Sanctuaries and "Beach heads" Poll and discussion

[HELLFISH88]

This thread is for discussion about the renovation to the Sanctuary system in Planetside 2. It has been stated that SOE intends to remove sanctuary's and instead replace them with Un-captureable beach head positions on every continent of Auraxis. This of course is a severe change in gameplay mechanics from the original.


The poll serves as a barometer for our Developers to judge public opinion with math.

I for one don't really like the idea of the beach heads but understand the desire to "speed up gameplay" to suit an evolving market.

Do you approve of the new concept? If not why?

[MgFalcon]

I like the idea of a beach head is ok and good for a home base of operation... but NOTHING can ever beat the GLORY of Sanc locking another Empire... THAT is why we fight, to smear that and trash talk the other Empires about it!

[MooK]

With the kind of immersion the first Planetside had, I cannot imagine a way to introduce uncapturable bases of any kind per continent.

I prefer the original sanctuary system, with the potential for invasion.

[SKYeXile]

Yea, i really think each empire should have a home base or capital...seems kinda week without them...can you imagine playing any MMORPG without a capitcal city...they make the game feel more like an MMO and alive and IMO are a requirement for one.

[EASyEightyEight]

Except for the odd staged raid, sanctuaries were an annoying loading screen waiting to happen. Sticking the safe havens on continents streamlines the process. The old breed just can't let go of what they have grown accustomed to. Not like they can't stage the same raids in the beach heads.

[HELLFISH88]

Except for the odd staged raid, sanctuaries were an annoying loading screen waiting to happen. Sticking the safe havens on continents streamlines the process. The old breed just can't let go of what they have grown accustomed to. Not like they can't stage the same raids in the beach heads.

The issue with the beach heads is that it changes the dynamics of the Game. No more Cont. locks, no more capturing the whole of Auraxis..and my biggest fear: Meta gaming a Ghost hacking during off hours. Now to be fair the Game dynamics are being drastically altered as it is so may not be as big as an exploit as we fear...but we still don't know. I for one will feel better when we have a better idea of the resource acquisition and base capturing dynamics


Dynamics.

[MgFalcon]

I want to see what they have currently (as beachheads). But I love Sanc's and HOME CONTINENTS... It's always "Defend Amerish those TR bastards are attacking it again" that drove me insane... like legit Sanc's and Home Continents made Empire PROUD to keep that shit... whenever you were invading another Empire's Home Continent... You made sure to bring A LOT of friends cause you knew the entire Empire would be after y'all!!

[Raymac]

Main reason I'm glad they are getting rid of the sanc...It really sucked NOT being able to go back to a sanc to form up or get a vehicle because you wouldn't be able to get BACK into the fight because of a poplock.

I can definitely see the pride in having a home continent, but we'll have that same pride for the territory around the beach head.

Personally, I think the pros outweigh the cons. We don't need a whole separate zone.

[Marth Koopa]

What I think should be done is a combination of both....

Don't make sanctuaries and don't put footholds for every empire on every continent, instead give each empire a home continent, have the rest of them be neutral

A home continent will feature a SUPER Base for the Empire it belongs to. This is an uncapturable, large base where people are free to mass forces. It would feature automated weaponry that would completely annihilate anyone stupid enough to get near.

Neutral continents would feature no uncap footholds and can be taken for a continental lock bonus

[FastAndFree]

I need to see these Footholds before I can decide

[NewSith]

I need to see these Footholds before I can decide

And I decided already UNTIL I see these footholds. I mean they sound innovative but a little bit MMORPGish...

[GuyFawkes]

I like the beach head concept , but I feel the way they are described so far is flawed and detrimental to the game overall.

Why? because despite apparently replacing sanctuaries and speeding up gameplay ,it will nullify the strategic purpose of planetside as a whole, and the legacy upon which it was based.

Imagine for a moment that the basic concept of the hexagrid is true , and that you can capture territory anywhere, though a hex close to your own area is much quicker to cap. If you follow this through on a continent by continent basis and have to cap searus to enable a quick start on an adjacent cont , there is a genuine flow and strategic chess game going on in faction v faction v faction.

