Are Devs ignoring the issues with how bad lattice has made the game?

If PS2 had the popularity and capability to populate continents as much as originally hoped for (2k+ per continent!!!) then there'd be enough fookin player density to actually make it fun.

As PS2 came out however, with reduced max pops (LESS THAN HALF the desired amount) battles HAVE to be focused by the system or it degrades to inane merry-go-round/whack-a-mole bullsheet

You don't have any data to make claims regarding player pop then or now. Your claim is speculative, and therefore nonsensical.

You should have been here before lattice. There were plenty of players. there was no problem in sending a couple guys to check out enemy activity.

In my experience, repetition is the reason games get old. Lattice is the epitome of repetition.

Players need lattice to make up for a lack of imagination. Instead of figuring out ways to discover dangerous enemy movements, forumites decided that they would prefer to have the enemy come to them.They wanted the sandbox to be turned into a shoebox.

At the mortal risk of fresh gameplay experience, entitlement took the forefront. the use of pejoratives to describe an unwanted situation is evidence of a mentality of entitlement.

TBH they made a rod for their own back ... They should have left cap points needing a person to stay on it to maintain the tick over , and also added that cloaked Infi's couldn't effect cap points ( would need to uncloak and remain uncloaked for the tick to proceed )

But as soon as they made it so you could flick a point and leave the area and it would still cap to you .. Is the day they made it a chore to deal with Ghost cappers ..
It turned a First person shooter into a wack-a-mole hopscotch chase ...

Something that is a favorite of the crybullies is "zerging".

Evidently, it is lost on crybullies that one of the best ways to splinter a "zerg" is to "ghostcap".

Now, turn those two pejoratives into terms that reflect a valid enemy tactic. One may chose "massive enemy force" and "diversionary action".

You have moved gaming closer to escaping the dark ages of gamers' sense of entitlement creating repetitious experiences, and closer to the enlightenment of player choice influencing fresh gameplay.

Do you work?

Regarding your daily activities, what is better:

1. Doing the same thing over and over again, with no need to engage mentally.

2. Being faced with different challenges that require an amount of cranial engagement.

Chasing someone down that was trying his hardest to avoid a fight in a fighting game wasn't and isn't a Challenge .. It's an effort in boredom ..

Like I said they should have made it so people had to remain on cap points to cap them .. Then people wouldn't mind so much dealing with Ghostcappers .. Because to take the base they would have to stay and fight for it ..

But as it turned out ( As someone who used to go and deal with them alot ) all you would end up with was someone skipping around in an ESF flipping points and ******* off .. Not highly engaging for anyone ...

No, my claims are not.

Hell, it'd be WORSE now than it was before because we still had, up to, 1500 players back then. At max cont pop hex was just barely decent....

There is nowehere NEAR enough pop now to even joke about Hex. Hell, as it is, even Lattice you STILL have several different bases you could ghost cap.

Data please. You have none. Therefore, your premise is flawed.

Have you ever heard of a guy name BH Liddel Hart?

Have you ever heard of something called the indirect approach?

Anyway, I don't hate ya. Society needs people that can stand in front of a machine doing the same thing 10 hours a day.

btw, there's a counter to the guy flying around in an ESF...do you have any guesses as to what that may be? Hint: it is *not* coming into the forums in order to limit his movements.

Lattice is terrible. Same fights. ALL. THE. GOD. DAMN. TIME!

Massive battles isn't the same as 20000000 people on the same grid. It's the WHOLE faction fights as one, pushing and being pushed. Some of the best fights I had were with OTHER outfits, during hex system, where ALL coordenated actions with TRUE long term effects. Lattice is the same as changing the map rotation on normal FPSes. There are no objectives, just following the ******* lattice.

THERE IS NO POINT IN THE GAME! IT LACKS META SINCE DAY 1 (Played beta, saw how the lack of metagame ****** this game big time), and without metagame (base construction isn't metagame), there is no point in no system at all. Hex needed a smart population to actually work. Lattice guides most stupid into funneling battles which rages for HOURS in 2~3 grids (unless it's an uberzerg, which just makes the "all the same" point MORE crystalized), just to lose it.

