[Devs please read!] Construction is balanced, but there is just one small thing destabilizing it

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by karlooo, Jan 11, 2020.

  1. karlooo

    Oh yeah you're right, I just realized lol.
    I once tried to play PS2 with a friend and he was so frustrated with the spawning too. He couldn't spawn where I was very often and it caused some problems to just group together.
    There is also a bug where the game shows you can spawn but it doesn't let you because it's hidden timer isn't finished counting down yet, again frustrating.
    • Up x 2
  2. RiP0k

    I came up with a partial solution to this problem and immeno, a new design blocking the jammer
    All darts named after OS, Flail, Glaive in a radius are the same as Cortium Silo, with a limit on the same radius for installing OS, and as invulnerable as OS.
  3. Fisheyed

    So why not build a base without an orbital strike then?
    Why should it be removed instead?
  4. karlooo

    Yeah it can be done something like:
    OS deals damage to all structures hit for 50% of their max HP.

    So it will be more like a support weapon and will fix the lazy counter but will cause extreme OS spam. Which will be annoying.


    What I don't understand is why does the Silo have so much HP?
    Like to down a Silo with no repair I got to shoot it 50 times with an AV weapon and I don't understand why are the devs OK with this...

    Why don't they do something like rewarding the player for defending the Silo lol?
    How about decrease Silo HP, and increase the effectiveness of defenses - Turrets, Towers, walls and module effectivity.
    This simple solution will help decrease the OS spam and undefended OS use.

    Buffing defenses and damage output for nerfing the SIlo would be very beneficial for construction.
  5. Fisheyed

    What servers do you build on?

    Construction isn't designed to be done solo. It's like trying to fly a liberator solo. It can be done, and with practice it can be done very successfully. But it's way less efficient than having gunners.

    Turrets wise, 1 aa turret loses to 1 lib, 1 av turret loses to 1 mbt and 1 infantry turret loses to 1 heavy. If you want to play solo, you have to step your game up cause most of the time there's going to be multiple tanks and multiple planes attacking your base. It's not going to be just 1 person - as the tanks see your base as a threat.

    If you have a 2nd person building turrets with you, you go from being at a disadvantage to being at an advantge. Now your turrets have enough damage per second to deter a tank that doesn't have engineers and a repair sundy behind it.

    It also shortens the time needed to get defenses up by more than half. - You can now start building with an extra 8-10k cortium. You can fend off solo planes and tanks together whilst getting cortium instead of running away, and you can build at almost the same time.

    You're playing against humans. They're not going to just run at your base and suicide, unless they are new. They're going to avoid your base until they think they have the critical force to take it down. - Which is a lot of people, a lot of tanks and a lot of sundys.
    So you get decimated because they have way more force than you.

    You receive support too late because your teammates don't care about your base. You will even see other base builders see your base needing help and drive past it to go fill up their own base.
    Your base needs to be valuable to the teammates if you want them to defend it.

    I don't know what you mean by constant resupplying and supporting. But if your base is being attacked. You can't defend from other players and resupply simultaneously. Those are jobs requiring multiple people. If your solo you'd have to deter the attackers for long enough that you could focus on resupplying.

    It is very possible to survive without an orbital strike. There are several defensive options you have.
    1. Build an orbital strike of your own.
    There's a 500 minimum range between orbital strikes. This means he has to spend more time charging between shots.
    Giving you extra time to blow up his base.
    (Make sure someone is ready to deconstruct it if he does fire, as the explosion from your own orbital strike, will damage your base.)

    2. Attack his base with a flail.
    If he has a skyshield inside a protected building, you will need a glaive as well. - If he doesn't then its faster to blow up his sky shield.
    (It's much easier to do this with a second person. You can have 1 fireteam on offense and another on defense.)

    3. Kill the players carrying the orbital strike targeting device.
    This is best done with an esf with anti infantry guns and scout radar. If you can couple it with a wrym, even better.
    (They will often fly in from the direction of their base. So if you fly in a straight line to their orbital strike, you hopefully won't miss them.)