You can keep the beach head idea in a fashion as a genuine way into the continent within certain criteria ,and the idea of a huge mega beach head somewhere on a home continent is a good start imo.

Why does it nullify the planetside legacy you ask? Simply because this one feature ,if you assume say 10 continents on auraxis , will turn the game into 10x BF3 maps and not the global mmofps we have become used to as the ps template.

Don't forget too , the resources thing adds an element on a personal level with ftp/ class structure . Do I go fight at the main fight on cont A for hours and hours, or just *** over to cont Z and hack all that auraxium close to my faction base now its quiet . If ps2 does go ftp and attract many from world at large , many who may be more pve orientated possibly , the thought of path of least resistance will be attractive .

Its like in ps1 where some lone cloaker /hacker is off ghost hacking/draining a cont and 1 guy turns up to counter him. The 2 could spend the next week chasing each other and never doing anything contructive

[CutterJohn]

Bad poll is bad.

The beach heads are a good idea, and I'd like to see sancs too. Just reuse some stuff and make them for people to gather up for raids and whatnot.


Why? because despite apparently replacing sanctuaries and speeding up gameplay ,it will nullify the strategic purpose of planetside as a whole, and the legacy upon which it was based.

You mean the legacy of where someone who's played for more than a few months can call, with a high degree of accuracy, all the moves the factions are going to make on the continent for the next several hours because of the way the lattice is set up and the rather predictable herd mentality of the zerg?

You can still lock down planets. Higgs gave a figure of 20-30+ minutes to cap a facility that was surrounded by friendlies. What is every base in a capped continent going to be surrounded by? Friendly bases.

And guess what took 30ish minutes to do in PS1? Make a base neutral and cap it.

Capping every base still serves a function. It protects all of the bases on the continent, not just the ones behind the lines. Hell, owning the continent may reinforce that even further.

What the system does is get rid of the absurdly rigid lattice structure that forced the same fights over and over and over again, and made 75% of the fighting occur on just 4 continents. You'll still have 'home' continents, but theres not a guaranteed system enforcing them, and they will not remain static.

[Bruttal]

Honestly Id love to have Sanctuary's and even let the enemy come inside IF they can get past all the automated defenses and the tons of players In the sant. and IF and When they cap it, It gives them 10 seconds to leave the sanctuary then an "Auto Destruct" goes off killing All players in the sanctuary Putting a Protective Bubble up around it and maybe like a wave of Emp bursts start streching out past the bubble to keep people from driving or flying more vehicles into the area.

Now you have all that FUN stuff but to top it off, The faction that was locked Into there sant Now has free rain on where they wanna drop for the next 30mins. they could leave the sant to its demise and take some kinda vehicle/tech penalty or all hot drop on an area of the map and try to take it and get defenses up before there enemy gets there. Or they can stay in the sant spend 30mins repairing broken things and gearing up for an attack and be given some kinda bonus for a limited time.


IDK just rambling

EDIT: oh and the faction that took the santuary would be given like 1 free point to unlock something in there class.

But seriosuly it needs to be vary Hard to do even if 1 empire has 100 people online and the one attacking has 800 but still manageable if they do.

[GuyFawkes]

The whole 'win' scenario too needs some examination I feel.

I hope they have something that enriches your faction pride . You log in , and you get a message that your efforts from the previous day helped your faction to gain the most ground .General X had awarded you x credits as a bonus to spend on your class certs. If you just logged in and didn't play yesterday ,you get the faction message but no bonus.
Likewise , you log in and get the message ''despite facing overwhelming NC and VS numbers , the few brave TR that we did have managed to defend our last base for 4 hours straight until reinforcements arrived later to rebuff the insurgents '' and get x credits bonus and a medal for the battle of gonuku .
That sort of thing , a counter to the 4th empire mentality

[Peacemaker]

I wouldn't like to see Beachheads on every continent. I'd rather see home continents which had one empires beachhead (one per empire that rotate weekly), three neutral continents that have no beacheads, and the rest would rotate with more than one beach head (VS on NC, NC on TR, TR on VS, and one threeway)

[Twiggeh]

In agreement that they shouldn't be on every continent.

I'd like to keep the concept of a sanctuary, but it really depends on how beachheads are implemented.

