WDS awareness?

[EVILPIG]

The WDS Scores have been added in game to raise awareness by the community that the event is even taking place. Simple fact is that a small percentage of players for most any game bother with forums and many are not aware that the event is taking place. Now, if you're a PSU forum user, I doubt you don't know that it's going on, but have you heard any players bringing it up since the in game score was added?

[Corewin]

No. It's a ridiculously stupid band-aid put in place by SOE in an attempt to hide the fact they have a horribly incomplete game. Never mind the fact it has taken them a year to develop a new continent, but here are some new shiny things. People don't take notice because the whole thing is idiotic.

[Ghoest9]

Whats WDS means to me.


Every few weeks I get a 3 day implant for free - I then apply this implant to my NC toon

[Sirisian]

Whats WDS means to me.


Every few weeks I get a 3 day implant for free - I then apply this implant to my NC toon
No joke. What a better way to show how little SOE understand MMOFPS rewards than making it based solely on your faction. I play like maybe 5 hours a week and log into each character and collect my boost. The idea that factions are somehow fighting is preposterous. It's a game of random chance with populations.

[Malorn]

As stated weeks ago on the OF, rewards based on participation are on the to-do list, just not going to make it for the preseason.

[EVILPIG]

As stated weeks ago on the OF, rewards based on participation are on the to-do list, just not going to make it for the preseason.

Thanks for that Malorn. I think there's a disconnect with the OF and this community.

[Malorn]

Here's the OF thread for all your WDS info needs:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/wds-preseason-and-upcoming-changes.152266/

This is a feature aimed at the outfits, those that want a victory condition, and something to drive more strategic thinking and goals. In other words it's a feature that would be helpful to get constructive feedback on from the PS1 vets and outfit/empire leadership players.

[KesTro]

Here's the OF thread for all your WDS info needs:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/wds-preseason-and-upcoming-changes.152266/

This is a feature aimed at the outfits, those that want a victory condition, and something to drive more strategic thinking and goals. In other words it's a feature that would be helpful to get constructive feedback on from the PS1 vets and outfit/empire leadership players.

If you want some feedback it might be worthwhile to continue the pre-season until the factions are more evenly balanced or to hold off on the WDS until that can happen. People have been saying for months what needs to happen, the numbers are there to support it as well if Maradine's Oracle of Death Thread is anything to go by.

Now as he asked people not to read into those numbers to much I'll say that you as the developers obviously know what's going on in your game better than any of us do. I just don't want to see the WDS tarnish the game or the player base. The less we can claim X won because of Y the better. The things that should be looked at for this are the striker (To a much lesser extent than previously but the problem is still present), the Vulcan (The thing is pointless to fight against, it'll out dps any crew on a harasser - The harasser it self which might need looking into as well.) The ZOE could use some tuning to the movement speed buff it gets, perhaps take away the strafing bonus alone and keep the rest as is. The Vanguard Shield I have been seeing complaints about as well as the Airhammer and MAX balance in general.

[DirtyBird]

I consider the rewards a small token of appreciation for sitting through the "optimization months" while the player base continues to decline.

The WDS kept one or two in employment imo, thats about the only positive I can see in it, but thats important.

Do the majority of people log in to play where the ultimate goal for that session is to participate in the WDS?
I think not.
They probably check the WDS scores, I know I do, but the actual commitment to the event is zero.

I'm so glad that these new WDS additions to the UI have passed the optimization test.

[typhaon]

I think it's a very small % of the population that cares about WDS. I can assure you that a very small % of NC on Mattherson care/have any idea what's up.

I don't think many are bothered by it. Most probably log in characters from each faction to make sure they get the reward.

When the rewards start to skew towards the side that wins... has the most pop... has OP stuff... WDS is just going to just annoy 2/3 of the players.

[Babyfark McGeez]

Here's the OF thread for all your WDS info needs:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/wds-preseason-and-upcoming-changes.152266/

This is a feature aimed at the outfits, those that want a victory condition, and something to drive more strategic thinking and goals. In other words it's a feature that would be helpful to get constructive feedback on from the PS1 vets and outfit/empire leadership players.

The thing is, planetside 1 managed to achieve a sense of accomplishment and immersion without using artificial (and in this case also rather intangible and external) mechanics. Unfortunately planetside 2 in its current state (without having an intercontinental lattice to begin with) cannot achieve these effects. Basically WDS is just another form of "alert" in that regard, a tacked-on system that feels a bit out of place and more suited to "classic" lobby shooters.
So beyond that, i don't really know what to say from a "vets perspective".

WDS is ok, and i appreciate the effort put into it, but it can only serve so much as a substitute for the "real thing".

[Mastachief]

As much as I appreciate the effort put into the development of these types of systems they are artificial and thus detract from the point of the game, it really doesn't belong in the game in it's current state.

Territory means nothing and the WDS encourages zerging on mass > vehicle camping the point > zerging on mass > vehicle camping the point.

Really need to separate the combat flows, Base - fight in vehicles to next base - Dismount - Fight for base on foot (immune for vehicle interference) - Fight in vehicles to next base

The game is fundamentally broken and WDS just highlights the faults.

The teamspeak feeling on WDS is "MEH who gives a crap", it's just a free booster. This stems from the general fucked off feeling they have with the game and its many many problems. (fracture/vulcan/ZOE/Striker. Bad base design and decisions (3minutes biolab timer, someone slap the fool that thought that up), empire over pop, No back hack mechanics. People will say "hey be patient they will get to it" well a year later and $100's of dollars of faith and we have little to no progress (what little we have has been so slow and half assed it's not worthy of the word progress) The fundamental issues with the game are not new and were voiced extensively and loudly in tech test and beta and they were ignored in pursuit of a battle field clone and as a result it may have signed the death warrant for this game that had shown such promise.

I feel like i'm fighting a losing battle everyday to keep my guys engaged and the gameplay that WDS pushes the general pop into isn't helping and i think this is largely down to them (general pop) not understanding it and the overpop of TR.

[Malorn]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

[typhaon]

I think you're right about the general state of combat in the game.

I've always thought there should be...

1) Less bases.
2) More space between bases that is necessarily contested by vehicles. However when you reached the bases...
3) Base conquest was more interesting and inhospitable to vehicle camping. We could all write pages on this...

* I just feel like the approach SOE has taken... lots of bases.... quick and easy to conquer... doesn't necessarily = no fun. People didn't like being bogged down in BioLabs because they fights tended to stalemate in teleport rooms... and were dull.... not because they were just averse to fighting for a while to conquer something.

4) The ability for outfits to own, upgrade, customize, do-interesting-things-with bases... then be rewarded for continuous control... maybe have published records for each base.

[Mastachief]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

Tricky question and requires some thought, i'll ponder and post what i think.

[EVILPIG]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

I prefer player driven motives. I hate the automated targeting of Alerts. Get the Global Lattice up and running, designate Home Continents and the players will be motivated to make the calls. They will choose when and where to fight based on a global strategy. Tie the resource system into the global picture. Require that anything you own, on any continent, must be able to draw a line to your Sanctuary Gate, even if it goes across multiple continents. Just set up a balanced link between continents and let the players shape it. Events should happen at times, but not be the norm.

[bpostal]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

I can't really put what I feel something like WDS needs in words, at least not when I'm this sober. I'll have to pull a Duke and drunkenly ramble.

I will say though that one of my favorite parts of WDS has been the XXXX Night Ops with y'all devs. Realistically, it's not sustainable because there's work that needs doing and to ask that people take time out of their day, multiple times a week to do such a show is asking much too much. Still though, it's my favorite.

[EVILPIG]

Also, overall, I have always felt we need a 4th empire. The 3 way is designed to be perpetual. Ideally, the two empires in the weaker strategic position would always gang on the leader in any conflict. However, it doesn't usually work that way. Instead of that, which was supposed to keep it fun, empires will often flat double team when the blood is in the water. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just nature. It can be a ton of fun facing overwhelming odds, but empires can lose players getting kicked around a lot. If we had 4 empires, we'd see more diversity on that outcome, as empires would pair up more and we'd see a lot of combos.

I would also keep just 3 WG's per continent to really mix it up. 4 empires, 3 warpgates per cont.

[bites]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

Something you can't just buy with money?

EG like the old resource/xp boost combo? ..

As it is now .. since I can just buy the 3 day boost .. there is no incentive.

Overall the stuff you guys have done with scoring is really good .. (despite the issues evilpig mentioned above regarding the ability to catch up to [on our server at least VANUs] ghost capping bonanza).

Decals and titles are meh .. (especially since with armor etc you can't see em!).

At the moment with my 6 month boost ... (and my current BR) I can see virtually no point in swopping it out or using the 3 day boost .... moreso since I only play NC .. and have no Vanu/TR characters (nc fur lyfe!! or something).

