You are right, instead we should promote ghost capping because no one will ever come to defend a base. That is certainly in accordance to planetside's philosophy of huge battles right?
I dunno why...but I effing LOL'd. its so true. I'm always the only one flying around down those tunnels.....feels so lonely man. lol
Dumbing the game into oblivion.... FFS SOE... STOP JUST FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP TRYING TO MAKE A NEW GAME FROM YOUR CURRENT ONE BUILD UPON WHAT YOU ALREADY SET UP. Stop trying to make a totally new game, stop dumbing down, stop "revamping", stop trying to change what doesn't NEED CHANGING FFS. Taking away, IS NOT AN IMPROVEMENT. When will people learn that. Every game that TAKES AWAY...is doing nothing but ...taking...away...NOT ADDING anything new.
Safe bet... if the SCU is down... the spawn tunnels leading RIGHT NEXT TO IT are going to be guarded. You can still use them to go to the side buildings which are closer to the SCU than the spawn room as well as approach from another angle. the tunnels are AMAZING, I think the real problem is that most people don't even know they're there
Well that is true, but what about tech plants? And what about the tunnels that lead to the walls? No way of knowing even at the beginning of a fight, if those locations are being camped or not. The ones next to the SCU in the AMP station is just as bad if the SCU shields are down. You have a 50-50 chance of there being someone there, at that point. Don't get me wrong, the tunnels are a great system, it's just that it has room for improvement.
1 death and a 15 second respawn timer is a small price to pay to find out. Quit caring about deaths. Popup and see for yourself. If it's guarded, inform your faction via /re typically the small rooms to the side of the main building where you can pop up semi close to the main door gens are unguarded in my experience. The only ones that are ever guarded are the ones next to the SCU gen, and only after it's been armed or is destroyed.
1 dea th and 15 seconds... and 10 seconds to select a loadout, and a few more seconds to get to your location, a seconds to make up your mind.... So maybe 40 seconds, and then you die and 15 seconds again to respawn, and then you go through the whole thing again. Yeah, that is reasonable... in Bizzarro World! Seriously, you shouldn't care about death, but at the same time you shouldn't rely on 1 death to decide where to Go.
Just that, fully agree! I don't get it why linking the SCU shield to the capture progress should be any benefit to the gameplay. It just removes the last bit of "SpecOps"like gameplay. If another idea behind this approach is to prevent the constant GenGrinding we have everywhere currently, suggestions like http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/...ons-anti-empty-base-farming-nanti-ebf.122149/ should be considered. I mean, what's the problem with defenders being pushed out of a base right in the beginning of the fight if they weren't able to defend the gen? If a defender doesn't manage to react in time or organize proper logistics they deserve to loose the base. And still they could reorganize elsewhere and carry out a counter attack; that worked well in PS1 and created some really exiting battles instead of just spawn camping sessions and stalements. With independent hack timers and a more clear combat path given by the lattice counter attacks should work quite well. The best thing imo, sorry to say that all non PS1 Players, would still be the PS1 generator system combined with NTU power levels, hacking mechanics and base layouts like http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/...oor-structure-incl-concept.67711/#post-843343 or http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/...nt-walls-tank-nerf-reset-tunnelsystem.108350/ and many other good and similar suggestions all over this forum. Meh, now I have to remember the exiting fights over the last bit of NTU bringing in ANTs with Galaxies against overwhelming enemy forces..
I'm sorry to say at this point that I'm no longer a fan of Lattice. The other features could be implemented without it, and they would work fine. I do think that SpecOps gameplay is a necessary thing in the game, and should not be removed. Rather than forcing every single player into a meatgrinder spawn-camping situation, they should be encouraging emergent gameplay. Bases should be captureable behind enemy lines. It should be sufficiently difficult, and thus not likely to succeed, but it should be in the game. PS1 had a base drain. Assuming the old base drain system was not implemented, what would be an alternative to it that would allow for the same deep capture effect?
Based on official comments, and of course its not 'out' yet: - Large Outpost likely to get SCUs Fantastic. - SCU drop = pain field drop and shields drop Fantastic. - Can only touch SCU after certain time into a hack IF after part way into a hack, you may make it too hard to take a facility/large outpost unless you have a mini army of players with you. A small group could try and hold two areas, the CC and the generator, with this change they need to hold those two areas as well as the spawn room and all its exiting points. Revised game lattice (as on test) should = denser population spread over less points, what you should try to promote is active defenses not reactionary ones. With improved layouts in general this would be the ideal fix. Defense by better defensibility. Of course it depends on what your doing with capture timers too. Unable to touch SCU for 5 minutes might make some attacks hard for smaller outfits, thats all im saying. Could be proven wrong though! will have to see. - Capture timer tweaks Yes it can be dull to wait but if the flow of battle was changed as per what could happen in the test lattice, things might get less dull for those waiting for a hack....... Would not reduce timers too much. The error is in facility design. Solving that by redesign would be much better in the long run than but i can see your working with what you have. Just feels like your taking the easiest option, doesnt mean its the best.
