via Twitter: AA OP

[sylphaen]

Originally Posted by maradine

Not sure I'd like a world where stupidly wandering into an ambush grants you juggernaut defense, though.

That's why details would be nice because it would be surely complicated as hell to balance in the right way. "Stupidly wandering" and "being ambushed" together is definitely terrible but only for the "stupidly wandering" part. "Being ambushed" happens and having a chance to react is nice.

What I understood from Malorn's post (which can be read different ways) is an idea of favoring the creation of close-call situations.

I do not feel a lot of adrenaline build-up from situations where I instantly get fragged as I enter an area: no time is given for tension build-up. The TTKs and respawn times are so low in PS2 that when assaulting a base, I've found it easier to jump in the grinder and keep coming.

I used to have more fun with survival times in PS1, though. Many times, I've felt a lot of tension just keeping my skyguard and crew alive in the wild while ambushing air vehicles. It was great to stay alert and on the prowl for preys while we could also be preys. The process of surviving the destruction of a vehicle and managing to come back alive from hostile areas to your base was also one of those great PS1 moments I had. I insist on "process" since I rarely made it alive.
:P

The thought process behind balancing large-scale vs. small-scale encounters and increasing the chance of close-call survival is the idea I found interesting from reading Malorn's post.

I unfortunately lack of constructive ideas to add on this topic but I feel that giving thought about those things is a great sign and I wanted to support this process.