lattice base orbital strikes need to go...

Nice to see you totally ignored all my main points.

My argument on this minor point was that making any weapons system unable to interact with the regions of the map where it's most effective is pants on head ********, the primary complaints seem to be about rate of fire.

Can you think of any other ROF issues where the proposed solution is to prevent it from operating in those regions? Because that's what you're asking for with OS. Tanks not being able to go inside no-deploy zones or guns being weapons locked too close to a spawn room are similarly pants on head ******** solutions.

If you want to adjust these weapons you adjust the weapon, not where it can shoot. You and everyone else have jsut been whining without ANY proposed solutions.

You couldn't even be bothered to comment on my proposed balance solutions, either stating which you'd prefer or asking for clarity on how I imagine they'd operate or could be implemented.

YOU DO NOT GIVE A DAMN. You're just whining.

So suggest ways to limit how many are built and/or how often those that are can be fired? I've offered a number of solutions already, if you can't think of one yourself pick one of mine and discuss it FFS.

only a few minutes of camping while in 30secs the enemy gals have made it over the borders, unchallenged, dumped their loads into the base and stopped the base cap.
or youve been nuked by an OS you didnt bother to clear before trying to cap the base.

theres this concept called "border defense", you cant do it from within the cap radius.
too busy cowering inside to know what goes on out there in the open?

IF YOU DONT SECURE THE TERRITORY YOU DONT DESERVE THE BASE!

ive got over 8000hrs game time, 6 chars on 3 servers, im a strategic defensive/patrol player, i support my teammates, i dont chase carrots on sticks, i log in to the underpop team and i am one of the best at what i specialize in. regardless of whatever that is at the time.

youre what? someone with poor logic and strategic skills?

the message remains the same no matter what you say about the messenger.

IF YOU DONT SECURE THE TERRITORY YOU DONT DESERVE THE BASE!

play the game not the stats page.

No. The problem is the ability to fire into bases itself.

Increasing the time before or between firing won't solve the base issue. The solution in my mind is obvious.



Yes, let's all never attack a base before securing all of the territory around it first. See how well that turns out.

Lemme tell it to ya' like this: The only objectives recognized by the game which have a direct control over a faction's success are located inside bases.

toss a coin once it lands on heads do you then assume it always lands on heads?

and why are youre quotes FAKE?

i never said anything youre replying to

youre an online poser thats trying too hard to look smart, youre not. its obvious. BLATANTLY OBVIOUS.
shall i prove it?
go ahead make up some more lies like your type always does.
pathetic!

reported.

play the game not the stats page

The way you name ppl you must be on the top end of these "idiots". So far everyone raises their opinion. You dont have to agree with them, but you should respect them. This is what you dont do here. You see your way as the only right one, otehrwise you wouldnt go on a "everyone that is not with me is against me" post.

I'm sorry but you're just wrong in this, utterly wrong.

There are a great many weapons that can OHK a player, from Mines, Snipers, Tank shells, Decimators, Power knives, Shotguns, etc. The OS happens to be one which while has the capacity to kill a lot of people at once, is the hardest of all of those to use effectively, in part because of the warning granted to observant players.

When it was restricted to not being able to fire into lattice bases it was absolutely worthless. With a 200m minimum range and an 800m Maximum range, it's already got significant restrictions on where it can be placed ab be useful. On top of that, the no-build Zones are huge, in many areas they overlap for 4-5 bases in a row or have gaps of a few tens of meters in which you can target enemies.

Simply put prior to the update you'd build an OS and likely as not never fire it once, let alone actually hit/kill anything with it.

Having it able to fire into the lattice bases is the ONLY way to integrate it into the game. And once you acknowledge that the next step becomes ensuring that it isn't overwhelmingly present. Controlling the rate of construction and the rate of fire, as well as range and damage tweaks.

Any solution you come up with that doesn't allow it to fire into bases simply segregates PMBs and the lattice again which is exactly the problem we've had since construction began.

