Complete frustration. Changes have done it: Im worried about PS2's future.

I like to type, but even I cull a great amount of my post. Most of you that recognize me as a poster have no freaking idea how much I cull.

This guy is an example of what I usually start with, and I can't get through even half of it (which is kind of why I cull my stuff.)

Same and everything right back to you.

To piss a part of the community off, to deny some people their way to play wont help the overall picture.
Just because you are too bad to do anything without a zerg, find any meaning for your own is no excuse.
The reason you gloat over others misfortune is because you are a hurt, broken being - but laugh little human - cause if you dont laugh at all this revealation of truth, you will look even more pitiful. So I suggest you to laugh in a linear lattice like manner.
But even if you dont want, I will allow to just not answer or try to act smart and whatever.
Im still more generous after all.

Plus: Hex worked well. There had been battles everywhere -> seize.
Now its just "renderproblems-battles" at way less locations.
All you people who just fail to notice this are so mindless, how do you even manage to use a computer?

I hear having two or three options instead of eight is seriously limiting, folks.

Oh wait, that's wrong.

I'm pretty sure that's impossible.

Sorry OP your English is so bad I can't understand what you are trying to say.

How did the hex work better than the lattice...
You had 2-3 more options for territories you could go to. Thing is, only maybe 2-3 of those options were relevant unless you had air, because there would be geomorphological barriers that would prevent or hamper vehicle movement.

What were the problems with the hex...
The hex produced just as many, if not more problems than the lattice. It was impossible to plan a defense (I come from a defense focused outfit on Waterson and used to be Jager, I've played small squad and zerg tactics for 6 solid months now, I state that based on all of those experiences). You would find one good spot to defend, and it would work once or twice, then no one would ever go there again. If people saw that there was a group at whatever location, they would go around. Thus making the Strategic decision to defend a point, pointless. It was impossible to have a coherent battle line. On Waterson I saw the first coherent battle lines, where you would have platoon v. platoon fights along a front. Issue is, that all of these fights were being undermined by whoever found the exploit and worked around the line. Not because it was a flank, but because people had to be drawn away from the fight, in order to go recapture the 5 ghost caps. It was, and still is impossible to anticipate every ghost cap on the lattice, while people refuse to defend territories. You can say: "Oh, but you knew they were going there and send 3 people" but that is when 45 people drop on your head and curb stomp that 3 person defensive force. It was always better to just wait until the large group you were with just turned around to deal with the ghost caps, or chase the zerg that was AVOIDING FIGHTING ANOTHER ZERG TO CAPTURE RELATIVELY EASY TERRITORY. This happened every night. Without exception. For Months.

What are the problems with the lattice...
There is still no mechanic to open up a new front (Though there could be in the future). Also the lattice will work better when a continental lattice is in place, which is something that is way far off.

There is a calm and thought out series of statements. Counter without resorting to insults.

I'm glad when all I have to do is thumbs up a few good posts.

PS2's future is in the balance naturally, because the way SOE prioritizes things and the way the balance changes each patch.
This is a F2P game so the high priority for SOE is to make money so the priority list goes.

Highest priority:
Equipment That Sells, which includes all the weapons for everything, infantry equipment, and all that.

This stuff is made very quickly and released pretty much on a weekly basis, because it's a F2P game and this is where the income for SOE is at. One of the tactics used in this is releasing stuff that is overpowered so they get many sales, and then later change them to balance stuff, and nerf equipment in preparation for new more powerful equipment, again to make sure that new equipment sells.
Major Bugs.

Low priority:
New Continents, Game Modes/Types.
Minor Bugs.
Optimization.

New continents are one of the key aspects for PS2 for the future, on top of different game mode/types. But these on top of other stuff like many bugs not being fixed don't bring in money so are put back for months on end so the highest priority stuff can get made.

If you compare these two, you get an idea why PS2 is dwelling and not looking good for the future, it's possible we could be down to 2-3 servers come the beginning of next year. Major balance changes, no proper continents to go elsewhere, no variety in game play, many major bugs not being fixed, no proper balance and bug testing for

Slippery slope is slippery.

There were battles around during hex...but they were generally short skirmishes unless people ignored the hex gameplay completely by staying at that one biolab on the otherside of continent while you get warpgated and there's usually some wanna-be leader crying about this on the command-chat.
Hex only works effectively in an ideal world where everyone wants to play exactly the same way and communicate, which just doesn't happen because people are flawed.

