Wow, Lattice is BORING

This has destroyed the game. There is no place in the game for a sub 100 member outfit anymore. I hope like crazy they remove it or I will need to find another game.

get lost...

Your use of the word "kiddo" is a significant tell. You do not hold the conviction of your words. However, it does show your intuitive side is strong; there was no content other than an attempt to censor through humiliation. When communicating to adults, be sure to use language that adults use: not what shuts up children.

Your reference to CoD shoebox play is ironic. A person who laments the death of sandbox play, and the advent of contrived, soon-to-be instanced gaming is told by a person that supports contrived gaming experieinces that they are more suited for shoebox play.

Advocating a shoebox gaming system while accusing others of being little suited for anything but shoebox play is remarkable, and a firm indication that the SOE money machine is well on track. Abandon evolved gameplay, and sell hats. Those that buy the hats are in need of linear, hand-held gaming. I would accuse SOE of caving in to the contrived battle community, but they aren't. They're selling a game, and doing it masterfully. A player's dream of ethically fostering gaming evolution has no traction when the dollar rules decisions.

Perhaps the next sandbox will step up and have the courage to let people create their own experiences. perhaps people will ahve the courage to create their own experiences.

I'm gonna put this to bed right quick...

Go through all the posts in this thread, find all the likes from the ProLattice people and anti-lattice people, and see which has more. That will pretty give a tell of people's stance on it...

Now, while I don't have any exact numbers, I've been paying attention to many of the QQ threads about Lattice. A nice majority are happy with it. It's not perfect, but people understand and realize it's better than the whack-a-mole we had.

You are absolutely mother fu**ing right! I only play during off hours because of this problem. LMAO my score/hour dropped from 18k/hour to 9k/hour. I had never been so frustrated in my life. This problem is MAJOR if you fly or play LA since as LA you are ridiculously exposed and get shot down mid flight no matter where you are.

As opposed to the same battles happening in the same areas before the lattice came in - the reason there were dozens of posts calling the game "Crownside"? Are you saying right now it isn't like that but will go back to that? Great then at least we will have a few months of fighting over the map - maybe it will even last longer.

How is that even relevant? Loads of the unhappy people will not post but simply leave the game. Loads of people never visit the forums etc etc.

In any event, 30-40% unhappy will be enough to end the game (if they all leave). The populations will drop so far as to make the game no longer viable.

It's as relevant as the Naysayers saying "It's killing the game" "You've ruined the game" "SOE did this to my sandbox".
That is to say it's just noise.

But, if as you say, 40% (worst case scenario I assume) will leave, us outfit leaders will just have to work a little harder to keep player retention up rather than moan about how bad things will get when there are a good number of people who know better and aren't screaming bloody murder.

Here's how I see the current lattice system failing.

The outposts are ruining the current lattice system, because there are simply too many of them. What happens is that the link from one outpost/base to another one is so short that there is no room for any tactics. You are kind of forced to follow one narrow path. When the zerg rolls the path it's mindless chaos where numbers dictate the outcome.

So, what if you simply draw the links between the big bases like this? (Ignore the zones and the colors).



There's a need for a few other important changes for this to work.

1. The most important is that one can't capture the outposts anymore. They will remain neutral all the time. The resource benefits will be sent to the closest base automatically.
2. No spawns in the outposts. If you die and no one is there to rez you then you'd have to spawn to the nearest friendly base or Sunderer.
3. No vehicle spawns in the outposts. If you lose your vehicle then head back to the base for a new one.
4. Now, this is just a not-so-well-thought-out idea. If an empire captures the tech plant next to a warp gate then the warp gate would shut down for, say, 3 hours. This would allow 3 way combat to become 2 way for awhile.

There should also be a reason why one should hold to their bases. One of the most obvious in PS1 was to not lose the tech plant or the tech plant generator, because you would then lose the ability to spawn MBT and number of other important vehicles. I could see this area as something which has plenty of room for development and new ideas.

Pros

• More tactics
• More team effort (support is a must)
• You would actually need vehicles for transportation
• Small coordinated teams can make a difference

Cons

• It's basically PS1 all over again.. (is that a bad thing? )

I made a post about this topic a month ago and nobody posted in it, I even used the same example you did with the rock (but I used a tree lol). I even listed examples of things you could add in (like trenches, craters, ditches, fallen trees, stumps, mounds, burnt out vehicles, ruined buildings, etc, etc)

Current cover is sparse and requires more.

LMAO

I think you're mixing with the wrong kind of players. You see you fail because whilst you are imaginative, thoughtful and outgoing with a can do attitude you were probably expecting the same from your roomies but didn't realise they just wanted to sit in a room pressing LMB (which here could stand for LoMBotony, as in, are you an LMB player?) and farming their certs.

