So, apparently we got the number about AMP station's size...

[cellinaire]

Hmm don't get me wrong, for this isn't about rant, worries, disappointment or asking for more. At all. :cool:


What I had to say after hearing November AGN webcast is that the continents are rather.... small it seems. Even considering the fact that every single area of this game is hand-crafted masterpiece. :groovy:
And I'm saying this as a gamer who have played both Just Cause 1/2 and Dark and Light (this was a fantasy mmo, but sadly the developer gone bankrupt few years ago). I just guess PS2's conts are slightly larger or around the same size as PS1 conts.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/media/viewer.php?img_id=1754
(Our mighty dev Higby said in the webcast that AMP station on the northwest corner of that map is roughly around 350m long and 250m wide. That map also shows roughly 1/4 of a whole continent from what I heard in the webcast.)

I hope I'm wrong here ;) but after all, I can live with that.





And I'm currently at my wit's end to imagine how large the continents are going to be because the numbers seem to be changing repeatedly, ranging from "continents are dozens of square kilometers" in the IGN article to "8km*8km continents" in recent PCgamer interview.
Of course, will there be larger continents in the future, right? (Cyssor perhaps? :D ) Is the 8km*8km continent biggest one available or mid-sized one?

Ah, and it just popped up in my head that you guys are will introduce space battle and sea warfare in the distant future. Then what about the i-Novae engine used in building 'Infinity : Quest for Earth' mmo(which I remember I've seen in this forum several times)? Any underwater aspect of PS2, maybe?


Last but not least, will the pop-cap gradually increase in post-launch continents? (I mean, technological advances considered)

[sylphaen]

Morto, time to calc the continent's full-size, enhance it and infer the rest of the map content through statistical analysis.

You have 2 days.
:D

[Coreldan]

Think he mentioned that the map we saw there was approx a quarter of the whole continent, you could perhapd calculate something based on the amp station and that :D Overall though, Im not worried.

[cellinaire]

Think he mentioned that the map we saw there was approx a quarter of the whole continent, you could perhapd calculate something based on the amp station and that :D Overall though, Im not worried.

Yeah I think 4km*4km is already freakin' big enough for a FPS, but there will be thousands in a single continent in this game, if I remember correctly. :lol: I wonder if some areas of a continent will be over-crowded?

[SKYeXile]

Think he mentioned that the map we saw there was approx a quarter of the whole continent, you could perhapd calculate something based on the amp station and that :D Overall though, Im not worried.

ill do it...brb...

[SKYeXile]

i dunno what amp station is in the north west corner of this pic...perhaps he meant the other one...ether way, i doubled the width of the base for my squares, each one is 500mx500m, makes that sector of the map 2.5km across. Not going to be 8km across if thats25% of the map exactly, but lets been reasonable..he pulled a number thats is close out and im sure the conts will endup massive enough.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v629/SKYeXile/ps2grid.jpg
(cbfed skewing)

I see 5 bases on that map, if we times that by 4, thats 20 bases, more than any current PS1 cont has. even if we go by 4, the amount of full bases on screan, that would be around 16 bases, still more than anything in the current PS im pretty sure.

[Coreldan]

I think in that screenie its the one to the middle and right. In the other pic that was to the upper left.

Also, even if amount on bases was same as on PS1, the bases are roughly double as big or so. I think I also picked up that it won't be "room-corridor-room" but more about actual rooms in the bases itself.

*RWJ-voice* Check out the base beeeeeeeloooow

http://www.planetside-universe.com/media/main/psnext/basescreenshot_trayoct.jpg

EDIT: No wait, I think they were referring to a different base all together. This is the original map:

http://www.planetside-universe.com/media/main/psnext/twitter/20111117_4ec5ab0f19883.jpg

Buut anyways, I think your calculations could be roughly right anyways.

[cellinaire]

Great estimates I see =)

So, based on what released thus far, around the same or a wee bit smaller continent size as PS1's continent but much more detailed, with larger bases and greater number of outposts and control points. Maybe Higby just said it without telling too much.

[Coreldan]

Yeah I think 4km*4km is already freakin' big enough for a FPS, but there will be thousands in a single continent in this game, if I remember correctly. :lol: I wonder if some areas of a continent will be over-crowded?

The over-crowdedness depends on a few things, but overall I think it may not be an issue.

Higby mentioned long ago that basically every area is contestable. Not just bases. So instead of fights only going on in bases and the chokepoints near them (Cyssorsiiide!), the fight can go on about a forest (or anything that has in-game resources) that could be next to a road between two bases.

So instead of having everyone squeezed into bases, we're likely to have more battles in "the middle of nowhere" now too, cos we all know how greedy those damned TR and VS are, obviously all the resource should go to the NC.

[cellinaire]

The over-crowdedness depends on a few things, but overall I think it may not be an issue.

Higby mentioned long ago that basically every area is contestable. Not just bases. So instead of fights only going on in bases and the chokepoints near them (Cyssorsiiide!), the fight can go on about a forest (or anything that has in-game resources) that could be next to a road between two bases.