    4. Blow up his orbital strike whilst it's charging.
    This depends on his base defences.

    5. Activate your structure shield modules.
    Build your core modules inside a shielded structure, and active your structure shield modules.

    6. Get ready to rebuild again.
    I don't build solo, but I know that with 2 people you can build faster than he can orbital again.

    As for the other stuff.
    I don't understand what you mean by territory claim?
    When I build, i have to be 500 meters away from enemy orbital strikes as well.

    Orbital strikes are very easy for squads to kill. Make sure you are killing the shield and getting the core. Not attacking the silo.
    I've never done it with vlg valks, I normally hack a vehicle terminal from behind. And if it's built in the mountains I haven't really attacked it.
    If you haven't invested into structures and a pain field and you leave your ai modules exposed, your orbital base can be killed very fast, even if it's in the mountains. You probably can only get one shot off if you are already carrying the targeting module, once it gets attacked. The rest of construction and infantry are still necessary to defend an orbital strike base from being killed.

    I think orbitals work well in a team game. I am often orbitalling hard objectives or max crashes and playing with a squad or platoon. I'm never building solo.
    I also think that most orbital users avearge less than 5 kills per minute. The xp per minute is even more atrocious.

    I don't build solo, so I never have a problem with cortium draining. But maths wise, you should be able to shoot your orbital twice before needing to get cortium. (I think, I calculated it last year before they updated modules to use even less cortium). But it was something like 12.5k cortium for a 10 minute base playing solo, and 6k if there was 2 of you. - So you don't even need to fill your ant to 10k if you're not playing solo.
    I guess it depends how on how much your deconstructing too.

    Again, unles the numbers have changed, extreme drain from an orbital strike = 4 cortium per second. Or 50 meters per minute = 240 cortium. So charging 10 minutes is only 2400 cortium.
    To put it into perspective, 3 walls is 1.2k cortium - half of the orbital strike charge. If you mess up 2 walls and deconstruct them, thats 800 cortium - so you will run out of cortium 3 minutes sooner.

    But having 10k in your silo should be plenty for 10 minutes, maybe even 20 minutes given the last modules buff.

    Also if you find you are low on cortium. You don't need to shoot your orbital strike. It uses the majority (not sure if it's all) of its cortium when charging, so unless your base is going to die if you don't shoot it, keep the cortium to power your defensive modules.

    Bare in mind that teammates don't even defend our major facilities and large outposts during alerts, yet alone construction bases.

    If you want teammates to defend your base, it needs to:
    1. be valuable to them
    2. be where they are fighting at. (In their field of vision)

    Value wise - an air defense base where your friendlies are flring to to take cover and resupply. - You bet if they see a lib or tank attacking it, they are going to go kill it with their mosquito / lib
    You have vehicle gates allowing your tanks cover during a midfield fight. Or even an ammo resupply module. The tanks will value that and go back to defend it if they see another tank attacking it.
    You build by a large outpost like westpass watch tower and you place a router in the tower. If your base is under attack, and you say in command chat, Hey, my base on defensive request here is under attack, it's got a router at west pass watchtower. - You bet the platoon leader at west pass will send some people there to defend it, because he values the router.

    But if you spent 2 hours building an amazing minecraft base that has little value to teammates, people will look at it, compliment you on your base and then move on.
    Instead of supporting them, your base requires them to support you. And if supporting you means that they need to stop what they are doing (probably attacking / defending / gal dropping an outpost). Then they will need to value your base ALOT.
    Like it needs to be on berjess overlook during a close alert, at broken arch, blockading the crossroads / tawrich lattice or something similar.
    Cause honestly - most of the time - if i'm flying a galaxy, and I see a teammates base being attacked. Even if I can defend it, i'm going to continue to the base I was flying to anyway and let them struggle.

