No sanctuary's. Could it cause a problem?

[Heaven]

I have been reading up info on ps2 and see that their not going to have sanctuary's in the game, so what happens when a faction has no where to spawn? They have no territory or base's in their possession... And like they have said there will be 1000s of players online at once but cant play as they have no territory.

[Logit]

I have been reading up info on ps2 and see that their not going to have sanctuary's in the game, so what happens when a faction has no where to spawn? They have no territory or base's in their possession... And like they have said there will be 1000s of players online at once but cant play as they have no territory.

I'm sure they have thought of all of this.

[Gandhi]

Every empire will have an unconquerable base on each continent, so you're never really locked out of anywhere.

[basti]

The entire taking bases and stuff mechanic will be rather different. It is impossible to predict how the lack of sancuarys and addition of footholds (batstes infamous beachheads ^^) will play out. Beta will show, and i Trust T-Ray saying that if something isnt fun, they change it.

[dsi]

Every empire will have an unconquerable base on each continent, so you're never really locked out of anywhere.

:(

[Wakken]

Am I the only one who actually kinda liked the sanctuarys? Waiting for the shuttle and having toilet break while waiting for it xD

[Raymac]

There will still be unconqurable areas or "footholds" on each continent in PS2, just like PS1. In PS1 we call them warpgates. In Ps2, I imagine those footholds will be more like the Sanc in that you can pull vehicles there, warp to different continents, rally for attacks, etc.

Except now, instead of having 1 Sanc, we will have a Sanc on each continent so you don't have to zone out, rally, get in the queue to get back in the continent, then actually attack. Now it's just rally and attack. Sounds MUCH more streamlined to me while still providing what the old Sanc did.

Lets not let nostalgia ruin a good improvement.

[razor851]

Every empire will have an unconquerable base on each continent, so you're never really locked out of anywhere.
That sounds awful in theory.

[Warruz]

Here is the deal and why i think no sanctuaries is a bad thing and it breaks down into two things.

1) Is moslty a gameplay issue, in that there is no main center for gatherings. There is no "Main" area to gather for your faction. Rather your faction is now split between all these different contents, making it harder to put together mass attacks and cordinate.

2) Is without a central location or rather a stronghold or HQ for your faction you loose a sense of immersion. In a Game like Planetside it doesnt much stripping away and you get a glorified battlefield. Sanctuaries may not add much to the gameplay but it does add to the immersion giving you a sense of connection. With The current idea in place with no sanctuaries i feel you would loose this sense of connection that your in a mmo world as there would be no connection rather more of a fractured setup strung together.

[Hamma]

I honestly believe that it was more the HART that slowed down combat rather than the sanctuary itself.

[Marsman]

Even with the existing Sanctuary in PS1, you could spawn at Hart A, B, or C. In PS2, Think of each continent having a sanctuary area - thus perhaps you will have 9 choices instead of 3. In the same way you would say "Form up at Hart B", you will say "Form up at Searhaus" for example. Seems like this could work fine.

[Warruz]

Even with the existing Sanctuary in PS1, you could spawn at Hart A, B, or C. In PS2, Think of each continent having a sanctuary area - thus perhaps you will have 9 choices instead of 3. In the same way you would say "Form up at Hart B", you will say "Form up at Searhaus" for example. Seems like this could work fine.

i dont doubt it working, i just feel you loose immersion as there is no longer one single get together. It gives less of a feeling of a MMO and more of a instance feeling.

[BorisBlade]

i dont doubt it working, i just feel you loose immersion as there is no longer one single get together. It gives less of a feeling of a MMO and more of a instance feeling.

Yeah i got that too. But we are losin alot of the immersion stuff. They seem to want more of the much more superficial cod/bf stuff just with more players. But there is a long time between now and beta and then release, ya never know. I hope somethin of the old PS comes back besides empires and fight size. Its the little things that really add to immersion, sadly im seeing most of them not comin back.

