End work on Lattice now before any more effort is wasted.

Discussion in 'Test Server: Discussion' started by FrankManic, May 2, 2013.

  1. SilverAura

    Without a lattice system, battles are too unpredictable. It's not like you have a single person controlling each empire like you would in a RTS game where a lattice system would be a lot more restricting on strategy. You have thousands of individual people who are vaguely trying to understand what's going on.

    A squad can help, a platoon helps even more. An outfit helps the best. However at the end of the day, with individual people trying to find their place in a battle much larger than them, having more defined flow is essential.

    Bare in mind, this is not supporting a watering down of the game. It's not like you're forced to fight within the hexes on the map. The map is still fully open. The lattice system is just making base influence more defined.
    For example, there is absolutely no reason why the Ikanam Bio Lab should have influence over the AuraxiCom Network Hub, yet it does. A lattice system fixes this.
    • Up x 1
  2. VSMars

    .. .and on the same map, there's no reason why Ikanami Bio Lab should not have influence over Crux Headquaters, yet it doesn't.

    Amerish is a mess, with or without a restricted lattice like planned on Indar.
    • Up x 1
  3. SilverAura

    Which is part of the reason why (I hope) the lattice system is still on the test servers and not live yet.
  4. Hosp

    Same thread I've seen over a dozen times now. Same answers every time. Don't like it? Find a new argument that might change my mind or outlook on a reason to keep Hex.
    • Up x 1
  5. SiosDashcR

    Those who enjoy the more condensed lattice system are most likely players who have solid computers of being able to roll into enemy platoon territory and not drop to 20-10 FPS.

    Those who enjoy the more condensed lattice system are most likely players who follow the zerg, incapable of being able to judge which bases are suited for them.

    Those who enjoy the more condensed lattice system are most likely players in large outfits with zerg platoons instead of a small outfit with a smaller squad who only want to deal against other smaller squads (something manageable).
    • Up x 1
  6. SiosDashcR

    Then you must not know how to get your Sunderer up to AuraxiCom without going all the way around the Amp Station. The red line you highlighted, it's not a noticeable road (because who pays attention to knowing how to read a map or contour lines anyway?) but it's possible and I've done it before - To get your Sunderer up there.
    • Up x 3
  7. VSMars

    The way I see it, just because I can drive my party bus somewhere doesn't automatically make it not stupid to be able to do so, nor does it automatically make the road I take any less silly.

    Case in point, attacking Splitpeak Pass from Xelas:

  8. shackers

    Lattice WILL KILL all tactical movement
    Sure the fights will be bigger and im looking forward to them but im pretty sure they will get old

    I say give us tools for team work and communication so people can work together and scouting equipment to we know what is going where BUT only because a scout is telling us

    Dont dumb the game down

    • Up x 2
  9. SiosDashcR

    You don't have to attack from that angle (although it's highly required that you do and I commend you for at least being the very few people I see that actually learned how to attack Splitpeak effectively.
    The road straight to the left after Xelas, just brings it to Splitpeak Pass. You don't have to go through Silver Valley.
    • Up x 1
  10. TestyVenom

    If you honestly think that the new "Rush Lane" system will "kill all tactics," then 1) you must not be very tactically creative, 2) you've obviously never played PS1, and 3) you probably haven't played on the PS2 Test Server to give it a real chance. If anything, the Rush Lanes will be a saving grace for this game. This doesn't "dumb down the game," as a person without vision would say, nor does it remove tactics from the game; it will, however, lessen the frequency of the most foul and obnoxious of "tactics" (I use that term loosely when talking of this) which is to "ghost" and/or "back-hack" a base for the purposes of avoiding a fight or to draw combatants away from the "real" fight to make it easier. In my opinion, that's a pathetic tactic. It is time for the majority of the playerbase, which is probably most, if not all, of the nay-sayers of the Rush Lane system to really learn how to play the game and learn/develop real tactics specific to the immediate battle situations, not this sneaking around, cowardly, nonsense. The game needs this new system. Provide a real argument against the Rush Lanes and maybe people will listen to you (people who are against it), but you're just noise until then. Saying "it dumbs down the game" or "simplifies it too much" doesn't count as an argument, especially since I can easily just say it actually makes it require 1) more FPS skill, 2) more focused tactical knowledge/capability, 3) better reaction to events in the immediate battle at hand, and 4) even more important tactical decisions on a large scale (i.e. allocation of forces, for one).
    • Up x 2
  11. TestyVenom

    Whoa, this makes too much sense to be on the forums. Someone stop this guy before people learn something!!!!