Mainly because most of them pop out into little portacabins which are easily camped and you still have to run over open ground to reach gens, vehicle terminal etc.
This is a terrific change considering how quick the TTK is in PS2. If the attacker has a Sunderer(s) nearby and they disable the SCU before the defenders even realize their base is under attack, that's it, game over. It's simple math from that point on. A dead attacker can be back in the fight in ~10 seconds, a dead defender has to run/drive from an adjacent base, which means he won't be back in the fight for ~several minutes. That's a virtually insurmountable disadvantage for the defender in PS2.
Dont know if this is a bad thing . I will try it . I do know there should be a Audible warning of SCu sheild loss and this should NOT be put into place until there is a warning .
I like this idea only because i think it will lead to better fights... i would however like to see it so when the SCU is destroyed the shields in the spawn room are disabled to stop the pointless camp of the 1 or 2 guys who just sit in there and take pot shots.
Personally, I think we should move the SCU closer to spawn rooms and have a specific amount of damage cause it to blow instead of overloading it like a typical generator. This would allow for more vicious attacks to take it down but permit for a more violent counter attack to avoid it from happening. Think something similar to how people used to have to attack the spawning tubes in PlanetSide 1 before they were disabled. Players could keep spawning but with a hard enough push, you could cease it all together. Having the current system where players aren't worth as much EXP when killed just after spawning would encourage people to destroy the SCU instead of farming kills too. Just throwing the idea out there. Not saying I don't like this idea but seeing as we're constantly throwing new ideas around, figured why not at least suggest it.
Yeah, I think the SCU needs to be closer to the spawn room. More importantly, the spawn rooms themselves need to be in the primary structure, not out in a portable building where defenders have to cross an open field. They also need tunnels that actually lead to a defensible position rather than a portable structure. I also think the satellite bases around primary facilities need to have tunnels leading to them from the respawn room. The truth is, base layout really isn't as conducive to defense as it could be. I would also add another layer of anti-vehicle gates to each base, too. The system needs to be set up to allow the defender to actually be able to push out an attacker. As it stands, there isn't really a way to permanently push out an attacker without a sufficient population. The game should not be centered around population advantages alone. Automated defenses would be good, too. You could set the bases up to have standard turrets which could be upgraded with autoattack systems by engineers. It would give engineers something to do other than making sure everything's repaired. It would also cause any attacker to have to consider the potential for automated turrets. I would set up the automated turrets as losing their automatic systems if they're destroyed, however. This would force engineers to have to rebuild the automatic systems for them again.
just make the gens control points. 200 people fighting for a single point just makes for a mess. Keep some depth to the game and require squads/platoons to communicate to effectively cap a large base. We are being forced to zerg and now, once we get to the base, we have nothing to do. That is what is killing the game for me. It is just so damn boring. I don't even care about the base XP. If I could push forward, I would, but I can't, so I just sit there and watch spawn campers or do donuts in my flash.
Well problem #1 is that Amp stations and Tech Plants only have a single control point. This goes back to what I've been saying for months: - Outposts with a single control point make for boring game play because there is no chance of tug-of-war happening. Either you control 0% of the control points or you control 100% of the control points. Only the smallest of outposts should have a single capture point. All major facilities should be upgraded to have 5-6 capture points, with mid-sized outposts having 3-4. The more interesting bases are those which have multiple capture points. Places like Howling Pass, Quartz Ridge, etc. The secondary problem is the removal of the need for people to stack on points in order to keep the point under control and to move the capture bar faster (which was a good mechanic, even if the early implementation was flawed because it affected the timer too much). - Control points where attackers do not stay within range should flip back to the defending side after 20 seconds. By forcing attackers to camp control points, you spread them out and prevent at least some of the attackers from camping the spawn door. This allows a smaller, more organized, force to counterattack a point without having to fight the entire main force. - There should be a minimum number of attackers required to be on the point before it can flip to the attacker's control. For major facilities, this should be 3 people per control point, and major facilities should have 5-6 control points. For mid-sized outposts (with 3-4 control points), make it a minimum of 2 people on the point, and then 1 person minimum for small outposts (which only have 1-2 control points).