[Chewy]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

For WDS to be exciting with how the game is currently setup. I don't know if you can have the WDS be an outfit lever thing, empire level yes but not outfit. It takes many outfits to impact the WDS score and with the rubberbanding Iv been seeing at server levels any effort is lost soon after you get a lead thanks to the bonuses the others get. Then you have snowballing in the overall scores where no one has control over. Even if an entire server was a single outfit I don't think it would make a dent in the over all score if that didn't start a snowball.

With the old score system high pop numbers ruled. With this system I have no clue how it works. Some how VS have a 5k-10k lead on 3 servers WITH the new system made to handicap the leader. How the hell is this happening? I can't figure it out from not understanding any of the rules or score values never being the same. You can't win or earn anything with this score system, just hope the math backstage works out in you favor. Yet somehow VS have found a way on 3 servers and I don't know why or how.

But with a score system set in stone like before we go back to pop numbers equaling power. Not good either way.

I have no idea how to make the WDS better, nothing is coming to mind. All I can think of is for SOE to choose what level they want an event to be at. Outfit, empire (by server), or an overall world deal. If outfit then you need the Nexus, anything else and pubs ruin scores. If server then you need rules set in stone that never change, maybe. If world then maybe a complex score system is needed to even out things and to stop snowballs from forming.

The way I see it. A man should effect the outfit, but not the server. An outfit should effect the server, but not the world. And a server should effect the world, but not past a point.

[GeoGnome]

Something you can't just buy with money?

EG like the old resource/xp boost combo? ..

As it is now .. since I can just buy the 3 day boost .. there is no incentive.

Overall the stuff you guys have done with scoring is really good .. (despite the issues evilpig mentioned above regarding the ability to catch up to [on our server at least VANUs] ghost capping bonanza).

Decals and titles are meh .. (especially since with armor etc you can't see em!).

At the moment with my 6 month boost ... (and my current BR) I can see virtually no point in swopping it out or using the 3 day boost .... moreso since I only play NC .. and have no Vanu/TR characters (nc fur lyfe!! or something).

Pretty much what is said here. People need a picture of what they are fighting for. Currently the reward is: "A decal or a title" which is... well not much to me. A clear picture of what people are fighting for would be best... and it needs to be something special. A 3 day boost was put in place as a placeholder reward, I understand that, but there needs to be something that people can win that they feel motivated to care about trying to acquire.

[OCNSethy]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

To have a faction actually win... something, anything. Then have to fight tooth and nail to get it back.

I undertand that PS2 is a perpetual conflict but when I log in day after day and and we are still fighting for a base that we flipped when I logged off, is to put it lightly, not exciting.

I guess this ties into continental latice or meta games or what ever the terms are but I would like to see my squad / faction fight for some tangable results.

Resource linked to bases means squat to me... so I cant pull a MAxx, fine, Ill pull a HA. These are not tangable to me. WDS is just as intangable to me at this point. Its a 3 day boost... meh.

I think Evilpigs ideas have a solid base to proceed from. /signed

[Rolfski]

I don't mind "artificial" or "gamy" mechanics tbh, as long as the result is intended. But for this new WDS system, I'm afraid it drives people to even more Indarside eventually.

[DirtyBird]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

I dont think there is anything you can do in the short term to make the WDS exciting for myself.

This might have been different if there was faction loyalty encouraged by restricting players to one faction per server.
If people wanted to bypass that by creating new accounts then good luck to them, most couldn't be bothered.

As it is now I've created multiple characters on different factions for the sole purpose of getting a free boost.
When you eventually change that to reward participation then I guess in the long run I will still get my share.
Mind you, as soon as they release another paid heroic boost promotion I won't give a rats toss about a 3day reward. (provided the game is still alive by then)

Your goal seems to be directed towards having a balanced scoreboard.
I think thats something you will be forever tweaking if you want to achieve that. And you will have to continue to do that to be seen as sharing the rewards.
Your WDS becomes its own worse enemy if one side continues to dominate and there is little hope for the other factions.
It'll be a full time job when you currently cant control population/warpgate imbalances.
Maybe thats what you wanted, who knows.

I find it hard to believe that before you went to SOE that something like this would have been a priority in PS2 for you.
I would not be surprised if you arent all that keen on it yourself but its the job you have been given for now and you'll give it 110% in true Malorn fashion.
Like it or lump it, its here to stay.


Spinning a three faction Big Wheel to give away that 3day boost every month on an episode of the Command Center would have been a lot less work.
You could still weight factions to balance out results as well.

[typhaon]

Remember that time the entire NC faction rallied to take down those 2 fully upgraded and fortified bases that [name your top TR/VS outfits] had held deep within typical NC territory for 3 days? We worked for hours to cut off their supply lines and hold reinforcements at bay, while we hacked our way through various levels of shielding and defenses, until we finally took their control center in a epic firefight that almost ground the server to a halt. Man, that was awesome...

OR

Remember that time we (NC) captured 723 bases in a week and the TR only captured 698 and the VS 677? Man, that was awesome....


The whole concept of a scoring system that is designed to encourage you to keep doing what you're already doing, but at a faster pace.... so you can get more of what you already get (certs) from doing what you're already doing... seems flawed - if, the goal is to make greater fun for all.

If the goal is just to create a technically sound scoring system... I think you'll figure out the right variables and get them weighted properly.

I'm in the camp that thinks most would be just as happy if a wheel was spun each week to give away a 3-day boost.

[PredatorFour]

Make it more exciting ????? Well i dislike the normal alerts for being cheap band aid fixes and this is just one 'big alert'.

I suppose you could make it more exciting by randomly raining down meteors on the over-popped factions.

Like evil pig said, bring in home conts, global conquest, real Planetside. You played the original Malorn you know what we mean. Tell the other devs who claimed to of played the game but didn't.

[ringring]

Pretty much as evilpig said. Motivations should be player driven.

I can't see what can be done to WDS, I'm not even sure what it's intended to achieve.

The standard Events have their good points in as much as to do impact on player, outfit and empire behaviour, but because the end result is more XP (sometimes a lot more) and because more XP mean more certs and more certs equal more power then they have tended to destabilise populations.

An ideal ps2 would have neither Events nor WDS but rather something else and we know what that 'something else' is.

[Baptist]

Each Territory is worth points in the WDS system the longer you hold said territory the more points it's worth, is it possible to show how many points each hex is actually worth on the in game map while the WDS is in effect?

[Ruffdog]

I'd love to see implants come back. I know you had stick for stating cash could be used but bring them in with:

No real money to acquire them, in-game resources only, and

Associate a downside as well as an upside to using them which will help create real character development. And tie to battlerank levels so players have a real reason to level up.

That's just a bit of frosting for the ps2 cake. The main ingredients have been covered by pig and others

[blampoet]

Let me put it another way - what would make it exciting for you?

TL;DR at the bottom

how useful...
no one can agree on anything
and a lot of cross talk...

A DEV ASKED US WHAT HE COULD DO... oppertunity to affect the game ahead... full speed i say.

OK, my 2 cents.

What we're aiming at is bragging rights (you write it enough in you marketing fluff...) TR doesn't need to brag we're the most over-poped... and 3 day xp boost isn't much to brag about...

You want to touch the emotion of LOOK AT ME- I WON

3 ways I can think of doing that

1)
WDS specific items only availabe for the winners (doesn't have to be GIVEN...... but demanding certs for something you achieved would be a douchy move)

*PreSeason winner get a unique vehicular decals (SHOULD NOT BE A NEW tag each week... I would go for an evolving look= win 1 week and you get a simple decal, second week same decal but with an additional element, third week is the week 2 decal but again with again an ADDTIONAL element (kind of like service ribbons with distinction). This way its less work for you and other factions see the decal and want it for themselves (less 4th factioneering)

*WDS mission specific outfit decal (give the less useful SOE team something to do= go through the data and find the= outfit w/ most bases take/ outfit w/ for most bases defended/ outfit w/ most players participated). I know the software/feature isn't ready yet for the player missions, but the data should already be there which means so could the rewards.

*WDS specific horn for winners (let your creative people go nuts)

These are all things which will make players go "I WANT" & do you work for you (BRING & TELL THEIR FRIENDS)

And it doesn't even require as much programmers to do (yes, some of us are aware of terms like resource management)

2)
Name a base after the winning oufit of a WDS week (screw the empire nonsense- loyalty runs to REAL PEOPLE meaning the friends you play with). The bigger the win, the bigger the base. (I know this was mentioned in the player mission sometimes)
(Might be a programming issue here, but you get the idea)

3)
Name the next weapon/vehicle after the winning outfit (this would be a good suspense builder)

NOTE:
Thought would have to be put on balancing between the zergfits and the smaller outfits...
i.e- winner outfit=number of members divided by hours participated. (this'll keep the zombiefits a reason to prune the dead accounts... or actually try to contact their old mates and try to bring them back to play (the newly optimized????) game)

TL;DR
2 key insight here:
***Loyalty does NOT run to the faction but to ones friends=outfit*** =less 4th factioneering
***Rewards should be tangible (and easy for SOE to apply) items that will invoke feelings of ENVY by all who see them in the future.***
There are several cosmetically items or game feature names that could invoke this



*i should be getting paid for this....