We finally have them integrated so now is the time to tweak and balance the system to be acceptable.

On this mess, we have 2 groups that are very drastically at Odds.
The Pro OS-Lattice, where the weapon which is complained about being ineffective due to:

• Massive Set-up time
• Map indicator
• Min-Range limitations
• Ability to Flee from the Blast zone

What exactly can be tweaked about a one-man base-wide one-shot laser, to make it 'less' "Either die to it, respawn entirely away if lucky, die during retreat, or spend your time constantly sacking PMB's to attack or defend a lattice base"
Without making the Weapon with the Noted above requirements \ cons not 'even more useless'?

Charge time? Multiple weapons, as this thread shows, makes it even less rewarding & is not stopping the barrage waves.
And with the new proposed spawn-wave system, the OS system would wipe out any local force till the next wave, to fire again.

Damage?
What kind of damage can it have? What kind of adjustment would work?
It already costs a ton of cort, and has a 30~ minute charge period, with a firing delay with a massive map icon of the blast radius.
It can one-shot, or exterminate anything in the blast radius, and force any infantry to either to it, die from knockback, or die trying to run.
It has a lot of cons & a lot of pros for this 'damage'

Radius?
Given it was originally a Siege weapon against PMB's, it had a large radius.
Which puts it as the size of an entire bio-lab, where no one can actually run.
It also has a visual on the map of the exact range & radius it can fire, when firing, this blast radius becomes visible.
With the cort cost, time for construction, and the firing period, what kind of Radius can it have?

What exactly can be adjusted on the OS weapon, to allow it to fire into the lattice Bases, without making it 'further useless' in the grand scheme?

On one hand, people say just destroy the easily built PMB's (and relatively easily destroyed), that must charge-up before firing a shot, if they wish to avoid the weapon entirely.

On the other hand, people say, the weapon can have several in an area, and essentially barrage fire, constantly nuking the entire lattice base constantly, making anyone in said base unable to have fights without fleeing the fight \ base to engage an automated Base that is firing nukes into a spawn room & lattice base

Where does this massive weapon fit in?
The Construction system is worlds apart from the lattice fights, and how fights operate.
It then has a weapon that has to be handled constantly, or it kills all units (friend or foe) anywhere by the action of 1 User, to nuke hundreds in one shot, by avoiding the Lattice System & other players by building a remote automated Base, as an artillery weapon.
As a siege weapon, the OSC is perfect; in regards to PMB's. Which are designed around & capable of, returning fire & handling the weapon.

The Lattice however, needs to be adjusted to handle the OSC's existence, as it has no ability to return fire, no ability to force the Lone-builders to use team-work or force them to get close -- they just nuke it from whatever range they please.

If the Lattice had counter-measures, it would far less unavoidable of an issue, unless constantly haunting every single inch of the nearby hexes for single-player PMB's armed with a weapon that can one-shot several hundred people at once by themselves.
The Fact, an OSC is the only weapon capable of that blast-radius, of that damage, of that range, while needing 1 single person only, does not help its image to non-construction users.
It has a massive list of requirements, making it subpar when not landing blows where no action can be done to actually prevent it, without engaging on the Builder's Terms;
There is no situation, where the Builder is at a disadvantage when engaging Lattice Bases & Lattice Defenders.

• Ignore the 'easily' Destroyed PMB(s), and be nuked.
• Engage the PMB(s), disregarding the lattice you were defending, to lose the Lattice Base.

The OSC has massive problems, by the requirements, to the lack of counter-measures in the base, to the lack of team-work in its use paired with the needing of coordination by the opponent solely unless the OSC User plans mercilessly poorly.

It would help, at the very least, to know what the OSC's common users would tolerate as changes to their weapon, as they suggest to be done as a solution.
Given, the very same users state the very publicly known draw-back list to the weapon, which is quite literally why the "finally useful" argument comes in.
As past blasting PMB's that would blast the original PMB, the weapon was literally near useless in practicality.
And now it's basically nuking the Lattice, forcing others into a dance-or-die situation.

