[Suggestion] remove redeploy

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by FN202, Mar 30, 2017.

  1. FN202

    Hi all,

    I want to thank DBG for keeping PS2 going and continuing to improve the game. There are a lot of people who really like the game and if it wasn't for my outfit returning to play it I would not have reinstalled and bought a subscription. When I play solo and attack an outpost with other random players we are able to contest the base half way. After that though, it seems like the entire enemy faction suddenly appears and we get pushed out.

    It's a quiet, enjoyable, manageably paced 5v5 for an outpost and then suddenly it turns into an 16v32 right when you think you can win it. Then after that it goes back to 5v5... then suddenly back to 16v32. The pattern just goes on and on. If they had to use transportation in order to get there and get to other places I feel like it would make the ramp up from 5v5 to 16v32 more manageable. It would make winning an outpost feel possible.

    When I play cooperatively with the objective of capturing a continent or winning victory points I hardly ever have to get into a bus or a dropship in order to defend a base. We all just redeploy to the area, retake the point in a minute and redeploy back to the base on the other side of the map that we were just at. If it wasn't so convenient to redeploy to a base and walk 50-100m or so and recap a point, it would have the potential of being interesting, unexpected, fun. Unfortunately as it is, defending just feels like a grind.

    Removing redeploy would add the potential for combat over currently irrelevant spaces. It would encourage cohesion and teamplay by rewarding players for transportation. While it would foster lots of engaging and fun emergent gameplay scenarios that I think would be beneficial for the game, theres one special reason I would love for it to be gone. This special reason is often controversial and discounted but it's the biggest one for me:

    it gives the game a tempo. It gives it much needed lulls, and I mean that in both literal and figurative ways simultaneously.

    I really appreciate your taking the time to read my suggestion. Thank you for your consideration.
    • Up x 3
  2. Diilicious

    Dont need to remove it, 100 Nanites per lattice link to redeploy would be a better middle ground.
    • Up x 1
  3. Exitus Acta Probat

    If they add a aircraft equivalent of the flash, like a ultralight
    • Up x 1
  4. Rhello

    Redeploy should cost nanites, and have a cooldown after the second time you use it within 15mins. Transport vehicles are almost useless compared to what they should be, and the flow of battle is just destroyed, especially when you're capping a base with around 12 people, and then 50 people suddently spawn in, leaving you no chance of having an effect whatsoever.
    • Up x 1
  5. Yessme

    example. if you have no resi, and no redeploy, but your faction is Close to enemy WG and try to push.
    how, you will Support your faction?????? you jump in the Fight, or spawn vihecle, and die in 5 sec, or mines get you, or you drive with sundy for Support, and some harraser kills you.
    What you Thing People do, if they dit that 20 times in the Week?
    yep they Stop playing.

    sure, free kills for the skyknights , nice idea

    We don`t Need less Population, and we don`t Need gohstcapping, we Need spawnrooms, but less TTK, 1 Headshot with any Weapong = kill.
    reduce TTK from 12 bullets to 5 on distance, Close range from 7 to 3.
    Faster Vihecle kills, with rocketlauncher( max 2 shoots ) but 1 rocket should cost 50 nanites,
    more balanced maintanks, not 1 OP(Vang) tank und 1 harraser (maggy)
    this wold be good ideas

    that wold be a good idea
  6. OldMaster80

    You spawn an ESF, and get to other side of the map in less than 1 minute. Tell the SL to drop a spawn beacon and use the drop pod.

    Redeploy is ********, it has always been and should have never been introduced.
    You want to stick with your team? Great: use VOIP and coordinate. Tell the drivers to wait for you.

    Current game system are simplified nonsense to appeal the COD masses. Planetside used to be different.
    And still Redeploy is biggest killer of strategy in the game. They talk about "Combined arms initiative" when everyone has a free teleporter....that's ridiculous.

    If they don't plan to remove it, they should at least make it cost resources.
    • Up x 2
  7. LordKrelas

    The transport vehicles are, Sunderer and Valk.
    The first is a AMS, the second has squad-spawn.

