Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Home of the rare and elusive Hamma
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
2012-10-17, 12:09 AM | [Ignore Me] #1 | |||
Lieutenant Colonel
|
http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/i...etagame.32909/
__________________
"There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened."
-Douglas Adams Last edited by Geist; 2012-10-17 at 12:12 AM. |
|||
|
2012-10-17, 01:21 AM | [Ignore Me] #3 | ||
First Sergeant
|
I like all of those improvements; only tonight before I saw the post I, too, was saying outposts/bases should be timers instead of progress bars! The ease of spawning on your outfit/squad will also be a big help, particularly if they're halfway across the continent and the NC were blockading the TR Sanctuary for a few hours, like they were earlier.
I do have a suggestion, however. Recently you've been performing stress tests to see how many players you can fit on a server, but whenever I'm in a heavily contested area, my framerate grinds to a halt because of the amount of infantry around, even if they're all friendlies. Is there any way you could make latency optimised to be more fluid, depending on the relative number of total forces within occupied capture zones, compared to empty ones? For example, intel CPUs and some GPUs from both NVIDIA and AMD now increase their effectiveness based on the amount of load they are having to deal with, as do wireless NICs from Bigfoot... It would be great if server latency could be consolidated to operate at peak efficiency on a zone-by-zone basis, only when there's more than 50 people there, since that almost empty areas would not require the same level of performance unless contested. Last edited by Hyncharas; 2012-10-17 at 01:24 AM. |
||
|
2012-10-17, 01:42 AM | [Ignore Me] #5 | ||
I have mixed but mostly positive feelings with this, what i like for sure, is the Tactical point that you need a Tech Plant,...And i hope this does not Affect the Warpgates !
What i dont like is that you can spawn on every Sunderer in the Game with no Distance. DO IT SQUADBASED ! ! IMHO |
|||
|
2012-10-17, 07:22 AM | [Ignore Me] #6 | |||
Private
|
As in only squads can spawn on them. It doesn't even say Platoon-based, which will add organizational complexity. No need to freak out in caps, it's already the way you want it. Personally I think these are absolutely great changes and additions to the game, I'm a little surprised at the level of "meh" in this thread. Last edited by IRSAudit; 2012-10-17 at 07:24 AM. |
|||
|
2012-10-17, 08:11 AM | [Ignore Me] #7 | ||
Sergeant
|
These changes look like PS2 is heading more and more in the right direction. Granted, I still haven't played but I have been following this game closely, and I played the original PS back in its heyday.
Hopefully the devs implement these changes within the next few weeks because I have a feeling a lot of this stuff is going to really need to be tweaked by the wonderful beta testers. Release is getting closer and I get more giddy with anticipation as the days go by. |
||
|
2012-10-17, 12:39 PM | [Ignore Me] #8 | |||
|
||||
|
2012-10-17, 01:43 AM | [Ignore Me] #9 | ||
Sergeant
|
I don't like spawn and capture changes. Free teleports will make Galaxies even less usefull, while they already don't have a solid purpose in the game. If capture mechanics remain as Battlefield conquest, they will remain "whack-a-mole" fests.
|
||
|
2012-10-17, 02:17 AM | [Ignore Me] #12 | ||
Captain
|
You still have a huge timer on both those. I have a feeling these spawn beacon timers arent final either. Galaxies can also travel much faster then sundys so even if you can just transport a spawn point to the target doesnt mean it will get there in time to save a cap or help a tank/infantry push. I just wouldnt write galaxies completely out yet. I dont know how it is on the NC and TR side but at our warpgate we constantly have galaxies going to certain areas, sort of like air taxis.
|
||
|
2012-10-17, 01:59 AM | [Ignore Me] #14 | ||
sounds ok. not going to give any opinions untill i thry them though.
reading them is one thing but it always feels different when on the battlefield with other combatants contributing to the chaos.
__________________
Where Eagles Dare cossiephil http://www.twitch.tv/cossiephil http://www.youtube.com/user/cossiephil1 https://www.facebook.com/Guyvergamingtv |
|||
|
2012-10-17, 02:23 AM | [Ignore Me] #15 | ||
Sergeant Major
|
Was expecting something exciting, keep reading it to find something that sounds great, but alas nothing.
I'm not an organized squad player and very rarely use MBTs so most of this has little bearing on me personally, beyond how it may change others' ways of playing. Maybe it will play out much better than it sounds, I guess we'll see soon. The one part that might be good is the Intercontinental warfare, but no details are given for that. Also why just MBTs and not other advanced vehicles for the Techplant? |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|