[Suggestion] We Need a timer after successful Base Defence/Attack - Huge Flaw in gameplay!

What is the point of putting effort into taking or defending a base only for it to be INSTANTLY open to the enemy again?.. it's completely nuts.

When you receive the message that you have successfully taken/defended a base - I propose that a lockout timer of 20 minutes before the any part of the base or the connected teleporter/jumpad/outposts can be taken by the enemy.

Every time I see the message, like 'well done you have Successfully defended this base!' then straight away some enemy is hacking a gennie and the whole thing feels pointless.

Then zergs can just roll everyone back to their warpgate without any worry of being back capped.

All they need to do is build better bases for defense and have no-deploy zones for sunderers.

Well make large bases like Amp and Tech plants 20 mins and the smaller inbetween ones 5 mins.

If you get zerged back to the WG then you have not fought hard enough and deserve it.

There is no argument for not having a timer of some kind after a successful defence or attack of a base that I can see - right now the very act of taking or defending a base in pointless - why even have a message that you have defended a base?.. you haven''t you just so happen to have at a single instant turned the cap points your colour - 1 second after that you can be back to square one.

so you defend a base from neutral back to full control and you want it locked so the enemy cannot try again or continue assaulting? what if they have the base surrounded and there are hundreds of them pounding your base. where are they all supposed to go? now they have to wait 20 minutes to advance their territory and you are allowed to proceed? what if they defend the adjacent base that you attacked now you have two adjacent teams who can't fight eachother due to arbitrary timers! the current system is fine. if you dont want the enemy to capture a base from you then defend it!

I believe the roadmap mentions continent locking. Locks on individual zones are unnecessary.

Ghost capping is annoying when your outfit is trying to get the enemy to defend their base with numbers. 2 players ghost capping a base wastes the time of our outfit backtracking to deal with you. Something needs to be done as it ruins the potential for better fights.

No. Ghost capping and back capping are strategy used to divide the enemy. We do this to you because it makes you upset. When you are upset you do not think clearly. Then, we draw you into the meat grinder in a bio lab and tear you to bits.

If you can't organise a defense, you deserve to be back capped. Also you get enjoyable battles that go back and forwards between factions.

We had what is being suggested in Beta - it didn't work and was taken out.

The problem is defensibility, too short capture timers and too long resecure timers. -> learn lessons from ps1.

Upset? What planetside are you living on? Biolabs has nothing to do with it. 2 guys ghost capping a base only get themselves killed. All for the sake of 25 experience. We backtrack take you out and move on to the bigger base that you refuse to defend.

Our defence is wasting 2 mins of our time to kill a couple of nubs and their sunderer stood at a point twiddling their thumbs. On average are group is 12 to 24 guys looking for a fight away from the zerg. What we often get is either the entire enemy zerg vs us or 2 fools sat in a base trying to ghost cap. Theres rarely a in-between.

The game play in PS2 revolves around zergs or soloers instead of outfits because players here are lazy, disorganised and lack any forward thinking. There needs to be more incentives to run in a organised outfit and defend bases or attack bases.

The fools solo capping bases need to go back to call of duty. This is a squad or platoon game not cod/mw 2 death match.

I think they should reward defending bases more. Right now, almost nobody cares in defending a base because it won't give you that much. The further the enemy capped the base, the more points you should get for turning it into your base again. Something like: If the enemy almost caps the base, you defeat them and turn over the point again, you should gain nearly 100% of the bases "worth". If the enemy only managed to take away half of your "influence", you should gain 25% for turning it back. Something like this. The only problem would be ghostcapping and guys exploiting this. But seriously, right now you can go to an outpost and just cap over and over again aswell.


But I think the "locking" would be somewhat of a bad idea, like people mentioned already. If the enemy was able to gather up the units to harrass you right after you took the base, then he should get his try with invading the base again.

Watch out for counter attacks yo.

We took Indar on Waterson this morning. [H4TZ] graveyard shift among key participants. So yeah. Whatever you said I guess bud.

What are you rabbiting on about? You took indar when server populations were low by ghost capping in the early hours of the morning? If so then BRAVO! Congrats. Single player mode unlocked.

You don't know me bud, and you obviously have no idea what Waterson is all about. TR have a very strong European population. They're 5 hours ahead of us mostly. So 7:30 is noon thirty over there. Also, Indar is always hot. Been uncrowned for 6 weeks. Perhaps you missed that part in all of your nerd rage.