I also think there should still be some kind of "home continent" concept. For some people there was a sense of pride in keeping your homeland safe. God I miss Forseral.

[Captain1nsaneo]

The fear that beachheads brings is that conts will be uncapturable. If the goal is to keep a presence of all 3 empires on all conts then the territory near the beachheads will rarely be fought over. For example the sanc gates in PS mean that bases like Horus and Mulak are hardly visited. I'd recommend that all beachheads be capturable and allow for there to be an actual LOSS by one side. Having the knowledge that there is no safe haven can be a wonderful motivator. If a side does lose everything let them spawn in at any tower and be able to hack any base. I know the 'hack any base' rule was a fall back of a side lost all its bases in PS at some point.

[NCLynx]

I went with the beachhead concept, but I don't think every empire should have one on every continent.

Now of course on launch and in Beta (unless something has changed) we'll only have the one continent (maybe 2?). However as they release more it wouldn't be hard to say "This empire thought it would be more beneficial to move their *sanc equivalent* to *new continent*". Over time we have ONE beach head on ONE continent and after each empire had one on a different continent then I'd like to see continents with NO beach heads.

It would have to still have a slight for of lattice to it but instead of base to base you would simply have to own something like 85% of the continent before moving onto one with no beach heads?

I'm tired so some of this may make no sense at all.

[MgFalcon]

I went with the beachhead concept, but I don't think every empire should have one on every continent.

Now of course on launch and in Beta (unless something has changed) we'll only have the one continent (maybe 2?). However as they release more it wouldn't be hard to say "This empire thought it would be more beneficial to move their *sanc equivalent* to *new continent*". Over time we have ONE beach head on ONE continent and after each empire had one on a different continent then I'd like to see continents with NO beach heads.

It would have to still have a slight for of lattice to it but instead of base to base you would simply have to own something like 85% of the continent before moving onto one with no beach heads?

I'm tired so some of this may make no sense at all.

This is an amazing compromise I would be willing to do. Having the pride of one or two home Continents with a single beach head for the pertaining Empire. I.e. Amerish and Esamir would only have ONE beach head each, and solely for the VS.

I just really want Home Continent pride lol!

[Raymac]

Sactuaries and Cont Locks are both waaaay overrated.

1) We don't need a whole separate zone to fulfill the role that Sancs do in PS1. It would make much more sense to have everything you need on the continent you are already on. It's a waste of space and stupid. Plus with the size of the new bases with force domes, needing a whole zone is redundant.

2) I've said it in another thread but it bears repeating here I think. Cont Locks suck. More often than not, the losing empire ditches out before it is over leaving the last 15-30 mins a lopsided 9:1 fight. This is crap gameplay.

Plus, in a war game with a persistant world, there will never be a winner. Yes, you win battles, but you never win the war. So "winning" bases, towers, and territory is enough. Cont locks actually slow down gameplay. They are the reason for most of the boring downtime in the game. Fight where the fight is.

[Xyntech]

Sanctuaries and cont locks are overrated. Cont locks made for fun pseudo "win" moments, but that can be replaced by other dynamics.

Having home continents is not overrated.

NCLynx's idea is perfect. I actually hope that we start with at least 3 continents so that each one will be a home continent. 4 would be even better, so that we start with one free for all continent.

As for cont locking, I think pushing somebody back to their beachhead will be good enough.

[CplVars]

. I.e. Amerish and Esamir would only have ONE beach head each, and solely for the VS.


I want Forseral and Ceryshen back. Solsar and Hossin blow.

[Sifer2]

Personally I think removing Sanctuaries is a bad call. This is an MMO after all and one feature they all share is some place for people to come together. That's what kind of worries me about most of their game changes is they seem to be trying to make it less an MMO and more Battlefield.

If I remember correctly the real thing that slowed gameplay was hack times. I don't see how replacing Sanct's with footholds will in any way speed up the process of getting your squad together. I guess they are slightly closer to their destination but meh warpgates got you close enough.

And the big downside here is it removes one of the few senses of victory the original game had where you could completely capture a continent an feel like you won. I would rather the footholds be space stations or offshore ships or something. Anything but safezones that deny you the fun of total victory.