    And if the situation is the reverse, same problem.
    But of course, attackers can engage a base that has under 12 people, with 50 people in one instant by aircraft first.
    The Defenders have to be reactive.

    If it costed nanites, in order to spawn a vehicle, and be unable to use it more than twice in a half hour, or 4 times in an hour...
    You'd have to mystically travel grand distances, with less nanites praying a Lib doesn't fly over and kill you in a second.

    300 nanites to get past the warp-gating links.
    Heaven forbid you need to react fast as well. Or want a quick fight.
    Or aren't ready to die to aircraft, just trying to get to a fight, to have no nanites to use.

    And by having to use transport, I take it you mean every single solider has to travel the entire distance from the warp gate, just to reach a fight: most of which takes longer than cap times, for anything, unless flying.

    A squad flying a Galaxy or a couple of ESFs could reach the farthest enemy base, and defend it easily from any defenders that managed the distance, if they even picked the right base.

    You like literally having to fly every time you play, just for an infantry brawl?
    If you want to have a spawn point, you drive a sundy from that base to the next base.
    Forcing everyone to drive miles for anything, just since you don't drive, is a bit loony.

    How does it exactly?
    Aircraft flies over.
    Liberator stalks the only path, destroying the vehicles, whom must wait for nanites, and pray aircraft don't attack again.
    By the time two opposing forces meet, they'd likely either be near a base, or the side with more wins out.
    As the opponent can't get reinforcements, unless allies happened to use the same road, at the right time, and before they are destroyed.

    Defend base, clean up, attack opposing base, repeat.
    Attack opposing base, defend, clean up, attack opposing base, repeat.
    Or Re-deploy to achieve this elsewhere.: And You aren't literally stuck in a far flung base bored to death, if the enemy leaves.

    Your tempo is:
    Travel from wherever the hell the game sends you on login, drive, drive, drive, defend against attack or attack base, pray for allies.
    Pray your login spot has air terminal if not drive to one, fly, land at base to defend or attack, pray for allies.
    Whomever has the most numbers, retains numbers.
    Pray the enemy doesn't log out, or leave, or start from stage 1 again.

    Pray you aren't NC, for slowest tanks as well.
    • Up x 1
  8. TriumphOfMan

    Your entire stupid post can be refuted by the following:

    "Join an outfit or a public platoon and play the team based game with a team, stop trying to be a lone wolf ******."
  9. Fennel

    The past few days I've been actively avoiding using redeploy when trying to go to one fight to the next. It's more rewarding to me, personally, to just hop into my certed sunderer or just get a flash and jet along the front looking for places that need more people.

    Speaking of which, redeploy makes the Flash kinda obsolete, doesn't it? It's only 50 nanites, so it's priced to be an easy mode of transport from one base to the next, but it's essentially useless for such a price if you're just going to be able to teleport across the continent in ten seconds.
    • Up x 1
  10. Falloutdc

    I think redeploy should be limited too . Eighter by ressource cost and/or a timer based cooldown.
    • Up x 1
  11. JonnyBlue

    This is a mad idea truly insane as a pure infantryman I die a lot so redeploy to me is a lifesaver , What would happen with a lack of medics or if a zerg turns up do you really expect to die and run 700-800 meters to fight again , I get the hint from your post op you play in squad a lot and to me your idea of losing redeploy is because any decent squad players would benefit more than solo players , Normally if a squad drops onto the base its empty of defenders so taking a base would be a lot easier as you more organised and actually have medics in your squad.

    Also redeploy helps outnumbered factions , Can you imagine VS without redeploy they would lose all territory on Millar in a matter of minutes , Nope Redeploy needs to stay sorry I don't play squad of very rarely and I would imagine maybe 60-70% of the player base don't either

    • Up x 1
  12. OldMaster80

    Instead of Redeploy we should have blinking markers on bases under attack telling "reinforcements nedded" so players could know where they are needed.