[GeoGnome]

There has been something rolling around in my head since last night that I wanted to put up here. This isn't meant to bash the efforts of the SOE team, but quite frankly it's just something I feel I need to say.

Malorn: You say that you want the WDS to drive strategic thinking and whatnot. The problem here is that there is no planning or strategy or anything in the WDS that can be used. You log on and play. The battles are largely shifted up and down the lane by taking points, which Can be accomplished by some tactical movement... but because the bases change hands so easily, each base capture is just Meaningless. To keep assigning arbitrary values to the bases will not make people start caring about capturing Quartz Ridge camp or someplace else. What will make people start to really consider how, where, when, and why about base captures is for each base to have some kind of use... something that helps them in a realistic way. Strategically the Lattice is limiting (Tactically it has improved things though), and that is alright as the chaotic mess that was the hex did need some limiting factors, but it needs some kind of way people can actually make those big strategic decisions in an unforgiving environment in order for things to improve.

An example, but not necessarily a great one, would be a system by which you need to knock out power stations in order to take another facility. Or maybe you need to take out a communications array in order to move undetected through a valley. The only bases currently that embrace this, are the bases surrounding facilities, where you have to Take the base in order to get into the larger facility. Those kinds of things are actually exciting and make people think about how they want to approach. The current system stiffles that somewhat, because you are pretty much restricted to one approach because of the lattice, but an easy fix would be to bring back those outlying bases like there were, before the lattice... maybe don't make them full bases with a spawn, but a mini tower or underground facility, so that you have to take and hold a 30 second cap point, in order to move up through teleporters. People have to take out those strategic targets, it requires though, in order to advance. You can't take the base without a lattice link, but interaction within the base requires something different.

That covers attackers having some need to think to get in, for defenders holding a base should impart something to the owner. Again: Comm arrays could mean a sensor sweep of an area. Or you could do some kind of thing linked to implants where people need to hold a base to make and implant implants. This imparts a tangible value to the base and makes people want to take or hold these bases. These also need to be things that can't be done from the warpgate... everything can be gotten from that magical impenetrable dome. I understand that is so that people can get everything from go... but what reason then, do people have to advance down lane? They get nothing for their accomplishments. Giving people things In the world that they need to fight to achieve will be Much more of a driving force than XP or WDS or Alerts or cert points or BR EVER will be.

I Like the WDS. I get that it can help with a few things. But it will never captivate people until the world itself has some kind of reason to exist. It's all so empty and meaningless; and no amount of XP or WDS score is going to fix that underlying problem. When those kinds of things exist, so that people are actually challenged to do something... Then having those rewards in place, will mean that people will be that much Happier to get something: "Hey I worked really hard to take this, now I get a ton of XP and a ton of WDS score, yay me" but right now, it's like those consolation trophies you get for participating. You tried nothing and accomplished nothing but your still getting all this fluff. It carries No weight what-so-ever.

[kubacheski]

Am I missing the point of this? Am I crazy to think that the entire motivation for playing Planetside 2 is to take over the world? It's an eternal struggle against the other 2 factions to dominate the world of Auraxis, right?

WHY THE F*CK DO YOU NEED A SPECIAL EVENT TO PROMOTE THE ONLY OBJECTIVE IN PLANETSIDE?!?!?!

What this points to is that SOE has strayed so far from the core Planetside elements that they've nothing left to do but insert "match" based combat into longer timeframes that usual. This is no MMOFPS, it's just instanced continents with very long matches that don't reset landmass control when said event is over. This is not war, it's battles and skirmishes in different places on a big map.

I still cannot believe that you have to run events to promote competition and in the end all it has done is imbalance the populations with encouraging the 4th faction after a year into the game. Pick a side already. Go back and learn from the mistakes of PS1 and lessen the effects of population imbalance with dynamic xp and/or damage bonuses for low pop factions. People will switch to the low pop to get the bonuses. Events like this promote faction hopping.

Malorn, this crap of handing a faction or participtaing players a boost, or medal, or special snowflake in a crystal box is just crap. Most people want to hack an enemy vehicle, to jump a warpgate to continue on a lattice line for continent locks, to actually have to worry about defense of a base, to have control of a significant landmass mean something. To push the opposing force back to their respective home continent so that thereare 666 opposition soldiers sitting in their warpgate to push back onto Auraxis and release your jackboot from their neck. I want a goddamn bridgefight or a tower battle like in PS1. Footholds and chokepoints to drag out the death and destruction. I want concrete trees, dude. I want perm cloak and darklight. I want snipers and infils separated. I want finite certs and remove class switching. Remove classes. I want your chosen cert trees to define the playstyle you choose. I want CE deployables and doors.

Man, we want a game that is fun to play, not a fun event every now and then inside of the game. The big picture man! Make the game fun and interesting and playable. The game, not some damn event.

[Mastachief]

Am I missing the point of this? Am I crazy to think that the entire motivation for playing Planetside 2 is to take over the world? It's an eternal struggle against the other 2 factions to dominate the world of Auraxis, right?

WHY THE F*CK DO YOU NEED A SPECIAL EVENT TO PROMOTE THE ONLY OBJECTIVE IN PLANETSIDE?!?!?!

What this points to is that SOE has strayed so far from the core Planetside elements that they've nothing left to do but insert "match" based combat into longer timeframes that usual. This is no MMOFPS, it's just instanced continents with very long matches that don't reset landmass control when said event is over. This is not war, it's battles and skirmishes in different places on a big map.

I still cannot believe that you have to run events to promote competition and in the end all it has done is imbalance the populations with encouraging the 4th faction after a year into the game. Pick a side already. Go back and learn from the mistakes of PS1 and lessen the effects of population imbalance with dynamic xp and/or damage bonuses for low pop factions. People will switch to the low pop to get the bonuses. Events like this promote faction hopping.

Malorn, this crap of handing a faction or participtaing players a boost, or medal, or special snowflake in a crystal box is just crap. Most people want to hack an enemy vehicle, to jump a warpgate to continue on a lattice line for continent locks, to actually have to worry about defense of a base, to have control of a significant landmass mean something. To push the opposing force back to their respective home continent so that thereare 666 opposition soldiers sitting in their warpgate to push back onto Auraxis and release your jackboot from their neck. I want a goddamn bridgefight or a tower battle like in PS1. Footholds and chokepoints to drag out the death and destruction. I want concrete trees, dude. I want perm cloak and darklight. I want snipers and infils separated. I want finite certs and remove class switching. Remove classes. I want your chosen cert trees to define the playstyle you choose. I want CE deployables and doors.

Man, we want a game that is fun to play, not a fun event every now and then inside of the game. The big picture man! Make the game fun and interesting and playable. The game, not some damn event.

Sniff sniff.. marry me. :rofl:

[Sirisian]

Pretty much as evilpig said. Motivations should be player driven.

I can't see what can be done to WDS, I'm not even sure what it's intended to achieve.

The standard Events have their good points in as much as to do impact on player, outfit and empire behaviour, but because the end result is more XP (sometimes a lot more) and because more XP mean more certs and more certs equal more power then they have tended to destabilise populations.

An ideal ps2 would have neither Events nor WDS but rather something else and we know what that 'something else' is.
Well said. I think the WDS event was possibly a wasted effort as it lacked a goal or focus.

My main worry is that it's distracted from real development and design of the game. WDS wouldn't have been in my top 100 issues to work on at least given all the other issues. Especially taking time to implement it into the UI rather than focusing that UI effort on cleaning up the menus and the interface more. (Especially with the PS4 launch looming).

[Babyfark McGeez]

True. I would rather see them fix the floating turret at west highland checkpoint that's sitting in the air for over four months now lol.

[Edfishy]

In the culmination of the event, allow us to capture the enemy sanc and "win" planetside for the day (resetting the servers and disabling sanc capture).

That's where a leaderboard would mean something. :groovy:

[Natir]

I've watched the WDS stuff from when it got started. Clearly there was a population problem. I think the first round of changes were good but what happened now? VS are the underdogs and they are now winning 37% to 31/32.... It really seems like the higher popped factions now have to work twice as hard to achieve those points and I don't think they really care. They just want to play the game.

You want people to take territory? There needs to be an incentive. Resources right now do not cut it. There is still no other point in this game other than to cert farm. That might be a bit harsh but it is true. When people play the game, they look at the best ways to earn certifications and advance their character and taking a base is definitely not one of them. What do you get the most reward for? Killing players and vehicles. Not capping points or territory, which it should be. Killing players and vehicles, etc, should be the secondary objective but if you look at how you are rewarded, that would be number 1.