    Also unless you are specifically targetting base builders. It's severely inefficient to blow up their base with a base of your own. This will focus the base builders attention on you because you are now their biggest threat. And your base is in a stationary position. Not only do base builders know how to break down your base the fastest, they can rebuild in the same place or a different place within 5-10 minutes depending on how many enemy vehicles there are and you get less kills and exp than if you ignored them and orbital'd the big fight or played as infantry - in the first place.

    There are different methods to blowing up a base, but by far, using a base offers the most counterplay for the defending base.
  6. Shadowdev

    The developers ruined the building assets. The walls, buildings and silo couldn't be harmed until the repair mods were destroyed. The turrets targeted better and did more damage, infantry turrets bullet spread was closer together, it was a lot harder to down a base, now it's pathetic and I want the hives back!
  7. Clipped!

    Checking your own ideas for perspective before you say/post something can help you avoid looking less smart. You may never know how stupid or smart someone truly is until they open their mouth.

    The silo is a enormous weak point in a base, it's hard as heck to cover it and even then one destroyed wall means it's open to shelling, rendering the base completely inert, and thus meaning that base is doomed, even against smaller numbers/threats. And while decreasing it's size/height somewhat would certainly help keep it concealed/covered, doing so would only make it a QoL improvement, not something enough to nerf it's health.

    And yes, the actual defenses of a base could use some improvement, but only really with the repair module, pain spire, AA turret, and the various turrets' AI. The repair module is absolutely **** at repairing anything that's not a wall or building, and needs a large increase in it's flat repair rate to make a turret incredibly durable to a single person/vehicle, and highly durable to a pair of people/vehicles, and so on so that it's a daunting task, nearly suicide, and/or a waste of time for one/two people/vehicles, but still able to be downed somewhat quickly to a moderately sized group (3-4+). Pain spires could use a moderate reduction in how far apart they have to be for another one to be placed, as the aspect is rather annoying and makes them hard to use, despite how powerful they are to infantry when properly paced around crucial spots. Increasing their range instead of how close they can be placed would result in people always dieing before they can even fire upon it, which would indeed be OP.

    The AA turret isn't very good, as it ultimately relies on the AI's targeting and lack of heat generation for sustained fire and the target to actually kill something, and a small to moderate buff to damage and somewhat take longer to overheat would hep this. Most turrets need their AI fine tuned and bug fixed, as often times tanks, aircraft, and sometimes infantry will take much longer to register (talking 5 extra seconds) when the server is fine, or not registering them at all, especially with the AV turret (not the tower, the turret). Not to mention that both the AV tower and turret's AI will on occasional completely and repeatedly miss a stationary tank (usually this triggers with lightnings, but also MBTs at times). An small increase in both automatic targeting range and return fire range for AV turrets and a moderate increase (a bit more so vertically than horizontally) in automatic targeting range (non-return fire) for AA turrets to help with keeping the skies clear of aircraft and actually assist nearby friendly aircraft before they have to or do make a abrupt landing after being chased.

    Otherwise, Flails need to be usable/fireable closer to standard bases to have a real use outside of being anti-base, as a flail is otherwise useless unless it's quite a ways from a base, despite how useful it would be to help deal with armor and vehicle stalemates. That said, they shouldn't be able to fire close to sundy garages under any circumstances.

    Additionally, making it so that people cannot build quite as close as current to a warpgate they don't own would help allow friendly base builders to deal with warpgating, without making it easier for people to farm cortium. Cortium farmers are also a rather annoying problem along with abandoned bases with little to nothing built, not built in a useful spot, or nothing that is built is usefull, ie no routing spires or vehicle terminals. To say the least, silos that have been left alone by owners/cortium miners for long periods of time or abandoned altogether should be able to be deconstructed and/or claimable by any factionmates after a while.

