Need more continents for Global strategy - Page 4

Raymondo · 2013-04-03, 01:10 PM

I wish Hossin & Searhus wernt so far off

Phantomdestiny · 2013-04-03, 01:37 PM

well we might see hossin this friday let's hope so

wasdie · 2013-04-03, 02:03 PM

I guess sanctuaries are going to be required if they want continent locking. You would hit the 2000 player limit way too quickly if you had a home cont.

I don't expect a continental lattice system for at least a year. The next two continents will play out just like the 3 we have now and they'll up total server capacity.

Phantomdestiny · 2013-04-03, 02:19 PM

give it 3/4 month because i'm pretty sure they will get a cont lattice with hossin . it is possible PSU just showed it right now by adding copy paste sanctuaries made in no time at all.

bpostal · 2013-04-03, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by Phantomdestiny

give it 3/4 month because i'm pretty sure they will get a cont lattice with hossin . it is possible PSU just showed it right now by adding copy paste sanctuaries made in no time at all.

I'm gonna hope that you're closer to the mark but I'm afraid Wasdie has the right of it. A year at least until we see these mechanics show up and get fleshed out.

Obstruction · 2013-04-04, 09:50 AM

it wouldn't be hard to set it up around 4.

you just put the interlink facilities to work controlling who has access to which warpgates on the home continents then watch the fur fly.

Sturmhardt · 2013-04-04, 10:52 AM

I support this thread. Bump!

.sent via phone.

Lonehunter · 2013-04-04, 11:30 AM

VR = Sanctuary Once they add the ability to zone vehicles to continents they just have to add that to VR.

But first it needs to be improved. We need access to our loadouts in VR, and you need plenty of warnings/labels/precautions to make sure you only leave with what you have actually unlocked.

On more continents, I don't think anyone doesn't want more. But realize how much it could thin out the battles. You'd probly have to have one of them locked (as in no one can enter) at all times.

ringring · 2013-04-04, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by Lonehunter

VR = Sanctuary Once they add the ability to zone vehicles to continents they just have to add that to VR.

But first it needs to be improved. We need access to our loadouts in VR, and you need plenty of warnings/labels/precautions to make sure you only leave with what you have actually unlocked.

On more continents, I don't think anyone doesn't want more. But realize how much it could thin out the battles. You'd probly have to have one of them locked (as in no one can enter) at all times.

I hope VR can be made into sanctuaries.

I've seen this said more than once about more continents thinning out battles. It didn't happen in PS1 to any great extent and if it happens in PS2 it would be indicative of something being wrong and if it does the devs should revisit PS1 to work out why.

My thought on why it didn't happen on PS1 are:
-Good and simple information on hacks being available on the map (ie a straightforward flag over a hacked base, no mouse hover involved)
-Active and effective CR5's
-A base hack took 10 minutes in the caves and 15 on continents and that was enough for hacks to be spotted and a resecure crew dispatched.

Aveox · 2013-04-04, 07:36 PM

Originally Posted by Lonehunter

On more continents, I don't think anyone doesn't want more. But realize how much it could thin out the battles. You'd probly have to have one of them locked (as in no one can enter) at all times.

More continents doesn't have to thin out the battles if the global lattice / connections between continents is properly designed. If each continent is a self-contained map that is freely accessible like we have now, then yes, you start thinning out battles. But if you have a lattice structure between continents themselves you create intercontinental front lines that will shift back and forth.

That is why it was never a problem in PS1 with 10 continents and 4 caves: there were only 2-4 active front lines on various continents. The rest was either locked for an hour due to capture or inaccessible due to location in the lattice.

Artimus · 2013-04-04, 07:59 PM

Based off the original post what if you had the sancutary as some sort of massive fortress located off the side of the continent. Maybe towards the middle like were Mesa Sky Dock is on Indar. This way all warpgates can be capped and it allows the factions home cont. To choose which warpgate they want to try to cap.

Aveox · 2013-04-04, 08:45 PM

The problem with a single home continent and no sanctuary in a lattice structure: It's only one continent. In PS2 each continent can hold 666 players per faction if I'm correct. If things turn against you and your home continent is being invaded you have lost all other facilities worldwide already and are down to just your home continent.

What will most likely happen in such a case is that the defending empire will only be able to field 666 players. The rest of the players is probably no longer able to log in to the server as there is nowhere to go for them (or they end up in the VR?).
There is also no way out for the defending empire. Those 666 players have nowhere to go but defend that last stretch of land. While it does make heroic stories, it really stinks in terms of gameplay. You're basically with your back against the wall and your only hope is that you can bore your enemy enough so they eventually leave or hope that you get steamrolled quick enough because people are demoralized and switch faction/log off.

This is why you need a sanctuary with multiple home continents. Sanctuaries act as a lobby: You are always able to log in, even if your empire owns not even a single outpost or all continents are population locked.
Multiple home continents means it's more difficult to be backed into a corner (but still not impossible). Even if one home continent is a lost cause, you can shift your forces to another continent and hope to do better there.
It's still possible to lose it all, but it won't be as frustrating as just a single home continent.