgurr

oh and i want back the pyshx, you did such a great work

It's coming. It was disabled (that's what the grayed out "Enable PhysX" box is in your options) because it was causing a lot of crashes.

They're working out the bugs with PhysX.

yummy can't wait hope they'll come with some news by the start of the new week,

for anyone who played beta what was the eagle?

http://wiki.planetside-universe.com/ps/Eagle

it seems it's not in game anymore like the flamethrower right?

Oh wow, so they were going to "update/upgrade" the original PS1 base layout design with a fresh PS2 look, adding layers to defensive options an give the defenders real defensible positions... then scraped them for the open facility layout they have now. Oh my /facepalm.

Now I've been both an Esport competitor (CS 1.1-1.6/Tribes/Quake), a former PS1 vet, as well a current BF3/Halo franchise enthusiast. BF3/Halo are fun immersion shooters, they're quick, twitchy and the average ticket map has a victory/loss condition. it gets old after a while. Now PS1 had immersion, it had the tactical twitch level shooter (not a great shooter but a shooter, twitch skills translated well here) it also had the larger vehicle tactics, controlling ground to allow firebase footholds, established spawn footholds, to push the assault, be it for a base or a piece of land on the way to a base. It also had the larger strategic level of the game, maneuvering forces, gathering recon on enemy movements, strengths, supply lines.. an so on. There were tools available to players to help them with this.

PS2 has great twitch immersion, the vehicle combat isn't too bad (close in similarity to BF3, but not AS good). There are great moments for tactical maneuvering on land for both, yet almost no tools for oversight/communication to help assist this PS2 is lacking a strategic oversight at this moment, while it's there for the creative to put the effort in managing it logistically outside of the games mechanics, there's no reward or toolset system to help them or benefit those players wanting to play the "tabletop" version of planetside 2. Until there's tools an structure for commanders to actually get their hands on, we will not have a war room style faction control over the arena style firefights that PS2 is currently allowing.

PS2 is starving for a tactical defensible layer that benefits infantry, rather than punish them. Bases should have protective layers, not only from ground vehicles but from air power.. an quite frankly air power is the premier decisions making factor in a win or lose for a base. If bases had some sort of generator system linked to the field bubble protecting the base from bombardment, that required.. lets say.. Galaxy dropships airlifting assault teams to a top floor layout/structure on a base. Give that generator an AREA XP boost to all friendlies inside of it's sphere (defensive bonus) to benefit defenders, incentives to defenders. That gen has either a hack/detonation timer, a resecure grants a secure bonus to the player and any of their platoon mates inside the generators SOI.

bump for moar base layout whinning, they need to wake up.

Excellent ideas all.

Agreed on every point.

Looks like we're running low on discussion fumes.

Any new business?