Some simple strategy. Or playing without mind.

My plan is simple. Go to the Social tab. If my outfit is not on, find a platoon whose tags I can expect to be reliable allies. Join them.

And have fun.

(That's also a sideways suggestion for you, specifically, to get your way onto Command Chat if you have an idea.)
You know why your plan sucks? your plan sucks not because it actually sucks - it may very well be the best chance the TR have to keep the fight going for a little longer, at best, and at least it's better armchairing than I usually hear - but because you can't sell it.

this is a game, people shouldn't be told what to do if they just want to do whatever the hell they want. what this game needs is more communication and coordination tools which are not tied to outfits. that way you can collect up those teamwork and objective oriented players (i mean real teamwork players not ppl that join for the 5% xp boost when a squad member has a boost active) that way you can form strike teams and formations and devise strategy without needing them to be in your outfit. while they will actually listen and play the objective.

the next step is to stop listening to infantryside whiners and air crybabies and give tanks a valid role in base attacks (like demolishing parts of a base and suppressing automated A.I defenses) and providing them survivability against small numbers of infantry so it is desirable to pull some vehicles to counter them if you can't mass enough infantry RLs and engine turrets to take them out.

at the moment there is no real need or desire to counter a vehicle with a vehicle because infantry can on foot or via jetpack solo a tank.

the most a tank can do now is destroy enemy vehicles, hit infantry until someone comes along with C4 if they are unskilled or aircraft come along to demolish them.

as long as C4 is as effective as it is and tanks have no role there is no reason for someone who is infantry focused to pull a combat vehicle when they can leeroy at a tank as many deaths as it takes to deliver 2x C4.

This is the devs fault for listening to infantryside whiners instead of listening to tankers asking for valid (and rewarding) roles to fill in base assaults.

if you don't want to be shelled by tanks as infantry, pull your own tanks. tankers want to fight and kill enemy vehicles, not sit on a hill hitting squishy infantry because you won't use combined arms

You can already kick people who are screwing around out of the platoon. I don't think it's the lack of slavemasters with whips that makes PS2 unorganized, it's the fact that it's a dead simple session shooter and it doesn't really aspire to be anything else(especially the military).
Besides, if you leave players to govern each other like this it will only end up in abuse and even worse new player experience

Technically, the implied tools are available to squads and platoons, not outfits. I'm certain that's the "same thing" you mean and external bias just made you use the incorrect word. Where the tools are currently available is hardly important; where you want the tools to be available is important.

1) There is no way for the Average Player to talk to the other Average Player

At best you can deploy-hop to a Hex and send /re chat trying to get people in that Hex to move or do something. But such /re is largely just noise to most people. As long as the good Communication and Coordination tools are locked behind Outfit and Hardcore Organized walls, there is not likely to be Pan Faction coordination outside Server Smash (which oddly doesn't use Outfit tools at all; also odd, there aren't even good Communication Tools for different Outfits to talk to each other).

2) There is no way for the Average Player to mobilize effectively

Except as Infantry to defend a base using redeploy-hop, or if they are flying an Air Vehicle, the Average Player cannot mobilize effectively. If they are in most Ground Vehicles, they can't really redeploy without losing their Vehicle. And the Average Player is severely lacking in the tool to mobilizing onto an actual attack front... unless it's already a Zerg with setup and safe Spawn Points.

3) Lots of players just want to fight in a good battle (as UberNoob1337101 said)

They don't care about Alerts. Some because they don't care about them, some because they feel Alerts are content that is not made/tuned for them. They just want to have fun playing an FPS.

And finding and getting into a good fight for the Average Player is not easy. They have terrible mobilizing options outside of joining ally zergs or defending bases. And the game is not built to foster and maintain good fights. Also, each player's concept of what a Good Fight is will be different, so each will seek out what they like.

4) Most Leaders frequently come across as incompetent, jerks, or both (as UberNoob1337101 said)

Some Leaders are there to improve the fun level of the Average Player who joins them. These Leaders are great and people typically like them. Other Leaders have a personal agenda, and will attack Average Players who do not help them pursue that agenda. These Leaders are often annoying if you don't share their agenda and often drive Average Players away. And many people who give Orders or who try to get people moving often have very bad ideas or just sound very bad. Which often makes the Average Player just choose to ignore their noise.

Your plan has been tested, a lot. And the general problem is exactly what I've already told you. You need both factions to work simultaneously together against the VS to get what you want, and even then there's no guarantee that it'll work even if the TR actively starts giving territory to the NC. Because that will also undermine the TR's capability of attacking the VS, ending up in a single zerg that might take over some territory, but not enough and not fast enough.

And that just doesn't happen. So what's left is going for the sure-fire way of getting things: Farming the biolab. As I repeatedly said already but you seem to completely ignore it, the capture of Esamir will be over in several hours, but those certs and KD will be there for the rest of the game's life.

