A new Hardcore Mode/Server thread.

[Rbstr]

As much as we love to hate on Bronzy he did hit on an idea that makes some sense.
The idea of servers that have differing mechanics might be a solution to the constant "I wants PS2 to be the same as it was" "No, it should incorporate modern fps accoutrements" back and forth bickering.

Those that love the old game as is can be on their "PS Classic" servers where it takes a month to blow up a tank.
While us heretics that want changes can play on "New PS" servers where random bullets from two continents over hit you in the head and you die!

[Bags]

I support nothing that segregates the community, besides servers localized for decent pings.

Also, less strawman; no one wants tanks to never die.

[Vancha]

Oh god no. No. Just no. No!

No...

[Crazyduckling]

I think there was more to that thread than hating on Bronze. No one liked the idea. That seems to be a consistent theme to his threads.

Splitting up the player base with multiple game types on different servers is a bad idea, especially when the goal is to have a thousand players per battle.

[WarChimp130]

I imagine localization of servers will dilute the pops enough, I do not want to add different types of play to that mix also. And they already said TTK's will be lowered anyways so unless you want to be able to solo a tank with a pistol, I think they got ya covered anyways.

I am strongly against anything that chops up populations and changes the game from Massive into Mini.

[SavageB]

No, just cause of the fact of pop reasons.

[xcel]

No! If you split the player-base then you destroy planetside! Plus all the new players that come to planetside 2 without ever playing planetside 1 will just pick your so called "new server" without even understanding what the difference is. Thus causing a server imbalance.

You're basically creating 2 different games.

[Desoxy]

Optimizing one set of game mechanics is challenging enough (if you don't settle for local minima).. so let us first focus on that, please!

And if the population really sky-rockets so much that more servers are necessary, at least let me access my long-time-levelled up character on each of them...

[Rbstr]

Originally Posted by Bags

Also, less strawman; no one wants tanks to never die.

I was obviously being serious.

[Aractain]

No I want veterans in my server to kill me so I can get all mad and send them hate tells.

Then stalk them. Watch them. Wait. AND POUNCE! Take that AzK!! Err... I mean Ask anyone one - they would think that is a good idea.

[CutterJohn]

Its good idea. Half the people in EVE just want a PVE game, and hate the harsh pvp mechanics. The other half think all the PVP stuff is amazing. A third half prefers one or the other and deals with it.


I'm a fan of alternate ruleset servers. Why piss off all players with a compromise gameplay? Have a couple servers for major archetypes.

I concede it is easier to do with a lot of subscriptions. A game like wow or eq in its prime had no issues with splitting off alternate ruleset servers because they had to have many servers anyway. If PS somehow manages to acquire that level of popularity, then it would be fine.


I doubt the server populations will be enough to support many extra servers though. Instead I support the idea of alternate environment continents. Why have the same gameplay on all the maps? Bring in different, alien environments with very different properties and balances and available equipment.

[Goku]

How about no? lol. Massive waste of resources like I said in the other thread.

[CutterJohn]

Anything you don't approve of would be a massive waste of resources, it seems. If you highly disapproved of the planned gameplay, you'd likely sing a different tune.

And balance changes are pretty easy. Tweaking some numbers in a file. A slight waste of resources to hire an extra balance guy or two.

Its stupid to say no. The smart response is 'we need to see what populations will be like'. If(and obviously its a big if) populations are beyond the highest expectations, they'll probably need new servers anyway to support the populations. In which case things like this become reasonable and something the population can support, and a cost effective means to add new variety to the game.


I personally would highly support a 'to hell with rpg elements' server with zero leveling or certs. I'm just here for the fights, not character building.

[Goku]

You can think what you want of me. My opinion just so happens to be the opposite of yours. How about we just get one version of this game out first? Having multiple versions of a MMOFPS meant for huge battles with numerous servers in one region sounds like it will kill the population and leave people confused as to what kind of game PS2 even is.

You are wrong on balancing as well. It is one thing for ONE dev team to handle balancing one MMOFPS with three factions having empire specific weaponry on top of common pool. Then taking those weapons and tweaking them for several different versions of the game just adds way more testing to the game. That is a waste of resources. Hell one unique weapon may make sense for one version, but is impossible to apply to another. I just do not see this working. At least in the standard FPS you can actually switch between servers regardless of what kind it is.

[SKYeXile]

Its alot of extra development time to put in something like that i would think, i would not beleive its as simple as changing some TTK numbers, because that would totally change how the game is played(im aware thats the idea) but they're designing the game and the maps to be played a certain way, you alter kill times it will effect the flow of battle, you will see more camping and stalemates.

not to mention, this is an MMO, TTK's of under 1 second are not excactly friendly when you're hosting such a large number of players with varying pings.