Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Better then green eggs and ham!
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2013-02-15, 01:24 PM | [Ignore Me] #16 | |||||
Lieutenant General
|
To be fair, your critique on the bottom row is justified though. First of I didn't explain that extensively (see bottom part of disclaimer in first post), second I probably tried to place too much information in the same diagram. This could probably be better represented by separating these spots for attackers and defenders (might be slight differences in perspective).
So honestly, Kerrec, either you're pretty poor at interpretation, or I didn't communicate it well enough. Chances are both.
There are too many types of players to make a complete model in a single diagram and there's no exact data to generate the model from. The data after all, is in my head, but it isn't made up. Anyone will tell you farms attract defenders like moths to a flame and you'll have personal experiences that confirm that ghosts are generally unappealing, even if you get slight rewards out of it. Things like that, isn't science, it's simply common sense. A model however is an approximation and this is one that's IMO generally true for the average player on a conscious level. But it'd be nice if the dismissive attitude of some would be replaced by a more constructive correction and refinement attitude with suggestions on how to improve the model or what is needed or it lacks. You are right that it is conjecture (since it'd be hard to call this a hypothesis), it isn't exactly random though. Either way, it requires further evaluation and refinement, as well as verification. I'd also say it's at this point subjective. Last edited by Figment; 2013-02-15 at 01:43 PM. |
|||||
|
2013-02-15, 01:40 PM | [Ignore Me] #17 | ||
Sergeant
|
PEOPLE ITS ALL ABOUT CERT FARMING !
so crown ,cross and al biolab it really dosen't matter if you are attacking or defending if there are NO PEOPLE AT THAT LOCATION grind metagame needs to be changed PS2 need some system to funnel battles to other areas ( lattice ) |
||
|
2013-02-15, 09:54 PM | [Ignore Me] #18 | ||
Sergeant Major
|
This does seem to boil down a lot to cert farming.
Personally, I would love to see something that seriously contributes to your progression or experience in reward for partaking in your faction's domination of a continent/area. I would love to progress by something more than massive killstreaks. |
||
|
2013-02-15, 10:20 PM | [Ignore Me] #20 | ||
Corporal
|
At first, I thought it was an overcomplication of a few points you could have made in a couple bullets, but after thinking about it, I think this is the right format to provide a chunk of information(/opinion) in. Really impressed by the effort.
|
||
|
2013-02-15, 10:24 PM | [Ignore Me] #21 | |||
First Sergeant
|
I do go to biolab though, since they give lot of XP with my preferred playstyle (infantry). I will farm certs most of the time I play, I just cant be arsed to play the ghost capping game, its even worse. Last edited by Vashyo; 2013-02-15 at 10:36 PM. |
|||
|
2013-02-15, 11:10 PM | [Ignore Me] #23 | ||
Contributor Lieutenant Colonel
|
I play the game as its currently designed to be played, not the way people would like it to be played.
When they make the necessary changes to the game to how people would like it to be played then I will change my play style. With my alpha squad and premium subs I get 100% bonuses, I dont care if we hold a continent that gives me 10% off something. I care even less when its a resource I rarely use. I like to be part of the action where I am getting some kills or XP to show for the time I've spent playing. I dont like spending my time in game being fodder. I lol at /leader chat that curses those at The Crown while they are off capping a continent with piss poor resistance who's ownership isnt dictated by the stronger faction but more so by the time of day. |
||
|
2013-02-16, 06:44 AM | [Ignore Me] #24 | ||
Lieutenant General
|
The amount of time people have really shouldn't be underestimated btw. Consider the following process for a resecure attempt:
1-8: Decision making process - anywhere between 1 and 7+ minutes 9-10: Initial logistical challenge - anywhere between 1 and 5 minutes 11-12: Combat challenge - anywhere between 1 and 10+ minutes Now, most players can't do this entire process within less than 7 minutes. Hell, it's questionable if they can if they're already present to defend if they can't reach the CC due to being obstructed by tanks and other units. Note that infantry is a concern, but the least threatening of all here as they're the easiest to dispatch. Attackers may find long timers boring, that's only the case if there's nobody coming. Currently, often times, nobody can come. Sure the attackers can move on, but there's hardly a fight worth mentioning. The longer timers do allow for the chance of fast response teams to arrive and hold out for reinforcements. But that does require defensibility (some form of protection between spawns and CC) for the fast response team upon arrival, as they will have to make use of localy present facilities and a single spawn beacon per squad, if they're lucky an AMS at most. And of couse, that doesn't consider the scenario where you are already engaged and situation changes (like in PS2, sudden influence changes, one of four outposts is taken) arise. There's so much situational awareness you need to efficiently move through this process. And I must say this awareness is not generated very well by the game to support the players right now. The amount of effort required to keep up to speed with the situation around them far exceeds the average player capacity. This leads to players only having an eye for their direct vicinity: the region they are in. To many, even keeping an eye on the regions directly surrounding them is too much to ask. :/ And yes, a less complicated lattice does help reduce the information need, but that still isn't sufficient. Capture systems, controllable/fixed?/predictable capture times, communication channels, status changes, map information and more really need to be further developed as high priorities. The decision making process currently takes far longer than it should, simply because there is so much effort required and communication is far worse than optimal. Last edited by Figment; 2013-02-16 at 06:47 AM. |
||
|
2013-02-16, 08:24 PM | [Ignore Me] #25 | ||
First Sergeant
|
I always go where I know there's a need for someone. A flashing territory just off of the frontline usually means the enemy is taking it, and our guys are usually too busy to reinforce it, so I'll go there. I don't necessarily defend strategic outposts, but I will if need be. I try to go where I can make a difference, which sometimes means dropping into a biolab or tech plant/amp station a territory or two early to get things rolling and get us spawns on the outskirts, and maybe bring down generators. A squad I was with took a biolab 3 territories away from the lines once. We dropped in, capped all exterior points first, then nailed the generator, capped interior points while waiting for it to go down, took out the SCU, and held it against attempted reinforcements from the enemy until the main force arrived. There was maybe a dozen of us, if that.
But there are days where I just like to go to the crown. depends how I'm feeling really. |
||
|
2013-02-17, 11:44 PM | [Ignore Me] #27 | ||
Private
|
So, after poring over all of the complex information we can glean from those highly detailed graphs, I've created the following exhaustive analysis:
1. Players prefer to fight where offense and defense is well balanced. Did I miss anything? |
||
|
2013-02-18, 09:22 AM | [Ignore Me] #28 | ||
Major
|
That is a very complex way of saying there is a sweet spot in every battle.
Trying to make assumptions and generalizations about peoples behavior and motivations is a slippery route that should be taken with a grain of salt though. |
||
|
2013-02-18, 09:56 AM | [Ignore Me] #29 | |||
Contributor Lieutenant Colonel
|
From my reading of the map (and defensible options) players are not expected to actually resecure anything smaller than a full fledged facility. If a tower or outpost is under heavy assault the best option is either to A: set up defensive positions at the next base likely to be attacked or B: wait 5 min for everyone to leave and then ghost it back. |
|||
|
2013-02-18, 10:01 AM | [Ignore Me] #30 | |||
Contributor Sergeant
|
^^ same. The resource benefit is nice and all... but I don't have to pull vehicles enough to run out of resources very often... so what does the Benefits of Esamir and Amerish really matter to me. Indar is the nice one (to replenish all those grenades and mines, but even that is minimal. I'd rather find myself a near equal fight (in terms of population, or in the case of biolab... a little higher on the attacker side) and get a good fight than sit around ghosting or fighting the same 4-5 guys base after base. |
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|