Lattice: Bring back the ANT!

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Alexanor, May 31, 2013.

  1. Alexanor

    Please, bring back the ANT. It will help the Lattice system drastically, it will add another level of depth and strategy to the game, and it will make all of us old-schooler PS1 players happy.

    That is all.
    • Up x 3
  2. Seranov

    I played PS1 for all of like two days in 2005.

    What's an ANT?
  3. Alexanor

    Basically, every base (major base) has a power supply. Spawning vehicles, infantry, self-repairing turrets, etc. would drain the power of the base so that when it hit 0%, it would flip to Neutral and nobody would own it (nobody would be able to spawn there, use any equipment, etc). In order to repower the base, someone had to drive an ANT vehicle to a warpgate, deploy it, fill up the gauge, and drive it back to the base and deploy it again to repower it.

    Basically, it helped to prevent huge turtles for hours and hours on end, like what happens on Indar now.
  4. Vesper

    Advanced Nanite Transport? iirc. Basically, it would serve to resupply bases with NTU's otherwise the base goes neutral and anyone can place a hack into it. So you could either run bases dry that are well beyond enemy lines and try and take it that way, or perhaps the fight has been going on for 2 hours and the base either runs out or they get a clutch resupply and continue on.
  5. Alexanor

    That's just it -- it makes it so if you're fighting at a base for two hours (which happens consistently in Indar) then the base flips and it's very unlikely that you can continue defending it.
  6. FateJH

    Sounds a little pointless in the short run but exceptionally constricting in the long run.
  7. Dramma Lamma

    Yes, dear god yes PS2 needs the ANT.

    This is another one of those things that I was astonished to see were not in beta or release (tech-plant / amp-station underground tunnels i'm looking at you)

    No neutral bases is stupid, just zerg for hours with no other care in the world.

    Give us the lodestar while your at it too please.

    Like the lattice itself this is something people can't truly understand how important it is without having played it a lot and felt its impact. If you never played PS1 extensively don't expect us to be able to make you understand the idea in its entirety.
  8. MilitiaMan

    Honestly, ANTs would put a cap on your ability to farm a base such as a Biolab unless they coordinate to get an ANT in the base.
  9. Dramma Lamma

    You say that like its a bad thing.........

    Sure farming is cool and all, but hours and hours on end of zero change is boring.

    That's what the ANT did so damn well, it broke up the extremely tedious battles by forcing people to change before the base went neutral.
  10. Ronin Oni

    Lodestar was that big carryall flying transport that would move any ground vehicle right?

    If they make ANT's...

    Lodestars would be mandatory

    This would also make the air game far more air 2 air focused as these targets would be crucial to protecting or stopping
  11. Littleman


    Coincidentally, that was the purpose of the ANT. To give the defending team that sense of urgency to push the hell out instead of stacking up at the entry ways and waiting for the enemy to march in front of their sights. An empire can dump their entire army into a single territory and hold it indefinitely, or at least until the server crashes. The ANT/NTU mechanics would prevent simple holds and demand actions be taken to break a siege.

    Take the infamous Scarred Mesa Skydock for example. It can stay designed exactly the way it is with an NTU silo at it's base, and it will no longer be a solid plan to just sit up on top and repel hostile after hostile. They will be forced to come down and secure the perimeter and the supply routes to keep the outpost.

    This one little addition to every facility can have a HUGE impact on the way battles play out. I'd say facilities should only really drain if they're on the front line. It'd be way too tedious to have to worry about EVERY facility at all times.

    I'm for the implementation of ANTs and NTUs. It encourages the right behaviors in forcing a defense force to fully repel an assault or lose the facility. The offense will always try to cap the point because it's faster than waiting for the facility to go neutral.
  12. Talshere


    No. Dont kid yourself, making ANT runs to uncontested bases simply so you didnt lose lattice was the most boring *** **** in the game.
  13. BigMacDeez

    In PS1 you were able to put a small vehicle in the back of a Galaxy. I was surprised to hear that this function didn't make a comeback.
  14. OrbitalNZ

    If we had the ANT back i would like it to be a galaxy module. You would lose your ability to transport players (but keep gunners?) and it would have to hover/dock and a pylon for 10-20 seconds to deposit its payload.

    Main reason being is that driving basically a minivan across the map would not be fun.

    Also a ANT explosion needs to be big! (or radioactive)
  15. Littleman


    I think it's jarring enough that we don't see people visually boarding vehicles already. Imagine how jarring it would be for a lightning to roll up to a galaxy and hit... er... "the enter galaxy key" (it would have to be different key... right?)
  16. Alexanor

    The ANT is archaic, but the power system truly adds a level of depth that this game needs. While I don't disagree with the fact that powering bases not being currently fought at was annoying, it certainly beats the whole "ghost cap" mechanic that is currently in place.
  17. Vashyo

    Yup, I do want our lil ant back. It adds a new layer of strategy in the game.

    I understand SOE originally didnt want ant cause they think it is too tedious for the game but I completely disagree, it's just another thing to do for a player that isn't confident in shooting and it will make people who want more strategy/tactics in the game.


    Also ant means u cant camp inside a base, if the enemy drains it out of energy you lose the base.
  18. NikkoJT

    ANT is exactly what we need. I've said it before and I'll say it again: lattice is too constrictive without the additional tactical freedom the ANT system would provide, and should not be deployed without it.

    ANT would:
    Give freedom to attackers to decide how they want to capture a base
    Create rolling battles between bases, making use of the interesting terrain features that rarely get seen at present
    Give small squads something to do with a result they can see on the map (this already exists in hex, but lattice limits it considerably)
    Give the opportunity for long sieges to be broken from either side

    All things that are desperately needed in the lattice system and PS2 in general.



    One thing I'd like is for ANT vehicles to be drivable by either side, and have their drivers killed without destroying the vehicle. This gives the opportunity for an ANT convoy to be hijacked, or even used as a Trojan Horse.