You need to be rewarded for taking a base, not by getting more points towards your empire, no one cares about that. The people that do are just roleplaying like it matters when 90% of the population just wants to farm like in any other FPS game.

So, what would I suggest?

You get great rewards for capping a point and holding that capped point. You get great rewards for flipping a base. The longer you defend the base (IE: Stay at the base and defend), you get rewarded for that. Now, how much experience should a player be rewarded? I dunno, and I don't think it can really be done. Due to the free to play model, you cannot over reward players as there needs to be incentives to buy boosts and a sub. If people feel like they earn a lot of EXP (like Firefall), then there is no point to sink any money into the game.

Now, what they should do is lower the amount you are rewarded for killing vehicles, players, blowing stuff up, etc and grant you more rewards for territory control. Clearly the resource system doesn't work. Again, it is all about the farm.

But Natir, I already have what I want and I do not want anything else in terms of certs. Yeah, Okay... Lets humor that for a second. That person is the minority in that case and most players are always lacking things here and there to really complete their character. You finished your HA? Well, there are more classes and vehicles that players use so it will be a while before they finish the cert grind.

[bpostal]

...

WHY THE F*CK DO YOU NEED A SPECIAL EVENT TO PROMOTE THE ONLY OBJECTIVE IN PLANETSIDE?!?!?!

...

This comment is very apt and succinctly expresses my growing unease with PS2.

[Mordelicius]

Glad someone posted a WDS thread. I really want to post this but I didn't want to start another complaint thread :lol:

The Top Dog Mechanic must be discontinued and replaced with a different mechanic. It punishes winning and rewards losing. If the factions are ever to get balanced, this will sting really hard.

Suppose the factions are balanced and suppose this is basketball (5 v 5 balanced population).

Team A make 5 straight shots.
Team B misses 5 straight shots.

Team A leads by 10 points. Now everytime Team B scores, there's an added +1 because they missed 5 straight shots? So the team that made 5 straight shots gets punished and the team that missed gets the reward. One can see how awful this system is.

Alternative:
Make the bonus scores based on current continental population. Now if the basketball game was 5 vs 2. Now, it would be fair if the team with just 2 players get more points if they make a shot because it's 2 vs 5 and the odds are against them.

But the current program punishes a leading faction. It's a very poor way of rigging the scoreboard to make the match close.

I've seen this type of mechanic before in my favorite RvR MMO. And that was far more insidious form than this. It was so bad that losing meant winning. And winning meant you got cheated. What was the result? Everyone wanted to lose because there was a massive reward tied losing.:rofl: The reward was so big that winning was moot and pointless and everyone was fixing the situation so they can lose. It was horrible :doh:.

[Natir]

This comment is very apt and succinctly expresses my growing unease with PS2.

It is the free to play model that does this. You cannot reward people with so much EXP or certs that they do not buy boosts/subs or weapons.

The resource model does not work at all and is no incentive for people to take territory. They just don't care about it. What is the only thing people know to do in this game? Destroy stuff as that is what gives you the most reward. If you flip that and make it so territory capture and point control gives you the most EXP/Certs then people will be forced to play the objective. Yes, you must force people to play the objective.

At the end of the day though, this has been talked about since tech test and it is falling deaf ears over at SOE. These same issues have been all over the place (PSU, Reddit, SOE Forums, etc) and SOE has not once tried to fix it. Instead, they implement terrible ideas like the WDS. No one cares about it. Especially since all you gotta do is log onto the winning faction once to get your ACCOUNT wide exp boost.


Glad someone posted a WDS thread. I really want to post this but I didn't want to start another complaint thread :lol:

The Top Dog Mechanic must be discontinued and replaced with a different mechanic. It punishes winning and rewards losing. If the factions are ever to get balanced, this will sting really hard.

Completely agree. Its basically throwing welfare points at them. Obamacare faction FTW! But seriously though, seeing as how the VS were the underdogs and now they are winning with a huge lead just screams something is wrong.

[Mastachief]

To be fair Malorn is asking for input on how to make it viable, but so far i think we have come up short with solutions. I'm not sure there is one.

[Natir]

To be fair Malorn is asking for input on how to make it viable, but so far i think we have come up short with solutions. I'm not sure there is one.

There isn't a solution. Malorn really should just abandon the WDS at this point. Clearly it has not worked at all and just provided literally everyone with free boosts who logged on once to the winning faction. The population imbalances are way too great and there still is no incentive to take and hold territory. Until you fix those two problems, doing anything else will not actually address the issues.

WDS is a shame and should have never gone through. When it first started, it was obviously clearly biased towards the overpopped faction. Now it just favors the underdog with the new point system to the point that they are getting way too much help. At this point, it really seems like the dev team (primarily Malorn since this seems to be his pet project) has no clue how to fix population imbalances and make people want to take territory.

At the end of the day though, if all you do is reward people for killing vehicles and killing people (tons of exp goes into getting kills, kill streaks, bonuses with using weapons, etc) over taking territory or using any of the support mechanics. That is what needs to change for people to start caring about territory. Plain and simple. If you can earn the most certs by taking territory, people will do it. If you can earn the most certs by farming kills, that is what people will continue to do. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out easier solutions to the problems this game has.

I will even break down some ideas for the dev team.

Territory cap streak: You get bonus exp for taking more territory during your play session.

Territory defense bonus: You get little bits of exp here and there for defending a base. Maybe it is just passive for how long you have been in the area of a base defending or have it based off of what you do while defending. You repair something while defending a base? Maybe give you defense bonus exp.

For taking a point at a base, taking down a generator, guarding a point at a base while it flips, should grant you more experience than it currently does.

Actually capping a base should give you way more experience than it currently does.

But what do you sacrifice for this? Who knows. What I will tell you is that if you want people to care about taking territory, the resource system will not cut it and is a joke. At the end of the day though, due to the free to play model, you cannot greatly reward players. The free to play model right now is really what is holding the game back. Unfortunately, these problems will doom Planetside 2 forever.

How do you fix the population imbalances? Merge more servers into each other. Mattherson, at it's peak, has no more than 1700 players on. Briggs has less than 1,000 players during their prime time. Waterson is similar to Mattherson. Connery has about 2500 players total during their prime time but they also got 2 mergers as well. These numbers are also based off of people logging on during that given hour (and who are currently logged in) so the population actually playing will be much lower as people could just be logging in for their certs or checking to see who is online.

You should also note that a lot of the servers are not even at that supposed 2k continent cap when a continent has a queue. Clearly SOE has also lowered the population cap without telling anyone. Stats don't lie.


At the end of the day though, all these little fixes here and there are just band aid solutions to the problems. Band aids are only meant to work for a very small period of time until the real problem is addressed. SOE has tried to reuse the same dirty band aid and it clearly keeps falling off.

Hate to be harsh but these are all issues players have addressed and given answers to and SOE brushes them off. It is time to start listening more to the player base and implementing these tough ideas or their game really will be going no where fast. This MLG shit will also go no where fast as people will continue to ask, what is the point of taking territory. Do you know? When you take a continent, does it get locked, kick a faction off, rotate the warpgate? Nope. Nothing. You get absolutely nothing. Boom problem addressed and solved.

[bpostal]

It is the free to play model that does this. You cannot reward people with so much EXP or certs that they do not buy boosts/subs or weapons.

The resource model does not work at all and is no incentive for people to take territory. They just don't care about it. What is the only thing people know to do in this game? Destroy stuff as that is what gives you the most reward. If you flip that and make it so territory capture and point control gives you the most EXP/Certs then people will be forced to play the objective. Yes, you must force people to play the objective. (Emphasis added)

At the end of the day though, this has been talked about since tech test and it is falling deaf ears over at SOE. These same issues have been all over the place (PSU, Reddit, SOE Forums, etc) and SOE has not once tried to fix it. Instead, they implement terrible ideas like the WDS. No one cares about it. Especially since all you gotta do is log onto the winning faction once to get your ACCOUNT wide exp boost...

If we have to use a stick instead of a carrot then fine. Grab a stick and beat that ass. Try to modify XP variables so that players who are near their squad's center of mass and waypoints are rewarded more; those who are off mucking about in the middle of nowhere get less. The mission system might help if/when it's implemented but as it stands there's no real functionality that explicitly tells players 'hey dummy, maybe you should stack up with your squad'. The result being players acting like it's one giant TDM (Loosely using the letter 'T') and one either very frustrated or apathetic SL.

How do we apply that to WDS? WDS missions via the (recently updated) UI. We can see where the most 'points' can come from, it's almost thrown in our faces. Again the problem is forcing players to go after those facilities with nothing but arbitrary points in a system that not all players (especially the 'drop in, drop out' ones) care about.
An analogy being the tech plant bennie. Even if your empire is about to lose tech, players typically won't leave a good fight elsewhere to shift to a defensive battle to save their Prowlers. IDK if that's because tech has been devalued because of prevailing PS2 playstyles or the fact that no matter what you can always fall back to your WG and pull whatever you need.