Yes rather than take the exciting and fun approach you had and play the game, they preferred to sit on their backsides whilst there left hands were stuck in a bag of chips. At least you had fun though!

Unfortunately, this is the future of this game.

To the people who want 3v3 or 6v6 or even 50vs50... go play every other FPS out there!

I joined the game for epic scale and grand strategy!

It isn't panning out that way though.

SOE (at the behest of the membership, apparently), is attempting to reduce the inherent scale offered by PS2 into little areas to satisfy those used to 32 combatants jammed together on a little map (every other FPS) instead of focusing on the strength of PS2 which is Its sheer size.

There isn't much else to do in the game right now other than cram and spam... they aren't developing any game aspect to promote the scale, promote tactics or strategy. Every battle devolves into 50 people jamming into a little room to grab a point. Tanks falling all over each other to kill the lone defender, or Esf's falling out of the sky because of the bumping and grinding to do the same thing.

The cert system is symptomatic of the inherent problem, there is little need to specialize, and no process (really) in which to do so.

What else is there but, cram, spam, repair, heal, move on, repeat, then, compare scores? Or do the same thing on a different map?

There is no wonder there is so much zerging going on and so many new weapons are spam focused or designed for use at close range.

This is what is expected of every other FPS game, but Planetside 2 claimed to offer more... much more. I was drawn to the game because of that promise. It's free and I know I can go elsewhere, but I am tired of the regular FPS treadmill. I am still hopeful PS2 will change their course.

This argument is so wrong. Who's fault is it that you leave a base undefended?

Everyone's. Everyone does it, that is a fact so the poster above blames himself for undefended bases.

Now who is going to sit in an undefended base for hours?

NOBODY!

Is it reasonable to expect players to all work together - NO! That's never going to happen (it would be nice though)

So the poster above blames everyone for not have a balanced anything not realising I suspect the same is happening on his side and yet that's ok?

This is why the argument about "it's your fault" is total rubbish - it puts an unrealistic requirement on players and I suspect that the poster here wants everyone else to guard bases except himself.

And again you're wrong.

Tell me anywhere there has been a "well defined battle line" lmao

Tell me who wants to sit in empty bases doing nothing ust because you say so?

I think you just made a different point there. The players who don't pay attention, who serve as fodder for the machine, can find a battle easily and it will be quite engaging.

That leaves special-ops type missions still readily available because, one would hope, people don't feel that their motion of travel is limited by lines on a map.

I like the idea of the lattice system; a coherent map with multiple approaches to big bases, causing big fights to happen. That works well in concept.

The problem comes from the fact that this game, and granted it has gotten quite a bit better, tends to not handle huge fights terribly well. Two groups of 100+ players fighting over a roadway between two mesa's sounds great, right what you signed up for, right? Hope you don't like to be in vehicles though; you are getting engaged by three dozen lockons that aren't rendering for you. Oh hey, stand off range gunfights? Cool, shame you don't have much cover and that people are appearing and dissapearing while you are looking at them through your 4x scope at any range greater then 50 meters. It's like the problem with Scarred Mesa and earlier the Crown before it and, for that matter, any one hex in which a greater then a certain amount of people are fighting. The engine takes a dump and the servers are right behind it.

It confuses me that, given that the game as a whole has serious problems dealing with huge battles, a system would be put into place that tries to force huge battles.

Because its a discussion forum .. and when people want to get an idea or question out its alot easier to do so by making a new thread . why would they do so on page 12 of another discussion where they might never get a response ??

"Why was a separate thread needed for this when we already have 5 others?"

asking this question when it has such an obvious answer has always made me wonder if the people who ask arent the least bit slow ?

I like it so far, ghost capping dissapeared, which is good, now, the problem of ZERGS EVERYWHERE is because of the Indarside problem, if we had similar pops in every continent then it wouldn't be a problem. I think the lattice for Esamir and Amerish will be great in that aspect, it definitely won't be overcrowded with zergs.

There are tons of games the OP can go to have his group of friends vs someone else's group of friends battles. TF2, BF42,2,3, 2142, Any CoD, crap load of other f2p fps's. People like him want this game to be more of the same. More of whats already out there. Just go play the same games youve been playing and stop complaining about something totally different from what youre used to playing.

I actually complain about "more of the same" crap that gets added to this game. Everyone gets a shot gun..wow..revolutionary. C4..ok whatever, i guess boomers were too futuristic. My engineer has to man his turrets...yeah there are no auto turrets in the future.

Added connection points aka lattice ..omg game breaking. Honestly the lattice system is incomplete without it A. being on all continents and B. not having continent locks yet, and C. not having enough continents in game to fully appreciate it and enjoy it.

Once you have cont. locks, more conts, warp zones that are connected to another cont. then you really get to see how clever lattice is and how strategic you have to learn to be.