Resource system is broken when pushed back to WG.

[CutterJohn]

When I first heard about it, I was skeptical. Mainly since, as a self professed vehicle whore from PS1, I was unhappy that the play I preferred was getting a serious nerf in availability.

Right now, we're pushed back to the warpgate pretty much, both the VS and NC deciding we are better/easier opponents than each other. For the privilege of being the punching bag of two empires, we are earning:

+0 auraxium
+0 aircav/lightning resource
+15 tank/lib resource
+40 sundy/gal resource.

So no upgrades for tonight. No more skyguard for the forseeable future. I can pull a tank, but I better make sure it lasts an hour and forty minutes, because that is how long it is going to be before I could afford another one. But hey, I can pull a sundy every 25 minutes.

So basically, from this point, our empire is fighting, for the next couple hours, for no upgrades for the night. We have to make do with 1 tank every 90 minutes, or one lib every 2 hours. We are earning exactly zero towards aircav or lightnings(meaning 3/4 of our AA is gone.. relying on one armed AA MAXs and HA AA). Gals and sunderers we are slightly better on, but the enemy has so many vehicles to our none they last about 30s.

The resource system works fine when the factions each have pretty much the same, but when one empire gets pushed back, it just becomes pointless. You cannot take land with infantry in this game, and you're certainly not earning any auraxium for the upgrades you want/need.

At least in PS1, you could fall back to sanc and grab whatever you needed for free. Here, it is nearly impossible to push out. The only thing we can do is wait for the VS and NC to dissolve the ad hoc truce they had going.


How does this get fixed?

- Reduce resource gains from territory, add a respectable basic rate where you get at least 1 lightning or aircav every 20m, tank every 30, etc.

- implants to greatly reduce/eliminate the price of a single vehicle. You can always get your baby, in other words, but you cannot start spamming some other vehicle.

- Basic, no upgrade vehicles available for free from WG.

- other

what do you think?

[MonsterBone]

Try not getting owned.

[nomotog]

The problem seems to be that the two empires aren't attacking each other like they should be. Why is that?

[CutterJohn]

The problem seems to be that the two empires aren't attacking each other like they should be. Why is that?

Not really. When they add the new maps, and its a 2 way, the same thing will happen if one empire outpopulates another on a continent.

The effect needs to be made more subtle, else its just rich get richer gameplay. We had those in PS1, but the effects were a lot less dramatic. Even if they denied you tech, you could still pull stuff from sanc.


As for why they are pushing, who knows? All it takes is a subtle preference to start it. Maybe people like the landscape in the southeast more, so both VS and NC push on TR. Maybe they prefer fighting the TR over each other.

[CutterJohn]

Then add another map, you see how this problem starts fixing itself.:D

What I like to see is PS2 get up to three maps in beta, then lets see where the bottlnecks are, there will be.. but they may be far more simpler solutions at three maps, then they are at one.

I don't really see how doing well on one map is a solution for being resource starved on another.

Player incentive will be to move to the map that is being held most successfully. Why fight on the continent where you are earning +10 auraxium when you can fight on the continent earning +50?

And it still won't stop the double team, though it will make it harder to naturally occur, since the continent layout won't have as much bearing on preference. It will depend on enemy preference then.. Whoever the most people prefer fighting is gonna have a bad time.

Edit: And now at 1am it is..

+0
+0
+0
+19

You can get a flash every 15 minutes!

[qbert2]

The resource system is also broken because it tends to favor small outfits that consist of friends / people who are more concerned with playing together and aren't concerned with fulfilling a specific role. It does nothing to help promote larger combined arms outfits that have people in groups dedicated to specific roles.

[Ipimpnoobs]

when you say broken, it sounds like your expectations are of a completed game. Believe you me, when they say launch and if everything looks like beta today, ima demand the SOE gang be demoted to my understudies as I take on the new roll as DCEO (D=Dictator).

For the first few years, ima run a tight ship and insubordination will cost 10 lashes. I'll be damned if i'm gonna play that kid game higs created. Since he likes to smile allot and loves people, there could be perfect position for him as the new SOE receptionist. We won't have to worry about this though because they won't fail..right?! :lol:

All jokes aside, try making a complete compiled list of bugs you are seeing. This could range from faction imbalance to a map glitch. Don't be shy either. Post that list in a thread and in the official, even if its over 100. This will greatly improve the game guys. Making a thread for one issue is kinda of a waste.

Just today I encountered about 10 more bugs to add to my crazy list.

gl 07

[SpottyGekko]

Last time I looked, territory could ONLY be taken by infantry in this game ;)

So NC and Vanu squashed you, what did they do next ? Held hands and sang campfire songs ? When they (inevitably) turn on each other, you have your chance.