There is no tool, beyond the use of the occasional /order, that aids in zergherding. This problem is exacerbated in WDS not only because there may be as many different strategies as there are players but also because there's no real way to tell a 'good' order from a 'bad' one other than seeing if that order aligns with a given players goals. Of course, there's no benefit or disadvantage of following or ignoring an order either. The end result being typically no response from anyone or at most less than a squad of random people who may arrive in a heavily contested area with little to no idea of what's going on or what needs to happen. This is further exacerbated by the simply fact that the functionality of /re has been reduced to the probability of a coin toss. The discussion of tactics in /re is again hampered by the fact that, to most, there are either no tactics, bad tactics or pure trolling occurring in the chat. This all assumes your chat windows isn't 'stuck' on Platoon, resulting in most players ignoring/not seeing any text communication outside of platoon chat whatsoever.

The unfortunate part of my post is that I have fewer suggestions to fix these problems than I have complaints. I will admit that a player mentality of 'me first, squad second, faction whenever' in a game such as PS2 boggles my mind and causes me to refer to those 'greenies' outside my direct communications bubble with disdain almost equal to that of the VS or NC.

TLDR: Mission system would be nice to help incentivize and ease the act of moving and coordinating with those who are not in my mumble/teamspeak/ventrillo/whatever communication network. A small, preliminary of this system (even if generated automatically by a bit of programming and the use of metrics) for use primarily as it pertains to WDS would be even better.

[Ghoest9]

The lattice(as implemented) removed all strategy except thee most basic and boring concepts.
WDS does nothing to change this.


Original Planetside with its ability to back hack if you killed drained the energy the ability to capture small spawn points(towers) regardless of the lattice had much more stratgy potential.

[EVILPIG]

The lattice(as implemented) removed all strategy except thee most basic and boring concepts.
WDS does nothing to change this.


Original Planetside with its ability to back hack if you killed drained the energy the ability to capture small spawn points(towers) regardless of the lattice had much more stratgy potential.

Lattice is the worst. Since Lattice has been developed, I'd like to see the Lattice disappear at times. Perhaps a condition that players could affect can turn Lattice off.

[Babyfark McGeez]

Lattice is the worst. Since Lattice has been developed, I'd like to see the Lattice disappear at times. Perhaps a condition that players could affect can turn Lattice off.

The problem with the lattice in planetside 2 is that, to stay in Ps1 terms, they basically linked all towers together with the major bases which naturally results in way too linear and predictable network.
When i first saw that it was one of those "D'oh!" moments. :p

/sorryforofftopic

[Natir]

Lattice is the worst. Since Lattice has been developed, I'd like to see the Lattice disappear at times. Perhaps a condition that players could affect can turn Lattice off.

Lattice is a great idea for this kind of a game and it needs it. However, the maps, bases, etc, are far from even being ready to accept that lattice system. The lattice system on the Nexus island crap is how it should be, not like how it is right now. They needed to make the continents with lattice in mind. Until they completely redo the continents to flow with the lattice, it will never work.

[kubacheski]

Lattice is a great idea for this kind of a game and it needs it. However, the maps, bases, etc, are far from even being ready to accept that lattice system. The lattice system on the Nexus island crap is how it should be, not like how it is right now. They needed to make the continents with lattice in mind. Until they completely redo the continents to flow with the lattice, it will never work.

The lattice introduction into PS2 was the only way to make the fight go places. The hex system is far superior and more flexible. Think about the "influence" factor in having surrounding territories "assisting" with the defense of a base. The supply lines that would logically be there, not forced by a lattice line. The hex system allows for a much more dynamic land control system so you can actually cut supply lines by taking all the hexes surrounding a base or hex with a high value resource. But without more continents and intercontinental connectivity it simply doesn't work.

Consider this on a single continent you simply had 3 "frontlines" (TR/NC, TR/VS, NC/VS) and a couple spots in the center that were a free for all. The bases close to the warpgates were not fought at. The only contested land was in the center. The lattice forced you to go from one place and they tried to structure it so that you could fight more places before you worked yourself in a circle, but it's boring on a single continent. PS1 has what 12 conts with 3 connections each? And cont locking and base bonuses, etc. The PS2 lattice system reduces complexity and strategy as it's still limited to a single continent.

To be on topic, the problems with the game aren't addressed or repaired by the WDS, they're actually exposed more. Why would you want to advertize your shortcomings?

[Malorn]

What I've distilled out of this is:
1) rewards aren't motivating enough
2) world is not persistent enough for holdings to be meaningful
3) nothing to help outfits stand out in what they accomplish


The goal of WDS long-term is a victory condition in a world that is always changing, and where any one victory is short lived. We want it to be a way that outfits can compare strategic impact and get some recognition for their efforts and to develop some server pride and community to achieve that victory condition.

Intercontinental lattice adds to persistence and player agency but the obvious goal (capture every territory in the game) is not realistically achievable, nor can contribution towards it be measured. That's where WDS comes in. Its a strategic scoring system in its infancy. In the future I expect it will have points for continent locking, cracking, and sealing, with a possible instant victory if the unattainable is attained. I'm trying to sort out how best to score contribution of an outfit and identify good rewards. What would you like to see?

[GeoGnome]

Quick Answer if you are looking for something that can be implemented in the near future that people will like: Group XP boosts. That way if we win an award, we get a boost for the whole team who won.

What I've distilled out of this is:
1) rewards aren't motivating enough
2) world is not persistent enough for holdings to be meaningful
3) nothing to help outfits stand out in what they accomplish

It's not as much that the rewards you are offering aren't motivating, there are a million rewards for killing or taking bases, it's just that there is no meaning to the capture itself, thus the rewards have no meaning. It's like everyone in your town winning the lottery, it's nice when it happens, and now you are all millionaires, but the meaning of it is diminished somewhat because Everyone you know, now has the same reward.


The goal of WDS long-term is a victory condition in a world that is always changing, and where any one victory is short lived. We want it to be a way that outfits can compare strategic impact and get some recognition for their efforts and to develop some server pride and community to achieve that victory condition.

Intercontinental lattice adds to persistence and player agency but the obvious goal (capture every territory in the game) is not realistically achievable, nor can contribution towards it be measured. That's where WDS comes in. Its a strategic scoring system in its infancy. In the future I expect it will have points for continent locking, cracking, and sealing, with a possible instant victory if the unattainable is attained. I'm trying to sort out how best to score contribution of an outfit and identify good rewards. What would you like to see?
But as of right now, there is no possibility for strategy to be done. It is all tactics. So this is a system (Scoring system) being implemented prior to the system it is meant to compliment (Strategic game of PS2) being implemented. It's fitting a submarine with some kind of silent running technology, but leaving out the oxygen system... so it's nearly impossible for us to tell you what we want. We can say a Ton of things that people will want for some hypothetical strategic game... none of which could be applicable to the final plan of the strategy game of PS2... because we don't know what that is yet.

Will we be able to cut lattice links? If so, then maybe More of what is needed to do that.

Will there be artillery? Maybe enhanced range on that.

Will there be LLUs? Maybe a few more possibilities for those.

All people can comment on now, is what they see IG right this moment, and there is nothing IG right now that they can't already get through easier means, which could be rewarded through the WDS... that will benefit outfits more than the play time that is used to accumulate that score that won them the reward.

So things that I would like to be rewarded, but I have no idea as to if they will be part of the final product that is PS2:

-Something that will add Temporary Lattice links
-Extra use of an LLU, or a closer LLU...
-Ability to disable shields over a wider area
-Tanks available at more bases
-Orbital strike usage

Edit: As a scoring system the WDS scoring system is good. The 50% bonus to groups that are lead might be a step too far... just because it is so much of a boost, maybe a 10% boost in score when it comes to the winning faction. Other than that though, it is a solid premise. Understand that, because I know I just spent a whole post trashing it, it's not that I don't like the WDS, it's just that it's not going to work until the thing it compliments is put in. When the strategic game of PS2 is better implemented I think the WDS will do a great job.

[Ragnafrak]

I'm looking forward to outfits getting credit for base captures.

One thing that might make it more meaningful for outfits to take over territory would be if the outfit's logo got to be displayed on the continental map. For people who didn't want to see it, they could turn it off with the filters just like base names and resource types can be turned off. For people who are interested in outfit v. outfit stuff or props, it could be a way to earn braggin' rights.

Seeing that an outfit recently took a territory on the map would also give other outfits an idea of whether or not they would want to make the strategic choice of going head to head against that particular outfit as well.

Once we have the outfit revamp, with outfit specializations and such, the WDS could be used as an additional layer toward benefiting players who join outfits. Outfits who earn more WDS objective points could receive outfit-wide bonuses that would hopefully further encourage them to continue participating actively in the WDS.

