Contestable open terrain and vehicles vs. infantry

[kaffis]

Given that we know we'll be fighting to control things other than buildings and the enclosed infantry-centric things that implies, I have to wonder:

Will infantry be dead? Okay, okay, it'll never be completely dead. But will ground-pounding be more irrelevant?

As a linked question, though, do you guys anticipate that engineer deployables may play a role in promoting infantry play and putting a toe on the scales, as it were, to keep infantry relevant, even a quarter mile from the nearest building?

Are deployable shelters and *manned* gun emplacements in store for engineers? Should they be?

[Bags]

It sounded like the are:

Some environments dominated by ground vehicles (large open plains)
Some environments dominated by infantry (dense jungles)
Some environments dominated by aircraft (uneven terrain high in mountains)
Some environments dominated by a mix (forest? idk)

For infantry, they mentioned there will be some urban combat, and then we also have bases and towers to fight over.

Infantry should be fine.

[SKYeXile]

Originally Posted by Bags

It sounded like the are:

Some environments dominated by ground vehicles (large open plains)
Some environments dominated by infantry (dense jungles)
Some environments dominated by aircraft (uneven terrain high in mountains)
Some environments dominated by a mix (forest? idk)

For infantry, they mentioned there will be some urban combat, and then we also have bases and towers to fight over.

Infantry should be fine.

oh you mean like the battle islands? HOW ABOUT THOSE TANK BATTLES?!

[Bags]

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

oh you mean like the battle islands? HOW ABOUT THOSE TANK BATTLES?!

You can't pull armor on the battle islands.

[SKYeXile]

Originally Posted by Bags

You can't pull armor on the battle islands.

I know, which is funny, because the point of desolation?...the desert one anyway, was ment to be all about tank battles, hence why its 3 tech plants.

I just wanted to pointout thats what SOE says, but no what always happens.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

I know, which is funny, because the point of desolation?...the desert one anyway, was ment to be all about tank battles, hence why its 3 tech plants.

I just wanted to pointout thats what SOE says, but no what always happens.

Ahh. I'm going to give them a second chance here. The second they start not following through...

[BorisBlade]

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

I know, which is funny, because the point of desolation?...the desert one anyway, was ment to be all about tank battles, hence why its 3 tech plants.

I just wanted to pointout thats what SOE says, but no what always happens.

Actually they were released with tank battles and it was like that for awhile before gettin changed...for what reason i do not remember. The original idea for the BI's was very cool and worked well (nexus needed tweaked tho), just kinda went bleh with that patch that changed em all was the prob. Limiting what you can use and adjusting terrain to go hand in hand with the stuff really gave you some new gameplay experiences. Cool idea for the time, they shoulda stuck with it tho and not changed it.

[Death2All]

I hope these areas don't have specific rules to them...Like you HAVE to use ground vehicles. Even if the area is only captureable with tanks I still want to be able to go on ground with my Lancer and wreak havoc. I also some areas don't allow certain vehicles.

It would suck traveling across regions in your mossie and then suddenly it's a non aircraft region and you're forced to either fly around or stop and get out.

[SKYeXile]

Originally Posted by DeeTwoEh

I hope these areas don't have specific rules to them...Like you HAVE to use ground vehicles. Even if the area is only captureable with tanks I still want to be able to go on ground with my Lancer and wreak havoc. I also some areas don't allow certain vehicles.

It would suck traveling across regions in your mossie and then suddenly it's a non aircraft region and you're forced to either fly around or stop and get out.

yea that would suck, thats why I hate the battle islands and brang it up, if they design a map for aircraft , dont restricky other vehcile, cery is awesome to fly...just wish it had a higher flight cealing.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by DeeTwoEh

I hope these areas don't have specific rules to them...Like you HAVE to use ground vehicles. Even if the area is only captureable with tanks I still want to be able to go on ground with my Lancer and wreak havoc. I also some areas don't allow certain vehicles.

It would suck traveling across regions in your mossie and then suddenly it's a non aircraft region and you're forced to either fly around or stop and get out.