I never did get how sancs slowed down gameplay. They have said it several times, but never once said why. The fact is, sancs dont slow down gameplay at all. Now, the hart could, by makin you wait a whoppin 3-5 mins the very first time you log in, 3-5 mins is horrible for the ritalin addicts apparently and could cause them to explode despite the fact they only would do it once during the whole night, or not at all if they know to how take 5 seconds and hit instant action, but 5 secs is prob too long for them too.

Honestly i just dont get what the downside is to a sanc. I see quite a few tho to not having them. A sanc on every cont will function much like a single sanc, just more instancy feeling and harder to coordinate or keep raid form ups secret and just....well...bleh feeling. I dont have a home for my empire? I feel no connection to this world. Feels like several instances instead of a planet.

And yeah they dont want sancs so they put sancs in on every cont? /boggle.

[Death2All]

My main concern is what happens when you log on. Are you just spawned at some random foothold on some random continent? It would make organizing a whole lot more difficult when people are randomly spawning everywhere.

[MgFalcon]

It's a hugely new concept, I think not having a Sanctuary can be a good idea but right now this really only makes me feel homeless... :(

[Bags]

My main concern is what happens when you log on. Are you just spawned at some random foothold on some random continent? It would make organizing a whole lot more difficult when people are randomly spawning everywhere.

I have a feeling we'll be able to choose, within reason of course. It would go along with their whole "get you into the action faster" thing.

[Death2All]

I have a feeling we'll be able to choose, within reason of course. It would go along with their whole "get you into the action faster" thing.

It still seems chaotic. Also the fear of a fight never ending, which I think is their direction with this game. It was nice to capture all the bases on a continent and then move on to the next one. But since every cont has an uncapturable foothold it would seem impossible to ever end the fight and given the prevalence of people spawning at them it would just be a constant back and forth.

[Spark]

It still seems chaotic. Also the fear of a fight never ending, which I think is their direction with this game. It was nice to capture all the bases on a continent and then move on to the next one. But since every cont has an uncapturable foothold it would seem impossible to ever end the fight and given the prevalence of people spawning at them it would just be a constant back and forth.

That's exactly what I don't want. It's hard for me to get motivated when I gain no sense of progression (or regression).

[Death2All]

That's exactly what I don't want. It's hard for me to get motivated when I gain no sense of progression (or regression).

The motivation to fight now seems to be more over resources than capturing bases. Still, I don't want to fight on the same continent forever because the empires can constantly keep back hacking me.

Although they did say there's a capture bonus for an empire with a lot of territory. Basically saying something like "If you were to back hack it would take you 30 minutes to capture said territory because you have no bonus. But if the empire with all the territory were to come re-secure it would take 30 seconds".

Even still, it sounds tedious and boring much like how resecuring back hacks are in Planetside 1.

[Bags]

I'm going to have to see this in action as we know nothing about these footholds.

[Death2All]

I'm going to have to see this in action as we know nothing about these footholds.

It's so much more entertaining to tear the game apart before we've even played it and wallow in our own self pity.

[Bags]

Maybe these "uncapturable" facilities will deactivate for a few hours if you have no resources (read: you lost the continent), forcing you to fight elsewhere? Who knows.

[Marsman]

If I understand what I saw in one the vids, upon login you will see a time-lapse map of how the battle has progressed - where the fights have been, how the front lines have shifted, etc... I suspect you then might be able to see the mission system "suggest" a place to engage. I think at this point you are then given a option on where you would like to spawn. Perhaps it'll be at a "suggested" staging area on one of the continents sanctuaries. You'll probably will be given an option to spawn on your squad leader if he has the skill or proper position to allow it, or perhaps another empire/outfit controlled base. I believe the whole idea is to quickly bring you up to speed on what's been going on since you logged off, show you the current situation and current mission assignments, and then give you the option of spawning where you see fit to join the action asap. My best "guess" :D

[krnasaur]

someone write up a petition thread to get sancs back.

ETA: i would but my eloquence doesn't help me.

the only real problem with the sanc was it was 90% baron and the hart.

[Bags]

I honestly don't care either way. I liked them but I rarely ever spent more than a minute or two in them.

