New lattice and gray lands

[capiqu]

Trying out the new lattice system on the test server. It brings much needed clarity and I believe it is the way to go. I just have an issue with all the gray on the map we now have. so much of the land will not be fought over now.
What if all those gray areas are divided into hexes with facilities that can be instantly hacked without the need of any link or adjacency. Those captured lands can then give your empire resources.
The enemy on the other hand will be able to hack those facilities, also with no link or adjacency, and thus capture those lands depriving your empire of resources or in order to disturb your empires reinforcements and or resupply lines.
These facilities would function like Planetside1 towers. They can be instantly hacked and captured but they can not be used to capture a lattice link facility or base other then providing a near by spawn point.
These captured none lattice hexes can be lighter colors of the empires colors or could have highlighted borders so that the direction of the lattice will remain clear.
Thoughts?

[Whiteagle]

Eh, I saw an idea on the SOE forums that I liked better, where to collect the Resources of a Neutral Zone you had to hold all the Hexes on its boarders.

I would however like Enemy and Allied Activity Monitoring to be broken down for each Micro Hex instead of just Lattice Territories, sort of like the Heat Map of old...

...I find it rather bothersome an entire Platoon can drop off the face of the map just by scooting 5 meters outside of a thin strip of land.

[AThreatToYou]

Eh, I saw an idea on the SOE forums that I liked better, where to collect the Resources of a Neutral Zone you had to hold all the Hexes on its boarders.

ZING

[Whiteagle]

ZING

...How is that a zing?

I mean there is nothing preventing you from entering the Neutral Zones and I'm not opposed to something being located in them that would be worth fighting over, but link-less bases that give you Resources are just asking for abuse...

[Phantomdestiny]

what about AI trucks that drive from neutral territory then to your "captured" link then convoy to your warpgate and that give you resources. Therefore it makes an event and allows for a new way to deny resources by ambushing those trucks and destroying them. Heck those could just be sundies with a NS color scheme (already in the game files) on them with maybe some sort of logo describing which faction they are delivering to .

You could even add a mechanic to "steal" the resource sundies like a train robbery and make them go to your warpgate by hacking them with an infiltrator.

We need more ANT like mechanics but while making them more interesting and more new player friendly while adding strategic depth

[Climhazzard]

[...] there is nothing preventing you from entering the Neutral Zones [...]

Except our treaty with the Romulans.

[AThreatToYou]

Except our treaty with the Romulans.

Aaahh, funny.

[capiqu]

I would love to read it if someone has a direct link. If not I'll search it when i get time to.

[camycamera]

there is nothing stopping you from fighting over those neutral zones.

[Whiteagle]

what about AI trucks that drive from neutral territory then to your "captured" link then convoy to your warpgate and that give you resources. Therefore it makes an event and allows for a new way to deny resources by ambushing those trucks and destroying them. Heck those could just be sundies with a NS color scheme (already in the game files) on them with maybe some sort of logo describing which faction they are delivering to .

You could even add a mechanic to "steal" the resource sundies like a train robbery and make them go to your warpgate by hacking them with an infiltrator.

We need more ANT like mechanics but while making them more interesting and more new player friendly while adding strategic depth
Eh, I'm rather weary of AI Convoys...

Back in my old Second Life Military days, our genius Merczateers R&D department came up with a capturable, self-driving Convoy that would tour around the map every so often...

Don't get me wrong, it was fun as hell to fight over, buuuu~uuut...

Second Life is a persistent world MMO, and when left running constantly all those in-game moving components would cause the control system to eventually glitch, forcing an Admin to shut it down until someone could go in and de-bug it.

To make the analogy, it's sort of like an Amusement Park Ride...
Eventually, with all those moving parts something is going to break down, so you either require constant monitoring and preventive maintenance or some kind of contingency for when you inevitably need to temporarily disable that feature.

As we don't have enough admins to regularly monitor the activity of randomly generated, AI controlled Vehicles, I would rather a crucial automated mechanic such as Resource Collection not depend on such a system.