Besides that, you assume there's always a perfect solution out there, that there's always a plan or idea to prevent a captured continent. But even if the potential is there (IE 2 factions double down on the current best with 33% pop each) the actual chance of this happening is incredibly low because the actual rewards might not be enough. Why risk your time and enjoyment on a plan that requires having faith that one of your opposing factions suddenly allies with you?

In real-life punishments might work, because you can create problems for them without punishing the army for it. You can give them fines, restrict their life outside of combat or force unwanted duties on them (like kitchen duty).

But in games you can't really do such a thing. In games punishments also mean less enjoyment for the player, and that is something to be avoided. The best way to create a strategy and command structure is by making it rewarding and easy to access. In games players will resort to slang to get the message across. An entire complex tactic might be created, but by just saying "need pocket engi" you can convey the entire tactic to the players, who'll pick out the right class and act the right way. Now PS2 has far too few tactics available like that because emergent teamwork wasn't in the developer program when creating the game. A pocket engi is a relatively simple tactic. You stick close to a MAX with a repair gun and the MAX knows you'll keep him repaired and with ammo. The MAX in turn will attempt to keep this prized pocket engi alive.
And no one is punished.

If you want more command structure and orders to be followed the first thing you need to do is increase awareness. Currently players only really know what's going on when they arrive somewhere and see for themselves what's happening. You can be fighting at one end of a base for an hour and not know how the fights going at the other end.
To increase awareness you have to keep it simple for the players. For instance: The current map and radar have a maximum distance where it shows off individually spotted players/vehicles. The moment something is spotted and outside of your individual range it's location gets marked with a "general whereabouts". Just a circle that shows the average position of the player/vehicle. If you are moving that circle becomes whatever shape you are moving in until your spot wears off. If more players/vehicles are spotted in the vicinity those bubbles just "fuse" together into an irregular blob.
These average positions remain on the map for a few minutes or until a spot/scout equipment shows no enemy presence there. This way the positions don't go away just because the spot ended.
Why is this useful? A player can open the map or zoom out his radar to see the general whereabouts of his allied vehicles&infantry while at the same time seeing the general whereabouts of enemy vehicles and infantry. So if a commander tells him "go to the south ridge, clear out the vehicles" the player can instantly see what he needs to do, where enemy infantry might be to thwart him.

It also increases the importance of scouting as a role, since spotting some enemy tanks at the next base will actually alert your allies at the previous base, rather than have the spot wear off before anyone even notices the tanks approaching. It also becomes important to update the map through scouting. If the enemy suddenly leaves a ridge, players might try to attack enemies that aren't there anymore.

Then you can move from there. Orders can now be specific and rewarding. The commander can pick an XP increase modifier (of which he has limited available) and dump it on the general whereabouts of a group of enemies. Now any enemy killed within that region will give increased XP. This way the commander can incentivize attacking a specific chokepoint, enemy troop or attract people to the enemy Sunderer.

Commands and requests also need to be made available for everyone, rather than just your squad/platoon. A player from squad X needs to be capable of requesting an airstrike from platoon Y. A player from platoon Y needs to be able to request a tank attack from the few randoms hanging around in tanks nearby. Just use a Q-spot radial menu to give orders for individual targets. Hold the V key to give area order (IE "There's AA here", "Need infantry around this area", "need tanks attacking here" etc).
This needs some way to prevent clutter. So a limitation on the visible requests is necessary. The player themselves can set the amount of requests visible at a time (I would keep it around 3 or 4). Priority will be for requests you can fulfill (and higher priority for squad/platoon requests), so as a tank you will be seeing tank-related requests rather than aircraft/infantry requests unless no tank related requests are available. Additionally, I would keep it at 1 request per player, and unless your request is fulfilled you can't place a new one soon. Squad/platoon leaders can place more, but only the first one will be visible for people outside the squad/platoon.

And there you have the first framework for better teamplay. Awareness and ease-of-access for command and teamwork and communications. The background behind the systems might seem cluttered, but the use of the information will be easy to understand.

DrakeFang,

No. If TR starts push VS with most of their pop, they certainly start to take VS territories - and VS can't resist it without redirecting most their pop to VS-TR fight-line.
And here you must look closely on the screenshot. There are good fights on NC-VS line. So, if VS redirect forces to VS_TR line, they definitely start loose territories on VS-NS line. And that will be what we need.


Guys, you problem is that you gave up before you loose in real. You too scared of big scores and percentage of land. It's a bad tradition.




There is situations when too faction fights against 3-rd union-like. But not in this case. About union-like fights I wrote in my game suggestions.

OP isn't showing the whole story.

What other continents are locked? Ceding Esamir to open another continent seems likely as many don't like to play on Esamir. I've seen this strategy done before.

Taemien,

In most cases OP is what we need to successfully push.




Next.
Here is another sample of forces disbalance (fatal tactical mistakes of too factions NC & TR) with egual faction pop. A - balanced, B- disbalanced.

Dobryi, you started this post by complaining why no one else was so tactically-minded to understand what they needed to do just by looking at the map; and, you've gotten a lot of responses from people. What exactly did you try to do, while standing in that Biolab as you are in the image, to get people to move to the southern front lines and what kind of responses, if anyone actually gave the plan mind, did you get? were they different from what you've heard here?