As long as you can build the bases virtually everywhere in ways that greatly prevent anyone from taking it down we can hardly talk about integration. Firing it on lattice is more like a "we have to do something otherwise noone will construct bases". This is the reality after refinement has fallen away. The majority of all OS i ever saw where not placed by tactical value, tehy where simply placed to maximize the gain. Im curious how your idea is to keep them usefull but restrictive at the same time. This is a balance nightmare.

Of course players building bases build them to optimise their defensive abilities. But you still need to get an ANT there, so in most situations that means armour can get there too, sky shields no longer prevent Gal drops and there's always the option of throwing up a quick Flail/Glaive site. Seriously set up on that takes about 10 minutes, bring a buddy with the Glaive darts and you with the flail darts and even if they have a skyshield their OS/Silo is toast. And best of all you don't need to worry about defences because the base is A) expendable and B) not on the minimap. If there's an OS that's bothering you it's typically within a high-level player's ability (with a handful of allies) to neutralize.

The one concession I would make regarding ANTs is to remove or heavily modify the boost. It allows them to get to stupid places like the tops of mountains on Hossin which IS broken AF.

Typically I'm seeing most people are complaining about 3-4 OS's built around a major fight and with a 15 minute reload time (or less if bugged) you end up getting hit by OS too often to be fun.

Now the first and simplest solution would be to bump up the recharge time and fix any bugs that allow for multiple shots without a recharge. I'm a reasonable man, I'd settle for a 30 minute or even 45 minute recharge between shots at any range. This would mean even with 3 OS' around a base you'd still only be being hit every 10-15 minutes on average.

An alternative to restricting fire rate would be to have the shot also drain a significant portion of the Silo's reserve forcing the operator to either have a friendly constantly bringing up cortium or taking the time to get it himself. This is probably not as reliable a solution as the first IMO as it could see faster fire rates but only if several people were working together which is at least a partial balance.

A more complex solution would be to increase the difficulty in building Os' so as to reduce their prevalence and limit the chances of encountering so many in one area. To this end, it may be possible to make it a three-piece structure that needs to be assembled from the silo by three separate players. Eg. Player one goes to Silo Select OS get piece 1, player two selects the OS and is given piece 2, player three, piece 3. The three components would need to be assembled within a certain distance of each other and combine to grant the OS uplink. It would need to be coded such that if player one went back to the OS and tried to select piece 2 then they would be unable to do so. This would force at least some cooperation and prevent lone wolf OS builders from throwing up bases behind enemy lines with minimal effort.

This feeds into another idea I had which was to extend the time taken for the OS to be in it's under construction stage. Place it on the minimap but for a good 5 minutes or so it's still in its vulnerable construction state and hasn't even started charging, this would give enemies a chance to interdict it.

Adjustments to the minimum or maximum range may be made but honestly, I think they're in a good place right now. Similarly to the actual power of the shot. You could tweak it but it does the job it's supposed to.

Frankly, any of these or a combination of them could be used to reduce the prevalence of OS' and the frequency at which they fire. So long as the changes are too extreme making them impossible to operate I'd be generally quite willing to go with them.

If we're playing a game and the objective of the game is to have the coin land heads up, then yes, I'd place specail importance on having the coin land with the heads side facing upwards. In the case of PS2, points are the sole factor in capturing bases, not the external land. Capture points hold a higher importance than the ground surrounding them.

Whenever a quoted post is fairly long I shorten in down to save page space and so that readers don't have to scroll past the exact same thing twice in a row. Given these forums lack any means of condensing the post without altering the contents, I've no choice but to replacing it with something much shorter. And while I'm at it, might as well include a joke or a quote out of context.

Nice try, but that's not going anywhere. I've even stopped intentionally bypassing the forum's censor as requested by a moderator.