...Though Resource Logistics and the new Lattice does bring to mind my old "Resource Pipeline" ideas. (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?p=842398#post842398)

I would love to read it if someone has a direct link. If not I'll search it when i get time to.
Here it is! (http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/the-lattice-system-seems-so-empty.115431/)

Weaving in my own Resource Pipelines, each Neutral Zone could have its own "Nanite Resource Generator/Mine/Nodes" that pipes into all the surrounding Bases.
Spec Ops teams could then go in to either shut down these Nodes to deny the enemy extra Resources or simply divert all the flow to any connecting Base they own.

There could even be "maximum flow capacity" that limits how much (or rather mechanically the rate of Resource tics) can be diverted through a single pipe, encouraging the capture of all of the surrounding Bases for peak efficiency!

[Mastachief]

Grey areas are good these are the areas to sneak through for spec ops once they get around to allowing such things.

[Whiteagle]

Grey areas are good these are the areas to sneak through for spec ops once they get around to allowing such things.
Eh, that's the part I don't like about them...

Don't get me wrong, I understand the concept of allowing a group to "operate under the radar" as it were, but as I've said before the current set up allows for entire platoons to just "vanish" because they're not all standing on a particular strip of land.

Of course this presents another thing we can put in the Neutral Zones to fight over, Radar Stations!

These would play into my idea of breaking down Enemy Activity Level Detection down to individual Micro Hexes, with each Station providing an area of such precision, narrowed-down coverage.

Then we could have a small Stealth transport aircraft that ingnores Detection on the Continental Level so that Spec Ops could move in and take down these sites, reverting Enemy Detection back to simply telling one how many are in those strips of Territory a Faction owns.

How's that for a Special Operations mission?

[Figment]

I think it'd be nice if the neutral areas would turn into a muted, dominant empire colour by owning the lanes on both sides of it, like such:

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/PlanetSide%20Map%20Concepts/RushLane_ZoneControll_zps86223c4d.jpg (http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/PlanetSide%20Map%20Concepts/RushLane_ZoneControll_zps86223c4d.jpg)

If you wanted to have it worth fighting over, in theory, you could have the resources in the areas between the lanes. Not sure if that's worth it though.

[capiqu]

OK, or a darker shade of the empires colors. Looks nice Figment.

[Kail]

I think it'd be nice if the neutral areas would turn into a muted, dominant empire colour by owning the lanes on both sides of it, like such:

Something like that would be really nice, if only to reinforce that you're turning the whole continent to your faction.

[Ruffdog]

http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb78/Rufffdog/OneDoesNotSimply2_zps7d5ad6af.png

[basti]

/facepalm


The Lattice system is there to FOCUS stuff, adding any new BS would work only against the very goal of the lattice.



In any way, there is no "gray land that isnt fought over". THere is only neutral territory that you cant directly capture. There will be battles for every inch of the map in the future, and thats the very purpose of those gray lands: They provide space to have those battles.

[capiqu]

No it will be like Planetside 1 where there where places in the map that almost no one ever set foot on much less knew it existed.
Let me put it this way. I can fight at neutral land and get nothing for it or I could fight at a lattice hex and get experience. 99% of players will choose the lattice hexes. Just because it's there is not a good enough reason to fight on it or for it.

[Whiteagle]

The Lattice system is there to FOCUS stuff, adding any new BS would work only against the very goal of the lattice.
True, but...

In any way, there is no "gray land that isnt fought over". THere is only neutral territory that you cant directly capture. There will be battles for every inch of the map in the future, and thats the very purpose of those gray lands: They provide space to have those battles.
There needs to be an actual reason for people to fight over them...

Ideally the reason two Bases next to each other don't have a connection is because there is a geological feature in the way preventing a road from being stretched between them.

But if there is nothing there, why bother stepping off the "Lane" instead of proceeding to the next Node on the Lattice in the first place?

Thinking players like you and me of course know that if you attack from unexpected angles, you can off-balance the Defenders and soften up a Base for invasion...
...But I expect others will either ignore this entirely or abuse the granted "undetectability" to break the game.

[Rothnang]

There is no "gray land", it's still all part of the battlefield. I personally don't understand why they chose to visually represent the lattice with small hexes that make it look like there is a specific intended path between one base and another, but I'm sure people will get used to it and use the "gray land" all the same.

[Silent Thunder]

There is no "gray land", it's still all part of the battlefield. I personally don't understand why they chose to visually represent the lattice with small hexes that make it look like there is a specific intended path between one base and another, but I'm sure people will get used to it and use the "gray land" all the same.

