Sanctuaries for PS2

[Qwan]

I think I know why they dont want to add sanctuary's.

As most can recall from PS they used a linking system from base to base. For you to hack this base you had to have a link to it. If your faction owned no bases or continents then you were restricted to your sanctuary. A sanctuary had three links to certain continents, so if you wanted to fight back you would only have these three links. Once you decided which warp gate you were going to use, you would end up one of the three continents inside of a protective warp bubble waiting for the rest of your team. In PS2 we have the Hex system (God help us) for them to have a sanc they would have to go to somthing similar to the link system which they dont want to do because they love there Hex system and in there minds it works fine. And as they said before the game released they refused to cut and paste anything from PS1 to PS2 except for the game name, factions, weapons names, vehicle names, concept, continent names, and base names.

See we the players are asking the wrong question, instead of asking:

Are you going to add sanctuarys.
We should be asking:

Why are you not adding sanctuarys.

Cause it seems to me this is what people want to see added to the game. So I ask the question " Why are we not adding sanctuarys to the game SOE" .....

[PredatorFour]

They didn't want to add sancs because they said it slowed down gameplay. They said it took 5 mins to get into a fight. In the current system it would take a click on deploy to get into a fight. Soe just baffles me with their design decision making.

[Qwan]

Originally Posted by PredatorFour

They didn't want to add sancs because they said it slowed down gameplay. They said it took 5 mins to get into a fight. In the current system it would take a click on deploy to get into a fight. Soe just baffles me with their design decision making.

This is true but in PS1 there was a instance action button, as well as a orbital dropship which left like every 1 or 2 minutes. If you think about it they would have to add some type of linking system from sanctuary's if they added them. I mean if they had it set up like the old sanctuary's were there was three warp gates on each sanctuary then were would they connect to (Hence a link). I think that there so determined to not have a linking system that they don't want to add a sanctuary for that reason.

So what if they did add sanctuary's were would the warp bubble take you ?
1. To only one continent (that the warp gate is connected to perminantly) i.e. as in PS1
2. Give you the option of any continent with a active warp gate (this way the enemy will not know your destination) they'll never see you coming.

I dont know how they would set it up, I just hope like alot of gamers who play PS2 that they consider adding sanctuary's.

[bpostal]

My one, overriding thought on Sancs is the question: What are we supposed to do when a faction gets zero based once the footholds are gone? Sit in a hundred+ person queue to get back to our 'home' cont/foothold?

[Dkamanus]

Originally Posted by PredatorFour

They didn't want to add sancs because they said it slowed down gameplay. They said it took 5 mins to get into a fight. In the current system it would take a click on deploy to get into a fight. Soe just baffles me with their design decision making.

WOW! 5 WHOLE FUCKING MINUTES? OMG, THE HORROR!

It seems like most of them don't even play games where preparation can take up to an hour, like EVE Online, a game smedley says he plays a lot. 5 minutes, with all the drop podding, instant actioning and all other forms of travels is a ridiculous amount of time, and losing the sanc for those "horendous" 5 minutes is just stupid.

EVEN more so, if it actually kills gameplay because of it. Players can deal with 5 minutes. 30 minutes would be pushing it, but up to 5 minutes is not a problem.

[Phantomdestiny]

sanctuary help to give the feeling of persistence to the game . Also we could expand the game so much with the sanctuaries . Specially on the side of social interaction.

[Qwan]

Ive played with Azures Twighlight quite a bit on PS1, they used Sanc to work on tower missions and to show new troops the ropes. It can have its uses than just being a hang out area. Im just saying I think it would be an exellent addition to PS2.

[Phantomdestiny]

Originally Posted by Miir

How's about something new this time around.

Instead of Sanctuaries have a continent that is primarily one large urban city. (Capital City)

i love that idea because it really brings a feeling of something to die for. but i'm scared of the cpu bound problem we already have. Maybe later on we could have vehicles that can only be build in sanctuaries like the bastion . They would need specific building like a space port which would only be present in the capital city of the sanctuary and would require a day to week to make with a lot of resources and a specific blue print.

