[Suggestion] Spawn beacons need a slight nerf

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by adamts01, Oct 4, 2018.

  1. adamts01

    Platoon+ size forces are too easily able to move from one side of the map clear to the other, crashing fights with 96+ in the last 30 seconds. Maybe limit their range to 2 hexes? Gal spawns could maybe be limited to 3 hexes. On a platoon level, it would be nice to see where the enemy has committed their forces. They could still redeploy to the warpgate for Gal drops, but you can at least see their warpgate pop spike and track where that platoon is headed. The spawn changes definitely helped keep clutch fights more competitive, but the system still needs some tuning.
    • Up x 3
  2. JibbaJabba

    Not sure if a range nerf would or would not be the fix. This is a good point of discussion though.

    Redeployside does have some serious negative effects. An attacking force can pull some really clever stuff.... feint one direction, then go another, deny "rescue" armor/sundies to the defense, dig in on the base, etc. Then it can all be undone with some half-@5ssed "hey guys, we should go save that" and a mouse click.

    It doesn't reward tactical/strategic skill for sure.
  3. strikearrow

    It makes being a PL very stressful that's for sure - unless somebody just wants to play PS2 like an RTS instead of a tactical FPS.
  4. VeryCoolMiller

    i personally disagree .. i like the possibility to bypass armor fights and force an infantry vs infantry fight without the need to defend a sunderer from a tonsload of tanks...
  5. adamts01

    But with a 2 hex range you could still easily do that. I love spawn beacons, and I love the new changes they've made to them, but they still need just a little work. Consider not only the ability to instantly drop a ridiculously overwhelming force out of nowhere, but also the need to keep a ridiculous force on a ghost cap because at any second you could have 48+ drop on the fight at the last moment. I've talked with some of the zergfit guys, and while a lot of them hate ghost capping with a full platoon, they're basically forced to because of redeployside and the fact that they quite often get instantly overwhelmed in the last 20 seconds if they don't ghost cap with a full platoon. I want good infantry fights as much as the next guy, and I really think this change would help keep things a little more competitive and fun without crippling tactical squad play.
  6. LaughingDead

    I was making this post before this change, on spawn hoppers, leets that would just swap the beacon around. WHO'S THE CRAZY ONE NOW?! AHAHAHAHA!!!!!

    Maniacal laughing aside, yea, infantry shouldn't just have free logistics without vehicles everywhere and anywhere, even if it's vulnerable, it's just a chore for someone to remove it if it's in a high spot.
    • Up x 1
  7. frozen north

    Maybe instead implement a squad size based penalty on their usage rate. For example, if it's only a singe six man squad, no penalty. It then increases in increments up to say a 5 second interval delay for a full platoon. It could also be tied to outfits as well.
    • Up x 1
  8. OldMaster80

    Redeploy is the main reason why this game cannot have depth. It's the reason why Planetside 2 will never be anything more than a stupid meatgrinder.

    Because the biggest groups can move around so quickly that small, agile and fast warbands have simply no reason to exist.

    Moreover any time a faction is losing a battle you see their population drop: the game does not encourage people for staying, retaliate, call for some help: if you cannot win immediately you better redeploy and search for a battle where population ratio is in your favor.

    In the end the battleflow is completely confused: our campaigns are just a sequence of disconnected base fights, where playera teleport back and forth continuously trying to zerg and avoid being zerged.

    Considered the potential the game has, it really hurts to see it reduced to this.
    • Up x 5
  9. PlanetBound

    The population drop pattern is so obvious even I noticed it.
    • Up x 1
  10. OneShadowWarrior

    My biggest issue in the big fights is allied spawn beacons start to block my vision during distance fights because there are so many of them. I then have to destroy friendly spawn beacons in order to be able to see.
  11. adamts01

    Haha. Please tell me these aren't close fights.
  12. Armcross

    I want my ability to have choose my fight with wide selection.
  13. FateJH

    You do. The game has practically no invisible walls so driving or flying yourself anywhere on any continent to which you have access is always available.
    • Up x 1
  14. OldMaster80

    With an ESF you can be anywhere on the map in 30 seconds despite the population. It's easier than redeploying multiple times.

    If players are allowed to teleport around at will that easily what's the point of a big open world map?

    I've been reading about the zergs issue for 6 years but the main reason why zergs are so effective is cohesion just requires to press 1 button. As long as it will remain like that zerging will always be the winning strategy.

    It's not a case that in ps1, which was not designed to appeal the modern fps crowd, Redeploy used to work in a much more limited way.
    • Up x 1
  15. adamts01

    Another option is to have all travel cost Nanites, with a larger cost for further distance. Let people redeploy anywhere on the map if they can afford it. This would also be a deserved buff to factions who hold the least territory, as they could more easily travel from one front to the next. Apply this same penalty to spawn beacons outside of the hex and maybe 1/2 the penalty for deploying in to a Gal outside of the hex. We'd still have redeployside, but a very nerfed zerg once they got to the fight, so no Maxes and limited C4/Grenades once they got there.
    • Up x 1
  16. Twin Suns

    Re: Population drops.

    Gamers nowadays are raised on instant gratification in video games. Every shill screaming, I'm the Elite shizzit brah! *rolls eyes*

    Nobody wants to put any effort into a real fight against a larger opposition. I've seen a 24 stop a 96+ and a 48 stop a 96+. These things do happen you know.

    Seeing some of you're outfit's best killers doing the little things for the good of the fight. The killers that could've had a high KDR if they chose. Not to mention you're outfit's hustlers. The ones that lack the necessary gun game skills, but on the other hand bust their @&$! completing the task at hand. o7. Add a disciplined command communication and it's pure bliss. *sheds tear*

    Bottom line... It's a combined arms shooter. Why play PS2 if you want only 12 v 12's??? It makes no sense with a market that is inundated with bubblegum shooters.

    I guess I'm old fashion. I know I can't win them all, but that doesn't mean I stop trying. ;)
  17. adamts01

    Who said anything about wanting 12v12s? You've clearly missed the entire point.
  18. Armcross

    Because that is what my PC can handle:oops:.

    And I have bigger influence as an individual.
  19. adamts01

    OK. I think I misunderstood you. The entire point is for populations to make commitments to the map. If a large force picks a lattice line, it should be harder for them to bounce around to a different one. This would benefit you by limiting a large force's ability to appear out of nowhere and crush your small fight.
  20. OldMaster80

    It makes sense, but at the first Redeploy you would see a platoon scattered around the continent because not everyone has the nanites to jump :)

    What we need imo are simpler, more limited, clear and streamlined redeploy rules. The day someone decided any single player must be able to teleport around like the crew of Star Trek the battle flow was destroyed.
    • Up x 1

Share This Page