Large Outposts are problematic. (semi-rant)

Rorke's Drift ?
Alamo ?
Camaron ?

No matter if you lose or win in the end, defending against bigger forces is the coolest thing you can find in military warfare.

More like removing thermal for aircraft.

Agreed, but the difference between those fights and these fights is that those fights actually ended.

Every fight ends... someday. Even in PS2. Even the stalemates at the Old Crown ended after a while...

I would actually prefer a more 'static' game than the 'pulsating' game we have now that sees every facility change hands a dozen times a day.
Conquering a facility should feel like you actually accomplished something.

Giving us doorways again would make the battles much more intense along with giving infiltrators something to hack.

So, you punish vehicles for doing a good job? I wouldn't want to push up to a base where my vehicle would be useless. I could only pull another in 5 minutes minimum. Also, large infantry fights take less skill than air. Get 20 MAXs (NC with Shotguns would be preferable.) 20 engineers, and 10 medics. Then zerg until you get to the point(s) cap them, leave some infantry behind to keep infiltrators from back capping, then camp all exit points from spawn until you cap the base. Air actually requires you to learn some maneuvers, though a good air zerg is still unbeatable. Also, did you even read my post. I'm not saying that tanks should keep farming, I just think that capturing a base should be an effort of combined arms, to give vehicles a goal to accomplish. Since infantry are the only way to cap a base, everyone else wants to take them down, hence farming.The air doesn't want to get out of their expesnsive vehicle, and they have nothing else to do but farm.
Actually, tankers don't like Esamir because every little ditch and bump is just a flip waiting to happen.

Then you might as well not have bases at all. Did the Gauls say to the Romans, "Your bases are too hard to attack, please make it fair and remove them." No, and neither should a war simulator like Planetside 2.

I like fighting in towers because as mentioned above it's one of the best places to push back at the zerg till your faction can regroup, I also hate the way some towers are designed where tanks can shell directly into the tower messing with the infantry battle, I'm fine with having to deal with the armor and air when trying to make it across the field to the other capture points.

Don't get me wrong I want the dedicated vehicle players to have their fun too, PS2 needs to add some objectives for vehicles to fight over that don't involve strapping on a heat cannon and shelling a base repeatedly. If vehicles are given true objectives to fight over (like the ANT things from PS1 or whatever) then perhaps bases can be somewhat be better protected from cannon fire, and vehicles can get more resistance from infantry attack.

For the most part, I would love that. If we had nothing but facilities and none of those 40+ outposts in the way of the main event, things would be so much better. We would actually begin to see the terrain become relevant to the gameplay.

I'm fairly sure the Romans didn't put 3-4 small buildings in an open field and call it a base.

This is just a casual shooter with an MMO setting. Every actual "war simulator" would like a word with you.

and by skill, you mean numbers.

If you haven't seen the genius of PS1 first hand, I highly recommend checking it out.

https://launch.soe.com/installer/PS_setup.exe

Personally, it was a huge wake-up call. All must know the ingenuity of PS1 AMS, PS1 spitfires, PS1 mines,PS1 motion alarms, and the many more things that coalesced into an incredible experience.

Yes...because maybe 10 posts ago, in this thread, i wrote:

No i "punish" vehicles, because they are a crutch.

This would never go through because a) they are working on 2 major updates, hossin and continental locking, b) not enough resources, and c) no motivation to have to go in there and spend time to redesign entire continents. We shouldn't be having this thread anyways so to not distract the mods. We need those 2 updates first instead of any cosmetics or environment nonsense.

I avoid towers for the most part. They are sort of fun to cap. They are no fun at all to defend. I don't like any base design that favors the attacker.

Maybe if turrets couldn't be destroyed in like 2 seconds it would be a little better.

I like the three points large outposts. They offer rich, intensive and varied (most of the time) fights and gameplay.

Some of the best bases in this game are three points large outposts ; and some have even redesigned towers : take the tactical-rich Nortpoint station on Esamir ; or Esamir Munition corp.

And why the hell needing 20 minutes to take a large outpost is or should be a bad thing ? It's not a competition to end in the Guinness book of fastest captures. Some (all ?) of the most epic battles are battles that take time to progress, like when you have a bridge to cross / defend.

I'm not personally fond of towers but I prefer them in that kind of bases, because (at least when you are in defense) you can use the tower like a real tower, meant to allows defenders to monitor and defend the surrounding barracks / landscape (Jaegers crossing or Crimsom bluff are good examples).

Everything's a crutch. Do you want everyone have to run from spawn because sundies and all means of faster transport are a crutch? Does the Reaver having the vertical thrust of a hover 3 Scythe make them a crutch? Is the HAs shield a crutch? Its a slippery slope.

So... It seems that PS1 was much less casual. Was it a 'war simulator' in your book ?

Simulating war doesn't imply realism (ARMA style), especially in a futuristic setting.

No is its not.

Transports and spawns are a convenience. In a fire fight it doesnt matter if you have spawned from a sundy, from a nearby spawn or run from the WG.

The reaver is a crutch, just like the scythe. And yes the heavy overshield is also a crutch.

Vehicles negate FPS skill, and should be litmited to outside bases and transports.

Well, its also kind of conveinent that vehicles are plain better, right? and that HA's shield gives you extra health?
So everything should be about skill? Everyone should have the exact same weapon? The exact same certifications?
Like I said, its a slippery slope your sliding down, and you can't really choose where or when to stop, can you?

The slippery slope argument is a silly argument. From your point of view, you can never nerf/buff or even change something, because we might get a slippery slope. Yea? For more on the silliness read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy

And yes, if you want a competitive shooter, like SOE wants, you need to make sure that skill, is the deciding factor on who wins an encounter, not who has the biggest or best crutch.