Systems: Possible Sanctuary System

[Tool]

Well your simply consistanly complaining about an unwanted issue then advocating it's use in one of your posts, ie. camping warpgates. Instead of whining like a child which you are, propose something valid with your "experience" as an alternative or system to limit or restrict it's use?

If all your going to do is complain or attack simple ideas, there's no reason you should be in a forum for discussion, simple as that.

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by Tool

Well your simply consistanly complaining about an unwanted issue then advocating it's use in one of your posts, ie. camping warpgates. Instead of whining like a child which you are, propose something valid with your "experience" as an alternative or system to limit or restrict it's use?

If all your going to do is complain or attack simple ideas, there's no reason you should be in a forum for discussion, simple as that.

I'm not allowed anymore by Forum Etiquette to insult you anymore so I can't call you a fucking idiot without getting banned. So I'll address the points you think you're making: I'm not complaining. Is that what you call making a valid point? By your logic, anyone who disagrees with you is complaining? Umadbro? I think so. You're just mad because I fucking destroyed your suggestion about base domes. Cry me a river, Justin Timberlake.

"Attack simple ideas"? Pardon me, chap. I believe you ASKED ON A PUBLIC FORUM direct-quote: "Capitals had domes, why couldn't these bases have some similar mechanic to prevent that base rape you're worried about." Don't get all butt-hurt because I replied and gave you ample reasons why that wasn't a saucy idea.

"Propose something valid" you say? How about this?

Originally Posted by Logit

Nail on head. I don't know how SOE doesn't see this coming. Unless of course they do have something in mind for Uber defense.

Sorry, I missed this in my zealous zealness of zeal to prosecute an explanation at why base-raping was not equivalent to camping and why base domes were not sufficient defense.

My suggestion, so as to avoid looking like I'm just trolling Tool, is either make sure that Sanctuaries and HARTs are in-game (Sanctuaries provide a large inviolable safe haven and HART ensures a flawless means of getting to combat without being camped)...

... or make these "uncapturable bases" something like what's in the concept art: that big effin' mothership. Institute a flight ceiling similar to what's in Planetside 1 (only, a lot higher). And then put the mothership well above that. This gives feasibility to what I call "lore whores" who want to know, from where are those drop pods coming? It also allows you to launch aircraft out of the safe zone - they fall right into the flight zone (ie, the stuff between sea level and flight ceiling) and zoom-zoom, they're in the game.

Kinda hard to camp something you can't get to by existing game mechanics. Kinda like Sanctuaries in Planetside, heyoohhh!!

[Manitou]

But even a drop-ship has a location where you come into range of the enemy. How do they prevent that from being a camped spot?

[Tool]

Originally Posted by Firefly

I'm not allowed anymore by Forum Etiquette to insult you anymore so I can't call you a fucking idiot without getting banned. So I'll address the points you think you're making: I'm not complaining. Is that what you call making a valid point? By your logic, anyone who disagrees with you is complaining? Umadbro? I think so. You're just mad because I fucking destroyed your suggestion about base domes. Cry me a river, Justin Timberlake.

"Propose something valid" you say? How about this?



Sorry, I missed this in my zealous zealness of zeal to prosecute an explanation at why base-raping was not equivalent to camping and why base domes were not sufficient defense.

My suggestion, so as to avoid looking like I'm just trolling Tool, is either make sure that Sanctuaries and HARTs are in-game (Sanctuaries provide a large inviolable safe haven and HART ensures a flawless means of getting to combat without being camped)...

... or make these "uncapturable bases" something like what's in the concept art: that big effin' mothership. Institute a flight ceiling similar to what's in Planetside 1 (only, a lot higher). And then put the mothership well above that. This gives feasibility to what I call "lore whores" who want to know, from where are those drop pods coming? It also allows you to launch aircraft out of the safe zone - they fall right into the flight zone (ie, the stuff between sea level and flight ceiling) and zoom-zoom, they're in the game.

Kinda hard to camp something you can't get to by existing game mechanics. Kinda like Sanctuaries in Planetside, heyoohhh!!

Originally Posted by Tool

Capitals had domes, why couldn't these bases have some similar mechanic to prevent that base rape you're worried about. They said they aren't capturable, it seems doubtful they would be attackable in a game like this.

But who knows? Perhaps they aren't ground bases at all, but those mega cruisers like suggested in that other thread?

Simple concept I shouldn't have to extrapolate on considering the very little known facts on gameplay. Complain, then cite an example I already gave as a potential solution for sancs, laughable man.

As for the f'n idiot snippet, you are not clever, seemingly unable to read, vuglar, constantly display reasons why I should have little respect for you or your opinion. Is this how you talk to people at work or other places?