[Skorne]

Part of what I loved about sanctuary's was being able to test all the vehicles and weapons available in game. It helped me no end to decide where to put my next cert points when I was a noob. I hope they include some kinda similar VR training area to replace it. Also I for one didn't mind the HART shuttle wait.

Given that they are going with deep cert/resource/sandbox system having a sanctuary to do all that stuff when not fighting makes a lot of sense. At least part the fun of PS for me was making new crazy builds to try out in combat, but since the inventory system is gone I guess that area of the game is pretty much dead in PS2 anyway.

I just hope the continental uncaps will be able to provide similar staging/training area experience.

[Raymac]

It feels like the people who really want the Sancs want them primarily for the sake of nostalgia. It sounds like anything you can do at the Sancs now, you will be able to do at the new "Footholds" including staging for an attack.

We don't need a whole detached continent for this.

[Volw]

It feels like the people who really want the Sancs want them primarily for the sake of nostalgia. It sounds like anything you can do at the Sancs now, you will be able to do at the new "Footholds" including staging for an attack.

We don't need a whole detached continent for this.

This.

The only disadvantage or advantage, depends how we look at it is that now it is going to be much more difficult to capture whole continents.

[Hyncharas]

I think if anything, the lack of Sanctuaries, but the use of the Foothold mechanic and Outfits controlling their own bases, will cut back on the monopolising of one empire over another 75% of the time... in fact, it was one of the major weaknesses in gameplay in the original.

The NC or VS always had unbelieveable impunity towards the TR and that primarily made me quit playing, as the "underdog" perspective gradually ceased to be any fun. I don't believe the new system will prevent vehicle/weapon testing, however, and it may actually be better if the Certifications become a process of improvement as the player-character ranks up.

[Kran De Loy]

Other than the missing nostalgia of large martial forces converging on one place to formulate a plan of attack safe from the ears of common soldiers in other factions what change will there really be?

I mean, I havn't played in a long time, but I remember Warp Gates being untouchable. So please forgive my forgetful ignorance, but what makes them different than having a single Sanc that adds a pair of loading screens in-between each continent?

In this day where Ventrillo, Teamspeak and now Mumble are much more widely acknowledged and used, communications between faction leaders have the potential to be that much more secure than the ingame chat. Even when that chat happened within the Sanctuary.

[Rabb]

I kinda like the idea of no sanctuary’s it means other bases and locations will be used as staging areas which opens up more tactical options in the form of spoiling attacks to stop an assault before it starts.

[Tikuto]

While there may not be an old Sanctuary, I still like the idea of VS's homeland being named "Sanctuary" nevertheless - just a name.

VS homeland: "Sanctuary" in a spiritual sense.
TR homeland: "Metropolis" in a developed sense.
NC homeland: "Bastion" (stronghold) in a rebellious sense.

[Aractain]

The VS's homeland is called "Graveyard".

[Princess Frosty]

I'm mixed on this.

On the one hand waiting for the HART was boring and slowed down time between combat, but it also let randoms group together and all hit at the same time rather than trickling into battle and never amassing enough punch to be effective.

Kind of like wave spawning in a lot of FPS games today, it means you're forced to attack as a unit.

Hopefully they can balance all that with the new system.

[BlazingSun]

The VS's homeland is called "Graveyard".

"Gaybar" is more likely

[Tigersmith]

Ill tell you right now. I dont like how there is going to be a base on every cont you cant get. Its stupid.

For me I got the most satisfaction eliminating a enemy empire from a cont. Now its gonna be like ok. We got rid of all their land. but they still have a base.

Stupid idea. :cry:

[Elude]

As said before I don't think sanctuaries have been removed even though the developers claim that, they simply just changed how they work.

I'm perfectly fine with permanent bases per faction on each continent. I imagine the way spawning will work is that when you log in you are able to spawn at either of these permanent bases or squad spawn in with a drop pod on your squad leader if he has the upgrades for it.