The issue isn't even the OHK potential, at least not entirely. The fact that it can fire at anyone without line of sight where truly nowhere is safe from its effects is more of an issue than the OHK, though I'm certainly no fan of that either. Even if a player isn't within the OHK radius or can retreat out of the lethal range, he'd still be hit with the EMP effects and thrown into a wall for his troubles.

I'd make the argument it is one of if not the easiest weapon to use "effectively." Of all of the listed weapons, the OS requires the lowest amount of skill for the highest potential number of kills. Even HE needs the user's shot to be close to his target. And a mine at least requires the owner to have been at the location and survived long enough to place it down; An OS does not ask that the user so much as see the enemy they wish to kill, nor so little as to aim at the ground near the target. It merely must be fired in an approximate location.

So what if player can survive a strike if they see the AO? The poor bastard would have to drop everything and run as far as he could to make it, and I don't have to tell you it's not unlikely he'd be shot at along the way. Happened to me today already. Safe where I was, then it wasn't.

At the time with the restrictions it was mostly worthless. But now it can fire more times and can fire sooner than before. If it still took an hour to fire an OS into a lattice base and only got one shot it would be much less of a gripe for everyone in the area, but it doesn't take an hour and it is a gripe even for one's own "allies."

The only thing it's actually used for right now however is easy no-skill kills on as many players can possible. It could be used to stop armour convoys and break stalemates in no man's land like down in the west of Indar. But no one wants to waste a shot for that.

Construction simply should not be integrated within the core gameplay. It doesn't work well and it hasn't worked well, half-baked and broken. We don't need "tactical nukes" dropping down every 10-15 minutes in a heavy fight. The only tweak needed now is a return to old firing limitations.

Ok ignore OHK, yes it's a superweapon that is disruptive even to those on its fringes. Personally, I'm ok with that so long as it's not firing so often as to be obnoxious.

I'll grant there's room for debate on its ease of use, my argument stems from the need to deploy pull the dart gun, travel to the desired target site, get within SMG range, aim down sights and fire.
If you die or redeploy at any stage you lose the dart gun and must start over. In major fights of 96+ v 96+ It can pretty difficult to avoid getting gibbed before you get close enough to dart them. As for HESH, you get 20+ shots a minute, any one of which could instagibb an infantry. You also have the mobility to relocate if the battle moves away from where you pulled your tank.

I'm a fan of frag grenades, I throw them into cover and shoot the enemies that I flush out, or get the kills on those that stay. what your describing is essentially the same principle, forcing your enemy to abandon their defensible locations. It's a much grander scale to be sure but as before, so long as it's not firing obnoxiously often I'm ok with it.

ME

“So suggest ways to limit how many are built and/or how often those that are can be fired? I've offered a number of solutions already, if you can't think of one yourself pick one of mine and discuss it FFS.”

YOU

“No. The problem is the ability to fire into bases itself.
Increasing the time before or between firing won't solve the base issue. The solution in my mind is obvious.”

That's exactly how this conversation began me asking you (and others) to at least consider ways to reduce the stresses that OS Lattice integration caused. And you argued that there was only one solution (presumably the removal of construction/OS altogether).

I'm not sure which server you're on but I have noticed that different server typically adopt subtly different cultures towards such tools. For my part, I'll gladly fire into a stalemate if it can punch a hole through which allied armour can proceed. Most shots with OS I've made have scored me less than 5 kills, none have scored me 10 or more. There may be some selection bias on that front, no one is going to post a montage of OS hits getting one or two kills, the hits everyone talks about are those rare few where the guy makes a tonne of kills.
I'd wager that if you checked what proportion of shots fired those were it'd be minuscule, even limited to shots that made at least one kill it'd be very low.

Why not?
Look I freely grant that the present rate of fire (especially from clusters of OS sites) is flawed but there's nothing inherently wrong with a superweapon hitting a battle occasionally to mix things up. Construction was designed to cause players to engage with more of the map and mix up the meta without it we'd return to vast areas of the map never being travelled.

