Why Are Logistics Being Eradicated Instead Of Embraced?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by MrJengles, May 28, 2014.

  1. Axehilt

    I suppose if words have an established, agreed-upon meaning and that meaning literally, objectively was the exact opposite of my subjective opinion, I might complain that someone was being "too literal" too.*

    We aren't on Fox News where subjective opinion has more value than objective reality. You don't get to just redefine words because you individually have a wrong opinion about their meaning.

    (*Actually I wouldn't, because I value being right more than I value winning arguments.)
  2. Tuco

    I see, so as long as the definition of the word logistics includes the word "transportation", and star trek teleporters are "transportation" devices than in your world Star Trek teleporters = logistics.
  3. Axehilt

    Yes, as long as logistics means what it means, it encompasses transporters. Part of the definition is transport of personnel, and that's exactly what transporters do.

    How is this confusing to you?
  4. Tuco

    Wrong, star trek transporters is the anti-thesis of logistics.
  5. Axehilt

    We just finished going over why your subjective opinion is objectively wrong. Restating your opinion won't change anything.
  6. Tuco

    If a word is used in the definition of A word
    And the same word is used in the definition of B word
    That doesn't mean A=B or even A is related to B in any way
  7. uhlan

    I'm really suprised that this topic is even discussed.

    It's been a year and a half since the end of beta and now people expect a massive change?

    The game has been designed around the premise of massive battles supported by the F2P model and lots of "drop-ins" to give the epic feel. The hope being that F2P would keep the supply of new blood an endless stream.

    The problem is that the game is a simple shooting gallery akin to a F2P version of "farmville"... with guns. There is no depth, no reason to do anything but follow the flowchart... er, lattice and grind away. If the game was more complicated, more difficult to get into a fight people would get even MORE frustrated and the pop would sink even further.

    Don't get me wrong the game is fun and I've dropped a few dollars into it to get some goodies, but the devs have to walk a fine line between supporting an epic feel and supplying the means to do so.

    They've gotten much of it right, but for anyone that spends more than a few days playing will come to realize how shallow the game really is.

    There are some thing that I personally would like to see, but I'm sure the vast majority of folks groomed by the games "farm mechanic" would heartily despise... even if those ideas would promote more developed game play.

    Like I said it's a no-think shooting gallery and unfortuately the loudest players like it this way.
  8. Tuco

    The closest thing you're going to get to simulated logistics in a video game:


    And it drives back and forth about 2 inches between resource and command center. After that the chain is broken as whatever the SCV brings to the command center somehow magically teleports over to the barracks/vehiclespawnbuilding/airspawnbuilding.
  9. Axehilt

    "Transportation of military personnel" isn't a singular word. It's a full concept. Transporters are the identical concept in identical context.

    It doesn't matter that the name incidentally matches one word in the definition. What matters is the concept and context match identically.

    Are you suggesting cargo ships aren't part of logistics? Because cargo ships or planes or trucks, and even Star Trek transporters are mere variations on the exact same concept: a means of transporting military personnel and materiel. The details of conveyance don't matter. What matters is they're methods of transporting military personnel and materiel.

    Basically the definition says "A comprehensively includes concepts A1, A2, A3, and A4" and B identically matches the concept defined A2, right down to the context, which lets us indisputably say B is part of A.
  10. Malleablelist

    For all of you people who are against redeploys.
    There is already a system implemented where whether or not you can spawn at a base depends on the pop of defenders/attackers.

    What could be implemented is keeping that system, however if those conditions in pop aren't met at a base, allow it to be quick redeployed. Doing that right there could be helpful in many ways, an example being allowing new defenders to redeploy to a base behind the heavy popped fight and pulling vehicles so as to help push the attackers back from the overly popped Base, it would even stop the redeploy outfits from changing the fight with a simple quick teleport.

  11. Tuco

    Wrong. Star Trek transporters would make the military science of logistics obsolete.

    Just because the word "transportation" is used in both definitions doesn't make them equivalent.
  12. Hatesphere

    star craft is the worst example when bringing up any sort of logistics in a video game, you should be ashamed of yourself.

    why? star trek transporters deconstruct and then reconstruct something out of available mater (or in some cannon out of the mater it is transporting and magic). you still have to move around or have that mater in the vacuum of space (gotta lug it around in a useable form) on a planet though its less of an issue.
  13. Tuco

    Real Time Strategy is the only examples of simulated logistics in a video game.

    No need to go nerdy, this isn't a nerd contest.

    Short version: Star Trek teleporters makes transportation obsolete, and by extension the military science of logistics.
  14. ColonelChingles


    You do realize that Star Trek transporters also require a variety of resources themselves to operate? Like energy, personnel, parts, etc? It'd be essentially the same as any truck we have nowadays. Sure it's faster, but it still requires spare parts, fuel, drivers...

    The transporters were also far from perfect, and could be blocked under various conditions. Deflector and magnetic shields namely, not to mention other specialized devices aimed at disabling the transporters.

    As a method of logistics that both requires resources and that can be intercepted, Star Trek transporters aren't that different from any other form of logistics. You can just think of it as a tiny, superfast space truck.
  15. Hatesphere

    yes and you picked one of the most mainstream and streamlined for fast PVP RTS games, and completely left out anything 4X, but carry on with your silliness.
  16. Zar

    i miss my protoss probe
  17. Tuco

    4X doesn't simulate logistics. Resources are generated from equipment that magically teleports there, the raw resources magically teleport to the factory, and the finished product magically teleports to the front.
  18. Tuco

    No need to get nerdy
  19. Hatesphere

    you are on a video game forum friend perhaps stop pretending not to be nerdy yourself.

    not all of them, some have simulated civilian economy and trade/mining lines that can be disrupted to removed the ability to utilize specific resources and technology (since they require said resource to be built/used). or do you want PS2 to have a forklift driver class, and a shipping office?
  20. Tuco

    No no, you are entering Star Trek Nerd-land. I only used Star Trek teleporters as an example of how the magical transportation of equipment from point A to point B breaks the chain of supply and negates the entire concept of military logistics, not to get into a Star Trek nerd debate on Star Trek technology in the Star Trek universe. But if you insist.....