[typhaon]

I think you need to separate the scoring system from the actual conditions for a map victory.

You can tune the scoring system to identify outfit/individual participation and use that as a measure for the rewards at the end of a 'war.'

Map Victory:

* Each continent should have 3 Citadels.

* Each Citadel would function similar to an A, B, or C point in a typical base battle. Control enough of them, for a long enough time and you capture the continent.

* A Citadel is typically unassailable. The control center (singular capture point) is surrounded by an impenetrable shield, powered by a special reactor.

* This reactor is kept stable through 2 methods:
1) Connections to adjacent territories with power stations.
2) Manual delivery (ANT mechanic) of "power."

* Once a reactor has been destabilized - a meltdown will begin.

* A meltdown cannot be stopped and when complete, the reactor will be destroyed and the Citadel will be assailble.

* Details about the meltdown:
1) Length of time before the meltdown is complete will be no less than 12 hours, no more than 36.
2) Meltdowns will always complete during a designated (6-hour?) window of prime time hours for that particular server.
3) Once the reactor has been destroyed, it will remain so for a minimum of 2 hours.
4) After 2 hours, defenders can repair and re-energize the reactor <--- a not insignificant effort should be necessary to complete this process.


* Details surrounding the speed at which meltdowns could be triggered/prevented... the number of reactors that can meltdown in any one day... would all need to be tweaked, but the idea is to provide a "real" way of conquering the world AND keep those major conquest moments happening during the hours when most are playing.

* I'd also design the Citadels such that they were organized in a series of layers that attackers must battle through - BUT, that can only be repaired by the defenders when the reactor is re-activated. This would create a better flow to what should be intense battles. Defenders would have multiple chances to make stands, falling back when overrun, without having the fights devolve into the gen-tag matches we see in typical Amp, Tech Plant, Bio Lab fights... especially when there are even numbers.

[Crator]

^ Really like that idea typhaon! Also, Ragnafrak's ideas about the outfit owner display indicators is nice too!

[Babyfark McGeez]

What I've distilled out of this is:
1) rewards aren't motivating enough
2) world is not persistent enough for holdings to be meaningful
3) nothing to help outfits stand out in what they accomplish


The goal of WDS long-term is a victory condition in a world that is always changing, and where any one victory is short lived. We want it to be a way that outfits can compare strategic impact and get some recognition for their efforts and to develop some server pride and community to achieve that victory condition.

Intercontinental lattice adds to persistence and player agency but the obvious goal (capture every territory in the game) is not realistically achievable, nor can contribution towards it be measured. That's where WDS comes in. Its a strategic scoring system in its infancy. In the future I expect it will have points for continent locking, cracking, and sealing, with a possible instant victory if the unattainable is attained. I'm trying to sort out how best to score contribution of an outfit and identify good rewards. What would you like to see?

The problem with these mechanics is that they distract from the immersion and feel just out of place. Imagine playing "World of Warcraft" and having a excel sheet window inform you that the horde is leading in the war because of some intangible numbers. It just doesn't fit.

I read from your post that it is planned to keep the "wds" even after an intercontinental lattice is being put in the game. I honestly don't think that's a very good idea.
If you want to have some kind of "winning scenario thing" for gratification, do it with the game itself, not accumulated scoring spreadsheets. Take "typhaon"s idea for example, try to go along that lines. Let the players do something to achieve "victory", don't caclulate it. The game is bland enough as it is when it comes to gameplay and mechanics.

[DirtyBird]

There are more important things concerning players right now.
The WDS is just a distraction because nothing else is happening within the game.
Once you finally complete the PS4 release and can then focus on the real concerns of the player base then after that they might show an interest in the WDS.
Although I guess all this WDS testing is also for the PS4, maybe more so.
As it is now, how you manipulate a territory scoreboard to give the impression of a balanced game is the least of my concerns.


The game needs to be balanced, not the scoreboard, you would have included K/D data as part of the scores if it was balanced.


If you think rewards are a major factor to the acceptance of this why don't you tell us what rewards you are able to offer.
How important is this WDS to you, what's the best you have at your disposal to buy our interest? :D

[Natir]

What I've distilled out of this is:
1) rewards aren't motivating enough
2) world is not persistent enough for holdings to be meaningful
3) nothing to help outfits stand out in what they accomplish


The goal of WDS long-term is a victory condition in a world that is always changing, and where any one victory is short lived. We want it to be a way that outfits can compare strategic impact and get some recognition for their efforts and to develop some server pride and community to achieve that victory condition.

Intercontinental lattice adds to persistence and player agency but the obvious goal (capture every territory in the game) is not realistically achievable, nor can contribution towards it be measured. That's where WDS comes in. Its a strategic scoring system in its infancy. In the future I expect it will have points for continent locking, cracking, and sealing, with a possible instant victory if the unattainable is attained. I'm trying to sort out how best to score contribution of an outfit and identify good rewards. What would you like to see?

1) The WDS rewards, while are part of the problem, the whole point of the event is territory control and holding. You get almost no rewards in-game for this though compared to things like randomly getting kills. If I can earn more EXP in a couple of kills than I can waiting for a base to capture, what would I rather be doing? It doesn't matter if you are attacking or defending, if it is a good farm, then it is a good farm and no one really cares about the overall objective.

2) Well, yeah... Been like that for a while and WDS is not going to change that.

3)Outfit leaderboards...

Here is the thing, Malorn. In order for the WDS to actually work, you need a fully polished lattice, a working resource system (or removal) that matters, a reason to take territory, continental conquest, and the list can go on. WDS is mainly icing on top of the cake at the very least. It is a global reward for what you do in-game but the mechanics in-game are just flat out missing.

The game needs to be reworked from the ground up and an overhaul of the EXP system to favor what the game is supposed to be about, teamwork, continental conquest, etc. Right now it just favors your COD, BF4 mindset.

[Carbon Copied]

I apologize in advance for the long winded nature of this post.

1) rewards aren't motivating enough

Correct - stop throwing xp and boosts at the player base there's more than enough ways to get xp in this already. Why should I be motivated to fight for a 3 day boost when I should be being motivated to get some tangible in game empire benefit? The thought of "oh I must log in today and fight for my empire because I really want that 3 day boost / decal at the end of the week" is not something that I've ever encountered or cared about; have you? These need to be things that are a part of the game, not some war score on an excel spreadsheet - means fuck all to me if I'm playing or not.

2) world is not persistent enough for holdings to be meaningful

Creeps into the above and what you've expanded below: every player knows that full domination of a global lattice / cont lock is chasing the highly improbable in a 3 way, but you chase it anyway regardless. It's weird but I think even then it's motivation to chase it - currently there's nothing that gives a glimpse of this.

3) nothing to help outfits stand out in what they accomplish

The outfit revamp should cover the majority of this as more prominent outfits get their names on the banner board - but you can't forget the smaller ones that take part either this should have some sort of recognition roster in the installation of "Oufit x / y / z last took this base" base it around a minimum player threshold to be "recognized" where their decal displays on the board or something. The recognition, community and rivalries will grow from that naturally; supply the tools, nuture it if it needs it in infancy, just don't try and control it too much all in one go.


The goal of WDS long-term is a victory condition in a world that is always changing, and where any one victory is short lived. We want it to be a way that outfits can compare strategic impact and get some recognition for their efforts and to develop some server pride and community to achieve that victory condition.

The victories are short lived now yes, but come continental lattice they will be more persistent - you say that yourself. I may be missing the point but I don't see how adding points to an excel spreadsheet per outfit gives them recognition in game? See above reply #3.

Intercontinental lattice adds to persistence and player agency but the obvious goal (capture every territory in the game) is not realistically achievable, nor can contribution towards it be measured. That's where WDS comes in. Its a strategic scoring system in its infancy. In the future I expect it will have points for continent locking, cracking, and sealing, with a possible instant victory if the unattainable is attained. I'm trying to sort out how best to score contribution of an outfit and identify good rewards. What would you like to see?

I think WDS has a bright future and place post continental lattice as it will give indication of how things are going per faction, per server etc. Once the other more important areas are sorted out then you can think about sprinkling WDS on the top - the framework is good I think you're using it to try and fix or solve the wrong thing; trying to use a spreadsheet and points to justify an outfit's contribution and think it'll magically inspire to do that.... I just don't get any sense behind that.

WDS doesn't have to be complicated by any means if you limited it on it's final incarnation of locking continents, breaking them, taking major facilities (like typhaon's citadel continent captures) and any other planned "hallmark moments/actions" then you're giving goals... within the overall goal. Territory between is the stepping stones to these overall points added it doesn't mean you need to be handed them like they're sweets every time you walk out of spawn. Could potentially turn out that this abated scoring would also stop one faction accumulating to a point of the other 2 not being able to catch them on the score boards as well so you haven't got to really come up with any magic formulas to constantly appease.. sometimes Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS).. is best.