Similarly without integration between the PMBs and the Lattice no one would build and you have the same effect.
Therefore you need integrated construction. We just need some common sense tweaks to prevent it from being too obnoxious, I've suggested a series of them any combination of which could serve to reduce the ROF issue.

And thats the problem. First of all i have to draw forces out of a fight, which is not always possible. Then i have to drop them with a Gal, because getting tanks their is not always possible due to landscape/enemy positions etc. And then you suggest i build a base to counter a base that is threatening a lattice base. This doesnt fit for me. Especially not when counting in how long it take to take the base down and how much ppl i need to take it down vs how much ppl where needed to build it. Its like suggesting players to get a tank to counter a tank because explosives stopped working.

There are some good points. Still the map doesnt always support it and thats a huge issue.

If the rate at which strikes could be called down was greatly reduced I'd be more inclined to accept it, but I don't think I'll ever like it personally.

I don't really it'd be too hard to sneak in, especially as a stalker or with an ESF or Gal/Valk drop. HE tanks aren't exactly the pinnacle of balance either if you ask me. They're due a visit from the nerf fairy, but that's neither here nor there.

Love me some frags! But as a displacement tool they cannot compare to an OS. A grenade might only force a single target to move as little as two meters over, maybe more, maybe not at all. An OS has no gray area.

Heh. Well technically from my position the issue still remains regardless of the fire time. As I said above, it would be less bad but I still wouldn't like it. If ever given the chance I'd change it despite any and all other changes. That is to say the core issue persists.

In my mind there still is only one true solution, increasing fire times merely dampens the problem.

I come from the land of Miller, where the randos are dumb and the tryhards are cheesy. Can't say I've ever fired a dart myself (because RIP cert wallet and also I hate PMB and everything about them), but I've read some people bragging about 50+ kills in /yell. Also lots of complains about friendly fire from whatever side fired it. Obviously I can't really say how accurate they are, but people have made the claims.

Hard to say how many are directly responsible, but the potential for as many kills as there are players does exist.

I don't agree. No superweaons should ever exist in a competitive multiplayer game where every character is controlled by a player. Getting obliterated just isn't any fun at all.

Construction has been a black sheep since it was added, I really don't think it has a proper place. As for the map, well, it's the empty space that makes the bowl useful.



I'll take this opportunity to address my opinion on setting others to "ignore."

If someone is just chumming the water to see what bites, by all means blacklist their wasted space. But it is intellectually cowardly and dishonest to block someone just because they have a dissenting opinion. The entire purpose of discussion is to challenge our beliefs and grow as individuals. Hiding from ideas we dislike is childish. Thinking done by fools.

To be blunt, I find it both pathetic and disgusting to block all thoughts and ideas one does not appreciate or agree with.

With a serious nerf to the ANT boost I think the issue of impossible to reach bases would become almost non-existent. I never use the boost and I don't think I've found a spot yet that isn't at least partially accessible to armour.

Honestly, if it's undefended (eg. a lone builder is away getting cortium or trying to fir the OS a single person in a harasser can destroy a base quite quickly. Two in a harasser or MBT can overrun a lone defender, those same two with 5-10 minutes effort can Trow up Flail + Glaive site and waste any base within minutes defended or not.

I grant that's not appealing to every player but when you're talking about 96-96 fights if your faction can't spare 2-4 guys to set up some Flail and Glaive support then they deserve to get hit by the OS.

This counter becomes particularly potent if the three-part OS is used as it can be built faster with fewer people and still lay waste to any base.

Since you seem to be willing to engage in a properly considered discussion I was wondering if you'd care to give your opinion on my proposed methods of balancing the OS?

More strawmen? Really, OK Cpt Fallacy let's try to explain the difference. (Very, very slowly...)

A tank Is destroyed easily by a single LA or heavy, (hell I can do it with a freaking fury flash)
An OS relay base IS NOT.