But more continents will probably make a big difference, unless 2 whole factions can maintain an alliance across 3 continents...

I'd love to see the ability for outfits to store up "contingency resources" which can be allocated to members in times of need. It can even be a "corporate tax" like in EVE, so each outfit member automatically donates a % of their earned resources to the outfit pool.

[Syphus]

Try not getting owned.

^There you go. This isn't a problem with the resource system, this is the punishment for losing.

[RoninOni]

The meta fix is Esamir. A new map is needed.

^This

Beta is Beta and incomplete game is incomplete.

Congratulations on discovering that though.

[Tatwi]

The effect needs to be made more subtle, else its just rich get richer gameplay. We had those in PS1, but the effects were a lot less dramatic. Even if they denied you tech, you could still pull stuff from sanc.


Sanc should come back and it should support this game play, so that you may have an obvious disadvantage from not having any land, but at least you can fight properly to get some back.

[maradine]

^There you go. This isn't a problem with the resource system, this is the punishment for losing.

Beta commentary notwithstanding, you don't grow playerbase by punishing losers. This isn't real life - players can go play something else pretty easily and without a lot of mess and paperwork.

The losing faction should be incented to fight their way out, not go somewhere else. I don't know what that incentive should be, and I'm certainly not advocating they should be rewarded for getting pushed into a hole - just that getting pushed into the hole shouldn't be the end of your effective character progression and therefore the end of your night.

edit: unless the philosophy is "if you're not good, you're going to have to pay for AUX." I guess this is one way to do it. Is it the right way? Dunno.

[Kipper]

And neither can you reward people for being owned or you take away the incentive to fight and win.

I propose this - if you suck, you lose your background resource gain, but there should be 'loot' for capturing a territory back.

More loot would come from a combination of the less territory you own, and the more the people you took it from own - so if you're pushed right back, you can get a significant insta-boost.

Also, I'd make it so that only people in range of the capture when it goes through get the loot. Incentive to get off your bottom and start taking back land.

[CutterJohn]

Theres some hardcore people here. I think we did fine in PS1 fighting over 10% hitpoints, Amp shields, dropship bennies, etc. This punishment for losing is too extreme.

Try not sucking? The problem is making several hundred people not suck.

[cBselfmonkey]

Player incentive will be to move to the map that is being held most successfully. Why fight on the continent where you are earning +10 auraxium when you can fight on the continent earning +50?


Well I don't know how its currently working in the Beta but isn't there supposed to be pop caps on continents? If one is earning your faction 50+ Auraxium, or whatever ends up being absurdly high, then its probably got a fairly large amount of players on it. An amount that would probably cap soon after people saw it was raking in a ton of cash.

So people who can't get in will go to other, less populated conts where they'll have an easier time anyway. Or just not play but I'd guess most would rather play then not.

[qbert2]

IIRC the goal of the resource system was to a) keep people from mass spamming vehicles and b) introduce some level of attrition. The problem with this is that it does neither of those things well.

Mass spamming was prevented in PS1 with timers and we rarely had the problem of no infantry in that game.

Attrition is altogether more complex. The general concept of attrition in the realm of planetside is that of a siege. You siege the facility, outpost, etc. to whittle them down and you slowly but surely reduce their ability to fight back by bringing vehicles to bare. That concept is centered around regional attrition. You have an attacking force wanting a region and a defending force wanting to keep it. The attackers can use attrition to help remove the defenders by killing more of the things that cost resources and the same for the defenders.

The problem is that the resource system doesn't work at a regional level. It works on an individual level. Attrition doesn't happen to a general area it happens to individual players from playing the game. This is a problem. Since a battle of attrition over one region affects that player's ability to fight in another region.

What happens is attrition is too slow to effect region level conflicts because of the number of players in the game while at the same time greatly exaggerating the effect of snowballing that comes from being pushed closer and closer to your warpgate.

That snowballing effect sucks because now you, as an individual, have no recourse and eventually this happens to everyone in your empire. The result of which is that as the snowball progresses more and more people just sign off.

Thus, the resource system as it is currently envisioned and implemented is broken.

[SixShooter]

When I first heard about it, I was skeptical. Mainly since, as a self professed vehicle whore from PS1, I was unhappy that the play I preferred was getting a serious nerf in availability.

Right now, we're pushed back to the warpgate pretty much, both the VS and NC deciding we are better/easier opponents than each other. For the privilege of being the punching bag of two empires, we are earning:

+0 auraxium
+0 aircav/lightning resource
+15 tank/lib resource
+40 sundy/gal resource.