I'm thinking maybe it was some sort of placeholder at first, but it would up sticking around so long internally that it grew on them. That or some weirdass limitation with how the engine displays the map that won't let them do lattice lines without a major rewrite. Programs can be weird like that.

[Figment]

What I don't get is why people think neutral zones would not be fought in... Have they never heard of alternate approach routes?

No, you don't fight over the flipping of the neutral zones in the coming version, you would use it to turn the pathway areas. The paths only represent the shortest, most straightforward route without looking like the SOI / line of old. Probably to guide new players to the next objective better. Doesn't mean you have to use that route nor that you don't have to block access over it!

[Brusi]

Here was my take on it:

(link to Official Forums)

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/the-lattice-system-seems-so-empty.115431/

[Hamma]

I don't like the neutral areas either. There was so much land in ps1 that never saw anyone due to the lattice. I think ps2 will be a little different because its a bit more compact.

Bottom line is if they put something there it defeats what they are trying to accomplish.

[Dougnifico]

I support figment's modification. It just feels better; more significant.

[capiqu]

I disagree that breaking down the neutral zones into smaller resourced hexes that can be captured would undo what the lattice system is trying to achieve.
The way I see it is that as we move along the lattice routes we can then, with little effort, hack and capture those hexes for additional resources. This sounds better than automatic resource acquisition just by capturing the neutral zones surrounding lattice hexes.
Most players will not set foot on those neutral zones unless they have an incentive to do so. Again I use Planetside1 as an example. There where sections of the maps that most players never set foot on.

[Figment]

Capiqu ffs, don't make such a fuss out of it. The distances between ps1 bases were the same as te distance between allatum and saurva! The chances of using a straight line there are significantly greater and you wouldn't use terrain that is too far from the route. Still, even then you moved in areas around the lattice line that in our case could easily be up to three to five miles on either side! But the longer the path, the later most zerglings and resec groups deviate from their path to cut down on travel time.

That said, empty terrain was often used for sneak attacks, like Galaxy drops and like we did, drive with Thunderers around hills to come up behind enemies or to do a raid without being seen till the last moment, using the empty terrain as safe, unsuspecting approach and route and sometimes you just need to have that space due to the concentration of enemies. In PS2, the pop will be dispersed over terrain more in comparison.

The thing is that capturing the entire continent did not require capturing all towers, usualy there was just one or two towers left after cont capture, due to enemies being present there and them hacking the point back after everything turned (blue of course ;)). That rendered most towers useless as you neither could footzerg from it (too far), and they were out of route (too far), after which they were ignored due to cont capture turning. That situation does not occur in PS2.

You completely ignore the density of bases which completely renders your argument voor aside from a few edges of the map that do not see Antarctica now either (just ghosting) because the zerg is attracting too much attention in the central areas. These paths will generate more use from both sides to the edge bases, likely with the zerg taking the middle routes predominantly.

Please don't pretend the situation is the same!

[Ssential]

Why should we suddenly stop fighting in these neutral zones? What would be the big difference compared to now?

The only difference I see is the XP boost for defending and attacking while being in the vicinity of a base. But that's only because of the small influence area around a base we currently have with this new system. It doesn't really have something to do with the lattice system itself. Just make the area of influence larger ---> fixed

In my opinion, reject the whole hex system, introduce connections between bases that can be captured in succession as a line and make a rather large circle or custom geometry of influence around a base in which you get the attack and defend XP bonus. You could even keep the hex layout we currently have on the normal servers for all I care and introduce the lattice system as a system of lines connecting the bases.

[Figment]

In my opinion, reject the whole hex system, introduce connections between bases that can be captured in succession as a line and make a rather large circle or custom geometry of influence around a base in which you get the attack and defend XP bonus.

I'm sure I've seen that before somewhere. :o

[Qwan]

maybe put a small tower there no vehicles, just spawn points.

[Qwan]

In my opinion, reject the whole hex system, introduce connections between bases that can be captured in succession as a line and make a rather large circle or custom geometry of influence around a base in which you get the attack and defend XP bonus. You could even keep the hex layout we currently have on the normal servers for all I care and introduce the lattice system as a system of lines connecting the bases.

