Can I pay someone to attack my base? ....and other issues plaguing the new construction system

I think its a great system....I think it however is meant to use tactically....not put wherever I want x_X No one cares if you put a grand base in the far corner of the galaxy....specially without a HIVE....what exactly does that do for your faction or what tactical advantage does it give you?????????????????????

Now an example of putting one near the bridge on either side lets say Indar (Regent Rock or Scarred Mesa) Tactical...yes...why, because any opposing faction either has to do a massive air drop or they cross the bridge...hence run into the "construction system"

I love the system, it has its uses and it has its wtf r u doing uses. No one cares about your base in a hole that does nothing for your faction let alone puts it in the way of an opposing faction. Sometimes using something requires you to think before you use it.....

So far the bases we have managed to build either get wiped or we have a ton of fun defending them. Nothing like putting a base in a very annoying spot or a place you know the enemy will run into making it extremely difficult to move forward or causes a real pain in the ****.

edit#2 another great place is the center southern part of esamir, a lot of great places to put a base, one we have put up calling it helms deep , you want tactical, get a good group going, put 12+ turrets up, see how that annoys anything trying to cross the channel let alone fly, you be amazed what that does.

YOU HAVE TO THINK MAN THINK! If you can think go zerg....theres a lot of mindless zerging that happens still, no one thinks when they do that, they just zerg.....

If you're assuming I'm building mega bases right next to my own warpgate, you assume incorrectly. The bases I build are generally near the middle of the map, or as far as I can push them in my own territory. I've made them very accessible.

But, this may all rapidly become a moot point very fast. I just watched two conts. get locked with massive HIVE action. VS just locked having had 6-7 cores active almost the whole time. The game is changing for the better by the minute!

Attracting them is one thing. Taking that too far is eventually mandating they beat a path to your door so to knock it down.
That was the gist of your original post I was addressing.
(I probably should clarify that I am not addressing the whole thing. I sorta slid a position on Alerts in there, which I will apologize for, as I now re-read your post and it was not mentioned.)

You will excuse if the organization of the wording was inelegant. I had intended the meaning of the "vice-versa" to swap the adjectivial phrases "in all the colorful senses of the term" and "in every mechanical sense of the term" between "fun" and "victory" as a shortcut to having to retype the sentence. I wonder which word-swap you presumed I had intended? In any case, my purpose was to draw the points that: 1) we have a wide playerbase that brings a variety of viewpoints as to how one wants to approach and play the game and 2) things that one group prioritizes as "acceptable gameplay" does not match what the other side does, and might even be viewed as wasteful, degenerate, or just repugnant. Sashaying in any fliers' thread and mentioning "Tomcats" alone is enough to demonstrate our differences and disagreements.

Part of the uneasy personal compromise with people who had disagreement with the construction system and favored the territorial progression system was that no compulsion forced one out of their cubby and into the other if they did not want to stray. That did not mean an agreement that neither side would have any influence on the other's actions, just that progressionists might keep to their Lattice bases and diehard HIVE-goers could erect their picket fences and, in the end, VP would be generated one way or another. At some point, one side or the other would generate the necessary VP that would shut down everything on the continent. That also included the possibilities that, at some point, a Lattice lane might crash headfirst into a player-made base or, at another point, someone else might never get violent houseguests.

Be that as it may ...

You did pick out my meaning, or just jump to that meaning on your own, all the same.
The only thing that matters is that all of those niches have the potential to coexist in the game and remain content.

I think you're still misunderstanding. What you call a mandate, I simply call structured gameplay. This is a shooter, and we have a brand new system that did not have a lot of shooting going on in it. I'm merely asking for it to be tweaked so it plays like a shooter, and not Space Engineers.

If you want to capture lattice bases, it's generally expected, or 'mandatory' that you "shoot mans" in the process. No one would ever say, "why are you making it mandatory to shoot people to capture lattice bases". It would be silly.

If the Devs want to keep it separate, that's their prerogative. I would prefer to have it more integrated, and I suspect we'll see more integration but perhaps not as much as I'd like. Only time will tell. If this game is to be around for 5-10 years, the odds of these two "battle channels", as I called them, remaining virtually separate the entire time is very slim. I think it's far more likely that they will gradually become an interdependent system.

Too little effort-to-reward ratio.

You put up 10 autorepairing Spear turrets and put the base where you can exploit Skyshields, then wonder why no one ever shows up for you to farm. You also overestimate how much people care about continent locking to bother assaulting a player base.

What the developers fail to realize is that once a continent locks most of the casual players log off.

It depends on where the base is.
If it's a 100% efficiency near the warp-gate that base always gets attacked because it's an actual threat.
Some 20% efficiency base in the *** end of no-where isn't much a threat unless VP are at 14 and it's the only hive that faction has.

I'm playing PS2 for the same gameplay that got me hooked on it to begin with. I actually hate the lattice, and wish PS2 were still using the hex based design it started with. But that's another topic.

I didn't really want to see the construction system to begin with. I felt the time and resources spent in designing and implementing it would've been better spent fixing bugs and the craptastic resource system. But that's just me. I understand that many players wanted it. And it didn't turn out as bad as I thought it would.

