Population Fix

[Mudflap]

I love the game, I really do. I love the fixes they've put in place, and I think the game has become alot more fun except for one thing. I continue to find myself in hopeless fights on locked continents. I don't see the point in fighting for a continent that we're going to lose because the enemy has twice as many people as we do and the continent is locked.

The populations are so disproportionate sometimes that I want Konried back. Emerald is swarming with NC, and as a Vanu there, we rarely hold more than one continent. Anyone who plays there knows the NC rule.

So here's what I think should be done. Firstly, make the continents lock by allegience. For instance, 100 of each per continent. That way, if a continent is locked for the VS and NC, then the armies are of equal size. I can't see the point of the current system. Zerg friendly is all it is.

Secondly, and more debatably, limit the populations by login. What I mean is, make it so that if you're logging into Emerald as NC, and the NC population is over 10% higher than any other, you can't login. I know this seems harsh, but there are enough fighting fronts that you tend to lose ground on a global scale because of population differences as well as a continental scale.

So what do ya think?

[Rayder]

Don't know what you mean by "anyone who plays there knows the NC rule" I play on Emerald, NC don't rule. What times do you play? 99.99% of the time it's the time you play that determines everything. So don't go whining about how the populations are all screwed up. Secondly, and more debatably, limit the populations by login. What I mean is, make it so that if you're logging into Emerald as NC, and the NC population is over 10% higher than any other, you can't login. I know this seems harsh, but there are enough fighting fronts that you tend to lose ground on a global scale because of population differences as well as a continental scale.
That is harsh. And it's a really bad idea. How bad of an idea? Well let's just say that superly-fuckedup-pieceofstupid-mudbrained-annoying-shitassed-bullshit, is as nice as I can put it :)

[Mudflap]

I play at various times. Check it now, check it whenever. NC almost always have 5 locked continents.

Yesterday's winner on Emerald: NC 35.4%. What a shock!

There are population differences all the time, and I'm not crying 'nerf'. You're not being objective, you're being defensive. I am looking for constructive criticism, not trolling.

If you don't like my ideas, at least acknowledge the validity of my gripe. have you never been in a fight on a locked continent where you were outnumbered to all heck and back? Where's the fun?

[DeadTeddy]

yeah, no point in locking if it doesn't make the fight fair. or should I say, makes the fight unfair.

on the other hand, the devs are working on making base defenses something to actually fear. when they're done, I bet 3-5 squads would be able to hold back the same number of platoons. in that case it would be pretty hard to take a cont even with full power zerg.

[Madcow]

I've always thought that pop locks should be handled differently. I don't know what the maximum population per continent is, but I think each empire should lock when they reach 1/3 of that maximum number. If the maximum is 750 (hypothetically) then once your empire has 250 people on the continent the continent should be locked for your empire only. The other empires then have the ability to bring an equal number of soldiers to the party before they are locked out.
I don't understand the logic behind locking a continent and forcing 1 of the 3 empires to either stay off of the continent or show up with a handful of troops doomed to failure.

[Veteran]

NC has the advantage in numbers. It's just fact. I play at different times around the clock and when NC doesn't have a 10%+ advantage, they usually have at least a few percent advantage, and when they do, each of those percentage points is dozens of players.

With the strongest (by far) main battle tank and (by far) the best Heavy Assault weapon in the game, it's little wonder. Add the second best MAX units, arguably the best empire heavy buggy, arguably the best empire AV weapon and it starts to fall into place why NC crushes its opponents on a fairly regular basis.

I'm not trying to threadjack this into an empire balance debate. I'm just saying what I feel is pretty obvious.

[flypengy]

If each empire gets exactly 1/3 of the server space, then you end up in a never ending merry go round. You boot one empire off and they just backhack right back in because they always have the space available. As it stands there is always one empire with the fewest people, if you think you're 2nd on that list, target the weaker enemy or force the empire with the greater population into fighting the weaker empire. That way once they are booted it becomes more of a fare fight.

I would rather loose every day and never hack a base than never be able to boot the enemy off.

[TheN00b]

Ya, it's really a good idea to focus on one enemy empire at a time. Concentrating your forces is a key to success.

[Mudflap]

But that's all kinda pointless when you're facing one enemy that outnumbers you 2-1 or more.

