The Fix That PS2 Deserves: Stop Spawn

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by RagingShrubbery, Oct 26, 2013.

  1. RagingShrubbery

    I think PS2 is a great game. It's a shooter in a league of it's own, since no other shooter on the market has the potential for the scale of combat we have here. But I think PS2 has potential that it isn't capitalizing on to immerse it's players in a real battlefield, instead of a game with "zergs" and nanitemagic. So here's my crackpot suggestions. Enjoy!

    Remove The Spawns:

    This may seem crazy, but hear me out. PS2 has these great troop transport vehicles, and the scale for them to be applied in their intended roles. They are never used as such since players ability to spawn anywhere makes them redundant. With the spawns removed from everywhere except the warp gate, an efficient transport system would be essential for map control.

    This would also push the combined arms of the game, as ESFs would fill the role of harassing and defending galaxies, and trying to prevent aerial troop deployment, instead of their current grey-zone role. Armor would need to make columns, since boundaries would be less defined by bases, so instead of safety being had hiding behind the infantry zerg, it would be in a group of armor. This would put value into setting up an ambush on a road leading to a base to buy your team some time to capture it. Sunderers would become APCs, and perhaps buff their armor a touch to compensate for lacking a deploy ability, but enabling them to get foot-soldiers into hot zones. Harassers and atvs as scouts, to guard the columns flanks and harass (heh) the enemy, and liberators in the obvious role of disrupting armor movement.

    It would also push people into teamwork, and being tactical, since the punishment for death would be a short commute, instead of being dumped right back into the fight. People would also be able to better fill their favorite roles, as they would all play an important factor in combat. Transporters could have all the intense hot drop action they want, vehicles would have massive high stakes battles when columns inevitably collide, and infantry would have pulse pounding action as they try to hold on just long enough for the next drop ship to come in, delivering reinforcements or whisking them out at the last moment.

    The metrics of the game would change a bit, since defense would be initiated by the attacker, who would move into the base and try to hold it as the owners rushed in to retake it. Some game mechanics would need some reworking obviously. And being tactical may not appeal to some, so this game-type could be better suited in select "hardcore" servers.

    Class Specialization:

    Here's another one, hope you don't mind the novel. Classes aren't so much classes as they are kits. They don't really feel specialized to roles. Sure, the engineer has a nanitewelderthing, and can put down mines, but any stormtrooper could do that. Heavy? Give him a big gun. Light assault? Take away his big gun. Let him jump up there instead of taking the stairs.

    Classes should have things that REALLY separate their play styles. Let engineers make walls and tank traps, repair shields, fortify, deploy sensors, upgrade turrets, be engineers. Light assault should be able to hang on to stuff, like . . . Galaxys! We all want it after seeing *that video. Get on walls, stick to vehicles so they can really stir up some trouble. Give them swords! Heavy assault? More armor, people who play heavy want to be HEAVY! Then give them more armor. Slow them down a bit. They should be sluggers.

    Classes should really feel different when you play them. It shouldn't feel like you just swapping your weapons out.

    So you made it this far. Agree? Disagree? Discuss.
    • Up x 4
  2. Conscripter

    I don't think people are ready for such a drastic change especially for an undeveloped game, and I think PS2's market is one that wants instant action. We'll sooner see universal spawn choices IMO.

    PS2 has an arcade quality I think it should probably keep. Some spawn change like that belongs in something like ww2ol. PS2 is about big battles, the faster we get them better imo. At least in the old days of wow where you walked all over the place you could argue you're supposed to see the world. Who wants to travel in PS2?
  3. RagingShrubbery

    Yeah, I can see where you're coming from. I think that removal of spawns would be undesirable for casual players. It would be something that I think outfit players would really appreciate, to reward teamwork a bit more than in the current system. I'm not entirely certain that PS2 should have an arcade feel to it. I think that's something that small map games should concentrate on.

    It is possible the game will head in a more instant action direction, but a "hardcore" server would definitely get some attention. You can see a lot of games that have servers that cater to more strategic players that enjoy higher risks. Games like red orchestra and the Battlefield series, which I consider in a similar vein to PS2, and attracting similar players.

    It wouldn't be so much of a tank zerg, as tanks moving in organized groups to prevent themselves from being picked off on their own, and I definitely think that they would actively seek out other tanks. People play this game to fight, and no one shies away from a chance to get some certs,
  4. Bibibla

    Community clash use the no spawn rule.