I'm still unsure how drop ship spawning will work, my guess is it'll be a third option just after logging in, where you spawn in a drop ship on the field. But perhaps you must select and spawn on a continent first, and selecting a drop ship to spawn in on that continent via a terminal or something. Then again maybe it's attached to an upgrade for the pilot who can perhaps filter out whether he wants random team members to show up in his craft or just squad mates.

Anyway, I really don't mind fighting over one area forever because there are great resources there, in fact I love it. To me it feels more like your own when you have to take care of it and live off of it. This will add a completely different feel to PlanetSide 2 I think and will ultimately make the cause of fighting feel more real.

Truth be told the resource location will feel more like the sanctuaries themselves but instead of something completely safe they will have value to them.

To me this seems much more lively then before.

[Logit]

Am I the only one who actually kinda liked the sanctuarys? Waiting for the shuttle and having toilet break while waiting for it xD

You're not alone.

I really hope they reconsider the whole sanctuary idea, although it seems unlikely.

[Warruz]

It still seems chaotic. Also the fear of a fight never ending, which I think is their direction with this game. It was nice to capture all the bases on a continent and then move on to the next one. But since every cont has an uncapturable foothold it would seem impossible to ever end the fight and given the prevalence of people spawning at them it would just be a constant back and forth.

There needs to be a end to the fight thought, their needs to be a point where you move on to a different place. Planetside is a constant struggle but once again what gives that sense of immersion and mmo feeling is that at some point that fight is done there, you conquered it and its time to move on. Or your defending and loosing and its time to fight a new front.

Id rather have that new front be on different ground/environment/weather not on HEX 38 in the top right corner right outside my minisanc.

What id rather see if anything is these bastions are neutral and become a simply larger undertaking to claim the entire place as yours.

[Elude]

Don't you guys see? The end of the fight is taking the enemy resources which could benefit you much more then taking any one continent in Planetside 1 would do.

Just imagine how well defended said resources might actually be! There could be more troops there defending then there were people massing in sanctuaries of PlanetSide 1.

To me those are the main homes, something you actually claimed rather then given from the start, taking one of these will feel way more like an accomplishment in my opinion then taking an entire continent in PlanetSide 1.

[Volw]

Biggest plus of no sanctuaries I can think of is ... I won't have to worry about bloody pop-lock.

In PS1, unless one of the factions had access to all types of facilities, there was always a reason to go back (usually to either bring in the tanks or Galaxy). That when people still played :p meant at the very least 30 minutes of waiting in the queue.

Seems like no more this time. Recall to 'foothold', grab a gal, fly back. Win.

[Warruz]

Don't you guys see? The end of the fight is taking the enemy resources which could benefit you much more then taking any one continent in Planetside 1 would do.

Just imagine how well defended said resources might actually be! There could be more troops there defending then there were people massing in sanctuaries of PlanetSide 1.

To me those are the main homes, something you actually claimed rather then given from the start, taking one of these will feel way more like an accomplishment in my opinion then taking an entire continent in PlanetSide 1.

resources are a means to a end, they aid you in taking over and doing better.

Sanctuaries like i said add to the immersion, they connect the world and give a sense of world. Without it you now have these mini sancs on the different worlds not connected. It becomes just a jazzed up Map switch like a traditional FPS game, no different then the server changing maps.

I would prefer the strongholds where Neutral and could be captured, you gain it to give a main base of operations on that area but you can loose it.Also giving quite a fight for that last piece of land to take over.

I know im really on this immersion thing but i feel it is a important part, look at WoW or other attempts at a sort of MMOFPS. They are all instances, you need not do anything or have nothing to do in the world. You click a few buttons and you que up and are sent in a BG esc way. I dont want planetside to simply be larger scale of this, where instead of 16vs16 its 100vs100.

[Raymac]

Volw makes a great point in that when there is a pop-lock, you don't want to leave that continent just to rally for an attack because it will take you forever just to zone back in. This limited your tactical options. I'm glad they are removing that limitation.

Also, since the lattice is out the window, and we have this new awesome terrain control dynamic, locking an empire out of a continent is probably going to be significantly harder whether there is an uncapturable foothold or not. You don't just have to take that last base connected to the warpgate, you are going to have to surround your enemy and force them into a corner.