So instead of having everyone squeezed into bases, we're likely to have more battles in "the middle of nowhere" now too, cos we all know how greedy those damned TR and VS are, obviously all the resource should go to the NC.

Oh, thanks for the clarification. This and new mission system will help, I guess. :cool:

[CutterJohn]

And I'm currently at my wit's end to imagine how large the continents are going to be because the numbers seem to be changing repeatedly, ranging from "continents are dozens of square kilometers" in the IGN article to "8km*8km continents" in recent PCgamer interview.

Dozens and dozens = several dozens.

8km x 8km = 64 square kilometers = several dozens.

[cellinaire]

Dozens and dozens = several dozens.

8km x 8km = 64 square kilometers = several dozens.

Hehe sorry. Looks like I did a mistake here.

But it was rather a bit ambiguous for us to chew on at that time, I think.

[Graywolves]

I like what they're doing with the map but I'd also like clear colors?

[Coreldan]

Higby touched on the colour issue in AGN. Well, more likely the UI guy did. There are just some colours that work better than others, but also in that picture he was testing sort of different kind of overlays. This might not be the normal map.

[CutterJohn]

Hehe sorry. Looks like I did a mistake here.

But it was rather a bit ambiguous for us to chew on at that time, I think.

Not really. Its just 8kmx8km sounds a hell of a lot smaller than 64 square kilometers.

[Captain1nsaneo]

Map size does not equal land mass size. Either way, little known story: in PS the original conts were MUCH larger but with such large conts the fights are strung out and thin so they compressed the conts to allow for constant fights and shorter drive times.

[Death2All]

Someone also pointed out (I think MightMouser did on the official forums) that the original PS' measuring system was completely wrong. It would appear you were only a few feet away in game but the measurement came up as 3m. So either everyone in PS was giant or the measuring system was wrong.

Whether or not that ties into the actual size of the map is unknown, but still.
I think we might still be looking at smaller sized maps unfortunately, at least for now.

[Bags]

That 3m bs always confused me.

[Baneblade]

Unfortunately, when you have an air component, especially one as pervasive as PlanetSide's, small maps just don't cut it.

[Skepsiis]

A smaller map could perhaps feel much bigger if there is a lot more going on in it. I mean both in terms of physical content like structures and scenery, and battles and front lines if the action is less focused on going from base to base.

Good point on the aircraft being able to get around a bit too quickly on a smaller map though... Could be an issue. Maybe they could make much more use of the z space with higher altitude and big variences in height. Sky bases anyone? Or they could make AA really effective at tracking and killing fast moving (hotter) aircraft that fly at altitude and therefore have little to no cover. Would need to approach much more carefully flying through canyons and skimming around hills that way.

[Aractain]

Thats a good point about PS1 measuring system seeming to be in feet not meters, will the new one be in real meters? So 3 m in PS = 1 m in PS2? Where is that technical director dude?

[Tasorin]

Planetside 2’s settings – continents on the planet Auraxis – measure an epic eight kilometres square, with weapons capable of firing a full kilometre in distance. “One of our largest development efforts on this project has been hand crafting every single area of those eight-by-eight kilometre continents,”


MMORPG OCT PS2 Article (http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/loadNews/22374/Battles-to-Take-Place-on-8x8-Kilometer-Continents)

So like someone already said, 8km x 8km square with weapons that will shoot 1km.

[CutterJohn]

with weapons that will shoot 1km.

Pretty sure those weapons will be a type of artillery, not the standard ranges on weapons.

[Hyncharas]

I think most of what we've seen so far is actually the AMP Station and its perimeter. Those who watched the Dev Roundtable at the weekend instead of listened to it could clearly see the structure appears to be a power generator with transmission conduits that may extend out beyond the facility itself, linking to other bases on the continent.

On PlanetSide's maps there were at least one of these on every continent; realistically, however, there could be as many as three in the new game, to evenly distribute energy to power all the bases and their defences.

[SKYeXile]

I'm sure snipers can...You know what it takes to make a shot a that range? Everything comes into play that far. Humidity, elevation, temperature, wind, spin drift. There's a six to ten second flight time so you have to shoot it where the target's going to be. Even the Coriolis effect, the spin of the Earth comes into play.

...cant find youtube video...

[Raka Maru]

Pretty sure those weapons will be a type of artillery, not the standard ranges on weapons.

I think this is sniper range but can't find the post.

[krnasaur]

I'm sure snipers can...You know what it takes to make a shot a that range? Everything comes into play that far. Humidity, elevation, temperature, wind, spin drift. There's a six to ten second flight time so you have to shoot it where the target's going to be. Even the Coriolis effect, the spin of the Earth comes into play.

...cant find youtube video...

haha, good movie.


But yea... Would be kind of annoying if you were off somewhere loading a gal, and you got killed by a stray MCG round shot straight into the air.