[nurizeko]

Originally Posted by GuyShep

While changing your mind in light of new information or perspectives is fine and all, the issue is that SOE has spent an alpha and beta, both with player feedback, saying "No sancs" throughout. Even if sanctuaries do show up later on, it's gonna be a very bumpy ride because SOE hadn't done so earlier.

However, it's kinda nice that they suggested the possibility of sancs showing up later.

Indeed.

I like some of the OP's ideas. Again its obvious what SOE needs to do to get the game up to scratch.

Just a case of them doing it.

[Phantomdestiny]

just to remind people of old concept art . they devs did think about urban areas for combat. maybe when hardware gets better on the cpu side.

i am wondering are those soldiers attacking a fortified/urbanized home continent foothold/warpgate or a sanctuary?

" note the fleet carrier on top "

[robocpf1]

Let us not forget that warpgates don't even work the way they're supposed to yet. Higby made a "warpgate terminal" where you go to a menu and select the continent you'd like to warp to. You still can't take vehicles between the warpgates yet.

With that in mind, sanctuaries wouldn't work - yet.

I am glad they are seriously discussing including them in the near future - but now that we've played through tech test, beta, and the first months of launch, I can see why they didn't spend precious time and resources creating sanctuaries.

When you consider the balancing, optimization, leaderboard functionality, metagame and vehicle issues they are still having, it seems like a very small issue to worry about designing entire continents and working warpgates when they have quick ways to get into the fight on any continent.

Is it perfect? No, but the devs know that and they're working on upgrading and changing a lot of things - just look at the Roadmap.

I understand the reluctance to worry about sanctuaries at this stage. I am glad they are thinking about putting them in soon.

As far as Planetside 1 goes:

1) Warpgates. Which you had to fly to, warp to the other continent, and then fly from that warpgate (almost always on the edge of the map) to the fighting. It did take some time to move Galaxies, AMSes, Lodestars, etc if the fighting was far from your warpgate.

2) Instant Action. Hit Escape, click Instant Action, wait 10 seconds and it will spawn you at a hotspot. This was completely uncontrollable, and not a reliable method to get into a specific fight. It was more an "I want to shoot something" button that would spawn you somewhere enemies were.

3) The HART shuttle. This is like the drop pod deploy button we have now, except you could drop anywhere on a contested continent except for inside a facilitiy's SOI. It did not come every 1-2 minutes - the timer was nearly 4 minutes long with a lengthy loading time to allow players to get into the shuttle. When you consider, for PS1, that towers can flip in a matter of 12 seconds and facilities took 15 minutes (or less, with an LLU), 5 minutes is a heck of a long time. If you take too long loading up your Galaxy, you may miss the opportunity because of the travel time. It was a problem, we just had 10 years to learn the best ways of dealing with it, and we sort of ignored it after a while because it was part of the game.

[Rockit]

I think a lot of it gets back to their comments early on about wanting to have every square inch of land contestable. Obviously sancs don't come anywhere close to being in that conversation. It's probably one of those community requested changes they just couldn't ignore forever, at least I hope that is the case.

[Mox]

Sancs would be nice to have. But i believe it when i see. His grace John "stubborn" Smedley announced several times that he hates sancs. His thrall Higgles wont do it without a royal pardon....

[Crator]

Originally Posted by robocpf1

2) Instant Action. Hit Escape, click Instant Action, wait 10 seconds and it will spawn you at a hotspot. This was completely uncontrollable, and not a reliable method to get into a specific fight. It was more an "I want to shoot something" button that would spawn you somewhere enemies were.

I really like what they did in PS2 with this. Which is they took away the PS1 random selection and let you select a hotspot you want. The only issue now is the hotspot system needs to be tweaked in a bit in PS2...

[Phantomdestiny]

Originally Posted by Rockit

I think a lot of it gets back to their comments early on about wanting to have every square inch of land contestable. Obviously sancs don't come anywhere close to being in that conversation. It's probably one of those community requested changes they just couldn't ignore forever, at least I hope that is the case.

depends how stubborn we get by trying to get them to do it .