It's really hard to say for certain what this major change will bring until we see what the maps look like. From what I've heard so far, the pros for removing Sancs are going to far outweigh the cons.

[Vash02]

It feels like the people who really want the Sancs want them primarily for the sake of nostalgia. It sounds like anything you can do at the Sancs now, you will be able to do at the new "Footholds" including staging for an attack.

We don't need a whole detached continent for this.
Then one could argue why have a individual sanc for each continent when you can just have one?

This is what I see happening at these footholds. CR5's call searhus as primary and to form up in the foothold. mindless zergers head off immediately before the empire is formed up and starts capping land where the opposing empire then notices, shuts down the raid and traps it inside the foothold.

Theres also the problem of enemy empire mossies/cloakers just hanging around outside watching your every move.

[Raymac]

Then one could argue why have a individual sanc for each continent when you can just have one?

This is what I see happening at these footholds. CR5's call searhus as primary and to form up in the foothold. mindless zergers head off immediately before the empire is formed up and starts capping land where the opposing empire then notices, shuts down the raid and traps it inside the foothold.

Theres also the problem of enemy empire mossies/cloakers just hanging around outside watching your every move.

Good point, but it's a reality that is unavoidable to a certain extent. The same thing happens in PS1.

Operational Security will always be important in a massive pvp game like this. We can do the same thing in PS2 as we do now. Form up somewhere, but not give the target until you are formed up and ready. I assume we'll be able to warpgate from one continent to another.

[Vash02]

Good point, but it's a reality that is unavoidable to a certain extent. The same thing happens in PS1.

Operational Security will always be important in a massive pvp game like this. We can do the same thing in PS2 as we do now. Form up somewhere, but not give the target until you are formed up and ready. I assume we'll be able to warpgate from one continent to another.
Then why have the footholds if they are going to be inneffective for their purpose?

Also theres the end of the fight where the empires just sit there having a staring competition through the impenetrable barrier. Just like that mossie you chased into a WG in PS1.

IMO its just better to have a single segregated staging area from which to launch raids. Less confusion and easier to control and muster forces.

[Raymac]

1) Then why have the footholds if they are going to be inneffective for their purpose?

2) Also theres the end of the fight where the empires just sit there having a staring competition through the impenetrable barrier. Just like that mossie you chased into a WG in PS1.

3) IMO its just better to have a single segregated staging area from which to launch raids. Less confusion and easier to control and muster forces.

1) That feels like a big leap in logic, or more likely, I just don't understand what you mean. Sancs would be no more effective with OpSec than a Foothold.

2) There's a couple issues I have with thie point. First, we don't know what the Footholds look like, so we may never have a situation of the old Warpgate staredown just because of the layout. Second, we don't know what the maps look like, so it may be insanely difficult and rare to push an empire locked into their Foothold. We just don't have enough information yet.

3) One of the lessons I took out of the Core Combat expansion is that creating a whole seperate zone doesn't nessessarily improve gameplay, in fact, by splitting the forces so much, you start to lose the massive scale that is the fundamental core of Planetside. Plus I don't think "Rally at Searhus" is any more complicated than "Rally at Sanc".

[basti]

Im pretty sure the idea is to have big fights on every continent. While i cant see how they will manage to have that during night time, i clearly see the idea behind those bases rather than sancs.

Gonna really just be able to wait and see how this turns out on a full server, im pretty sure they could manage to get a few thousand guys in the same for several days yet. Means they just have their idea, and no way to really test it real.

After all, Planetside had no lattience for some time, causing back hacks all the time. They once added the lattience, maybe they will add the sancs this time? ;)

[Vash02]

1) That feels like a big leap in logic, or more likely, I just don't understand what you mean. Sancs would be no more effective with OpSec than a Foothold.

2) There's a couple issues I have with thie point. First, we don't know what the Footholds look like, so we may never have a situation of the old Warpgate staredown just because of the layout. Second, we don't know what the maps look like, so it may be insanely difficult and rare to push an empire locked into their Foothold. We just don't have enough information yet.

