Like Needles In My Eyes (1)

I really really support this, but it ain't gonna happen. I've never played PS1, but the more I see of it, the more I wish PS2 was like PS1. But look at how much this game has changed over the past year: indeed, zero. The only change is the redisigned continents with a lattice system, and that's exactly what you would have to redo (again) with this change. They are not gonna do that.

Anyway, letting those bases remain capturable just for the resources would sound fine to me (only with shorter cap timers maybe), but they should indeed remove the spawnpoints. Because there is no deathpenalty and infinite respawns, litteraly all this game is about is spawnpoints. Removing some of those things (they are logically weird things too, they have 1-way shields and why don't all bases have them) would have a very positive impact on the game.

My opinion (and again i dont know if anybody else has posted something similar/exact) is that the need to keep the little outposts, BUT remove about half and the rest need interesting terrain enhancements. For example:
Last night i was playing Congy and i experienced the spawn camping nightmare that yall are talking about. Hot-drop or spawn at camp, exit door, get killed by a VS heavy holding a Solstice or a MAX with Blueshifts, rinse and repeat. I hated it.
But earlier today i was in a similar environment doing something amazing. There was a battle for an outpost where my VS army met a Terran outpost and we ransacked the half of the base on the bottom, but on a nearby cliff there was the rest of the occupation force firing down on us. It created a rather Normandy-like environment where Infantry were storming the cliffs and jumping up them Skyim style, getting picked off by snipers, meanwhile Tanks and MAXes were fighting their way up the adjacent hill covered by heavies and MANA turrets. IT was amazing dodging bullets and counter-sniping cliff campers and each unfair death felt only like a chance to try a new strategy to take the hill.
So yea, take away the useless buildings but keep some that have interesting or tactical playability

Bump?

Now we're up to 30 minute cap timers for this to work. And the underpopped side would still be camped, for 30 minutes instead of 10 minutes, that should draw out the misery a little more.

Know what happens to 80% of players when they're over-popped, camped and getting farmed? They leave and go somewhere else, and they're usually gone from an area for over an hour. 30 minute cap or 10 minute cap, doesn't matter.

It gives the defending faction more time to organise themselves and bring the fight to the attackers properly.
None of the current capture timers allow this.
Therefore, a steamroll for several bases and the resources lost with them.

The only reason beeing, that i fear the defending side would not have enough time to rally a counter-attacking force to create the tug-of-war, and the attackers would reach the target facility in to time. Its just my theory tho, i dont know what would happen in practice. I just think it would be better to play it safe at first, and remove like half of the outposts and remove spawns from the remaining ones. These outposts would serve as artificial chokepoints to create battles.

Upvoted because on my server (Woodman) it will give huge advantage to my faction. We have the best organization and zerg management potential.

Nobody is going to sit at the warpgate or at a large outpost and wait for 10-20 minutes for a large enough zerg to take off, unless they are told to. I mean, even in biolab fights it is very hard to rally a crash team. Most of the randoms and smaller outfits will go in smaller groups, and more likely than not be overwhelmed by a truly huge zerg our famous VS outfit KOTV can muster.

Imagine 300 KOTV guys capping Allatum, and then rolling together to Peris. All at once. 100 tanks, dozens of sunderers. They will not have to split their platoons to capture smaller bases in strategic locations, they will just advance as a tide and roflstomp everything.

So, yes, remove those meddling small outposts. That'd be great experience.

I didn't read a whole lot of the thread but what I am kind of feeling is that the bases would still be there but there wouldn't be spawn points. You would have to "capture" the outposts along the way to the main bases by flipping the point and moving right along? Sounds pretty good to me, most small base fights are really boring and amount to spawn camping in every single fight. The only base that I can think of that doesn't follow this is Abandon NS offices and that is because of the dead space between Howling Pass and Abandon NS and Mao Southeast and Abandon NS. Those 2 links are the only real fights where a standoff can happen from what I have seen (assaults on small bases).

Actually those 2 smaller bases between say a tech plant and an amp station take about 20 minutes to cap, so it's pretty much the same thing as your 30 minute cap timer if you're speaking about 'delaying the zerg'.

This idea would change nothing.

Great idea



(secretbump)

Small outposts could be the reason for the infiltrator's existence. Terminals and generators that could be hacked to give an advantage to your zerg.

I'm beginning to think Indar is too dense too, especially for aircraft. The amount of flak overlap from base to base is quite silly.

I wouldn't remove as many bases as OP though.

BUMP. SLASH THE TRASH~!

This is not a bump,hi guise how r u doin

Mother of god bump

Not sure if mentioned but it would make sense to have choke points such as Scarred Mesa, Quartz Ridge, The Crown, Crossroads, etc. on the Lattice as well.

Higby plz

Just from looking at it, fighting like how OP said on Hossin is going to be intense.

This is not Planetside 1.

I like the many different bases and their different build.
What I dont like a movies I have seen dozens of time.
Or painfully boring Zergs slapping each other in the face inefficiently.
Like what I see this days between Crossroads and Regent Rock with the TR.

Yeah it sucks that there is no deathpenalty. Everything else is ok tough.