Still, the important thing, is that I still get to play the game I want to play. I don't want to be forced, or even pushed to take part in the construction system. I don't want to build bases, and I don't want to attack or defend constructed bases.

I tried it a couple times, and I don't like it. Bases are constructed in favorable terrain with components that require way too much heavy vehicle firepower. It can exhaust a tanks primary ammunition (fully specced for capacity) just taking down a couple of walls. You also have to get these vehicles into the P2 teflon coated terrain they weren't designed to go, and where they have no maneuverability. Then you have to have ammo sundies trying to navigate this terrain to dispense ammo to these vehicles. The construction system shields negate enemy air, and give friendly air the protected airspace to easily take out enemy ground vehicles which can't maneuver.

No thanks. I'll stick to the game I like. Fighting at the lattice bases which are better balanced for P2 gameplay. You and those in favor of the construction system have it now. So attack and defend those bases as you like. It's not my fault you all seem to want to build and turtle up in a base and complain that you don't attack one another. And I shouldn't be forced or even pushed to play YOUR game. I'd quit if it came to that. You have your construction system now. Make of it what you will.

Locks are real fun killers. I hope they do something different eventually, but I kind of doubt they will.

As it is now, you have to do a total restart on a new continent, and that's a pain, it's boring, and you don't know where the battles will be. I think a bandaid fix would be mass teleports, including all vehicles, to the newly unlocked continent. That way, you don't have to start totally from scratch, and you all leave as a group, instead of a trickle.

when the war means notthing in general, then all means to succeed in the war are also meaningless, the war can not be lost by ignoring the base, the war can not be won by destroying the base. so the base is even more meaningless than the standard NPC bases. they are only attacked normally if the base is in convenient range of an existing lane base, otherwise who cares..

if the destruction of a bases with HIVEs would be tiered and made to award players of the majority opposing faction with a large CERT reward, youd see more people attacking bases

Reward would be given to any opposing faction unit within 100m of the HIVE when it explodes.

25 or more components = 100 certs
15-24 components = 75 certs
10-14 components = 50 certs

then people would FLOCK to enemy bases to kill them, since they would be WORTH actually going out of your way to do so.

any kill by the defending faction would be granted at +50% XP gains so long as the unit doing the killing was within 200m of the base HIVE, so a tank shooting another tank on the horizon would still get the bonus since he was within the base area.

On the map, the spinning hive icon should have a S / M / L indicator to show whether that hive is part of a small medium or large outpost

I dunno, I frequently go and farm enemy bases. Wraith flash with a fury takes modules out in under 2 clips and the cloak lets you troll auto turrets. With the bonus exp for fighting at bases now it's not a bad farm. Trying to hit the silo/hive solo takes a bit more time than is strictly worth spending unless you're pushing your faction to 'majority bases' to secure the last 2 VPs you need to continent lock. That's the only situation I go for HIVE kills under, but then I rarely run with organised platoons.

Totally agree. I've complained about this overriding problem since the beginning. There's no meat in the game. It's way too sandboxy, unattractive objectives, no real way to win, a 'pointless shoot 'em up', etc.

That sounds very interesting. I've got some ideas I'm working on too, unfortunately, the Devs don't read this forum, so it's got to be posted at that conversation wrecking ball called Reddit, where all your hard work disappears off the radar in under 3 hours. :/

I can't be bothered attacking something that is meaningless and I hope the construction system remains as meaningless as possible TBH.

I play PS2 because it's not like the others. Most shooter games now mix elements from other game types that have nothing to due with a FPS, much less large scale warfare. The last thing I want is for my experience in PS2 to be dictated by "sims" players who come here because they suck at aiming or have no real interest in winning. Sorry if it sounds a bit like I'm saying "Who the fk invited you to the party", but that's how I feel.

i don't get it why do you WANT people to attack you?

Hm this is something definitely hard to fix. If there wasn't any continent locking everyone really would only be playing on indar only, and the pop between all the rest of the open continents wouldn't be great enough separately to be all that fun. At the moment continent locking is better to have then not having it at all. Being someone that played well before the locking was implemented finding fights outside of indar was like finding a needle in 3-4 haystacks. At least now you generally can find fights quite easily given its not in the middle of the night.

Will say the idea of teleporting vehicles and such I do like though, but honestly don't think that'll do all that much to help fix the over all problem of having to go to a new continent and restart the fights (Especially since who would want to drive their sundie/tank from warp gate all the way to the nearest fighting hex, most outfits prefer just galaxying in and then get vehicles from the nearest facility to the battle).

Personally think if it was possible to jump between continents easily without without having to go through the warp gate being a interesting idea to make combat more free flowing between continents if it was somehow possible server pop wise, but other than than I myself really don't know what to do about it haha. And i'm sure there's a slew of problems to hammer out to with this idea to.

Yeah, I remember the pre-lock days too. As far as my mass teleport idea, it wouldn't have to be all to the warpgate. Let players select their preferred location after cont. lock, give it 30 seconds or so, and then do the mass spawn.