LMAO, really are you seriouse, .... Is this a post joke, ..... your just trying to be funny right. :rofl:

But let me ask you this, will these zones prevent you from locking a continent. I believe that this lattice system plays into them introducing the continent lock. Now if you got a zone that doesnt require any adjacent connection that can be hacked by any one, then will that stop you from locking down a continent if that one little hex isnt the same color.

[Ssential]

LMAO, really are you seriouse, .... Is this a post joke, ..... your just trying to be funny right. :rofl:

But let me ask you this, will these zones prevent you from locking a continent. I believe that this lattice system plays into them introducing the continent lock. Now if you got a zone that doesnt require any adjacent connection that can be hacked by any one, then will that stop you from locking down a continent if that one little hex isnt the same color.

Sorry but I have no idea what you are talking about here. What are questions, what are statements?

I don't see how it prevents continent locking.
With the lattice system I referred to in my post you won't be able to cap a base that doesn't have any adjacent connection to a base you own.

[capiqu]

As far as continent lock, be careful what you ask for. Remember two empires can coordinate against one empire and practically sanc you. sure won;t be fun for that empire.
Another thing would be that by one empire capturing all the lattice hexes then the continent would lock. Locking the continent would turn, provided there where any, such independent hexes to your empire and that said enemies would have no spawn points.

[Qwan]

Sorry but I have no idea what you are talking about here. What are questions, what are statements?

I don't see how it prevents continent locking.
With the lattice system I referred to in my post you won't be able to cap a base that doesn't have any adjacent connection to a base you own.

Sorry im just trying to be funny, but what you initially suggested is how PS1 lattice system was. Bases were connected by lines, and each one had a sphere of influence. I was just making a joke about that.

But the other part was a question in general, about continent locking if one of the gray area's was hacked.

[Whiteagle]

The way I see it is that as we move along the lattice routes we can then, with little effort, hack and capture those hexes for additional resources. This sounds better than automatic resource acquisition just by capturing the neutral zones surrounding lattice hexes.
We don't even need to "Capture" those Hexes, just something in there to fight over that could give our Empire a slight advantage.

Sure, the "Radar Stations" could be hacked, but they don't give you a Link to capture anything anyways...

Resource Generators/Mines/Nodes wouldn't even be hackable, they'd just have Flow Terminals at the start of each of the pipelines leading to the surrounding Bases that could be turned on or shut off.

[wildcat140679]

I think it'd be nice if the neutral areas would turn into a muted, dominant empire colour by owning the lanes on both sides of it, like such:

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/PlanetSide%20Map%20Concepts/RushLane_ZoneControll_zps86223c4d.jpg (http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/PlanetSide%20Map%20Concepts/RushLane_ZoneControll_zps86223c4d.jpg)

If you wanted to have it worth fighting over, in theory, you could have the resources in the areas between the lanes. Not sure if that's worth it though.

Great example of how to make the map easy to read, now we even have neutral zones... :)

[psijaka]

I like Figment's idea, nice simple visual representation, but no extra resources, bases whatever in the "neutral zones" would completely undermine what they are trying to achieve with the hex lattice.

[Figment]

We don't even need to "Capture" those Hexes, just something in there to fight over that could give our Empire a slight advantage.

Sure, the "Radar Stations" could be hacked, but they don't give you a Link to capture anything anyways...

Resource Generators/Mines/Nodes wouldn't even be hackable, they'd just have Flow Terminals at the start of each of the pipelines leading to the surrounding Bases that could be turned on or shut off.

Too much micromanagement/exp whoring, tbh.

[Whiteagle]

Too much micromanagement/exp whoring, tbh.
How would Radar Stations be too much Micro-management?

And yeah, the Experience whores will be all over them, but without permanent spawns they can't exactly camp them like a Base Battle.

[Figment]

"Someone just took the radar station in X1."
"Where is X1?"
"Ehr... X1 is near Y2."
"Okay, I'll take care of it."
*get to vterm*
*get flash*
*drive over and die to AI mine*
*respawn*
*get Sunderer*
*drive over again*
*rehack +150 exp*
"Done."
"Yeah... Looks like the guy just took the radar in X2, X3, X4, X5."
"You kidding me? Does he have no life?"
"Course not."
"Okay, I'll go..."
*X1 is hacked again*
"Oh **** it."

You were never on ant duty or tower hopper / gen dropper resecure in ps1, right?

