Like Needles In My Eyes (1)

One Word. Genius.
Ive been playing for a while now and the game is fun but everyday I play a little less.
Why ? spawn camping. Its either me who gets camp or I camp and its boring. The best moment of this game is in the OPEN FIELDS. when you get to a base its automatic spawn camp. I want a big massive shooter and there is nothing else like PS2 but a dont see myself play for long if it continues like this. the thing is i dont like the other shooters on the market, I want BIG maps and hundreds of players killing each other. So lets pray, may OP be heard.

Exactly!

12-15 major facilitates on every map, a hand full of small outposts and only if they push the borders out.

I think that major outpost only would be boring. It could be much complexe and subtle. I'll make a bunch of other maps in a few days to show what I have in mind. I think massive bases and small outposts are complementary.

Also, expending the maps to the borders of the continent is a great idea, it could bring a lot to the game.

Keep bringing in more ideas to the thread! (And merry christmas)

Well I think part of that is because most of the outposts in game are copy cut paste, and the major facilities are somewhat lacking in size and strategic depth.

If improvements were made in those areas, then bases would not be boring anymore. This, mixed with more epic field fights would keep things from being stale.

I never thought about it like this, but this actually makes a lot of sense.

This would also make the Harasser and other transport vehicles a lot more useful and necessary (PS1 had lots of different transport vehicles).

Good hes got 4 more like more today,

MORE INTERESTING BASES. PLEASE. EVERY PILE OF CRATES LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME. EXACTLY. GIVE US DIFFERENT CRATES AND GUNS LEANING ON THEM. DIFFERENT WALLS. DIFFERENT FLOORS. DIFFERENT STAIRS. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BASES ARE THE NAMES. AND THOSE AREN'T THAT INTERESTING EITHER.

Maybe, with a few more caps, they might here you.

BY GOD. GENIUS. HEY HIGBINS. HEAR ME OUT. MORE BASE LAYOUTS. NOW.

This thread needs seriously needs to brought to the attention of the devs. We want massive, epic battles! I really like the layered approach. Open fields on the way, with more structures as you get closer to the center.

I cant agree more with the OP. Please make it happen dev team.

With resource delivery, you could essentially choose to make an outpost more valuable. Maybe some kind of leveling system. At level 1, it becomes a spawn point. At level 2, turrets become active. Level 3, you can pull vehicles... etc . Outposts closer to the main facilities would level up quick, while outposts further away would be much harder to reinforce. Once an outpost is flipped, all progress is reset.

Personally I'd like to see something along the lines of:

Major POI's (bio lab/tech plant/amp stations) all have contestable spawns with destructible spawn tube areas ala PS1 - along with intense internal rework and expansion to accommodate changes and create "a base" rather than just another prop collection of huts. The fragile nature of spawn for defenders is offset by the defense rework and increased difficulty for attackers.

Medium-large outposts (route cruxes) retain current spawn housings at select outposts (size wise J908/ Stronghold/Octagon/The Bastion/Auraxis Firearms Corp etc.)

Small outposts have spawns removed and replaced with game centric ideas along the lines of ANT silos/refining for the resource revamp. Along with a number of outposts either removed entirely from the map or from the lattice system and forever neutral but possibly still contestable to use as a forward base for vehicles etc.

I certainly agree with all the points the OP has made though - the devs would be fools not to toy with implementing to see the effects.

I'm going to clarify, btw, because I saw a bit of confusion about this.

When I said "open fields" I didn't necessarily mean an flat grassland. "Open" in just refers to any territory that isn't covered by buildings including forests, mountains, grasslands, deserts, etc.

*Sigh* Please just make an anti-PS2 website get get the **** off this website!

I can't up this enough!

Sir/Madam can I just **** you right here or will I need to take you out for dinner first cause you are amazing this is the best single freaking post on this entire damn forum look at all the upvotes sony/Game Devs listen to this guys for the love of god.

Sir/Madam I salute you and you amazing mind! this is everything I wanted from this game

My thoughts exactly, however i dont want to take a leap of faith and remove all the outposts in case it backfires, and just remove the spawn tubes from them instead as a start. You could only spawn in major facilities and maybe towers. You still need to fight for those small bases, but it wont be an attack-defend siege every single time, but a tug of war between 2 attacking forces each with their own vehicles and mobile spawns that they need to protect. No more spawncamping. The reason i want to leave some outposts is to throttle an advance of a zerg. If there wouldnt be any bases to capture then defenders would not have a chance to rally.

I know people on this thread are likely to scream at me but I will make these arguments anyway.
first I hate the spawn camp play it drives me nuts. If this were done and we were after the big facilities only I would love sneaking a sundie out and hiding it near the base and ghosting in as a infiltrator( still a favorit tackic for me but with this much more effective).

(problems) Population imbalance. zerg effect, lack of recon tools, lack of higher level platoon organizational tools,
these are the problems I see with taking out all the small bases.

population imbalance

While this is a bad argument it still stands putting all those little bases around and giving them timers gives the devs a ability to control how quickly players fight. When there is a massive population imbalance it takes hours to take all the bases from a even slightly skilled foe creating gameplay bad yes but game play non the less rather then having you sit out side warp gates and slog it out you slog it out across the map and even that is not really the case in some rather well known places.

the other interesting factor with population it that I have heard about is that the population of PS1 is much smaller then the pop of PS2. If this is definitely the case then one significant issue in building all the small base's would be spreading out population or in the case of the lattice links managing population. This as far as I can tell is to create a situation where you will not stress the servers unduly in only one or two locations. the problem they seem to be having to managing to do two things.
1 keep the fights happening and rolling along.
2 keep the fighting spread out enough the servers could handle it and the players computers as well. they were/are playing a balancing act with this where no one wins but especially not them with all the complaints that balance generates.

The Zerg effect
players follow one another toward the action and build larger and larger fights. this happens in real life and it happens here even more often while this is not a bad thing as it makes for large and interesting fights it creates the above problems for server use and for users. if you free up the space on the board so to speak the game would flow like war but would crash more often and still get stuck on the major bases and create massive fights with bigger processing problems.

Lack of recon tool and missing organizational tools for platoons ( especially cross language)

When you conduct a organized campaign which is what removing the little base's would mean you need three things
information on enemy targets
organization
logistics
but most of all communication to make all three of these things work
PS2 has very little effective ability to communicate target locations
some good ground work for organizational communication
and almost no logistical communications

the only thing you would have if this was implemented now would be a massive Zerg battle pushing in between bases causing huge lags less now after MFG but still a issue. in order to use tactics you need effective communication and that is not apparent. some small groups have it but the Vast majority do not and with out major overhaul to that system this would be a disaster.

I would love to see some good solutions to these problems and get into those field fights because I want to be in there fighting that way but I don't see it happening without these issues answered.

You basically described what PS1 gameplay was except for the capturable outposts. We didn't have those. Instead empires lined up to some "natural" structures such as a small hill or ridge or maybe an edge of a forest or a bridge - anything which provided enough cover. Then the actual battle was fought entirely based on the mobile spawns (AMS's in PS1 / Sunderers in PS2). The empire which managed to destroy enemy's spawns usually moved ahead and the battleline would form somewhere else between the bases until the enemy had to retreat into the base itself.

My question is, if you'd like to have the spawns removed from the outposts and allow similar gameplay then where do you need the capturable outposts for? I mean they would only force the empires to fight in certain small areas every 500 meters and waste time on waiting for the capture to finish. Yes, no more spawn camping, but it would still be as boring. I'd prefer the freedom of PS1 over that any day.