[Coreldan]

Higby did say about a similar map screenie that it was approximately quarter of the entire continent. It wasn't the same map, but the map was the same size and full screen, so no reason to doubt about that one being approximately 1/4 of the entire continent :D

[Tasorin]

Pretty sure those weapons will be a type of artillery, not the standard ranges on weapons.

No one knows for sure, that was just what Higby was quoted as saying. One would expect though that with 1km = 1000M that is within the range of snipers and main guns on tanks. Unless they scale down current balistic ranges of today's modern weapons.

As an Vet of the US Army Artillery, a 1000M shot is a direct fire, tube on the deck, oh shit they found us, shot. Not a elevated tube with normal projectile trajectory.

It's all in how Higby and crew decide to scale the weapon effective ranges vs. the in game physical distance with the phys-x engine.

[SuperMorto]

Once I feel a bit better ill knock a little something up.

[GuvNuh]

Hmm, been trying to formulate my thoughts fer about an hour with no success, so let's go with a bit of rant....

I'm a TR ground pilot and the mechanized assault is what i love most about planetside. We all got fuzzy memories, and mine are of Dukes of Hazard meets Nascar style memories of my buddies pasting people while i got us in and out alive. Part of what made the big fights fun was all the armor and aircraft running around, and
just how hard it was to get those tanks and aircraft there in the first place.

(Here's where my thought process breaks down a bit, trying to distill a bunch of different aspects of a distance fight into a coherent argument. bear with me)

Part of what made the big armored fights good, and determined the success of many fights, was the logistics involved. AMS's would get taken out and have to keep being rolled in, sometimes a couple good OS's would take out all yer spawn ability and you had to lodestar some in quick or lose the offensive. Engineers would lay mines out in between vehicle runs to boobytrap you.("oh god, stay off the roads. They're a trick, they're always a trick...") During the assault over a long distance, say east side of searhus for example; if armor and aircav didn't have a place to repair and rearm, a few good pheonix kills would cost you the initiative as you suddenly had to deal with half a dozen vannys without armor or air support.

Part of any army's weakness is that it has to maintain a supply of vehicles and equipment, AND get them to the locations they are needed. It plays into the strategy and dynamics of a fight too much, and adds too much flavor and opportunity to be scaled down too much from where planetside was.

When attacking or defending a base, sometimes i just like to stop, listen to the gunfire, and watch the map. There's teams holding the back door, people trying to get outside, aircraft dogfighting overhead, and tanks rolling in from the next base over to help resecure the coutyard. Stuff going on everywhere, and it's a great feeling to know that those are all people, many of whom i know, in their own battles against thee enemy, most likely not ever directly involving my own fight, but our success as an army depends on the outcome of both our battles.

Although what i've seen says they're going to blow any misgivings away. i think the PS2 team loves this game as much as we do(while not on the clock anyways) and have a pretty good understanding of what makes a big fight engaging. It's that there's stuff going on freaking EVERYWHERE. i just don't want it to be contained like so many modern wargames are. It's gotta have that scale and scope to kinda break the invisible walls for you and bring that total immersiveness in.

Anyways, my worry is about losing that titanic scale and large involvement. But, what i've seen so far says not to worry too much, PS2 has some talented, dedicated, and most importantly, INVOLVED people working on her. I know they'll make one sexy gun totin' bitch for us all to get smacked around by. Keep up the good work fellas, we're rooting for ye. Look foward to pasting you all in the new prowler.

"Go on, try it out. We may even survive"-GuvNuh

[Khellendros]

Well said Guvnuh and I agree.

It's why I'm still not sold on the ability to spawn on your squad leader, I think the game could do without it just fine. While it is true that there would still be logistics in terms of protecting your SL to keep the spawn up, it's just not the same dynamic as an ams. I'd prefer to keep spawning vehicle based.

[Xyntech]

One thing that people constantly miss with the squad spawning thing is that it has never been the developers intention to have squad spawning be the primary form of spawning.

Presumably it will have a long reset timer or in some other ways be less viable for minute to minute respawning.

[Khellendros]

One thing that people constantly miss with the squad spawning thing is that it has never been the developers intention to have squad spawning be the primary form of spawning.

Presumably it will have a long reset timer or in some other ways be less viable for minute to minute respawning.

I can live with that.

[dsi]

Exactly how large were PS1's maps?

We should really compare these before we ftfo.


Also, if squad spawning is like a more streamlined version of Project Reality's rally points it might be good.

[Talek Krell]

It's why I'm still not sold on the ability to spawn on your squad leader, I think the game could do without it just fine. While it is true that there would still be logistics in terms of protecting your SL to keep the spawn up, it's just not the same dynamic as an ams. I'd prefer to keep spawning vehicle based.I understand your trepidation, but I think it's going to be a good move. As has been said, it's not supposed to be a primary spawn method, and won't be useable indoors.

I see it as a much needed boost to infantry in the field. In PS1 an infantry squad traveling any significant distance on foot was pretty much doomed to die of attrition. The ability to bolster their numbers without waiting for people to run back from the AMS will give them a lot more flexibility to move.