    No-spawn alert could be interesting.
  5. AlienDung

    As much as i like the idea of logistics being actual logistics instead of Nanite magic, that change takes an entirely different game design. To the point of completely redesigning the maps, bases, classes, movement.... everything to reflect the core mechanics. To the point that it just wouldn't be Planetside because this game is built around the nanites spawning mechanics.
    • Up x 2
  6. RagingShrubbery

    I'm not familiar with community clash, I'll definitely check it out. And no-spawn alerts would be great! Really add some variety to what they offer. It would also be a great way to "test the waters," see how the community would react to it.
  7. RagingShrubbery

    I don't think the design would have to entirely change. The map is already a great place for vehicles. The biggest problem I'd see needing to be addressed is an expansion of infantry combat areas in bases, just to stop vehicles from taking too much of the fun from the infantry. The class redesign I suggested would definitely take a huge overhaul though.

    I think it would make the game MORE Planetside. The nanites are just there to support the spawning mechanics. Without them the fights would be less focused on individual areas, and more across the whole map.
  8. ZeroErrorz

    the only thing i agree here is giving light assault abilty to blow up galaxy by shooting the cockpit, like the video.....
    as for transport unit, i think the only one need more tweaking is the galaxy,its basicly just a shared long range drop pod right now,maybe by reducing the ground vehicle speed,or making the all the map more vertical (more cliff,more hill) more j908 impact site type of bases would be a good change,as for spawn system it could be fixed by a few solution, adding more forward spawn (which could affect the size of a single base) or just by down right removing the ams and increasing the total amount of passenger in transport vehicle that way we gonna have more epic moment of galaxys flight full of passenger, this way esf will have more function as if any of the galaxy shot down it can result loss of a squad or two which making esf escort much more needed.
  9. MasterCheef

    I'd love this, but its too hardcore for the PS2 crowd. Also, the map would have to be completely redesigned for tactical and practical reasons.
  10. KAHR-Alpha

    I look forward to having to wait for 5 minutes to get back into the fight... :rolleyes:

    This is not "hardcore", this just wouldn't work. As other said the game would have to be redesigned completely.
  11. Benton!

    A less drastic change would be to get rid of re-deploy. You could only spawn into the hex you are in, and the warpgate. That goes for sundies too.

    Or maybe you can only spawn in a room/AMS that's 300m away or closer?
  12. RagingShrubbery

    I don't think it's too hardcore for the PS2 crowd. It may be hardcore for the very casual crowd . And some redesign would be needed, but not that much. A few of you have said it would need a complete redesign, but why? And how? The maps already huge, the vehicles are already there, the mechanics are there. Maybe some tweaks to cap time, but I can't think of anything else major.

    If you think the game would need changes, give some input. Why?
  13. Kunavi

    Change a few things left and right terrain wise, create more tactical options, create real Walls/Bases and this could work. TTK would need some tweaking as a whole for this to work too. But I'm with you, Logistics FTW :p
    • Up x 1
  14. EmmeraldWeapon

    You want to get rid of all base spawns? ..... why? Do you seriously think we have the man power resources to set up our own spawning armor network? That would effectivly kill the game dead.. no doubts about it. Sometimes its hard to get someone to pull sundies for a base attack, I can't imagine maintaining them for all bases.

    And specialization DOES exhist.. its called the last cert point. All the upgrades go up in price exponential, making the last 1-2 upgrade very expensive, this would be considered your specialize cert.
  15. MAMAW

    Imagine the number of players that will respawn at the same time in the warpgate! now imagine ur FPS! I agree with u we need more war simulation......instead of removing the spawns from everywhere, they could keep them in the warpgates + they could replace some region ressource rewards with the possibility to respawn in we would have the warpage + 3 or 4 regions allowing you to respawn....these regions would always be intense battle areas with a lot of fights for the control of the respawn regions
  16. Vastly

    You realise that for every successful attack, there's an unsuccessful defence? The disadvantages of losing would be so high they just wouldn't be worth risking. If people are "afraid" to fight without a clear advantage, how do you think that's going to play out?
  17. Liewec123

    i HATE this idea.
    they've already taken a huge chunk of fun from the game by throttling the respawn locations.
    if you want to spend 15 minutes driving around the annoying canyons of amerish go ahead, but don't force the rest of us to do it.
  18. HadesR

    Never a good idea to make it take to long to get to the shooting part of a arcade First person shooter .
  19. RagingShrubbery

    @Liewic132 and EmmeraldWeapon
    I wasn't proposing it as a substitute to the current game play, but as an addition. Check out the galaxy topics, and you'll see how many people enjoy just being troop transport, dropping and picking people up in combat. With actual incentive I think plenty of people would dust of their Gals.And in every squad I've been in (even public ones) when someone calls out for a sundy people always jump up and get one.

    Liewic, I understand you may be exaggerating, but it definitely doesn't take 15 minutes to drive somewhere, and in a galaxy it only takes minutes to get anywhere. The brief travel time would act as an incentive to play smart, and try to avoid mindlessly running into enemy bullets.
  20. Phyr

    If it takes more then 10 minutes to find someone to shoot, the player base would leave in droves. They want to promote the idea that death is meaningless, but if every death removes you from the fight for 5 minutes or more, you've gone in the wrong direction.