We've had Lattice for about three days and the gloss is already wearing off

I tend to find the Lattice works very well, as it now gives the Zerg some direction and means myself and my squadmates can go and harass incoming reinforcements, etc, and know we wont bump into the Zerg on route.

You seem to think that you need to be in it to win it. If it's a massive head to head somewhere, we push behind enemy lines and take down whatever's coming in to reinforce.

Small, strategic ambushes. Brilliant.

And how is this new?
it was always easy to predict and ambush the zerg. Especially when you are on the defending side.
Static defense is a bad call. Either in lattice or hex, the best place to defend a base is rarely within the base.

From all these anti-lattice posts, the only thing I'm really getting is,

"Lattice now forces huge battles and we have to work to make a difference and all we can do is go in straight lines"

I wonder how many of these lattice haters ever tried to organise 20 tanks to flank a battle, or 30 ESF's do all take off together and rocketpod the **** out of a base or even pulled back to a more advantageous area to give the the upper hand?

So basically Lattice forces you into some fights of which several are going on across the map, some huge ones, some smaller ones and it seems some people don't know they can turn left or right off the interconnecting lines to flank

Lattice=chessboard, hex=checkers

Wait wut?

This is insulting to chess. I wouldn't compare either the current hex implementation to chess, even less the lattice.
Chess is renowned for its depth and breadth, you can't compare it to a system that doesn't allow you any variety of move per turn and don't even allow you to anticipate more than one or two turns in advance.
Checkers may be fine for the current hex system, but I'd compare lattice to tic tac toe.
The moves are so obvious that unless someone does a mistake, it always ends up a draw.

I wish we could actually thrive to go towards something more towards chess, something deeper.

Depth comes with more continents, i really wish ps2 had released with more than 3.

The point I'm trying to make, is that in the current form of Lattice, if the opposing forces are smashing heads over 'X' Outpost, then small squads can maneuver around to hit the reinforcements arriving from further back along the Lattice, eventually whittling down the main force that's fighting at the Outpost.

If an Outpost is properly surrounded, the defending force shouldn't be able to pull out vehicles as they'll get smashed immediately. So the only call is to come from further back.

Then you end up having the main fight at the Outpost, but lots of indepth skirmishes further back.

I thoroughly enjoy the new tactical aspect of the Lattice, as do all my squadmates.

Thats because your a simpleton. There are less strategies available. Thats what anti lettuce do not like, we want options with consequences, the lettuce does the opposite.

You will not Flank with 20 tanks. The new mountains and other obstacles removed most of the flanking options. There maybe a few spots where this is still viable, but not enough spots left to be considered an option.

Why would anyone who has played this game for any amount of time think 30 ESF's vs a platoon or 2 is a good idea?
Your ESF's will be destroyed by the bursters and lockons before they can do anything, when was the last time you played?

The reinforcements can simply spawn at the base your trying to take. They do not need to start a territory back.

You may stop an armor column on occasion, but they were not on the way to help defend, they were about to push out. But for the most part, you are simply doing the samething as "ghost capping" attempting to split up the zerg, to make it easier to take the objective. ****** hypocrits

All you Pro-Lattice people seem to enjoy defending, you realize your soon going to be without anyone left who likes to attack, but that is ok, you'll get SOE to change the game completely to deal with the campers next year.

Again, this isn't new at all. This isn't permitted or created by the lattice.
It cannot be held as an advantage of the lattice, or it could also be said to be an advantage of the hex.

Maybe people are learning tactics faster due to the lattice, but it may be detrimental to the long term of the game.
Those tactics were going to become mainstream eventually.

I'll take an analogy I've used before:
"You could not defend the removal of air in the game by saying: We can still use tanks, and now we learn how to use them faster since we don't split our focus between several types of vehicles anymore!"

lattice = checkers,

Influence hex = Chess, risk, axis and allies, stratego all wrapped up in to a FPS.

We had a squad in outfit and one of their duties was dealing with ghost cappers, back cappers, it was never really the massive issue same are claiming it was, it was taken care of when it happened.

I'm sorry you lack the intelligence and imagination to be able to work that out. No wonder you hate the lattice so much.

As for ESF, NAP, pop up all at the same time, the sheer size of numbers will confuse the enemy, launch every rocket into the structure or targets a specific area then burn out - that's one of many ways to address the issue - I'm sure some of our more skilled ESF pilots could manage to pull that off.

Or we can both working together on the same maps, adding more strategic game play, sequels are about evolution, why not evolve the lettuce.

So tell me then, how come in 8 months of Hex we never saw any game play that even resembled the list of games you are attributing to the Hex system?

Why is it I remember mostly empty bases and crownside?

Because you didn't know how to play the game? Because you played on the wrong servers for your play times? Because you never played the above games and would rather play checkers, or connect four.

We would have 200 - 350 online in my outfit alone during scheduled ops, non-scheduled ops happened almost every night of the week with 100 - 200 online. That was just us, I saw lots of big battles, some skirmishes, and some medium battles, capped empty bases for influence.

I never had a problem finding any size fights, even in tech/beta, when we had no maps.

Either way you can argue till your blue in the face, thousands and thousands of people hate the current lattice. It sucks, it's always the same thing. The game needs to be fluid, offer something to everyone, and be more complicated than, hey follow this line, there is a big fight, constantly try to flank them, lets just spam each other for hours an hours.

Boring

To get there I think it would require every player to be in an outfit following orders and the platoon leaders having a plan, then the Hex system could work but it would also need resources to matter and have more of a meta game.

That's never going to happen, so instead the Devs put the lattice back in to herd the cats.

To get there I think it would require every player to be in an outfit following orders and the platoon leaders having a plan, then the Hex system could work but it would also need resources to matter and have more of a meta game.

That's never going to happen, so instead the Devs put the lattice back in to herd the cats.

L.M.A.O.

So now somehow the whole entirety of all PS2 problems are because Jex would rather play Checkers? Wow no wonder you have issues if you think like that! Then you blindly assert "thousands of people hate it" when all you can muster is 5 thumbs up for every lattice hating post made on these forums.

Pathetic.

?

You confuse me to great lengths, we, and many others played the game like a chess board, small/medium outfits would see us and say hey [____] are here, lets move and take the territory to the east, pubbie platoons knew where to go, as did pubbies, we would get to a large base and see that the pubbies and smaller outfits had it, would we stay? No, we would leave and move the front lines forwards, now the game is a stale slug fest.