Musical Continents - The Flaw with Three "Unique" Continents

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Lionel-Richie, Nov 23, 2012.

  1. Lionel-Richie

    This problem was occurring frequently towards the end of beta and really shows itself now:

    Musical Continents, as played by the three factions.

    What happens? A faction starts winning, maybe has a slight population advantage over the other two on Continent A. The other two factions (or large outfits within the factions), get annoyed with losing and say, "Guys, let's pack it up and head to Continent B/C. With this large exodus of players to another continent the population percentage goes BANANAS. For example, last night relatively even numbers turned into 63% NC and 13% TR on Amerish, and the TR had flooded to Esamir at 50%.

    This, so far, has really been the only way anyone has been able to capture a continent. Once the entire enemy team quits and takes their toys home with them there's not much in the way of a steamroll to the warpgate.

    The OVERALL needed solution is to link the dadgum continents. Turn Indar into the TR homeworld and make the Vanu and NC warpgates capturable WARPGATES that lead to either Esamir or Amerish. Do the same for the Vanu on Esamir and NC on Amerish. This keeps a nice front line like was had in PS1 (And yeah I had all the "this game isn't like PS1 wah wah wah" stuff, but the current system isn't working.)

    Until then, put a better cap on the percentage difference in population to prevent these mass exoduses from tanking the fun of this game.
  2. raw

    For a "homeworld" you need 7 continents at minimum
  3. CurrytheGreat

    The only solution I can see is being able to persistantly hold a continent (continent-locking). For this to work properly you need more continents though, since it's a three-way-push. The continent system now just seems like it was taken from Planetside 1 without consideration of having no continent-locking.

    Would be a ton of fun if there was a real persistant push you could make, not the shuffling back and forth cross the same maps as now. Sadly it requires a huge amount of effort to create new continents with the detail of the ones we have now.
  4. Lionel-Richie

    I don't see why you'd need 7 continents minimum. Sharing the continents like I said would just be a bigger scale version of what we currently have: three factions pushing at each other's uncappable bases on different fronts.

    It would just remove the "Let's swap to the other 'server' and try our luck" thing that continents are allowing.
  5. ted gillingby

    I hope a continent "front system" will be implemented
    right now we have 3 continents, so basically 3 fronts in which players can switch to whenever they please, which as you said causes the issues stated above
    now, imagine we have 6 continents, they all won't be connected to each other, maybe one or two other continents maximum (like a web of continents) in which your must personally travel from warp spawn A to warp spawn B in order to jump to the next continent, having to go across the map manually in order to do so without the aide of the current computer warp we have
    To put it into context, imagine Indar is entirely VS owned , to get to ersamir, they have to move from VS spawn to the TR spawn on map and go into the big circular warp gate to get to ersamir.


    empires will fight over these "front" continents in order to reach the next continent along the web, being unable to simply pack up their bags unless they go though all the "web" of other continents to reach their desired front if they think they are losing.
    How does this solve the problem? It basically means that empires who pack up bags will have to spend longer traversing to their other continents in order to reach the front they feel is easier to take, it also means that, by moving from front A just because it's hard, they may end up losing an entire segment of the Auraxis "web" making it strategically not viable to just contijump