So no upgrades for tonight. No more skyguard for the forseeable future. I can pull a tank, but I better make sure it lasts an hour and forty minutes, because that is how long it is going to be before I could afford another one. But hey, I can pull a sundy every 25 minutes.

So basically, from this point, our empire is fighting, for the next couple hours, for no upgrades for the night. We have to make do with 1 tank every 90 minutes, or one lib every 2 hours. We are earning exactly zero towards aircav or lightnings(meaning 3/4 of our AA is gone.. relying on one armed AA MAXs and HA AA). Gals and sunderers we are slightly better on, but the enemy has so many vehicles to our none they last about 30s.

The resource system works fine when the factions each have pretty much the same, but when one empire gets pushed back, it just becomes pointless. You cannot take land with infantry in this game, and you're certainly not earning any auraxium for the upgrades you want/need.

At least in PS1, you could fall back to sanc and grab whatever you needed for free. Here, it is nearly impossible to push out. The only thing we can do is wait for the VS and NC to dissolve the ad hoc truce they had going.


How does this get fixed?

- Reduce resource gains from territory, add a respectable basic rate where you get at least 1 lightning or aircav every 20m, tank every 30, etc.

- implants to greatly reduce/eliminate the price of a single vehicle. You can always get your baby, in other words, but you cannot start spamming some other vehicle.

- Basic, no upgrade vehicles available for free from WG.

- other

what do you think?

When they add a resource cost to get a Max it will get even worse:(.

[Flaropri]

Most PvP FP2 games I know with in-game resources (such as LoL, Poxnora, HoN, etc.) give those resources even to players that are losing, albeit usually at a reduced rate (TF2 being an exception because it doesn't care and just gives out pretty much equally to everyone). I think that completely cutting off all resource gain even if you're losing that badly isn't a good idea, not for the sake of balance, and not for the sake of letting players have fun. Even if the result is that you can pull one set of vehicles every 1-2 hours, that should still be possible.

It is though hard to say exactly what kind of impact having more than one continent will have, and it MAY result in it becoming a none-issue... but I doubt it.

[CutterJohn]

IIRC the goal of the resource system was to a) keep people from mass spamming vehicles and b) introduce some level of attrition. The problem with this is that it does neither of those things well.

Mass spamming was prevented in PS1 with timers and we rarely had the problem of no infantry in that game.

Attrition is altogether more complex. The general concept of attrition in the realm of planetside is that of a siege. You siege the facility, outpost, etc. to whittle them down and you slowly but surely reduce their ability to fight back by bringing vehicles to bare. That concept is centered around regional attrition. You have an attacking force wanting a region and a defending force wanting to keep it. The attackers can use attrition to help remove the defenders by killing more of the things that cost resources and the same for the defenders.

The problem is that the resource system doesn't work at a regional level. It works on an individual level. Attrition doesn't happen to a general area it happens to individual players from playing the game. This is a problem. Since a battle of attrition over one region affects that player's ability to fight in another region.

What happens is attrition is too slow to effect region level conflicts because of the number of players in the game while at the same time greatly exaggerating the effect of snowballing that comes from being pushed closer and closer to your warpgate.

That snowballing effect sucks because now you, as an individual, have no recourse and eventually this happens to everyone in your empire. The result of which is that as the snowball progresses more and more people just sign off.

Thus, the resource system as it is currently envisioned and implemented is broken.

See, I always figured vehicles would be free with timers, like PS1. But the various up/side grades would cost resources. Want a tank? Here you go. Want bonus armor on that tank? That'll be 50 resources.

This way the empire always has the basic capability to fight. But they are fighting in naked vehicles, sans any sort of upgrade.

[Maarvy]

I personaly dont see a problem with resource locking a empire out of a continent .I've been on the receiving end of the deal once or twice already in ps2 .

Without this what is the point in working towards pushing a empire back to there warpgate . Dont we already have 40 million MMOS out there that pander to the incapable and mediocre , planetside 2 shouldnt be another one .

If you get warpgate locked i think you should absoloutly be stuck there until your faction removes its head from its ass and does something about it ... no handouts !

I think a big problem with resouce locking in beta is that every johhny random rolls out one asset after another solo in a big derp train until none has a single resource left .... and then comes on the interweb to QQ about how hard done by they are .

[CutterJohn]

no handouts !

The ability to fight on a somewhat even level is not a handout. Giving the winning team even more tools to win, on the other hand, is most definitely a handout.

[Flaropri]

I personaly dont see a problem with resource locking a empire out of a continent .I've been on the receiving end of the deal once or twice already in ps2 .

If you get warpgate locked i think you should absoloutly be stuck there until your faction removes its head from its ass and does something about it ... no handouts !