[HELLFISH88]

I want Forseral and Ceryshen back. Solsar and Hossin blow.

Thems fighting words.

[Rivenshield]

big downside here is it removes one of the few senses of victory the original game had where you could completely capture a continent an feel like you won. I would rather the footholds be space stations or offshore ships or something. Anything but safezones that deny you the fun of total victory.

Quoted for truth. With all three empires having invulnerable outposts on most/all continents -- which is what it sounds like they're doing, unless I seriously misunderstood something -- you certainly facilitate the process of getting people to do battle with each other. But it robs you of any sense of 'victory', even in the temporary sense.

[Raymac]

Quoted for truth. With all three empires having invulnerable outposts on most/all continents -- which is what it sounds like they're doing, unless I seriously misunderstood something -- you certainly facilitate the process of getting people to do battle with each other. But it robs you of any sense of 'victory', even in the temporary sense.

I can't buy that at all. I get a MUCH bigger sense of victory after winning a hard fought base than I do being bored sitting around as we finish off a continent lock because it almost always ends in a hugely lopsided population advantage.

I know it looks cute when a map changes color and all, but gameplay-wise, continent locks suck and kill the flow of battle.

[Captain1nsaneo]

I can't buy that at all. I get a MUCH bigger sense of victory after winning a hard fought base than I do being bored sitting around as we finish off a continent lock because it almost always ends in a hugely lopsided population advantage.

I know it looks cute when a map changes color and all, but gameplay-wise, continent locks suck and kill the flow of battle.

Needing to go through a continent to open up another one makes the world feel like it's bigger than its parts. Otherwise you just have several very large FPS maps.

[Sifer2]

I think the disagreement there stems from another conflicting view of MMO and persistence versus FPS an just action shooting all the time. In standard shooters its just win map an then it repeats with no persistence so your always shooting people. Where as being to actually capture a continent an deny it to the enemy is real persistence that matters. Yes it might slow down the action some but personally I am all for it cause I want Planetside 2 to offer me a different experience than just any old shooter I could play.

Unfortunately it sounds like that isn't what the PS2 devs are after. Most of their proposed changes make it sound like they are gearing it to play more like todays standard FPS just with more people.

[krnasaur]

keep it like the old system in some ways, home conts+ bene conts(neutral? idk if they will give bene's this time around) and no sanc.

Homeconts: uncappable base ONLY for the empire its home to.

bene/neut conts: give more resources than homeconts, but dont have an uncappable base, and can still be "locked"

the idea of never being able to win sucks. Atleast we can win somewhat by owning all of the neutrals.

[Squeegeez]

The way I see it working is where there is a shielded base just beyond the frontline territories. The base will be impenetrable unless the enemy advances territory, but it's close enough to the frontline that people are willing to pop by and see the raid numbers. There's also more cohesion in moving out towards a target (Same continent).

[Canaris]

I voted for the PS2 beach head design but I'll be reserving final judgement until I see it in action

[TheRagingGerbil]

I thought in one of the reviews or maybe it was the vidcast they had stated there would be several continents at launch and there would each empire would have a "beach head" or uncapturable base. There would be only one of these per continent. I hope I heard/saw that and didn't dream it.

Personally I think this would be an acceptable replacement for sanctuaries. Each faction would have a home continent that it would need to defend in order not to get barricaded into their beach head.

Oh, while we are at it, remove the broadcast warpgates. If I want to get to continent "Z" from continent "W," then I should have to travel through continent "X" and continent "Y." Rotate the gates every 6 to 12 hours.

[Geist]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that while sanctuaries were gone, the home continents were still around due to these "Beach Head" things. I was under the impression that each faction had 1 or 2 beach heads, on 1 or 2 continents, that could not be captured. The continents that contained these beach heads were the so called "Home Continents" since they could never be completely kicked off them.

And I thought that all other continents besides these Home Continents did not have beach heads. That sounds okay to me.

[CplVars]

But I wants to Sanc lock the VS to get Red and Black Cylon Raiders....

[Xyntech]

Wouldn't capturing all bases on a map (aside from the beach head) be just as rewarding as capturing an entire continent? When you captured all of the home continents in PS1, the locked in empire could still warp to any of the three continents and try and fight their way out.