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by Manitou

But even a drop-ship has a location where you come into range of the enemy. How do they prevent that from being a camped spot?

I don't have an answer to this completely valid question (I hope Tool doesn't think that you're complaining since PS2 isn't out yet). I can take a stab at it, if you'd like. My best guess, without having seen what they intend, is to make shit up using stuff I learned from reading Boys Life and watching High School Musical 2 (since apparently it's fucking-lol to mention you have military experience as a reason why this is sound advice). Presume that they actually do intend to make these "uncapturable bases" out of those massive mothership things we saw in concept art. Let's say they make a flight ceiling and put these motherships above the flight ceiling. Let's say these bases are at the extreme ends of the map, so that way people aren't inclined to pull a Firefly and stage multi-outfit camp sessions (which apparently can't exist because Planetside 2 doesn't exist yet). And let's say that someone figures out where these DropShips are coming from, and decides to camp that spot.

Location is going to be your best tactical asset. Here's what I mean: pardon my unfunny drawings that are obviously from Planetside and therefore are not relevant because it's not Planetside 2 which doesn't exist as we know it and therefore everything from other games is obviously invalid.



In the above image, placing a floating base well above the flight ceiling and well off the beaten path uses location. This means that unless you're cheating, you can't get TO it. You can get FROM it because you'll drop inside the flight ceiling. Now, as Manitou suggested, there's an entry point so why not camp that entry point?

That's a rather large approach vector. Unless you put up a Civil War blockade and cordon off the entire area, which is a massive effort (which doesn't really exist since this is an invalid mechanic because it's Planetside or 1863 or something... what stupid logic...), you can't really close that off. It's two-way direction, as opposed to surrounding something. And the people in the Mothership can just pick a different direction, since they are not surrounded.

Sorry, that's my best answer to the question you proposed. I hope I was able to provide a little more food for thought.

Originally Posted by Tool

Simple concept I shouldn't have to extrapolate on considering the very little known facts on gameplay. Complain, then cite an example I already gave as a potential solution for sancs, laughable man.

As for the f'n idiot snippet, you are not clever, seemingly unable to read, vuglar, constantly display reasons why I should have little respect for you or your opinion. Is this how you talk to people at work or other places?

You asked a question, I gave you an answer. You don't like the answer, tough shit. It doesn't make it any less valid. If you don't want to know the answer don't ask the fucking question. I'm no longer paying attention to you or anything you post. You're an implacable troll. Feel free to do the same! Have a nice day.

[Manitou]

Originally Posted by Firefly

I don't have an answer to this completely valid question (I hope Tool doesn't think that you're complaining since PS2 isn't out yet)...

...Sorry, that's my best answer to the question you proposed. I hope I was able to provide a little more food for thought.

For the aforementioned person's benefit, I'm not complaining.

It is a good stab at the problem, thanks for sharing your ideas. Since this is unrevealed information it is tough to speculate. Honestly I am fairly confident the PS2 devs have thought about this, and if they haven't they are now from this forum. So I fully expect some counter to the camping issue.

Getting boots on the ground in effective fighting order without being slaughtered at the outset has always been a challenge. I agree with you, there is always someone out there testing all the angles and doing sometimes the illogical to accomplish the mission. Fog of war and all that. I will be curious to see what they have set up.

[Tool]

Originally Posted by Firefly

I don't have an answer to this completely valid question (I hope Tool doesn't think that you're complaining since PS2 isn't out yet). I can take a stab at it, if you'd like. My best guess, without having seen what they intend, is to make shit up using stuff I learned from reading Boys Life and watching High School Musical 2 (since apparently it's fucking-lol to mention you have military experience as a reason why this is sound advice). Presume that they actually do intend to make these "uncapturable bases" out of those massive mothership things we saw in concept art. Let's say they make a flight ceiling and put these motherships above the flight ceiling. Let's say these bases are at the extreme ends of the map, so that way people aren't inclined to pull a Firefly and stage multi-outfit camp sessions (which apparently can't exist because Planetside 2 doesn't exist yet). And let's say that someone figures out where these DropShips are coming from, and decides to camp that spot.

Location is going to be your best tactical asset. Here's what I mean: pardon my unfunny drawings that are obviously from Planetside and therefore are not relevant because it's not Planetside 2 which doesn't exist as we know it and therefore everything from other games is obviously invalid.



In the above image, placing a floating base well above the flight ceiling and well off the beaten path uses location. This means that unless you're cheating, you can't get TO it. You can get FROM it because you'll drop inside the flight ceiling. Now, as Manitou suggested, there's an entry point so why not camp that entry point?

