Planetside 2 Underground Bases...why we need them.

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Harry Beavers, Dec 14, 2012.

  1. ScrapyardBob

    A lot of the existing bases would be improved if:

    - There were more walkways or roof sections between buildings, providing cover from air assault.

    - More sight lines were obscured by walls or those curved wall sections so you can't fire straight into a control room.

    - More tunnel sections running between buildings.

    - More views out of spawn rooms besides the two doorways. Give us view slits which we can use to fire weapons out of.

    - Amp station walls need to have far higher walls on the outside that then allow infantry to move along the walkways.
    • Up x 2
  2. LadyE

    There is already too much real estate to defend and the mechanics of the game does not really support underground additions.

    What we really need is to limit the abundance of airpower spamming and to provide more cover from airpower for bases in general.

    Airpower should be useful for destroying armor on the ground and mass troop buildups. It should not be that useful for hovering over a base and raining hell down to defenseless players trying to respawn.

    I suggest adding FUEL to the game for all vehicles. Run out of Fuel flying and you crash. Run of Fuel driving and you have a vehicle that gets abandoned. Add FUEL delivery to Sunder so it can provide gas to the war machine.

    Fuel will force the endless hovering of a Lib to eventually end, because of the need to refuel. Very helpful.
  3. Sebyos

    My god yes YES YES. Infantry map please we would love it.
  4. Arcanum

    Irrelevant. We already have a bunch of new continents coming, all of them tied to the server pop cap. Server, not continent.
    How?
  5. Arcanum

    IMO they should make a smaller continent that's just a huge closed facility split up into smaller facilities connected by a tunnel network.
    I have an idea for such a continent.

    The purpose of ground vehicles there would be mainly ensuring infantry's passage on the tunnel system and ensuring entrances to facilities aren't camped. There would only be AI turrets. Spawn rooms would be sparse and placed away from the fighting. It would give you big discounts on all resources and capture timers would be unusually long and independent of adjacent maps.

    Air's purpose would be mainly transport(and guarding the transport) to special high up roof entrances and defending select few structures that can't be normally reached by ground troops and can't simply be zerged, kind of like the towers we have now but without any ground access points and more complicated to get in. I don't know what benefit the structures would be, maybe generators, but that's already something that would encourage more or less pure ESF vs ESF fights.

    Of course, this idea kind of makes liberators useless as there would be nothing to bomb and no one rolls them to hunt ESFs and they would hurt ESF vs ESF gameplay anyway. But that could be fixed somehow. The simplest way is making it so you can't spawn them on that map. But there should be other ways. I won't be giving this idea much thought, if someone likes this they can add to it(though there's no point as SOE is never going to do something like this if we look at the history of PS2 maps, I don't know why I typed this).
    • Up x 1
  6. tjalfe

    yes would be awesome
  7. tjalfe

    yes this would be an awesome addision to the warfare ^^
  8. MasterCheef

    i dont get it. i thought the fun in this game over the other was the large open combat. I honestly dont see why anyone would want to make this a corridor shooter. other games do that and do it MUCh better.
    • Up x 1
  9. Arcanum

    You'd still have places for "open combat".
  10. Eleo

    no no no no this no that everytime someone propose a feature, sometime interesting, sometime less, you always have that crowd of people to tell you no, no because they didnt like it in **** knows other games or just because they dont see the point (?????)

    When i read this forum its like we should stick with what PS2 is right now forever and god know how boring it is right now heck yet PS1 had it right yes because all we need is yet another ******* horn.

    no no no lets not bring diversity on the gameplay because my grand pa was having fun playing pong
  11. foam

    I read a dev interview where they said caves or extensive interiors wont be reality. The devs are following an extremely narrow cookie-cutter design in levels and it's boring.

    They could do so much with interior bases and other creative ideas but no doubt they'll prove once again mediocrity is their specialty.
  12. Arcanum

    Not ever? What's their justification?
  13. serenekaos

    The caverns weren't the problem with that expansion in PS1.....it was the BFR's that came with them.
  14. Rivenshield

    I endorse all of this. With ecstasy.
  15. Appendix

    /signed -- anything that gives more options for infantry only combat is A-OK in my book. I do love the open world and the possibility for large scale vehicle combat, just wish there were a few more options for infantry-only fights for those of us who like that sort of thing.
  16. Tol_

    I'm all for this if the underground area isn't too vast.

    All you need is a choke point to keep the tanks and libs out. Sounds like a perfect place for generators as well. Give some access from the defender's spawn building or something as well. Definitely has potential and makes more sense than the current setup of the large bases.
  17. Chubzdoomer

    Ain't that the truth.
  18. Tuco

    Hey I have an idea. How about 1 server with only infantry, 1 server with only tanks, 1 server with only air.



    How about fixing the game instead of trying to cover up shortcomings.
  19. Arcanum

    If areas with infantry only combat weren't supposed to exist then why do we have biolabs?
  20. Hellspawn

    Hmmm if I remember from the beta forums its not possible for them to do basements and such because of limitations in the game engine.