They didn't say anything about rules, just that vehicles would be inherently dominant on plains due to the openness of them, infantry would be inherently dominant in an area that vehicles can't traverse, and air would naturally dominated a bumpy area that vehicle sand infantry have trouble getting up to.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Bags

They didn't say anything about rules, just that vehicles would be inherently dominant on plains due to the openness of them, infantry would be inherently dominant in an area that vehicles can't traverse, and air would naturally dominated a bumpy area that vehicle sand infantry have trouble getting up to.

Like I said, infantry will never be dead. However, I should point out that the infantry-only battle islands weren't exactly a resounding success... having designated maps that favor one or the other doesn't guarantee that the playerbase will like them and provide a fight there.

My question was more, would it be reasonable and fun to give engineers the option to deploy deployable cover to supplement the natural cover in areas that don't have them, or to construct "base defenses" as it were (like the guns on the walls that never really did enough damage in PS1) for open terrain, since there will be open terrain being fought over?

[Heaven]

Originally Posted by DeeTwoEh

I hope these areas don't have specific rules to them...Like you HAVE to use ground vehicles. Even if the area is only captureable with tanks I still want to be able to go on ground with my Lancer and wreak havoc. I also some areas don't allow certain vehicles.

It would suck traveling across regions in your mossie and then suddenly it's a non aircraft region and you're forced to either fly around or stop and get out.

I agree that would truly suck big time, i hope they don't have area specific fighting etc... tanks v tanks, air v air, troop v troop as i would like to kick some vehicle ass with my phoenix

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Can the tanks blow the trees down when there is fighting in a dense jungle?

Well, Matt and Smed were dodging the cement tree question, and the PhysiX rep was talking about destructible terrain as one of the potential offerings that could be integrated into the new engine. So, I'm not sure this is a definitive argument, yet.

Originally Posted by Heaven

I agree that would truly suck big time, i hope they don't have area specific fighting etc... tanks v tanks, air v air, troop v troop as i would like to kick some vehicle ass with my phoenix

This is kind of what I'm getting at. I appreciated combined arms battles a lot in PS, especially the rare ones that formed in the open. They tended to be rare for a few reasons, some of which PS2 seems to want to tear down (few reasons to fight in a remote location (bridges were the primary exception in PS1), so PS2 adds resources to control even in remote, open areas), and others of which still concern me and could still prove roadblocks to combined arms conflicts -- things like areas offering too much of an advantage, or an insurmountable or unmitigateable advantage to one variety of combat or another.

I worry that open areas will be too custom-tailored to vehicles for infantry to stand a chance because they lack cover or heavy emplacements. I worry that mountainous terrain will be too custom-tailored for air conflicts because the slopes will be literally un-navigable to other means of transport, even ATVs or on foot. I worry that the urban combat areas will be too narrow for vehicles to pass into, literally precluding them from entering the fray even cautiously and with reduced maneuverability.

What I guess I don't want to see are areas where, thanks to the ability to focus and specialize my character and outfit, I feel like I shouldn't even bother fighting, even if they prove to have critical strategic value.


Tacked on to those fears, as well, is an opportunity I see for engineers to provide *manned* defenses, instead of strictly automated ones like autoturrets and mines. I'd love the ability to be able to reinforce a position in such a way that it leverages and multiplies my squad's manpower, rather than simply setting up defenses that play themselves. It's my biggest gripe with specializing as an engineer in Planetside. There's no reason "deployable" or "support" should *always* mean "do things for me."

[Lonehunter]

I remember reading they want infantry to have more reliable Anti Air weaponry. Adding MAXs and maybe some infiltrator, Engi, or Commander counters, I bet there will be plenty of ways for infantry to keep an even footing against vehicles.

Edit: and like bags said, come territories seem like they will be used by vechs instead of inf. Like an open plain for tanks and rugged mountains for air.

[Raymac]

Nah, infantry always have to use the terrain around them along with AV weapons to take out vehicles. With both those things being in PS2, I'd say infantry is safe. (well, you know what I mean)