It's not like the other two empires would ever be able to enter the beach head territory anyways, so what's the difference? It's like the sanctuaries have just been placed closer to the action, where defenders won't have to go through an extra load screen to try and take back some turf.

Every empire having a beach head on every continent would suck ass, but have there been any comments from the devs that indicate that this is how it will be?

Each empire getting at least one continent, where they are the only empire with a beach head, would be pretty similar to how things currently are.

Boo hoo, you can't capture that one little place off to the edge of the map, who gives a shit? You can't capture sanctuaries either. If you capture all of their bases and push them back to the beach head, then V-V-E and a job well done. Have a smiley sticker and a pat on the back.

Beach head lock = Sanc lock
It's the same thing, nostalgia aside.

Sure, it will probably be easier and take less time for the locked empire to make a comeback push, but they are intending to speed up the pace of the game, so that is only appropriate.

I still hope the game launches with at least 4 continents. One home continent per empire with a neutral battleground continent would be awesome. 10 would be nice too, as long as they were all very unique and high quality, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.

[Jendo]

I would simply still keep a separate island for each faction. But first you spawn straight in the sanctuary. Also you could have teleporters in a similar fashion that you use spawn tubes to change places on the different continents.

A different teleport for every continent would make it easy, simple and quick.

[Captain1nsaneo]

You push to a toe head you get the same situation you get waiting for a Capital shield to drop. It will be baby sitting the defending force as they sit in the toe hold.

[Talek Krell]

My impression from the devs is that each continent will have one uncaptureable beach head for each empire. I'm less than 100% sure that I didn't misinterpret though. I'll be delighted if it turns out they meant that each empire has one or two beach heads total. I like that much better.

[Xyntech]

This is different from babysitting a sanctuary warpgate on a locked continent?

[Jendo]

Then you would have to continuously defend a continent from other factions instead of moving on. Quicker sanctuarys is all we need, a uncapturable beach head is stupid since after they capture the continent the only base is surrounded with soldiers it would not make much sense that they would not just destroy it.

[Xyntech]

None of it makes sense if you think too much about it.

Again, from a gameplay perspective it's exactly the same as camping sanctuary warpgates, only at a faster pace of gameplay.

[Talek Krell]

None of it makes sense if you think too much about it.

Again, from a gameplay perspective it's exactly the same as camping sanctuary warpgates, only at a faster pace of gameplay.There aren't three sanc warpgates on every cont though. That's the real concern, I think.

[Xyntech]

There aren't three sanc warpgates on every cont though. That's the real concern, I think.

Right. if this turns out to be the case, it could be a problem. I'll get worked up if we get some confirmation that there will be a beach head for very empire on every continent. Otherwise, probably no biggie, at least not worth worrying about until we see how it plays in beta.

[Raymac]

Is it really that much different from each continent having 4 warpgates in PS1? Sure only a few connected to a Sanc, but there was usually at least 1 or 2 that another empire had access to.

Plus, why are people so in favor of having dead continents? I'd rather there be fewer continents but action going at each one. Why have wasted space of barren wastelands with nothing but the sound of silence? Does having a continent change to a pretty color on a global map really make a difference gameplay-wise? Are you all forgetting about the 30 mins before and after a continent lock of sheer boredom because there was no real fight happening there?

[duck]

Can someone explain what the beach head concept is, not following..

[Talek Krell]

PS2 is ditching the concept of sanctuaries in favor of giving each faction some uncaptureable bases. Either one on each continent or one for every few continents. Ostensibly the point is to allow people to get into battle faster.

[Xyntech]

Just picture a miniature version of the sanctuary, but sitting on one of the actual continents of battle, off at one of the far edges of the continent

We don't know how many beach heads there will be for each empire. Speculation runs anywhere from one per empire on every continent, to each empire only getting a single beach head on one continent and none on any of the other continents. We just don't know yet.

Given that we have seen concept art of warpgates, I think it's safe to assume that not every continent will have a beach head for every empire. Why have warp gate links if you already have a beach head that you can spawn at on every continent? Still, this is only speculation until the devs give us more info.