Lattice doesn't bring continuity. Just a tug of war, with NO winner. There are no workarounds to it. Hex had A LOT of work arounds. And it was quite easy to counter (the ghost capping). People were just stupid enough NOT to do so.

Most problems with hex were:

- Ghost capper didn't need to stay ON POINT! That alone would have resolved a LOT of issues with the game.
- More people mean faster capping times (as it once was). One person capping would need 7 minutes to cap a small base, more the enough to discourage MOST ghostcappers. And STILL, enough for idiotic factions to LOSE important bases due to a "I DON'T CARE" mentality on defense
- The more terrain adjecent, the faster the cap
- Defense XP for base defense.
- A true purpose for actually capping bases, not just XP (closer vehicle spawn)
- Instant Action (THIS ALONE is a ****** up thing in this game).
- Less possibility of mobilization (needs for transport vehicles and such)

As the game is now, with almost no penalty to deaths and vehicle destruction, hex would destroy the game faster. A lot of OTHER things must be taken in consideration before hex is implemented.

Agreed but eevs had to give up on capping timer based on population because someone on this forum cried as it came out taking a big base without a big squad was very slow. Some players pretended to cap a tech plant with 6 planetsmen.

So does that mean that DBG is betting the farm on Structure gameplay (at the cost of sacking existing gameplay, maps, etc.) is gonna be the giant boon the game needs? Didn't SOE overhaul Star Wars Galaxies and lose the playerbase?

It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me for them to mess with Indar, when it's their most popular Continent by far. Why not overhaul one of the other Continents instead? Having worked at Sigil on Vanguard, all too often I saw Designers mess with something in a non-productive way, just so they could make their name.

I'll be open minded with the ultimate results and feedback from others. I wish the best for the game. But my concerns are sparked.

Indar needed space anyway. It is mostly good but the distance between most bases is too short to support any real vehicular combat. More often than not you'll see one side besieging the other with tanks despite both sides having fairly even numbers in the area.

The Rebel Scum population data

Most servers struggle to hit 1500 for more than an hour during their prime time. Off-prime pops are laughable and people would be better off playing Battlefield.

Briggs in particular is so hilariously bad, it's a wonder that it's still there.

Ahh I remember the old hex based system where you played a game of whack a mole, removing a squad from the front lines to remove a single ghost hacker/infil from 6 bases and you inevitably had to kill the same annoying little cnut over and over again, stopping you from getting stuck into that 96 vs 96 battle.

Oh the fun that wasn't had.

Yes there is problems with the Lattice, BUT its infinitely better then having to chase 1 person around for 30 minutes, babysitting points for 3 to 5 minutes a time whilst they are flying to ghost hack yet another base.

Yay the fun of doing absolutely nothing...

You found some data, but not official data.

Anyway, lets go with it. So one guy turns a point. With 500 online, is there enough to investigate it? Especially when that guy has already cut and run?

The profoundest truth of war is that the issue of battle is usually decided in the minds of the opposing commanders, not in the bodies of their men.

Count the numbers of players from all fights on Indar. It's <1000.

The proof is right effing there in the pop #'s

You're forgetting one thing: Planetside 2 is a shooter before everything else.

If tactical/strategic depth can be achieved while keeping the shooter part fun, cool. If this depth can only be achieved by boring everyone who's actually trying to play the shooting game to death then no, this depth is NOT worth the cost.

The armchair generals need to stop trying to reshape this game like an RTS game, because it isn't one.

I routinely see Vehicle Combat in the Standard Game (non-Hardcore Organized Play) continue to dominate the spaces between most bases. Especially with the smaller populations. Vehicle dominance in the Standard Game also seems the biggest factor in whether an Attacker can keep from getting pushed off the base they are hitting.

You just don't often see the Foot Zergs between most bases anymore. They are too easily obliterated by Vehicles. And most Attack Fronts are reliant on a Deployed Sunderer, and can't keep it on the battlefield if they don't have Vehicle presence of equal control or greater vs. enemy Vehicles. 1 Tank can take out a Sunderer faster than most Attackers can stop it, and Harassers can do the same for medium and smaller fights or even large fights if the Attacker numbers are locked down Defending the points and the Sunderer is exposed, has poor line-of-sight cover, or is near easy enemy Vehicle access.

Which bases are you thinking of in particular?