In DotA* or Counterstrike**, you have limited resources that you have to build up by doing well. However, if you consistently do poorly, there comes a point when you have no chance of winning because the enemy outgears you. In both instances however, the round will end, and you'll have a chance to try again from an even playing field.

PS2 does not allow that. Therefore, if you are completely locked out it becomes much, much harder to do something about it. You can't just say: "okay, GG you win" and start over. You need at least SOME way of evening the playing field in at least one battlefield, and keeping it "even."

Ideally, the existence of three factions should help, since the other two will turn on each other, but developers should not balance a game purely around ideal situations. Certainly, if a single faction was absolutely dominant, or if two factions agreed to always beat up the third when they tried to push out, a GM could intervene. However, that seems like a cop out, and it would be far more satisfying for ALL players involved to have such events purely from the in-game mechanics.

If the advantage is too great, people just won't play, because it's boring, "unfair" or whatever.

I think a big problem with resouce locking in beta is that every johhny random rolls out one asset after another solo in a big derp train until none has a single resource left .... and then comes on the interweb to QQ about how hard done by they are .

There's a difference between someone as an individual wasting resources and an entire faction being unable to gain resources at all. Think also about how this affects incoming new players. If they join the wrong server and faction they'll get a terrible impression of the game, at best leaving that server for another and like as not to just not play the game.

I do believe that resource conservation should be important, but I also believe it should be possible even in such dire situations.


*(DotA also has XP differentials, but no matter what the losing side can still get gold and xp from incoming minion waves. If they're able to hold on long enough, they might even be able to equalize on items and levels, though such situations are rare.)

**(CS has fewer raw power levels between weapons, but they are certainly present. Much as I like Desert Eagles it's no replacement for an AK or UMP, to say nothing of grenades and body armor. It is also worth noting that individual skill can have much more impact on both these games, where even if you're the most awesomest awesome FPS player [or even squad of such] you can still get dragged down by the other 600 players in your Empire. All the conservation won't help you if you have no income in the long term or effective use for it.)

[Maarvy]

Sorry but i disagree with you guys , resource locks are fine imo .

The first bases around the warpgate are very close and can be easily recaptured by a foot zerg . Once you have them you are already earning resouces at a minimal level to get some armor and air back .

[SpottyGekko]

After playing WW2-Online for many years, I still feel very uncomfortable just "dumping" a perfectly good tank or plane just so that I can redeploy. My instinct is always to try to return the vehicle to a friendly base so that I can save the equipment for re-use by my faction.

But in PS2, my use of resources does not affect my faction supply. I don't have to worry much about the "bigger picture", I only have to manage my personal supply.

I have slowly adjusted to the fact that I can spam infantry endlessly (and recklessly).
Others have too. I have noticed an increase in "kamikaze" pilots lately. Is that Gal spawn-point taking too long to kill ? Spawn a few Liberators and just crash into it. If you don't fly much, wasting your Liberator resources is no biggie, you weren't going to use them productively anyway. And you will not be wasting an asset that someone else could have made good use of.

Personally, the fact that my faction is being pushed back to the warpgate makes me fight HARDER, not log-off or swop to an "easier" server. It gives me an extra incentive, and the satisfaction of breaking (or delaying) the strangle-hold is far greater than rolling over a hopelessly outmatched opponent.

If PS2 becomes a game where I just logon and randomly shoot people for an hour or two with no plan or consequences, I wouldn't be playing it for very long.

[Maarvy]

After playing WW2-Online for many years, I still feel very uncomfortable just "dumping" a perfectly good tank or plane just so that I can redeploy. My instinct is always to try to return the vehicle to a friendly base so that I can save the equipment for re-use by my faction.

But in PS2, my use of resources does not affect my faction supply. I don't have to worry much about the "bigger picture", I only have to manage my personal supply.

I have slowly adjusted to the fact that I can spam infantry endlessly (and recklessly).
Others have too. I have noticed an increase in "kamikaze" pilots lately. Is that Gal spawn-point taking too long to kill ? Spawn a few Liberators and just crash into it. If you don't fly much, wasting your Liberator resources is no biggie, you weren't going to use them productively anyway. And you will not be wasting an asset that someone else could have made good use of.

Personally, the fact that my faction is being pushed back to the warpgate makes me fight HARDER, not log-off or swop to an "easier" server. It gives me an extra incentive, and the satisfaction of breaking (or delaying) the strangle-hold is far greater than rolling over a hopelessly outmatched opponent.

If PS2 becomes a game where I just logon and randomly shoot people for an hour or two with no plan or consequences, I wouldn't be playing it for very long.