That's a rather large approach vector. Unless you put up a Civil War blockade and cordon off the entire area, which is a massive effort (which doesn't really exist since this is an invalid mechanic because it's Planetside or 1863 or something... what stupid logic...), you can't really close that off. It's two-way direction, as opposed to surrounding something. And the people in the Mothership can just pick a different direction, since they are not surrounded.

Sorry, that's my best answer to the question you proposed. I hope I was able to provide a little more food for thought.

You asked a question, I gave you an answer. You don't like the answer, tough shit. It doesn't make it any less valid. If you don't want to know the answer don't ask the fucking question. I'm no longer paying attention to you or anything you post. You're an implacable troll. Feel free to do the same! Have a nice day.

Originally Posted by Tool

It was simply an example, your multi-paragraph tangent is irrelavent to an unknown game mechanic. You are being childish in many ways, simply not seeing an example as just that, an example, is one way. You seem to think the same mechanics from PS1 will apply to PS2, there may be un-enterable zones for enemy factions near these bases, who f'n knows.

I do find a bit funny when people try to bring military service into these arguments then refute the concept of more realistic gameplay elsewhere. Also your not the only who served here, my left leg can attest to that so just get over yourself please.

And sure players will use things as were not intended, does that mean restrictions wont be in place to prevent them from doing anything detrimental to gameplay at least initially or even further in development? Of course not.

Yeah, really wish I would have came up the idea of a base which couldn't be accessed by enemy empires......

Thankfully, I'm a Marine so I have thick skin and your little potshots and calling me a troll just prove my point.

I didn't go into detail on a rather simple mechanic and you say you blew holes in my dome idea as if I had some stake in the argument or actively developing this game. You really need to either relax or understand the purpose of discussion, I didn't start this whole divergence but I wont let people cry about nonsense without calling them out.

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by Manitou

For the aforementioned person's benefit, I'm not complaining.

I bet he says you're right just to spite me now. But since I have him on ignore, I couldn't care any less.

Originally Posted by Manitou

It is a good stab at the problem, thanks for sharing your ideas. Since this is unrevealed information it is tough to speculate. Honestly I am fairly confident the PS2 devs have thought about this, and if they haven't they are now from this forum. So I fully expect some counter to the camping issue.

Getting boots on the ground in effective fighting order without being slaughtered at the outset has always been a challenge. I agree with you, there is always someone out there testing all the angles and doing sometimes the illogical to accomplish the mission. Fog of war and all that. I will be curious to see what they have set up.

As you pointed out, we don't have the information. All we know is that continents will now feature "uncapturable bases" and that these will replace Sanctuaries.

My point is, it doesn't matter if you cannot capture a base. You may not even be able to set foot in the base. I couldn't step foot in enemy warcamps in Warhammer Online but that didn't stop me from waiting outside, out of range of NPC defenses, and attempting to kill anything that came out. Just because we don't know doesn't mean fundamental tactics and strategies will not apply. We can still presume based on the way the human mind works and based on thousands of years of tried-and-true military offense, military defense, and everything in between. So the best answer is for everyone to start sounding off on what IS possible and provide counters.

Which is what I did. Apparently some people just don't like being told that their idea isn't going to stop a wet fart in a hurricane. Regardless, I encourage everyone to hypothesize on what can be done and what very well COULD be done, and how to make it as impregnable as possible and MORE IMPORTANTLY HOW TO STOP PEOPLE LIKE ME FROM RUINING IT.

[Manitou]

Originally Posted by Firefly

My point is, it doesn't matter if you cannot capture a base. You may not even be able to set foot in the base. I couldn't step foot in enemy warcamps in Warhammer Online but that didn't stop me from waiting outside, out of range of NPC defenses, and attempting to kill anything that came out. Just because we don't know doesn't mean fundamental tactics and strategies will not apply.

I am somewhat curious to see if the game mechanics would allow a different spawn area to activate in the case of a solid siege. Of course that implies the enemy holding the siege cannot see what is happening with the besieged army. Possibly not a force dome but like has been mentioned, some type of hovering drop-ship. Of course, this could all be solved if the hovering drop-ship has monstrous weapons of extreme doom pointing down at the siege army and can burn them down to their boots to allow the besieged army to embark.

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by Manitou

I am somewhat curious to see if the game mechanics would allow a different spawn area to activate in the case of a solid siege. Of course that implies the enemy holding the siege cannot see what is happening with the besieged army. Possibly not a force dome but like has been mentioned, some type of hovering drop-ship. Of course, this could all be solved if the hovering drop-ship has monstrous weapons of extreme doom pointing down at the siege army and can burn them down to their boots to allow the besieged army to embark.

In my haste, I neglected to fully flesh out my idea/theory/suggestion.