    In all seriousness, this is a perfect example of one reason why the game needs the Rush Lanes/Lattice System. I support this poster in their endeavor to enlighten the PS2 Community about the new Rush Lanes/Lattice System (w/e you want to call it).
    • Up x 4
  12. LordMondando

    Well some thoughts.

    1) I think peoples concerns over the lattice system largely revolve around population imbalance now. At least mine almost exclusively do. Yes by giving people more obvious moves from base to base, you'll concentrate them. If you want to promote larger battles, which are easier to find. Then you've achieved what you want, by and large with this new system. The worry to my mind, is what happens when you concentrate them in uneven amounts, which unfortunately is an endemic problem in the game and i've seen glimpses of on the test server. Law of unintended consequences rears its ugly head again.
    2) Amerish is a strange one in this, in terms of the mapping not necessarily the base capture logic. Bar remapping large sections of it, I don't see what could be done and make it more linear.
    3) What little 'extra' strategic ability the hex system occasionally affords, probably comes at too much of a ghost in ghost/back capping being so rampant. I do however still think, as a whole the game needs more in this regard. A lot of the debate around lattice has, in certain corners, sometimes presented it as 'the thing to fix the strategic metagame or lack thereof' (indeed early on people were selling it as this). I don't think thats correct and I think we need a lot more work here.

    If I get time this week, I indent to present my findings and thoughts in detail on it all. From playing a lot from as many perspectives as I can, its certainly modified. I do just caution everyone though, lets try to avoid getting into two hyperbolic diametrically opposed camps. Theres too much talk of 'dumbing down' vs. 'ghostcappers' and people whom don't agree with you, 'dont get it'.
  13. SiosDashcR

    Considering it filters and condenses a faction into smaller bases than before, you're getting much larger fights - sometimes too unbearable for smaller squads.

    I go out to fight with my squad against another small squad. We're not here to go against platoons where a handful of our players suffer from FPS issues and are rendered incapable of fighting as infantry and to some extent, even vehicles.

    Second, that post you made about AuraxiCom is hilarious and it shows the "lack of tactics" you so preached against the hex system supporters, that you have. The red line that he crossed out? It actually is capable of being driven up on if you bothered giving it a go.

    Just because you need to rely on visuals for roads (because you don't know much about contours it seems), doesn't mean others are incapable.
    • Up x 2
  14. WaRadius

    Tactical movement will stay untouched. Only "tactical ghostcapping" is going to be reduced.
    I hope the fights will BE. With too many links enemy forces often prefer avoiding each other and backcaping instead of defending.
    • Up x 3
  15. SiosDashcR

    Or some prefer select fights with squad on squad action or enemies to enemies.

    I'm not down to use one squad to versus an entire platoon amongst my horde of friendlies which causes my frames to drop to 20 or lower
    • Up x 1
  16. Lyel

    This is probably the stupidest thing I've read so far. Lattice is a very real thing, it's not a backhand trick by the devs. Otherwise, everyone would hate it.

    I really wish i could down vote this. All we can do is up vote comments supporting the direction lattice is going. People need to stop jumping to conclusions, it is ruining this game every aspect.
    • Up x 2
  17. Lyel

    Tiny fights will always exist, I can assure you that. But base fights of 3 vs 3 will probably not happen as much. And anything that encourages the devs to optimize the game further is fully supported by me.
    • Up x 1
  18. Lyel

    If you enjoy tiny base fights, Planetside might not be the game for you.
    • Up x 1
  19. SiosDashcR

    Not when you filtered the amount of bases that's capable of fighting on.

    Through the lattice system, with filtered lanes, they expect and encourage large platoon fighting.

    I want to fight in a base, not be forced to sit on the outskirts hoping for small battles there instead because the base is filled with platoons of enemies and friendlies.
    • Up x 1
  20. SiosDashcR

    I enjoy base fights where fights are equal.

    ie. Squads versus squads are the more common ones of my liking.
    • Up x 1