[Shidhe]

words...We want it to be a way that outfits can compare strategic impact and get some recognition for their efforts and to develop some server pride and community to achieve that victory condition...words

words...I'm trying to sort out how best to score contribution of an outfit and identify good rewards. What would you like to see?

Screw outfits, show players. That's what modern FPS players dig, their name in the sky. It's the whole entitled "Generation me" thing. Just like the SOE players site is centered around individual players, that's the mindset of CoD and BF players.

I'd prefer there was less of them around, but the game ain't going to make money without them.

[kubacheski]

We want it to be a way that outfits can compare strategic impact and get some recognition for their efforts and to develop some server pride and community to achieve that victory condition.

Woah, slow down there. So that moonshine you've distilled tells you to develop a system by which there is intra-faction competition? When there isn't even a fully developed system by which the factions compete against each other?!?!?!?

The very nature of Planetside is that there is no endgame, there is no victory condition, or at the very least, the victory condition is near impossible to meet. I only recall one story that a faction was pushed back to their home cont. That's part of what makes it fun. When you "finish" a game, what do you do? You move to the next game. Is this what you want?

What would you like to see?

We'd like to see PS1 implemented on ForgeLight.

Higby and crew stated way back that this is what they tried when ForgeLight came out. They said they had lattice (but wanted to try hex) they had vehicle hacking (but didn't have cross faction models for rides - btw, wouldn't a color swap have sufficed?), they had deployables (but it strains the Server processing). Look at PS1, even when it came out, the graphics were poor even by 2003 standards. This was by design so the server can handle the code to manage that many people, vehicles, and deployables. The graphics didn't make the game fun, the core mechanics did. Don't get me wrong, ForgeLight makes for some beautiful eyecandy. But when the processing that goes on to track the statistics that you're tracking is bogging down the game, maybe you don't need it all. Just a thought, but downgrade the graphics to make processing space on the servers.

Think back, whats your favorite game of all time. Did you play for the graphics alone or because it was a fun game?

You really have only 2 problems with PS2. Problem one is the size, we've discussed that, you're aware of it, and eventually, there will be more continents and interconnectivity to allow for the ebb and flow of global conflict. "Size matters" Remember that slogan? You couldn't have been more right and then fail to deliver. Sorry, but facts are facts.

Now the second is the polarization of play styles. There are those that want to play PS2 like PS1, well I guess those that expected to be able to play like it was PS1 on methamphetamines, like Higby and told us it would be. and there are those that have accepted PS2 for what it is and play the way the game has them play, blindly following the stated rules of engagement.

I blame this partly on the F2P model and partly on the infancy of the game mechanics. F2P allows anyone to join and stay. You don't have to invest anything but time if you so choose. This keeps players in the game who don't, necessarially have server or outfit loyalty. Nor should they really be expected to - they've invested nothing so there's nothing to lose, no attachment to what goes on. The ones that have invested cash or a portion of their life into grinding for certs, etc are limited by the basic game mechanics. There's not much to do but grind. They get to where they max out the certs they want and go "that's it? all this and now what?".

People say there's no "meta-game". I see it slightly different - there's not enough people interested in playing the limited meta game that the current mechanics provide.

Odd huh? That although I'm a huge critic of PS2 I understand that the problem is not the mechanics we lack in the game, but the inability of most current players to leverage what they do have. But I also remember the first few months after PS1 was released. noone was CR5. Noone had command structures built, everyone was just a toon running around trying to make a name for yourself. But guess what? people still had the organization to take base after base after base in an organized effort to take over the world. People simply shouted what we should be doing. They were leveraging the basic chat to organize between squads.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents. We want a Big Huge Giant world where we can fight all over the place. We want to be able to break continent locks and ghost hack a controlled territory to pull forces away from the main lines. We really do want to drive through 3 warpgates and across 2 continents to get the immersive feel of the vast expanse of Auraxis. The meta game will follow and actually be developed by the interaction of the players, not by the devs. The devs simply make it easier for the players to implement metagame. But when there isn't much to do but grind exp, you really can't have a meta-game.

And that is why you're trying to implement a mechanic like WDS to create that level of abstraction by which you can direct the playerbase to conceptualize a metagame. As I said before, you can't force the metagame. The metagame comes from the playerbase's use of the inherent game mechanics. Make the game big and people will stay, make the game fun and people will pay, do both and the metagame will rise on it's own as people become invested in a large expansive world full of conflict. Each faction trying to gain the upperhand through strategy and, occasionally, downright brute force (zerg has it's place). But until taking and controlling the bases and continents is relevant and has a tangible effect on the global struggle, noone will do anything but grind exp.

[basti]

3) nothing to help outfits stand out in what they accomplish



This is the key point.

But not for the WDS alone, but for the entire game.


Take a look Malorn, you played PS1 longer than I did, also with a tactical outfit that did the things that mattered, so you should know:

What can outfits actually do in PS2? Yes, we can all hop along in the big fight, taking out generators or pushing certain objectives, as part of the greater zerg.
Or we could gather up with other outfits and hold our own position against the enemy zerg.


But one way or another, the Zerg is always present, always there, constantly around us.

And this is what bothers me. Outfits cant go elsewere, they cant do the stuff that matter, because numbers are also a large factor.

So I say: Give us back Generator holds of the old days. Let us take out Benefits and ressource gain under the new ressource system. I got some ideas for how to fix the problems PS2s has with such things (Endless Repair, Revive, Ammo), but i need to finish preparing first.
Give us back Combat Ant drops. The new resource system already returns the ANT mechanic to us, but give us back our actual Ant. Let us load them up into Galaxys once more, and let Power rain down from the skies of Auraxis.
Give us back The Global Lattice, and lots of continents with it. let us open up new fronts on our own once more, or stop attempts of enemy outfits to open up our continents.


If outfits can differ from the zerg oriented outfit that is always in the middle, to the tactical outfit that takes stuff out behind enemy lines or helps where it helps most, then Outfits have a proper role in the game, and with this in the WDS.

Trying to shug on some points for outfits if they have plenty of people at a base capture, and calling it quits after that, would only make people angry.

[Malorn]

I know what you mean Basti. It's a complicated issue. A lot of what small outfits did in PS1 was before a zerg moved in - resecuring continent opening attempts. They got so good at it that empires had to start forming up raids in Sanctuary in order to break in. Having an intercontinental lattice will create those opportunities and may develop a similar meta.

The Zerg also predictably stayed in one lane on the Lattice most of the time and didn't shift quickly, so even on a poplocked continent you could make an impact by going after the non-zergy bases and get a good smaller fight because the zerg couldn't instantly relocate to deal with the threat. Your small fight stayed small for longer. And cloaked AMS made it not as easy to locate the spawn. There's a lot of reasons why the smaller outfits were viable and fun, and I have keen insight into what made it successful.

We're getting there. You probably won't see a big patch where that's the subject of the update, but it'll be something that gets chiseled at over the weeks and months. I think it is getting slowly better with every update.

[EVILPIG]

I know what you mean Basti. It's a complicated issue. A lot of what small outfits did in PS1 was before a zerg moved in - resecuring continent opening attempts. They got so good at it that empires had to start forming up raids in Sanctuary in order to break in. Having an intercontinental lattice will create those opportunities and may develop a similar meta.

The Zerg also predictably stayed in one lane on the Lattice most of the time and didn't shift quickly, so even on a poplocked continent you could make an impact by going after the non-zergy bases and get a good smaller fight because the zerg couldn't instantly relocate to deal with the threat. Your small fight stayed small for longer. And cloaked AMS made it not as easy to locate the spawn. There's a lot of reasons why the smaller outfits were viable and fun, and I have keen insight into what made it successful.

We're getting there. You probably won't see a big patch where that's the subject of the update, but it'll be something that gets chiseled at over the weeks and months. I think it is getting slowly better with every update.

Why was the ability to blow gens without a link removed? One of our spec ops units specializes in base preparation and this was part of their protocol. If it was removed because of players who just ran around and blew gens for points, then remove the point reward.

[Sirisian]

Why was the ability to blow gens without a link removed? One of our spec ops units specializes in base preparation and this was part of their protocol. If it was removed because of players who just ran around and blew gens for points, then remove the point reward.
It's been suggested before that at 50% the lattice links would be semi-connected allowing players to leave the base and move on toward other objectives. (Losing the objective though would immediately stop any captures on objectives that used that link). This preserves long hack-times and promotes galaxy based take backs and lets the zerg spread out. That said it also requires getting rid of the horrible system where you lose XP for taking a step outside of an objective. (That is you earn XP while fighting in the area and if the capture goes through you get it no matter where you are. At the same time though XP should increase as the capture gets closer promoting defense and offense during the last seconds. Assuming spawn kills are mitigated. Complex problem).