3) One of the lessons I took out of the Core Combat expansion is that creating a whole seperate zone doesn't nessessarily improve gameplay, in fact, by splitting the forces so much, you start to lose the massive scale that is the fundamental core of Planetside. Plus I don't think "Rally at Searhus" is any more complicated than "Rally at Sanc".

1) The purpose of the footholds from what i gleamed was to get people into the fight quicker (as if the few seconds to click instant action wasnt fast enough). If raids are going to have to be formed on another continent than that of the intended raid target then why not just have the single sanctuary?

2) I think it would be bad to just have an endless fight for each continent. I liked the win feeling when you lock down a cont in PS1.

3) Your argument also works against having multiple continents. I mean why have 5-6 conts when it just divides the forces?
"rally at searhus" has the problems of people getting to searhus either travelling through multple WGs or having to find a spawn tube to spawn to searhus. with the single sanc you can just recall and bang your there. simpler, easy for the new guys.

I do believe this is where the KISS principle should be prominent.

[Raymac]

1) The purpose of the footholds from what i gleamed was to get people into the fight quicker (as if the few seconds to click instant action wasnt fast enough). If raids are going to have to be formed on another continent than that of the intended raid target then why not just have the single sanctuary?

2) I think it would be bad to just have an endless fight for each continent. I liked the win feeling when you lock down a cont in PS1.

3) Your argument also works against having multiple continents. I mean why have 5-6 conts when it just divides the forces?
"rally at searhus" has the problems of people getting to searhus either travelling through multple WGs or having to find a spawn tube to spawn to searhus. with the single sanc you can just recall and bang your there. simpler, easy for the new guys.

I do believe this is where the KISS principle should be prominent.

You're making some very valid points, and I appreciate your tone and perspective. Frankly, I never thought Sancs were a huge problem, certainly not the main problem, so I'm kind of playing the role of devil's advocate. I have a feeling we'll just have to agree to disagree and see what the Footholds are like.

1) Personally, I didn't use Instant Action for the first few years because it would always send me to some random tower out in the boonies. Now that there is basically 1 fight going on at a time, Instant Action works a little better, but it sucked for years.

Also, if you form a raid on say Searhus, and the enemy finds out about it, well they still don't know if you are going to raid Searhus, or jump to Hossin, or anywhere else. But if you do decide on staying in Searhus, well you are already right there. No need to zone. That's why I say it is faster and better.

2) In a persistant mmo, you can't have a major win situation. For example, in WoW, the Alliance will never destroy the Horde and vice versa. Just like I say to the arguement that you can't "win" in PS1, the game is filled with hundreds of little victories and losses, except the computer doesn't stop and say "Yay, you win!". If I want to win rounds, I'll play BF or COD. For persistance, I come to Planetside.

3) You're right my arguement does work against mulitple continents. The devs should hopefully find a balance. They want us to fight for every square foot, so we'll see how many continents we get at the launch. Also, you mis-understood my "Rally at Searhus" example, but I've rambled enough.

[ShowNoMercy]

I have a question, who says the footholds that have been mentioned are stationary bases? did anyone catch that comment about how the tower in the trailer has landing struts. Call me crazy, but smed is telling us that something is going to move. IDK if its just a tower or an entire base but its something.

Also not sure how a movable base would be incorporated, but I agree that the feeling of finally taking a continent is pretty sweet. Additionally, since they are incorporating resource points, covertly dropping back behind enemy lines to try and take a resource point away from the enemy seems awfully like a gen hold. Who didnt like gen holds? they were awesome. Since they are removing the lattice system the resource rich hex's will be perfect locations to "gen drop"

Lastly, the sancs can go as long as there is an easy way to drop back to a predetermined location (im thinking binding here). An example being that you log in do an instant action kinda deal and join a sqaud. Your squad already has a bind point and you now have a new spawn location to choose from. When you SL calls for a recall you can meet up there.

P.S. dont you all remember drooling over the idea of fighting in the sanc? face it, no matter what safe central spots are lame and eventually you want to be able to fight there anyways.