Now this is my kind of player ...

If you fall back to the warpgate like a rabble , and try and fight your way out like a rabble . Then shit happens imo .

Whats promoting teamwork if you hand every soloist a tank to blow up every 10 minuites ? . Answer .... nothing . Players work together with a common goal and what better common goal in ps2 than gaining resouces if your getting none while gate locked .

Handing even more "free" resources to players that have aready wasted there supply through poor gameplay wont help your faction one bit .

[Timealude]

The adjacency system has helped with this a lil bit, it made it so an outfit cant go behind your frontline just to warpgate lock you. The whole problem I see with the price implant thing is that people will start using aircraft as taxis really quick once they have the safe landing cert in. I think there should be a passive tick in the warpgate say like 10 poly 10 cata and 10 alloy that way it would help you push back eventually.

[Maarvy]

The adjacency system has helped with this a lil bit, it made it so an outfit cant go behind your frontline just to warpgate lock you. The whole problem I see with the price implant thing is that people will start using aircraft as taxis really quick once they have the safe landing cert in. I think there should be a passive tick in the warpgate say like 10 poly 10 cata and 10 alloy that way it would help you push back eventually.

I could live with this , but the passive tick is all you should ever get inside the warp gate and never araxium regardless of how many bases you hold .

[Timealude]

I could live with this , but the passive tick is all you should ever get inside the warp gate and never araxium regardless of how many bases you hold .

Ya, but i think they would need to do this after they solve the afker problem atm.

[Maarvy]

I thought only getingt 10 alloy/cata etc while inside the gate would go a long way to reducing the afk problem .

Inactivity kicks are always semi ineffetive against aker's especialy if theres something to gain .

[Frotang]

When this happens to an empire it will be the time when truely dedicated outfits step up and use their amassed auraxium to buy resources. Yes 1000 AUX is too high i think for 300 resources but this is why it's in the game, for this very circumstance, therefore if you want to really play as a team you will have to band together and drop aux on resources to push back.

[Rat]

Not enough people are going to be willing to spend their auraxium on a common resource..there may be some, but not enough to push people back from the WG, I think most will just log off and walk the dog.

[Gortha]

After playing WW2-Online for many years, I still feel very uncomfortable just "dumping" a perfectly good tank or plane just so that I can redeploy. My instinct is always to try to return the vehicle to a friendly base so that I can save the equipment for re-use by my faction.

But in PS2, my use of resources does not affect my faction supply. I don't have to worry much about the "bigger picture", I only have to manage my personal supply.

I have slowly adjusted to the fact that I can spam infantry endlessly (and recklessly).
Others have too. I have noticed an increase in "kamikaze" pilots lately. Is that Gal spawn-point taking too long to kill ? Spawn a few Liberators and just crash into it. If you don't fly much, wasting your Liberator resources is no biggie, you weren't going to use them productively anyway. And you will not be wasting an asset that someone else could have made good use of.

Personally, the fact that my faction is being pushed back to the warpgate makes me fight HARDER, not log-off or swop to an "easier" server. It gives me an extra incentive, and the satisfaction of breaking (or delaying) the strangle-hold is far greater than rolling over a hopelessly outmatched opponent.

If PS2 becomes a game where I just logon and randomly shoot people for an hour or two with no plan or consequences, I wouldn't be playing it for very long.

I absolutely agree with this.

The "easy way" is not mine. To get everything without effort is not mine.
I also don´t like the system: the "rich get richer", but in the world of Planetside(2), even a good formed squad/platoon with the right mix of Classes/Equip can easily outmatch many vehicles.

The thing you need to do for this is, start teamplaying. Stop wasting time,
wasting your vehicle ressources. Use your resources more wisely.

[Rat]

See, I always figured vehicles would be free with timers, like PS1. But the various up/side grades would cost resources. Want a tank? Here you go. Want bonus armor on that tank? That'll be 50 resources.

This way the empire always has the basic capability to fight. But they are fighting in naked vehicles, sans any sort of upgrade.

This would have been a good way to do it..

[Figment]

Cutter, I believe some people need to see the other side of this system too:

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/Forum%20Pics/PlanetSide%20Beta%20images/PlanetSide2EU22012-08-24at03-25-39-11.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/Forum%20Pics/PlanetSide%20Beta%20images/PlanetSide2EU22012-08-24at03-25-39-11.jpg

[Flaropri]

I could live with this , but the passive tick is all you should ever get inside the warp gate and never araxium regardless of how many bases you hold .

Agreed on this point. I'm not saying they should be "rewarded" for losing, there should absolutely be a downside to losing, just it shouldn't be so severe that it prevents anything but footzerging.