[TheN00b]

Tuche'

[Rayder]

But that's all kinda pointless when you're facing one enemy that outnumbers you 2-1 or more.
BUt when their forces are split between two opposing forces, what half do you get?

[Mudflap]

BUt when their forces are split between two opposing forces, what half do you get?
Obviously when you're in a threeway, the rules are completely different. If your force is equal to one of the enemies, and the other enemy has twice your force, guess who's going to win. It's become clearer to me that population determines alot, and once a continent is locked, you're not getting reinforcements.

Example:
The TR have as many people as the NC and VS combined on a continent. The NC and VS forces are roughly equal. The TR don't need strategy. They can afford to focus on one enemy, knock them off the continent, then go wipe the other out. It will be easy for them, even with bad CR5s.
Once they knock the NC off the continent you might say "Hey, the VS could fill up that second half and have a force equal to theirs!" But we all know that that is not what happens. What happens is the VS and the TR receive roughly equal reinforcements, which means that the TR still have a huge advantage.

This is the problem with the way continent locks are handled. This is why the zerg persists.

[Hamma]

Supposedly there are equal spots for empires on continents, but sometimes it sure as hell doesent seem that way.

[Madcow]

Supposedly there are equal spots for empires on continents, but sometimes it sure as hell doesent seem that way.

I can absolutely guarantee it isn't that way. I thought I remembered them fixing it to be equal for each empire, but couldn't remember for sure. I went to Forseral with my VS char the other night and we had a single tower while all 3 empires fought over a nearby base. I pretty much saw every VS on the cont, we had no other spawn points and nothing else was being taken, and it couldn't have been more than 75 or so and we were pop locked. Once the NC took the base, they moved part of their force out to squash our tower and it was roughly equal to the defending force (although they had vehicles and thus the definite upper hand) while at the same time they had a Huge Enemy Force attacking the next TR base. Ain't no way numbers were equal.

[Hamma]

Time to add some questions for the next interview :p

[Professor Frink]

I always thought that was the rule until the server merger. This would be a be a good idea because tactics & leadership strength should win the battle not overwhelming numbers. This might also prolong the really good fights... :cheers:

[infinite loop]

Supposedly there are equal spots for empires on continents, but sometimes it sure as hell doesent seem that way.

Yeah definitely not the case. I can't remember where atm, but there was a dev post recently about the pop percentages on a continent. It basically boils down to this: if 2 empires have empire population lock, there is a much less than 33% free space for the 3rd empire. My guess is about 20% tops. So if VS and TR both have locked a cont, they both have 40% of the pop, while the NC would only be able to hold 20%. So basically, the third empire would most likely be better off fighting elsewhere, or hope that one of the other two empire's population drops on the cont. I think the only practical reason that 2 empires can't lock a cont, is because it's plausible there wouldn't be a fight anywhere else for the third empire. But I think an equal split would not be a better answer. Reward the 2 empires for getting their troops there first.

[BadAsh]

NC has the advantage in numbers. It's just fact. I play at different times around the clock and when NC doesn't have a 10%+ advantage, they usually have at least a few percent advantage, and when they do, each of those percentage points is dozens of players.

With the strongest (by far) main battle tank and (by far) the best Heavy Assault weapon in the game, it's little wonder. Add the second best MAX units, arguably the best empire heavy buggy, arguably the best empire AV weapon and it starts to fall into place why NC crushes its opponents on a fairly regular basis.

I'm not trying to threadjack this into an empire balance debate. I'm just saying what I feel is pretty obvious.

Thread Jacker!!! :) I don't agree 100% with your assessment.

I can�t speak for other servers but IMHO the main difference between the TR and the NC on Joharkov is CR5 leadership and organization. I play both TR and NC about the same, so I can see the differences pretty clearly.

When playing TR the leadership plays a basic �zerg control� role and that�s about it. You get commands like �everyone go here� or �repair that generator� etc. When I switch to NC I see a bit more structure. The CR5�s organize a few squads asking for volunteers for a few critical missions. They send troops to back hack and sabotage generators, they send troops to secure modules, organize GAL drops, and there is always a full ANT ready when a base turns blue. Also, the TR top brass have a nasty habit of breaking off offensives to �defend a home continent� when one of the continents linked to the sanctuary starts getting back hacked. Great, now you just split your troops again and are setting the stage for the next major TR defeat.