[EVILPIG]

It's been suggested before that at 50% the lattice links would be semi-connected allowing players to leave the base and move on toward other further objectives. (Losing the objective though would immediately stop any captures). This preserved long hack-times and promotes galaxy based take backs and lets the zerg spread out. That said it also requires getting rid of the horrible system where you lose XP for taking a step outside of an objective. (That is you earn XP while fighting in the area and if the capture goes through you get it no matter where you are).

This only applies to "the next territory". Gens should be opened up across the cont again. Just remove the XP award for destruction. Same for terminals. Players will destroy gens and terms if they need to, not because it gives XP.

[typhaon]

Why was the ability to blow gens without a link removed? One of our spec ops units specializes in base preparation and this was part of their protocol. If it was removed because of players who just ran around and blew gens for points, then remove the point reward.

I feel like there might've been other reasons it was removed. If points was the only reason then SOE would've done exactly what you said.

There's little reason (certainly not for getting score - and that's the only motivation in the game) to ever defend a base behind the lines. Prepping bases essentially involves sending some infiltrators into unguarded places, pressing E... with the only resistance you're like to ever find is a few unaware people milling around and a random mine or two.

You want to be really pro? Trigger the gens in unison. Yay!

I'm all for back-hacking, base prepping, whatever... but for such a huge impact on the base's defense - there just needs to be more to it. There needs to be some skill involved. There needs to be some danger.

Put it back in like it is now, and it's just a mechanic that would be fun for a few... and annoying for most.

[Mastachief]

This only applies to "the next territory". Gens should be opened up across the cont again. Just remove the XP award for destruction. Same for terminals. Players will destroy gens and terms if they need to, not because it gives XP.

But how would the scrubs get xp....

They give xp for everything, it really is stupid. You can't tactically use gens or terminals because littlejimmy has to make it go boom for xp yo.

Malorn i'm pleased to hear that the old game mechanics that provided meta game have not been forgotten, i live in hope they will come back. Gets tedious fighting within the zerg and getting crushed by much zoes than your platoon has members because every one can pull one.

[VampireCrono]

But how would the scrubs get xp....

They give xp for everything, it really is stupid. You can't tactically use gens or terminals because littlejimmy has to make it go boom for xp yo.

Malorn i'm pleased to hear that the old game mechanics that provided meta game have not been forgotten, i live in hope they will come back. Gets tedious fighting within the zerg and getting crushed by much zoes than your platoon has members because every one can pull one.

unfortunately most of the playerbase will only do something if it generates XP. i mean, when you're a non member with no boost, getting a 1000 cert weapon is a hell of a grind.

[kubacheski]

unfortunately most of the playerbase will only do something if it generates XP. i mean, when you're a non member with no boost, getting a 1000 cert weapon is a hell of a grind.

F2P model separates playstyles too much. Payers vs non-payers tend to have completely different motivations in a fight. Not always, but the 2 styles differ so much in that payers tend to be more strategic as they have "bought time" and non-payers have to grind grind gring to keep up so this simply feeds the zerg. What can ya do?

[Crator]

F2P model separates playstyles too much ~ What can ya do?

Does it? I thought SOE did a pretty good job with the F2P model. Isn't that why there are multiple options to purchase things which allow players to piece-meal or boost-over-time what they want/need to play with? Free-to-Play isn't meant to provide easy access to everything. It's meant to allow players to try the game out and if interested to spend a few dollars here and there. Of course, if you have the time and/or skill to obtain enough in-game certs so you don't need to purchase things with real money then more power to you.

[kubacheski]

Does it? I thought SOE did a pretty good job with the F2P model. Isn't that why there are multiple options to purchase things which allow players to piece-meal or boost-over-time what they want/need to play with? Free-to-Play isn't meant to provide easy access to everything. It's meant to allow players to try the game out and if interested to spend a few dollars here and there. Of course, if you have the time and/or skill to obtain enough in-game certs so you don't need to purchase things with real money then more power to you.

I completely agree that the model gives options and that there are many of them. The problem is the interaction between these tiers. Their motivation is different when it comes to strategy vs the zerg. Other F2P games have he benefit of the segregation of populations via instancing and grinding on mobs. Here in PS2 the grinding is done with and against other players. Paying players have bought the time of grinding 1000 certs when they purchase weapons. Nothing wrong with that in and of itself. But the grinding players have to choose one or the other. Or grind so much that they can do both. Nothing wrong with doing that either. But mixing the two doesnt always play out well. The strategy of PS1 will be near impossible with some of the population able to achieve it and the majority grinding exp and ruining any strategical mechanisms in the name of exp.

The 2 pops are not parallel to each other like in most other games. They are in direct competition as there is only PvP combat. Which s what makes Planetside Planetside. Im not saying i know a way to fix it. I actually think it cant be fixed.

[Jonboy]

If I may say, the issue I think most at fault is your logistics model.

I get that you want to make the game accessible to the single player. But by giving that player a multitude of spawn points, you then give a squad, outfit, and empire a multitude of spawn points.

Where PS1 was great was that you could hit a base off the main zerg route, and it required some co-ordination to resecure that base. By base - insert gen, spawn room, cap point, NTU, whatever ... these were all nice sub-mechanics; but the real meat here is that a co-ordinated response was required.

Not so in PS2; where you can easily make your way to pretty much any fight by clicking on a series of spawn points, and respawning as soon as you get there.


Why am I saying this? Because ultimately where you don't need co-ordination, numbers will always win. The WDS will be a numbers game. You can 'fix' the scoring system to adjust for populations, but that just penalises the larger empire for probably having more 'casuals'. As has been said before; really you need to get the game favouring strategy over numbers before scoring it.

For my money. Fewer spawn points. No spawn on squad lead. No sunderer "drop+nuke" from outer space.

[kubacheski]

Why am I saying this? Because ultimately where you don't need co-ordination, numbers will always win. The WDS will be a numbers game. You can 'fix' the scoring system to adjust for populations, but that just penalises the larger empire for probably having more 'casuals'. As has been said before; really you need to get the game favouring strategy over numbers before scoring it.

Exactly. Just count the number of people in your zerg and call the highest one the "win". :rofl:

[GeoGnome]

For my money. Fewer spawn points. No spawn on squad lead. No sunderer "drop+nuke" from outer space.

I would just like to say that this is being done.

Fewer spawn points have been implemented. Redeploy was reworked so that you drop on the nearest friendly base (you still have to get to your squad then) and beacons are supposed to only have a 20-40m correction, as opposed to the 100m that it is now.

[Aecius]

To add my two cents to the discussion. I'd say a lot of the issues with zerging (and the associated needless discussions of terminals and generators) vs strategic teamwork could be, at least to an extend, be fixed by making squad play more important and rewarding.

The "set squad objective" option could be extended, and the squad's primary objective might yield exp rewards or bonusses. This means making generators and terminals options for primary objectives and perhaps making it possible to make it an objective to keep an enemy generator alive. Capturing, Holding, or just hanging around the primary objective to keep it defended might yield exp rewards, while simulataneously providing an exp boost (to incentivise fighting and supporting people around the primary objectives).

Such a system could even be extended allow the squad leader to give a preferred squad set-up, e.g. "I need 2 engineers, a medic and the rest of you in maxes for a max crash" with an experience boost for people fulfilling said roles.

It's not a perfect solution and might well require more of the suggestions above (e.g. removing exp gains from blowing up terminals and generators when they are not set as the squad's objective), but it will create more incentive for people, especially in public squads, to follow orders, even boring ones.

[ModiThor]

To add my two cents to the discussion. I'd say a lot of the issues with zerging (and the associated needless discussions of terminals and generators) vs strategic teamwork could be, at least to an extend, be fixed by making squad play more important and rewarding.

The "set squad objective" option could be extended, and the squad's primary objective might yield exp rewards or bonusses. This means making generators and terminals options for primary objectives and perhaps making it possible to make it an objective to keep an enemy generator alive. Capturing, Holding, or just hanging around the primary objective to keep it defended might yield exp rewards, while simulataneously providing an exp boost (to incentivise fighting and supporting people around the primary objectives).

Such a system could even be extended allow the squad leader to give a preferred squad set-up, e.g. "I need 2 engineers, a medic and the rest of you in maxes for a max crash" with an experience boost for people fulfilling said roles.

It's not a perfect solution and might well require more of the suggestions above (e.g. removing exp gains from blowing up terminals and generators when they are not set as the squad's objective), but it will create more incentive for people, especially in public squads, to follow orders, even boring ones.

This

[Prepper Ron]

Here's the OF thread for all your WDS info needs:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/wds-preseason-and-upcoming-changes.152266/

This is a feature aimed at the outfits, those that want a victory condition, and something to drive more strategic thinking and goals. In other words it's a feature that would be helpful to get constructive feedback on from the PS1 vets and outfit/empire leadership players.

What about Ceasefire of the Empires? It's a charity drive for Save The Children and War Child. You see, the charities believes that the future is the children.