    Helping players to react quickly is one thing. Having a free teleporter is just a simplification that dilutes the countless tactical opportunities offered by the ope. World maps.
  13. Nuggz

    The Redeploy option usually doesn't give me the option to spawn where I want anyway. Even when I am only a couple hexes away I sometimes still cannot spawn directly to where I want. I don't know what platoons you're rolling in but the ones I'm in CONSTANTLY pull galaxies and sundies and we ride to the next battle. Very rarely do I just spawn directly to the next fight...
    From my experience you are GROSSLY overstating this mechanic...

    We don't need to start adding or removing game mechanics to make 5v5 (aka a near ghost cap) more of a thing... If you want a 5v5 you're in the wrong game and should go try CoD or something...
    • Up x 4
  14. LordKrelas

    That is what we have presently.

    Our "Free teleporter" has a cost of time. Beyond a sunderer, it takes less time to get to a base than to teleport.
    As well, unless you fly, and aren't intercepted by the attacker's aircraft, is more time than the base cap time.
    Which gets worse, the further out the base is.

    Defenders are reactive; Unless you mystically can predict which base will be attacked by what size of force, you are basically working with Luck.

    The attacker, or rather the first attacker, just has to pick a target, and can attack, with advanced knowledge of allied numbers, the base layout, followed by knowing when the Defense will be able to readily see the attack, how long they need to hold, and how long it takes for the defense to get there.

    Defenders never have time on their side.
    When it comes to population as well, it becomes even worse, given that the underpopped side is even more unlikely to be on the offense, and with that follows a reactive-play.
    Which is compounded by the attacker's advantage in a tactical sense, not including any pop advantage or the base's inferior use for defenders.

    Not to mention, that is just makes it even harsher for a defense to arrive, and the attackers to re-rout.
    Since if they have the numbers, it gets even easier to do this, putting the defense on a constant bore.
    IE having to travel grand distances, just for a retreating enemy, until the enemy finds a spot to farm the ever living **** out of them.

    Like dear lord.
    Consider that allies or hostiles can arrive without it taking longer than a base cap time, and not needing to air-drop which is easily blocked, Is a tactical element.
    You can not simply swarm a limited amount of defenders with an easily considered unlimited number of attackers.
    You need tactics to overcome this mutual capability.
  15. Insignus

    75 Nanite Hang-glider with smoke launchers and a turbo. No other power source. You run out of Turbo juice, you're gliding to the ground. You're completely exposed, like on a flash.
  16. adamts01

    You're confusing re-deploy with re-spawn, big difference there.
  17. JonnyBlue

    Must be my age....:p
  18. zaspacer

    Planetside 2 should have launched as 2 games:
    1) a Guild based logistics simulator
    2) a Faction based Instant action, fast paced, meat grinder brawl

    Because the two groups have been crying to get the version they prefer since launch, and to squash the other version from existence.

    You would prefer #1. I would prefer #2. It would be great if we could just log on to different games and both get what we want.
  19. adamts01

    It's all boring specifics, but very important to distinguish in this case. Re-deploy is what mostly big groups do to quickly move platoon sized forces around the map from fight to fight. Re-spawn is getting immediately back in the fight when you die. I think the game could use a slight re-spawn penalty, but not much, and OP isn't suggesting changing that. Re-deploy on the other hand needs to be severely restricted.
  20. adamts01

    I think PS2 is in a unique position to make most people happy. Let the nerds handle logistics while the CoD kids act as pawns. At this point that's the only option, as dumbed down infantryside hasn't been working. And look at the numbers from construction release, which I thought was a great move, you can play base builder and harvester if you want but you'll never be required to. I suggested a que that players can join for a 12v12v12 infantry fight at a random base on the map, shielded off from interference. You get a message when it's your turn and warp to the fight or wait for the next one. It would appeal to competitive infantryside players and could be made to have very little impact on the rest of the game. They could even do the same with 8v8v8 tank or air fights in a shielded off area of the map. I think there are some ways to create a little niche for any type of player in the game.
    • Up x 1

Share This Page