The amount of effort required for continuously going back and forth between points to stop someone farming quick and easy experence points or is not directly related to reward, it is boring, repetitive and therefore annoying and not going to be well received. In fact, you will give people such an overkill in objectives to secure, the objecties lose their appeal. Bassically all you do is recreate the same control console whack-a-mole we just got rid off, just further away from spawn points and defensible positions where you could defend it passively by your presence.


You make a cubicle job out of playing the game effectively and for the empire. If you want apathic players, do just that.

[Whiteagle]

You were never on ant duty or tower hopper / gen dropper resecure in ps1, right?
Can't say that I did what with neven playing the Original, but considering I'm one of the few that bother with Gen Repair and Mantaince in this game I might have done just that...

The amount of effort required for continuously going back and forth between points to stop someone farming quick and easy experence points or is not directly related to reward, it is boring, repetitive and therefore annoying and not going to be well received. In fact, you will give people such an overkill in objectives to secure, the objecties lose their appeal. Bassically all you do is recreate the same control console whack-a-mole we just got rid off, just further away from spawn points and defensible positions where you could defend it passively by your presence.
Ah, but the easest Stations to get would be those on the Front Lines anyways, and those would be the ones whose range is enough to tell you which Micro-Hexes on your enemies Front they are gathering in.
The closer you get to a Warpgate, the more and more these Stations' ranges overlap, so the deeper you go behind the lines the harder it is to stay hidden long enough to avoid danger as well as an increasing longer trip back if you do screw up.

Sure a single Infiltrator could easy get Radar Stations F1 on the Front Line, but C1, D2, and F2 all cover the Micro-Hexes around D1, plus we now know something under a Squad's worth of troops hacked F1 on us.

[Figment]

Can guarantee you it's not going to be just one guy going after them. I'd say for every sixhundred players there is 1-3 active per empire around the clock to be "tactical" by forcing resecure outfit members to chase ghosts.

It is very annoying an can easily require you to bassically discourage someone by sitting on point and babysitting it.






Btw, one of the most annoying things to me is you get exp for triggering gens to overload, same for hacking a control console (non instant capture) or terminal. Similarly for destroying random equipment terminals.

In ps1, the experience you got out of a control console was upon completion of the job (hacked base turns = 0-5000 exp based on activity. The exp for hacking equipment terminals is based on kills and assist actions performed by someone using, something from your car.

[Whiteagle]

Can guarantee you it's not going to be just one guy going after them. I'd say for every sixhundred players there is 1-3 active per empire around the clock to be "tactical" by forcing resecure outfit members to chase ghosts.

It is very annoying an can easily require you to bassically discourage someone by sitting on point and babysitting it.
True, but that's the good thing about putting them in Neutral Territory that should either be between contested Bases or ones a single Faction already owns.

So you're either leading people to fight for something on the Front between the Lanes, or Spec Ops are blacking out Coverage on a particular Lane to mask a large push.

Btw, one of the most annoying things to me is you get exp for triggering gens to overload, same for hacking a control console (non instant capture) or terminal. Similarly for destroying random equipment terminals.

In ps1, the experience you got out of a control console was upon completion of the job (hacked base turns = 0-5000 exp based on activity. The exp for hacking equipment terminals is based on kills and assist actions performed by someone using, something from your car.
Yeah, we even have a particular player on this Forum who apparently takes his misspelled name from that Activity...

And I agree with you on the Experiance Rewards, some of which are for things that should be done but they felt the need to have some enticement for players to do it anyways.

Hacking Terminals and Turrets has a decently scaled reward, you don't get a whole lot for it but it can be EXTREAMLY useful, while a reward for starting the Overload on Generators and SCUs is ridiculously out of line considering the lack of risk involved.
A Successful Destruction or Stabilization should pay well considering you should have to get into a hostile held room to do it, but since they didn't use the same reward mechanics as the Original Planetside this is rather easy to exploit...

...Just ask said unnamed Forum user...

Personally, I wouldn't mind it if Radar Stations did not give ANY Experiance Points just for flipping them.
The reward should be the satifaction of doing something for the benifet of your Empire, not some in-game credit for virtual items.
Hell, now that we have Ribbons, just make it take ten Radar Station Flips in a day to get a bonus if people complain they get nothing for the effort!

