Two-part thread. The first outlines the problem and a quick why-it-is. The second outlines the causes of the problem, and things that could be done to fix it. The objective: make it possible to crack the zerg through strategic play, and make sure the strategic play is presented in a way that makes it available to players who aren't in the top-tier military discipline outfits. The Problem: I see it is most of PS2's strategy has been designed with the following caveats: 1. PS2 should not have battles that drag on for hours and hours over a single point 2. We haven't really got a final resource system in place. Supply lines are pretty meaningless. 3. We haven't really got a lock-out system in place. The only denial mechanic in existence stops the spawning of MBTs (only), which are such a minor aspect of a PS2 force that a vehicle terminal not advertising MBTs feels more like a bug than a feature. Point 1 is reasonable: we want a sense of progression in the game, rather than a sense of futility. Even if the progression is backwards. However, because of points 2 and 3, the way point 1 is achieved is to remove anything resembling a force multiplier for bases. This means that fights are determined pretty much exclusively by numbers - which in turn means people will typically flock to the best friendly : enemy ratio that provides xp. Under Hex, that was an empty base that could be capped. Under Lattice, that's the place your zerg is and ideally their zerg isn't. Also, because of the interplay of points 1, 2 and 3 - force multipliers by terrain are kept low. This means bases tend to be deathtraps for defenders - and there is a general trend to try avoiding making bases too tough in case they end up breaking point 1. Thus most fights are determined not by who has the best strategy, but by who has the most numbers. What Should Change : Bases * Bases and chokepoints need to be good force multipliers. Much better than they are now. * Bases need to have more layered defenses. A base should not go from 'defenders on the walls!' to 'defenders confined to the spawn room!' This means things like anti-infantry turrets, pain fields, etc. within the base and not just on the walls. * Bases should require either overwhelming force or strategy to crack. * Bases should be siege-able. This means supply (coming soon, I believe) and being able to starve out a base by holding the siege lines for 30-40 mins. What this does is allows a small force to effectively stall a larger force long enough for friendlies to deploy and drive back the attackers. It means the attackers need to consider ways to shut down the defender's supply lines and cut off their reinforcements coming in from outside, rather than just zerging the walls and camping the spawn. What Should Change : Map Non-base chokepoints need to be much more visible on the map. Rather than simply the 'lattice lines of approach', there needs to be very clear and obvious delineation of traversible vs. non-traversible terrain. Show us where the walls are, show us where the passes are. Let someone relatively new to the game (or to that continent) be able to look at the map and at a glance say 'they have to come through here, we can set up here.' Right now the maps are not easy to read, and the only people who use terrain outside the bases effectively are those who know the continents well. If a zergling could look at a map and clearly see 'I can't go from here to there easily' it provides more flow than the current hard-lines and less confusion than the hex system did. What Should Change : Supply Lines Supply lines are meaningless. Even with the upcoming changes to resources the supply-game looks like it is supposed to happen in close proximity to the base being attacked, and thus the zerg. This means that severed supplies has to have real, immediate and really obvious effect. For example, an unlinked base cannot spawn MBTs, Sunderers or aircraft of any kind. That would force a response. Any existing vehicles would obviously still be present. To make the counter-play fun (and not turn it into a ghost-cap game), line-cutting needs to be more involved than pressing E and waiting for 45 seconds. Severing a link and keeping it severed should require the covert ops person/team to stay at the base and 'keep things down' - ensuring the auto-repair systems don't let the base come back online. This means to have anything beyond negligible effect they need to stay at the point of sabotage, meaning the now-annoyed faction with the severed link can send people to dislodge the saboteurs - and meaning the saboteurs can put out a welcome-committee for the inevitable response.
