Lattice System is game breaking

or how pro-hex people cant understand why its the right choice to go lattice in this game. its like trying to have a discussion with a liberal.

As a lone wolf, I make my own happiness. It is my job to make me happy if I deviate from the prescribed "massive combat" method. But I know that I sure as hell enjoy taking a small group of people and making a large impact on these new, large, sometimes immobile lattice battles.

Wut?
Definitely feels like the other way around, with people using the terms interchangeably.

Here's a quick help cheat sheat:
tactics
strategy
zerg

>OH NO DA LIBRALS R TRYIN TO STEAL OUR GUNS.

In all honesty both systems have flaws. Lattice Prevents Ghostcapping in exchange for larger Zerg vs. Zerg Battles/Steamrollers.

Well said the OP.

Thats not all it does. Open your eyes and learn. The lattice is here to stay because it has improved the game greatly. It aint perfect yet and its got issues, but already its superior to the failed hex system

In your opinion. Plenty of people disagree.

Exactly. There is no reason to use them interchangeably unless you have no idea what they mean. I would think we were in agreement then.

lol...they kind of are.

More people disagree that the hex system is fun. Fine with me.

This thread is still alive? I could've sworn the OP was so bad that this thing would've died long ago.

Let's look at his cons:

Strategy is obsolete
Small squads are obsolete
Small outfits are obsolete
Scout units/squads are obsolete
Leader collaboration is reduced
spontaneous fights are gone
Low end computer players will find it harder to play
Zerg > squads/platoons


On strategy: Strategy is obsolete? Ghost capping is obsolete, you mean. You can't screw a Biolab and cap it with a squad and a half anymore by taking the forward base near the shield gen, and pop the shield and SCU gens before anyone knows you're there. That wasn't strategy. That was a simplistic formula to avoid an actual fight.

On small squads: Small squads can still do things. It just takes some tactical thinking. Protip: You can still go to bases you don't have an immediate link to. When the zerg is camping a spawn with their thumbs up their butt while waiting for their 300 points, go to the next base. You can stage your troops at there to ensure the op4 doesn't turtle up, and standby at the shields to blow them.

Yesterday, IR had half a squad. That's a small squad, right? Hell, IR isn't a particularly big outfit either (and seven guys online is functionally a very small outfit). We were pushing around Hvar. The zerg took a base directly next to a forward base for Hvar (I forget the names; might edit them later when I can see the map). Not waiting to get the measly 500 points for the cap, we move onto the forward base of Hvar. We can't pop the vehicle generator before the previous base flips, so we set up around the generator. Or MAXes suppress the spawn and I arm the generator the second the previous base flipped. Forty seconds later, we have a Sunderer and a tank zerg inside the walls. Easy as pie.

Our small squad "prepped" the base and turned the tide of that battle by keeping the momentum going for our faction. The only difference is that there defense was a little better and the fight more fun because they weren't completely screwed the moment we got there.

On leader collaboration: You can still collaborate and use both flanking and pincer movements. IR's aforementioned push on Hvar got 2 platoons worth of VS (minimum) to divert from the north, thereby allowing us to push onto Quartz Ridge. I'm not sure where you got the idea that collaboration doesn't work anymore.

On spontaneous fights: What does this even mean? If you're talking about fights not directly surrounding a base, I've had more of these in the past couple of days than I ever had previously. IR is a very mobile outfit; we often don't stay around to cap and allow the pubbies finish what we've started once victory is assured. We should've run into many of these spontaneous fights. Pre-lattice, we didn't.

Now? You're often fighting for every inch of ground in an attack (or defense). The funneling of players into a particular area combined with the new defensive bases means you actually have to push your way to the base. I've fought across terrain more in the past couple of days than I ever did.

On zerging: Planetside 2 is all about epic battles against hundreds of people. If you want some place where you can individually show off your xXleet360noscopezMLGproddubstepsmokeemifyougotem420Xx skills, this isn't your game. This game thrives on big battles, and the bigger the battle the better. That being said, small, tactically oriented outfits do have a large role to play in the game both pre- and post-lattice.

On Waterson, IR changes battles. XoO does it. TIW does it. Lots of outfits do it. The question is: why don't you do it? It's not the game's fault.

sigh....did u really have to relate this to politics?

Lattice has destroyed the game, end of story. There are limited tactics because you can't go past the enemy anymore. Its funnelled the cattle into the meat grinder and for the ******* that enjoy that congratulations. I play this game for the thinking involved in taking down the enemy from areas they do not expect. This is all but gone now because our 50 man outfit don't have enough guns to take out the 200 magriders driving down the 1 road. This is what Planetside 2 has become.

Somebody did before me but replace liberal with republican
I was taking a playful jab. The guy responded with another which was also humorous

If we had MORE breakdowns (A,B,C,D,E,F) where if a faction holds one point of 6 (Say like holding B - Bravo) they have access to the next adjacent point(s) further down. That way Outfit leaders can load up, fly over / around and drop behind enemy lines and start capping behind (albeit slower) and change the flow of the battles while keeping them within a reasonable distance. Not 20 hexes further into enemy territory.

Also, having more capping points on the bigger, more important areas would allow for tactics from smaller groups, especially if these point are slightly spread out so zergs actually have to split to keep up.

While were talking about more capture points for main areas, one of these could be underground.

How about another being a tower structure FOUR STORIES tall? Imagine 12 guys dropping on the roof from a Gal.

I'd like this.

Yes we were in agreement.
I was just stating that I observed that the people misunderstanding the terms were nearly always Lattice supporters.
Which makes sense. Since they don't see the difference, they cannot comprehend the loss in potential for the game.

And I talk about potential, because the hex system was not deep or strategic enough, but it had room for depth and evolution geared towards player driven content.

Let's campaign for the third system.

I whole heartily disagree with your every assessment and this system is going to only improve as they continue to build on it.

I hope you're being intentionally silly.

Lol, necro much?

But yeah, I agree with you. Generals or warchiefs have always fought for retribution.
Be it money(certs) glory(epeen) or their country/cause (an actual meta game please?)

The best way to improve the game is to engage players on those levels.
- Greed(certs) being the easiest.
- Glory has been announced with outfit capturable bases. Other suggestions like showing how long a base has been capped and by whom would fit the bill as well and may encourage more defenses.
- Cause can be addressed by increasing the depth of the strategy layer or adding more overarching win conditions. For instance with an improved hex with each territory having an intrinsic value, or an intercontinental hex system with multiple capturable warpgates.