By the by, you're on ignore, for ignorance.

Automation of the turrets (at about 1/3 effectiveness of being crewed by a player) might help a bit. It would at least slow things down on the large facilities to give you time to react.

The problems lie in a few directions:

1) Players don't enjoy guard duty where you stand around waiting for an enemy to show up while you get zero XP/hr. The vast majority of players will not perform activities which are not rewarded, and guard duty is definitely unrewarded. You can see this in a microcosm by watching how many players will guard the points vs how many players go off and shoot at the spawn room.

If you want players to guard a particular location, you should be handing out some XP (equivalent of 4k/hr, handed out every 5 or 10 seconds) for them sticking near what you want them to guard while they wait on the enemy to show up. Maybe that guard bonus only shows up if points are actively being flipped or there are at least 18 enemy players within the hex.

2) Killing players near objectives is no more rewarded then killing players anywhere else in the hex. While the 15% bonus for killing someone in a territory that you control is nice, it's not enough. They should also give an additional bonus (another 15-20%) for killing someone within short range of a generator / control point / etc.

3) Base designs are poor. It's too easy to bypass the walls and go straight for the final objective on the large facilities.

- Wall sections should be redesigned so that there is an interior, fully sheltered, tunnel in the base of the wall, with a doorway into the courtyard at the halfway point. This would give defenders a 3rd path between wall sections. It would also give map designers another location to put things like shield generators, capture points, or other machinery.

- Upper wall sections are still too porous to vehicle/air attack, especially on the exterior. It's better then it was, but you're still horribly exposed.

- Wall tower mid-sections are still too open, plus they need to add a lower level where the map designers can put things like generators, etc (and connect to the corridor in the lower wall sections).

- Large facilities should be like peeling an onion. You have to first defeat the wall defenses, which you can only do in sections (each shield gate should have its own generator). Then you need to control the courtyard. Maybe even section the courtyard using additional shield gates. Then you should be forcing your way into the main facility and fighting down to the last control point.

- More 2nd and 3rd story bridges between structures within the courtyard to make for multi-level combat instead of everything at ground level.

4) Static base defenses are unrewarding to use. Base turrets need to have their HP boosted by a large amount. Right now, they're a minor speed bump because they're so easily killed.

- Engineers should be able to tinker with the innards to make them harder to hack (2x or 3x speed?)

- Engineers should be able to kit out with a "turret automation device", which they can only carry one of, which lets the turret perform automatically at about 2/3 effectiveness. So an engineer could crew one gun, while automating a 2nd weapon to act as a force multiplier.

- Add a "turret shield generator" for each wall section that increases the HP of friendly turrets by 4x

5) Facilities need more capture points and a minimum number of attackers required in order to flip those capture points. For a large facility, you should be required to bring 6+ to the party in order to affect the capture bar. Large facilities should have multiple capture points (as many as 5) with a point total of up to 15-20 total "people points".

A tech plant might have a 6/6 in the current location, a 4/4 up on the level below the flight deck, a 3/3 up on the AA/AV turret deck, plus a pair of 3/3 control points elsewhere for a total of 19 points. Attackers would need to have at least 6 more people on points (30% of total points) then the defenders in order to move the bar.

Smaller single-building outposts could be downgraded to having a single 3/3 capture point. Mid-sized outposts should have a pair or trio of 3/3 points.

They would need an insane detection range to of any use at a Tech Plant.

Also, the hack should not proceed if there are 0 people on point.

No. Simply no. If you can't be bothered to defend against a counterattack, then you deserve to lose your newly gained territory.

It's not a counter attack when 1 or 2 infiltrators try ghost capping by waiting for the squad/platoon to move on to attacking the next base. This creates the problem we have now with certain groups of players AVOIDING fights and trying to ghost cap behind the enemy while never defending any bases.

It's the same players who sit in spawn rooms letting their base get lost because they care too much about K/D ration and they can always ghost cap it 2 mins after the enemy starts attacking another base. Obviously there needs to be more incentives for defending bases and less ways to ghost cap.

If the enemy can't be bothered to defend their base then they should not be given the option to retake it straight after they lose it. There needs to be some kind of game mechanic to discourage players from intentionally letting bases be lost.