[Figment]

No, that's not the good thing, that makes it far worse. Don't you get it? You force more logistical challenges on the defenders and remove ANY CHALLENGE from the attackers.


That's BAD. VERY BAD.


Empty territory is the best territory to fight a field battle in or use for approaches because you have freedom to do whatever. It doesnt need focus. Quite the contrary.


There shouldn't be anything there. If it provides some sort of advantage, it needs to be tied directly to a defendable position. That "neutral territory" isn't neutral. It's simply the areas you can use to flank. There is already plenty of fighting going on there and doesn't need more encouragement.

I'm sorry, but I simply don't understand why the hell it needs to have some sort of experience point jackpot machine in it. What you're doing is the same theory that they used for the influence outposts. It didn't work. People didn't go for them because it's too much babysit work (which is utterly boring!!!), which means it's just a bunch of ghosts. Sure, they provide a strategic benefit and I'm all for strategic benefits, but not when you can't defend them, not when you can't go out there and turn it back.

On top of that, given the tools at your disposal and the base layouts we have, the last thing we need is more advantages to the attackers. Look, if you want there to be a terminal that disables interlink style radar (if interlink radar: all-moving-objects-automatically-on-radar ever returns), sure. Put it somewhere in the facility. But what you ask people to do is to get out of a sieged base, without say... decent radar, travel a few hundred meters out of any cover towards a position in the field that even if you do manage to get back will be flipped a few seconds later again.



It's just not worthwhile. It shouldn't be done, period.



EDIT: anything you want to do as benefit with that terrain, it should have a passive effect. For instance, effect of being considered friendly territory, causing Bio Lab effect to be active.

[KodanBlack]

what about AI trucks that drive from neutral territory then to your "captured" link then convoy to your warpgate and that give you resources. Therefore it makes an event and allows for a new way to deny resources by ambushing those trucks and destroying them. Heck those could just be sundies with a NS color scheme (already in the game files) on them with maybe some sort of logo describing which faction they are delivering to .

You could even add a mechanic to "steal" the resource sundies like a train robbery and make them go to your warpgate by hacking them with an infiltrator.

We need more ANT like mechanics but while making them more interesting and more new player friendly while adding strategic depth

I've always liked the idea of destructible resources. How about an automated bullet train? It would be fast enough to require some skill to target and destroy, or require planted explosives to derail and/or destroy, as well as allowing for a somewhat rapid influx of those resources. Maybe even elevate it, to force the enemy to find a way to get up to it in the first place.

[Whiteagle]

There shouldn't be anything there. If it provides some sort of advantage, it needs to be tied directly to a defendable position.
Who said they wouldn't be in a defensible position?

Ideally they'd be perched on some god forsaken crag or mountaintop, hence why they are just a Radar Dish and not a full fucking Outpost!
It would be HARD to GET to, let alone trundle a Sunderer and park it up there!

I'm sorry, but I simply don't understand why the hell it needs to have some sort of experience point jackpot machine in it.
Didn't I JUST say it didn't need to give Experiance Points?

[Figment]

That's not defensible. If there are no defenders, it's not defensible.

Fly over. Done. Hard to get my arse.

[Whiteagle]

That's not defensible. If there are no defenders, it's not defensible.

Fly over. Done. Hard to get my arse.
Aren't the flyboys always whining about the amount of AA they have to deal with?

[Figment]

Aren't the flyboys always whining about the amount of AA they have to deal with?

In dense base areas.

[Whiteagle]

In dense base areas.
...Well that certainly isn't the only thing that dense in this game...:rolleyes:

Anyways, I don't see how a hackable Radar Device located in each Neutral Zone that give you more precise Detection for several square kilometers of Micro-Hexes is a bad idea.
One of the things I fear about the Rush Lanes is how easily their lack of Detection outside those thin strips of land could be used to break the game, and making Radar just another fixture of a Base means that it will befall the same fate as Generators and SCUs.

To use the MOBA/DOTA/Whatever terminology, the Neutral Zones are currently a "Jungle;" an area where players can hide, recuperate, and harass the Enemy.
Characters that excel at using the Jungle are called "Gankers," because their job is to leap out of the mist and Gank people...

...Once they get wind of this tactic, each Zergfit will become a Ganker, and due to their elusive nature Ganker Characters are one of the most frustraiting mechanics in MOBAs.