A tank is limited to the outside walls of a base, there are a few exceptions without walls, or some with hills nearby.
But generally if you're fighting in the base, tanks aren't an issue.
OS murders everyone in the base, even if they removed it's indoor effects entirely it'll still murder the defenders heading from the spawnroom and the attackers heading from their sundies.

A tank needs to aim at an enemy, fire and then has a high chance of missing if it's infantry.
As said previously, OS nukes everyone, friend and ally in a colossal radius.

Stop setting up this "you're trying to ban tanks!" Strawman BS.
One guy clicking his fingers to end all life in a base in not the same as a mother ducking tank.

It's a terrible change and the only ones who could possibly enjoy it or defend it are the one abusing it.
I suspect you are one of those abusers, and simply can't fathom why anyone would have an issue
with clicking once and getting 60 kills and a whole platoon of TKs...but hey its just like a tank right?

Of course.
Though I don't know which post of yours to reference as the guide for the details.
-- a TLR; I love the Group-Requirement, and have at the end, a theoretical 'solution' to 'OS spam'

I assume it's the Ant-Boost nerf is part of it? , to reduce the ease of supplying hard-to-reach locations.
Which in theory, is something, but if you shelve multiple Ant's, or have more than 1 OS, it is likely not notice-able.
Though, it's in a practical direction.


Additional Cortium Cost, is addressed by the sheer capacity of Ants, Silo's, and the sheer tedium of collecting the rock.
The targets can't see it nor can notice the difference, let alone with multiple OSC, and it just adds to the pain of using the OSC as a Builder.
(And the thing costs a lot already)
Though maybe it could be worked with? Mind you, PMB's are also presently suffering from a SEVERE drain increase right now.


Construction time only adds pain to the Builders.
If an enemy can find or intercept the OSC during construction, they were equipped to kill it while it was completed.
Aka it just lengths the period of just getting started with the OSC, which is mostly just painful on the Players building it.

I love this Multi-person construct idea.
This means, by nature, it doesn't stop tactical use by coordinated groups, but it stops joe-blow from single-handily having a weapon of sheer power, being able to nuke a PMB or Lattice-base as a lone stalker.
This means, that to use it, You actually have to have some coordination.
Which means, it's less a sololist's mass-killing tool to the victims, and more a Tool of the Squads & Platoons for engaging fortifications & clusters of opponents.

Warning duration, adds to the problems facing an OSC unit, in practical use.
As then the target has essentially enough time to walk out if it could in the first place, the blast radius
Which means any target area that people flee from, would essentially never actually land hits or kills.
While any target, like say the external Control-points of a Lattice, critical chokepoint or an area surrounded by hostiles, would notice no difference.



My own concept, though I myself haven't used the very impractical OS much let alone after the changes:
Perhaps, a slight interference on a lattice-base hit, that prevents targeting for the cooldown of the original OSC that hit it?
I don't mean, a prevention of hitting the lattice at all, but a Cooldown on strikes hitting that area, mirroring the OSC's Cooldown (specific to the OS fired, so the cooldown matches, or some nature), this would allow the full power of the OSC, and only be notice-able when fielding numerous OSC's, for firing on the same lattice base.

Pair that with that glorious Group-Construct, and then you have a Team-weapon, that can't be as easily spammed, making it less 'annoying' to the targets, while not costing the thing any more practical capabilities.
After all, damn thing needs a base nearly to run, and charges up, warns the enemy about existing, and then warns when firing.

Ok can someone give me a TL;DR of the arguments above pros and cons? I have work in like 20 minutes and I'd like to read this on break.

You would change the whole vehicle to do this. I would preffer otehr solutions, like a map overlay that marks spots that are not allowed to be build on (like hossin mountain tops).

The problem i have with this is that its always the same 3-4 guys that have to do it because the majority complains but doesnt do anything. PS2 is more like a single player experiance right now where everyone fights for themselfes.