The other night was a perfect example of, IMO, poor TR leadership. The TR got shoved all the way back to their sanctuary WG. The NC had about 7 vanguards, 12 max units, the WG tower, and about 40 or so infantry� the TR began massing troops in the WG� at one point I counted 16 prowlers and 9 reavers with marauders, AMS, and other vehicles thrown into the mix.

My outfit squad realized we were outgunned and braced for an ALAMO style fight to the death. But instead what happens? The TR troops got no leadership past �everyone mass here� and they just sat there coming out 1, 2, or 3 at a time and got spanked. This went on for a bout 30 minutes and when I left the TR had only 2 prowlers and a few stragglers remaining. How hard would it have been for someone to say �hold on until we are ready� and give some kind of count down so everyone knows what to expect and when to go? If those guys would have come at us together the NC would have been smashed� but the leadership void again yielded predictable results.

Another leadership debacle was on a battle where the TR had �massive enemy forces� at two or our bases. Our leadership realized, to some amusement, that the TR only had a link to one of the bases they were attacking. So the NC just organized and brought the bulk of their forces to the base with the link. We crushed the half of the TR force that was there and then smashed them at the other base. Despite swarming a base they could not hack the TR even failed to kill the generator or take down the spawn tubes. So you have attackers swarming from the outside, only 1 AMS for yourself on a blue locked continent, and attackers spawning behind you from within the base you are fighting from. Do I have to explain what eventually happened? Through individual effort the TR put up a good fight, but the leadership void had them at such a disadvantage it was an unwinable uphill battle.

Also, the NC leadership understands how to attack. As NC I�ve been a part of coordinated tank, MAX, and infantry rushes hitting the enemy all at once. You get this with the associated support (i.e. adv meds and engineers following the MAX units for revival and repair). Also the �distraction� of the main offensive is used to have a few support guys flood the area with AMS stations. This way if the main offensive is stopped the enemy will now be subjected to a flood of infantry and casualties are very quickly replaced with all of the local spawn points that were just set up. I�ve NEVER EVER seen the TR come close to any of this organizational effort.

Additionally, the TR as a whole don�t field anywhere near as much armor as the NC or VS. I�m not sure what the deal is, but it�s always a wave of 12 Vanguards against 2 Prowlers and 30 infantry. Now if it were 12 tanks vs. 12 tanks things would be about even. Prowlers OWN if used properly. In a Prowler I have little trouble taking out a Vanguard 1 on 1. The problem is that it�s never 1 on 1 because the NC are working as a TEAM. I see a disparity in MAX numbers as well and this is also critical. And please don�t give me the crap about the TR MAXs being useless. The TR had a tower behind out lines one day with an organized squad defending with engineers, infantry and 4 Pounders. The Pounders were spamming the front entrances making them virtually impenetrable. If you got past them you got MCGed and Boomered trying to navigate the stairs to the spawn room or CC. This went on for a LONG time with the Pounders racking up dozens of kills. It finally ended with a combined MAX push with a full GAL drop on the roof. When the TR decides to organize and fight they are TOUGH.

The TR have good numbers, they have good gear, they have great players� they just need someone to lead them. With the NC it�s only a small handful of the CR5s that are good� but that�s all it takes. Any new up and coming leader has a disadvantage in that the TR are pretty demoralized. They need some organization and a few good wins before they can �get back into the swing of things�.

[sPooT]

I'm pretty sure Spork explained it on the official boards somewhere not so long ago. If I remember correctly, the first empire to grow large caps out at 50-60% of total continent capacity, I have no clue why they did that however. So it's definately not at 33% as some people seem to think.

I'll try to find the thread for ya.

EDIT: Well that wasn't hard ;)

--> Info about population Locks. (OB) (http://boards.station.sony.com/ubb/planetside/Forum16/HTML/000541.html)

[Cyanide]

It's true that NC has the biggest population most of the time on emerald, but saying that they're always doing the best is just false. VS often controls several continents and more than contends with NC when we have our good CR5s on to keep the zerg from being uber stupid.

[infinite loop]

Thanks spoot for finding that post. So apparently 2 empires CAN lock a cont. Interesting.

[Indecisive]

They need to reserve a specific amount of equal spots for each empire. We are set up for a three way battle, and only 2 vanu can get on the continent.