Ammunition -- how to add to the Planetside 2 Metagame with only minor changes

But wouldn't you agree that you would only have less ammo if your force completely neglected the rest of the map? Also, you would still have 25 minutes to reestablish a link to your warpgate. I honeslty don't think that smart players would experience any noticeable loss of ammo in 95% of situations.

Admittedly the change would not affect me or my outfit much at all, but it just seems a little gimmicky.

I don't have any better ideas so I know I shouldn't be arguing against others, but I just don't like this idea. Sorry. =P

I have never once found a compelling argument for removing features.

Causing people to spawn with less and less ammo due to the hex system seems like a really poor way to add depth anyway.

Dying is enough punishment, because I was taken out of the fight and possibly even need travel time to return to it. Why penalize defenders who are in a bad enough situation further?

The game could use some changes, but this isn't one of them.

Like others have said, it's already too easy to attack, especially with number advantages so we don't need more help for attackers.

Bad idea

No, thank you. Defending your territory is already punishing enough anywhere but Biolabs.

I appreciate the effort you put in this (game needs more strategy than the current "zerg everything" solution that people prefer) but I'm not sure these changes would be for the best. Defenders already have a hard time against attackers (historically speaking proper defense can be achieved with lower numbers vs a higher number force in a large scale battle, this is not the case in PS2), this would make it even more difficult for them,

Long run - Not practical because it does not only not discourage zerging, it actually encourages it in more ways than one.

While the idea does properly apply to the whole 'siege' situation, where being cut off, eventually, resources for said location should be limited, the thing you also have to consider that, by all technicality, the resources that an attacking force will also need to be replenished.

Another situation you have failed to take into consideration is history...

In December of 1944, Europe. The Battle of the Bulge was the German last ditch to push the Allies back and buy more time to fight the allies back. During that big push, a town known as Bastogne was surrounded by the Germans. The elements of the 101st Airborne, surrounded and cut off, held their position against the Germans until they were finally relieved by Patton's forces. This was accomplished by them raiding the Germans for weapons and ammunition even when their own supplies were running low and then when the weather permitted, the air dropping of supplies by Allied air power.

Thing to note here, is while it is admirable that you want highly defendable positions to eventually crumble, you have to consider the fact that there are way to support cut off positions. As mentioned above, the 101st made do by raiding the germans on occasion for intel and supplies when they were literally cut off from their supply lines and weather did not permit them to get air dropped supplies.

With troopers dropping in from the air with no air support to support an action area and the fact that repairs are done via Nanite rebuilding... The resupplying of material would be coming from other sources, which would also be drop pod delivery as well.

So logically, a hold out area can hold out only as long as there are people willing to hold the key positions.

You will also note, you are ignoring something that has been pointed out in the Battle of the Bulge as well. The Germans suffered much from the Bastogne siege, more so because of McAuffie's "Nuts" response to their appeal to the Allied Commander to surrender or face wiping out the entire town through superior forces. The fact that McAuffie refused to surrender, tied up German resources to try and take the town down, even though most of their forces pushed on. Resources that could have been used to continue pushing the Allies further back.

In this game, the tactical situation will be to be the annoying gits holding onto a section. While you focus on trying to weed out said gits from that position, it ties up resources that could be defending another location. As a TR player on one server, I heard that 8% of our population was at the Crown, holding it off against the rest of the VS and NC. During that time, the rest of the TR population on that continent was taking advantage of that fracas to start taking other territory.

So you have to realize that part of the tactical situation of hold out locations, if it is easier to defend, will have a tactical significance in a continental fight.

The most fun fights I've had are defending cut off pockets trying to stop a superior force.

I vote no.

I think it should be implemented with a few twists. This can really make teritorry meaningfull.

While it hurts the defender of cutoff teritorry. The defender of cutoff territorry is mostly going to be a zerg attacking too agressively. Or indeed a team of soldiers trying to cut off the enemy by capturing territory behind the lines the former should be nerfed and the latter will be made more meaningfull with this change. I don't know how you can say you have had the most fun defending cutoff territory. There is no difference between territory that is cutoff and not. I think you are trying to say that you have had the most fun defending defensible territory like the crown. This is the kind of territory that will get cut off while surrounding territory is easily capured. You have you causality wrong there.

This is what I would change. I would do away with the timers, but limit the amount of ammo available in a base to a fixed number. For example, once a facility gets destroyed it can fully resupply up to 100 soldiers before being depleted. Larger facilities have more resources.

In fact, it could even be possible to have the remaining ammo physically appear in the base in the form of a destroyable structure and be destroyed by the opposing team.

I would also change the ammo sunderer so that it too, does not have unlimited ammo but it can resupply 50 soldiers + 10 per level of certification. Resupplying an MBT is the equivalent of resupplying 10 soldiers, lightning 5 soldiers, etc.

In fact, I would also change the facilities and the AMS sunderer so that they have a limited amount of respawn juice and can resupply this at an ammo tower, or maybe a bio tower should be created for that.

The medical applicator and engineer ammo and repair should have similar limitations, they hold a large amount of nanites/heal juice/ammo but when it's gone, you will need to resupply.


I think that this change would hurt the attacker far more than the defender, which is good.

Outlying facilities of larger bases should track their supplies separately. The combined resources of the outlying facilities should be less then the base they surround.

At the same time, you can remove the restriction of capturing territory with 0% influence. But you do have to provide more warning of territorry being captured and how far along is.

Even a connected facility could be somewhat limited in the amount of supplies it has, as long as the attackers are more limited than the defenders, owning a techplant, biolab or amp stations could increase speed of replenishment of these supplies.

It could be possible to disable the connecting power of a facility by disabling a certain structure. That way, the facility would not count as held territorry for determining whether other territories are connected.

It could be possible to supply a cutoff position from the air. A galaxy could drop a large version of an ammo box on a base.

Commanders could have the ablility to call in orbital ammo drops.

I do not have a much of a problem with how this would affect gatelocks. A gatelock should be broken by a focused effort, not a few guys ninja-capping an outlying territorry that is of no other significance than that it is not the warpgate being locked.

Sounds like someone isn't happy about the TR taking and holding onto the Crown to the last man. Being cut off shouldn't be penalized - after all being cut off is penalty enough.

No, some of us like trying to hold out against the odds and fight off the enemy until our territory is reconnected and no longer cut off, this change would just put more power in the hands of the zerg as we'd not even be given ammo to fight them.