[Suggestion] How to improve map flow.

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Scr1nRusher, Dec 4, 2016.

  1. Scr1nRusher

    1) Move A out of all Tower bases

    Self explanatory.

    3 point Tower bases are the biggest map flow stall causers other then Bio-Labs, which is directly due to A being inside of the Tower(below the spawn room).

    2) Replace all Bio-labs with the new Bio-Lab Design.

    With Bio-labs being fixed, map flow vastly gets better.

    3) Connect all Facilities satellite bases together with each other

    This allows for more strategy and more attack angle options.

    4) Reduce the number of small bases

    This reduces the number of speed bumps the map has and increases "finding fights" consistency while making construction more viable/useful.

    5) Reduce 4 point Large Outposts to 3 point large outposts.

    This is just removing the 4th point in the bases, to speed up map flow & create some better fights.

    (For instance Lithcorp secured mines C point should be removed, and the other points would be just A,B & C(formerly D))
  2. Demigan

    "map flow" according to you means "bases must be pushovers and defenders shouldnt ever be able to create a stalemate".

    Good map design means bases play different. The tower bases, unlike biolabs, do not require an overpop to capture and are wonderful additions to the game
  3. Scr1nRusher

    Stalemates mean the maps don't move, which is a bad thing.

  4. FateJH

    Responses like you're getting suggest that it is more of a subjective thing.
  5. Badname707

    Gonna agree with Demigan here. Maybe with pops being what they are now it's no longer valid, but bases playing out differently is really important for making strategic choices. Capping a hard base while the enemy is distracted, then using that base as an impediment against enemy incursion allows you to focus more of your forces to offense. As it stands, you can usually avoid attacking those bases anyways.
  6. Scr1nRusher

    If the devs do X amount of effort to make Y amount of bases, yet only Z amount of Y is played on.......

    Then it shows there is to much of Y and/or Y isn't well designed.
  7. Scr1nRusher

    Lattice & also continent design in relation to base positions and base density.
  8. FateJH

    No, that just means that the rules of the gameboard is set up thus that you do not ideally allow for your enemies to push you back into your primary spawn points. To us, those are the Warpgates. Indeed, if nothing else, the scoring conditions of the victory points system even provide evidence that we should resist every effort to just allow our enemies to waltz across our terrain. Mainly, I am thinking of the rules whereby points are awarded for owning all of one type of major base at once (which suggests making significant gains into the "enemy's side" of the map) and connecting one warpgate to another (which requires making a significant gain through the "enemy's side" of the map). For that reason, it is good that there are bases in which one will not often fight for reasons of complexity, difficulty, or aesthetics, and cost estimates have to be made about choosing where to engage the enemy. For that reason, it is also good that bases have additional allowances for defense to those who possess it.

    It is not our benefit to make positions on the gameboard less defensible thus increasing the odds and decreasing the effort that the map becomes a tide that flows up and down the lanes in shades of blue, then red, then blue again. The value of base possession loses meaning.

    Not at the moment, or for the foreseeable future.
  9. Badname707

    wat. is missing parts
  10. Badname707

    Ideally speaking, I'd have shorter cap times all around, but better systems for an active defense. Defense should consist less of capping empty bases and waiting for the faction that holds the base to respawn there, and more of detecting large enemy movements before they arrive and redeploying other forces as necessary. Imagine if we had radar stations and the like, or ESF's having a more defined role as scouts and vehicle convoy raiders. The bases are fine, IMO. The game is just critically lacking in other areas, which slows things down.
  11. Pikachu

    • Up x 3
  12. Scr1nRusher

    What is understanding game design for large scale games?

    So faster capture times?

    That would be a good suggestion.
  13. Scr1nRusher

    Well no.

    Stalemates in a large scale game like this mean that Devs wasted there time building too much & in the places that see fighting they didn't do a good job because no one can progress past those places.
  14. Scr1nRusher

    I literally just explained the problem from a game designed perspective which is why the game has many different problems relating to this core issue.
  15. Scr1nRusher

    Less parroting more of a seasonal migration. ;)
  16. FateJH

    And I accept all of your explanations for that what they are - your opinion.
    And I reject your explanations for that what they are - an opinion with which I do not agree.
    • Up x 3
  17. UberNoob1337101

    Are you implying that you will make another "Lancer/Vortex 800m range OP", "0.75 ADS OP", "Sheetfire is useless", "NS-15M is Zoolander" and "Battle rifles for infiltrators" threads? :p
    • Up x 1
  18. Demigan

    No movement isnt a bad thing. Stalemates mean two factions are on equal ground. Creating maps that "move" means that the attackers will constantly capture bases until the defenders clear out the vehicles and instantly become the attackers, crushing the other team's defenders constantly.

    If you want more bases to be used the metagame surrounding the lattice and base captures needs to be changed. Also to make the stalemates more fun all attacks need to be multi-staged. Currently its: destroy enemy vehicles, place sunderer, push to point, hold, done.
    Attacks need to have seconday objectives. Defenders need to start with advantages to make it easy to defend. The attackers can make the fight even and in some bases in their favor by destroying secondary objectives. This gives more flow to a battle as the fight goes back and forth between the secondary objectives.

    I understand that you've avoided tower fights for a long time and have created this monstrous image of them, but tower fights dont require overpops to beat. Tower fights are some off the best. You need control over multiple points and towers offer better options for the defenders to retaliate, which is different than most other bases where the attackers have more advantages rhan the defenders.
    • Up x 1
  19. kr47er

    1. yes please

    2. are you sure about this without trying it? the idea is not bad. the design couod be way better. we still will have the door problem plus in adition we'll now have phallanx turrets defending it. what biolabs need is their outter shield letting cross infantry throught it ( but not bullets ). the biolab desing was meant to be without shields, if i'm correct, so the design inside it is meant to be entered from all directions. at the very least biolabs need 3 entrances.

    3.pointless. the facilities that are not connected with each other usually are not accesible between them.
    there is no point connecting the facility if you have a 500m high mountain between and have to travel 2 km to arrive.

    4.agreed. the majority of small bases are not designed to handle 96+ battles. well, there is not a single facility to it on the game, not even for 48+. the continents need to be smaller, with less but larger facilities, and this facilities should have much more entrances, flank posibilities, vertical differences...

    5.meh, if you say so... I dont think it would be much of a difference.
    oh, except biolabs, f***in hell, remove that D point that's out on the ground.

    Hey, have you ever heard about the crown ?

    jesus this meme is selling like donuts today
  20. Scr1nRusher

    Stalemates are a direct result of base design. I merely want better base design to encourage better fights & better map flow.

    Its that simple, because if the map doesn't flow, that means the devs wasted a **** ton of time.