Those points of approach can have automated defense turrets, like... on the shore. Facing inward. A sort of beachhead. Those turrets, unlike Planetside's base turrets, cannot be destroyed. High rate of fire, mega-damage. That way, there's a secure avenue should the incoming DropShips choose to go that way.

The other thing is, ground vehicles would pretty much be screwed. They'd have to implement a vehicle delivery system or the ground drivers would have to rely on a Lodestar pilot. Who knows if that will even be in the game? And that basically says "you can't drive a ground vehicle unless there's a Lodestar waiting to take you", which leaves a lot to chance. So the theory I proposed is definitely not without its faults. But in my opinion it's a helluva lot better than expecting a Force Dome to magically kill off the hordes of enemies waiting outside gun range who are camping your uncapturable base.

[Manitou]

True, and I won't criticize your ideas or theories because we just don't know. But I could see that as an interesting approach if from sea. Again, we would have to deal with shore camping but utilizing your ideas of turrets that keep an approach clear might work. That way you could use LST-like transports to bring armor and vehicles on-shore.

This would allow you to approach from any direction that had landing possible on a continent and also incorporate sea-borne ops.

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by Manitou

True, and I won't criticize your ideas or theories because we just don't know. But I could see that as an interesting approach if from sea. Again, we would have to deal with shore camping but utilizing your ideas of turrets that keep an approach clear might work. That way you could use LST-like transports to bring armor and vehicles on-shore.

This would allow you to approach from any direction that had landing possible on a continent and also incorporate sea-borne ops.

This reminds me of the BF2 map with the landing ship off-shore that had rubber raiding craft, VTOLs and helos. That, however, was also not impregnable. In fact my favourite thing in that game was to take my squad and assault it, because it was so damned easy. Oh, but I forgot: BF2 is not Planetside 2, ohnoez the mechanics are invalid!!

[Tool]

Originally Posted by Firefly

In my haste, I neglected to fully flesh out my idea/theory/suggestion.

Those points of approach can have automated defense turrets, like... on the shore. Facing inward. A sort of beachhead. Those turrets, unlike Planetside's base turrets, cannot be destroyed. High rate of fire, mega-damage. That way, there's a secure avenue should the incoming DropShips choose to go that way.

The other thing is, ground vehicles would pretty much be screwed. They'd have to implement a vehicle delivery system or the ground drivers would have to rely on a Lodestar pilot. Who knows if that will even be in the game? And that basically says "you can't drive a ground vehicle unless there's a Lodestar waiting to take you", which leaves a lot to chance. So the theory I proposed is definitely not without its faults. But in my opinion it's a helluva lot better than expecting a Force Dome to magically kill off the hordes of enemies waiting outside gun range who are camping your uncapturable base.

Heh, I'm the dumb one yet obviously sees continious potshots taken at a very simple idea not meant to explain away every issue all the way to human exsistance.

But that's right, adding people to ignore after calling them names on a gaming forum then continuing the complaints one sidedly isn't childish.




Oh well sorry cheif for sidetracking your thread, you do have some good ideas I hope sanctuaries are in, in some form or another. As often as we, in my outfit, duelled in PS1, uncontested places where we could do that may be few and far between now on continents in PS2.

Whatever these uncapturable bases turn out to be, so long as they have the ability like others have said to gather forces, look at certs, or just chillax in saftey, I think we'll be fine.

[MasterChief096]

Honestly I think the best bet would be to just have the same Sanctuary system in PlanetSide 1 used in PlanetSide 2, just make it optional.

On footholds: I'm concerned as to how these will work. How can you fully capture a continent as an empire if the opposing empire simply spawns into their uncapturable foothold after the fight on the continent is over? It would mean you would have to camp the hell out of the foothold 24/7 until there were no signs of enemies left in the foothold, otherwise you'd leave to another continent and everyone from the foothold would just start hacking your shit again.

Is there any official word that there is an empire foothold on EVERY continent? Or is there one single foothold for all empires?

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by MasterChief096

Honestly I think the best bet would be to just have the same Sanctuary system in PlanetSide 1 used in PlanetSide 2, just make it optional.

This is pretty much what I would like to see. If you can't get to the action quick enough from Sanctuary, that's your problem. Not like they don't have an Instant Action feature. Knock the HART timer down again and you've got two fast means of getting into combat.

Originally Posted by MasterChief096

On footholds: I'm concerned as to how these will work. How can you fully capture a continent as an empire if the opposing empire simply spawns into their uncapturable foothold after the fight on the continent is over? It would mean you would have to camp the hell out of the foothold 24/7 until there were no signs of enemies left in the foothold, otherwise you'd leave to another continent and everyone from the foothold would just start hacking your shit again.

This is also another reason that I am concerned about these "uncapturable bases". Though in this case I'm sure there's a valid function to work around that... OR, there's just not going to be continent locks.