Like I said above, regardless of the soundness of the logic you're attempting to convey, your plan is awful because you can't convince anyone it has anything but awful chances and won't even be nearly as rewarding as it sounds on paper.

Avoid frustrating yourself over the thought that everyone else does not follow the same "win at all costs" mentality. You'll burn yourself out too quickly.

FateJH,

What I did? Usually I build HIVEs. 1-3-5 VP (or even more) - very good result for faction of my work and my play-time, much more, than if I was fighting. But of course i fighting in some cases too ))

I was not standing in BioLab, I was in those places riding to the cortium. I stopped to tell in /re chat my idea to those guys, who heroically make pointless work - trying take NC territories, but of course, nobody thought about what I said.

No, i'm not frustrated, don't worry about me. This topic mostly for those, who are leader of big outfit of big platoon. I hope, I can open their eyes and help them to start thinking in such situations. I'm in a small outfit, which haven't enough forces to change something in such situations.

Perhaps you are not as tactically minded as you think. Well.. you're not thinking outside the box. Lets take your example:



This diagram is actually pretty great. It shows what actually happens the majority of the time when one faction dominates the other two in a 33-33-33 scenario. Its not weapon imbalance or even teamwork, but culture.

Sometimes leaders are slow to react, and that's what you get in B. So how do you fix it? How does a small outfit who has insight fix the problem?

1. You can talk to other leaders. Not in /region, but face to face in a VOIP like Team Speak. This is the hardest to do as not all leaders will do. If they do. Congrats, you've just screwed your enemies on the server for the next few months. Like you will utterly ream them with that sort of cooperation.

2. If the above isn't possible, and it likely isn't as everyone has their own agenda most times. You can take a small unit and do anomalous things. For instance if you are TR in example B, you can grab a Gal and make sure one person is an infiltrator. Pop behind the VS at their NC front and pull a small tank column.

What this does is causes the VS to pull back. They might even pull forces from the TR front to deal with it. This causes the NC to push in more to the VS and may give the TR in this example time to regroup and reassess. Its not infallible, no plan is. But it is an option, one better than a stalemate on one side and a lost cause on another.

You could also hit another part of the NC territory to draw more of them away from the stalemate. But you'll need to use strategies that make you seem like a bigger threat than you are. The best thing a small outfit can do is tie up a force that is twice or more its size. If you make enough noise with a squad to get a platoon on you, that's a platoon that isn't where your real forces are.

That's the great thing about PS2, unconventional tactics and strategies can work. You just have to be clever to think them up, and need a crew crazy enough to pull them off.

Personally, I don't expect the entire faction to care about continent locking or even what half of it does. I just push agenda, if I feel fighting at x will help the rest of the x faction I'm playing, I will do x. If I am disappointed in what the rest of my x faction is doing in x area then I will xxxx this xxxx out. If I don't like any of the fights, atley base building squads don't disappoint when it comes to good spots for bases.

No. I have led outfits and Platoons enough to know what I'm talking about here. I would actually go so far as to say that you are lacking the experience to properly analyze the situation.

You're relying on the not only the NC but also the VS to behave in a very specific way to cater to your plan. Even if the NC did break off of the Northern front, you as the TR will not have the ability to win the alert.

Base timers are a thing that exist, and while you are correct that the VS likely couldn't hold the combined forces of the TR and NC, they could most definitely slow them down. With only 11% territory and only around twenty minutes to make it up, the TR would need to be completely uncontested in order to take enough territory to close the gap. The VS are not going to let you just walk through their base. They will slow you down enough to keep you from catching up within the allotted time.

Even if both factions react in the manner you want, it is only the NC that even have the chance of benefitting from it. This could have possibly been salvaged with earlier action, but between the territory percent, timer, and natural inclinations of the standard player, this particular alert had passed the event horizon and been set on the inevitable course of a TR loss.

That's actually the point of his plan. He wants the TR to sacrifice themselves by seceding the Mani lane to the NC and helping them get territory control at least equal to the VS so that the VS don't win the Alert.

Taemien,

While I try to connect to leaders the alert will over. ))

I think, such methods a better to do if you have more time, than 25 minutes. If you have short time, you need to do more
categoricall and strong actions.

Yes. And here is a one moment - for example, NC from this diagram, are afraid to redirect a part of forces from NC-TR line to NC-VS, coz the the rest TR overpop will start grab NC territories on NC-TR line.

And I think, in case of hard disbalance we need some system message displayed (may be voiced by a female voice, like "Shield generator critical/destroyed") to help factions to proper balance their forces and bring back more competition and intrigue in game. System message must help keep balance when difference in faction score is minimal. Also those messages must learn factions to more think about it and automatically keep balance of forces.

Taemien,

And I say more, VS from this diagram can win even having lower pop on continent, if TR and NC are dumb enough to keep such disbalance. And I saw those situations in real.