I dont see any render issues like you state in big battles though performance isn't as good as in smaller battles which is about the only issue I have with bigger battles atm.

On a personal level
Your attitude is very arrogant and elitist, fix that and people might take you more seriously. It's not very effective way to convert people to your cause.

it's "size" not "seize" btw.

Not my experience at all (woodman/miller). Hex had massive field and base battles lasting hours. No trouble finding one either. Except with hex they were dynamically forged as opposed to created by an artificial game mechanic.

I disagree and I play on Woodman, the massive field battles were meagre skirmishes at best between handful of tanks vs the enemy capture zerg. And they certainly didn't last hours anywhere else but biolabs or crown. And I'd rather fight big battles elsewhere too.

Vanus Aran you're drunk, go home

Uh, no? There are plenty of people who have more kills than deaths. Tankers and other vehicle-users who redeploy when their vehicle gets destroyed are pretty common, for example, and they tend to have K/DRs of 4-6. It's further proof that K/DR doesn't actually mean anything, but they totally exist.

However, the average PS2 player absolutely does not have a KD/R over 1.0. Because they can't, for the simple fact that the above type exists, in addition to the fact that suicide deaths count towards your total deaths.

Whaaaaaaat the **** am I reading?!

The OP and the responses were quite amusing. Thank you!

Anyway, I know many people claim that PS2 is a strategy game disguised as a shooter, but I'll always submit that it is a shooter game disguised as a strategy game. You know what happens when you conquer Indar? Nothing. Oh, you get some sort of bonus, but its effect on gameplay is about nil. The only bases worth capturing are tech plants. I know the pretty colors on the map are really pretty, but they are meaningless. Go shoot stuff. Stop pressing 'M' so often. Maybe go play SimCity or Civilization if you want to conquer the map.

Ooooh? So all those Outfits that organized "defense" at unlogical locations just to be able to shot down everything, had all not existed elsewhere except for in my head? I guess my imagination is very scary then. It looked like it really happened.
No wait, it did happen! They camped everywhere when they really wanted/needed it.

In short you are complaining that Indar didnt allowed people to be everywhere at once without a price?
You are aware that its the same for your enemys, there was no disadvantage? There is only one real disadvantage on Indar and that is the locations of the warpgates.
Because the northern Warpgate is in a position that makes it easier to defend against the two southern Warpgates. Its easier to secure many hexes without having to face the other empires. The line is about just one more but that is always good enough.

If VS and NC are really hard fighting each other on Miller, TR will always win without even trying hard at all.


No one can overthrow this reasoning : No one can look in the future, no one has the right to now where the enemy can strike or will strike and where not. Lattice doesnt make sense. Campertactics are everything now and populationnumbers.
The game lost depth, the game lost surprise, the game lost innovation, dynamic action and overall movement.
It supports the lazy, the uncreative, the people without dreams and ideas.

Its an eyesore.

What he was trying to point out is that everybody starts at a 1.0 K/D. But for each person that increases their K/D, several other K/D's must suffer. So if one player has a 4.0 then he is killing 4 people before one person gets him. As you can see eventually it does in fact become physically impossible for every player to have a 1.0. And while you may consider 1.0 as your average, the actual average is closer to .70.
Another part that makes K/D a bad metric are assists. K/D for whatever reason does not count these, and by definition neither do you. K/D only marks the kills made by you rather than the overall number of kills and assisted made by you during the entire session. So in reality a players K/D may say .63 but with Assist Kills included he may actually be closer to .95. But it's not because of the 20 kills that you partook in before a death, only 3 of them were awarded to you.
Lastly, player class is not being taken into account. K/D is automatically more biased towards all of the assault classes (HA, LA, Recon, MAX) over the support classes (Engy, Medic). One group spends more time shooting, the other spends more time keeping the first going. As Engie I die a lot between kills made by myself. I die when I'm repping vehicles or base defenses. I die repping Max Units in the middle of a firefight. I die when I'm trying to drop ammo. I die trying to keep you standing. But when I go AI MAX in a biodome, the numbers turn around and I start mowing down everything in sight. In short, as an engie I'm happy if I break 1.0. As Max I can easily get 5+ in a single session.

This is why K/D is not a good metric to go by.

Since you are incapable of responding in a collected way, and instead resort to wild hyperbole and nonsense I wont waste time trying to discuss this with you.

By the way, you missed an apostrophe in your thread title.