    Like if say a base's ownership had a timer on it that started counting down (like vehicle decay). Factors like cortium hasn't been delivered somewhat recently (half a thousand), owner(s) hasn't visited the base for a while, silo has been low on cortium, silo has been out of cortium, and silo isn't powering much (vehicle terminals, orbitals, and routing spires would count for double), would cause the silo's ownership timer to decrease faster, with 40 minutes as the maximum time for ownership loss, and the minimum at 10 minutes. Two of the factors would have to be in play/true/filled for the ownership change timer to start counting down, so that a base's ownership won't be doomed to be lost at some point, regardless of upkeep. This system would allow for more than enough time for stuff to be left alone in attempt of doing other things or bringing back some cortium, but not so much as to have veritably abandoned the base and still leave it undeconstructable for a long period of time afterward such, so that new builders can actual do something.
  8. karlooo

    Emerald, Miller, Cobalt...same game, same thing happens.

    Yeah I know construction isn't designed to be defended solo, like what's the point of the massive structure sizes with peeking holes all over?
    But cooperative construction is something very complicating and can only work with a friend you know and understands what's going on.
    I'll start off with why construction doesn't work out with random builders. Simply you can't trust, rely on them and you may disagree with their design. Me personally I like perfect bases and even if it is in a good spot I'm never going to support someones base with gaps in walls, bad spawn location, ineffective structure placements...It will just end very badly.

    I tried building with a friend that has all the structures unlocked. I showed my unique base design to him, the steps on how to build it and how to place it, it's not easy and we tried to build together.
    The first thing we tried is combining bases together, where one does the main design with the core structures and the other expends the base with the rest of the structures.
    It always ended badly and it was very ineffective. Basically if one wall gets penned (which is easy) your base is finished and also that extreme large scale gives cover to enemy infantry that are zerging it.

    I came up with a solution to not join the bases but instead build 2 separate bases. One in the front and one behind it for long range support, OS, flail and also as a backup base.


    This is actually pretty hard to do cause of the OS spam in general and lone Silo placements that are unsolvable in game other than having to relocate somewhere else.
    It's much more effective, which also disrupts the enemy armor advance.

    Turrets are the last thing to rely on. Very weak, very large and AI module doesn't do its job often and is easily counterable by hiding the tank hull behind some landscape.
    The best way to defend yourself from armor is by a long range AV MAX unit, which is still pretty weak but there is nothing else that can do the job better.
    My base design allows for a vehicle terminal to fit inside so I can just take out a Sunderer and deploy it.


    The main problem with construction and something I cannot find a solution to in game is receiving support from allies.
    This game is very inconsistent. Suddenly all teammates can just U out, suddenly an attack consisting of 30 tanks may arrive (that happens often to me).

    There is not a way to get help from allies but also there isn't a reason to sadly. When you get attacked by 20 tanks the last thing allies should do is come and help.
    ->Good, your player made base is holding off 30+ players...lets meanwhile take over their lattice base while they are busy there.
    This is the PS2 gameplay and this is why construction won't receive support currently.

    I suggested in this topic the removal of the OS. This gun is responsible for receiving sudden extreme armor attacks by showing yourself on the map. The OS mainly counters construction because that was its original design but it counters something that already is countered by armor.

    If the devs want to keep the OS then the structures should receive back their shields. (Remove the manual shield mod ability, it's just too much)
    The walls and structures should not fall down this quickly as it does now!
  9. karlooo

    How come I've never had a problem with an exposed Silo? When I design the base I put the Silo at a high or lower than the walls.
    If you meant a wall falling down and exposing the Silo, then that's not a Silo problem.
  10. Botji

    If you build your base out in the open right next to a major objective/base then it might get swarmed by a dozen or two infantry and similar number of vehicles but that is like complaining that your tank dies when you are stationary and turn our *** to the enemy, 100% self inflicted.

    In my experience very few people will bother to hunt player built bases unless they are a serious obstacle for attacking a objective or just sitting there on the way from one base to another... and rarely do these people that end up hunting a player base even work as a team and this experience is from both attacking and defending player built bases.

    My wish for construction would be a vehicle refitting pad where people could go to switch weapons and stuff on vehicles they have already pulled and either a change to OS so its not a instant base wipe or a OS shield module that protects your base but blocks building one as well.
  11. Fisheyed

    Any on TR?

Share This Page