Huge Outfits and PlanetSide 2

[p0intman]

Originally Posted by Kate

I wrote this on my phone

holy shit

[thegreekboy]

Originally Posted by Kate

and being in a certain large NC outfit on Connery...

Despite you being part of 666, I agree with every single one of your points and I really like them

[Kate]

Originally Posted by Sturmhardt

You wrote all that on your phone? Holy....

I'm a little TL;DR and self-taught with my writing to begin with, but throw in being hopped up on chocolate and turkey with nothing to do, and being away for a week with double xp going on, and you get something like this...

Originally Posted by thegreekboy

Despite you being part of 666, I agree with every single one of your points and I really like them

Cool. It's always interesting to run into you guys, you're kinda like our rival or frenemy...

[Rodel]

Well I'm an officer an outfit that runs about 2 squads on non event nights and I don't agree that a group that size can't acomplish anything. We do it all the time and still have great fights. We brke a tech farm a couple weeks back by running 15 shield breaker sundies as bridges. We just held them their and maintained them while the zerg jumped in and over ran the place.
I hear these complaints all the time and I just don't see it and I've realized I'm the only one who disagrees. I don't know. I might have a different perception of the game then other people but I find this game to be very playable for soloing, small squads, and large platoons. However each is played differently and non are played the way you would play planetside 1.
I think a lot of people miss then gen/tower/cc holds of PS1. You just simply can't do that in PS2 right now. Sorry. But what I do is run my squad in a way that supports the zerg. Taking psuedo-points in large bases, slicing the enemy's enluence off from their WG, or simply calling for the squad to take over the airpad at a Bio lab and letting the zerg do the rest.
We are very effective doing these things and we have a hell of a time doing it. I always find something for a squad to do.

[igster]

What Rook said basically (Great post). Please please don't discount the views of the long time contributors to these boards like figment, pointman and rook. They want new players more than anyone but also want the depth to be playing this game in 10 years time.

- Map Sucks & is form over function. Doesnt support anything more than the zerg.
o Need to know where our population is as well as nme population is.. so that the tactically minded people can make informed decisions about how much force is needed to respond to the enemy on the map.
o tactical activity overlay from PS1 is all that is needed - the one that a lot of PS1 players didn't realise was there and often didnt know how to use. Malorn please give the map UI designer a demonstration of how amazing the tactical population overview was in PS1 since I have a suspicion that he has never seen it in operation. Then you can ask him to rip up the whole 'hover over a hex to get population information' concept and replace it with a population map overlay.
o The radar/detection meta game was great in PS1 where setting off CE would create a 'trace' of enemy activity on the tactical map. We crave for some of this depth in PS2. Bring back the Sensor Disruptors!

- Lack of indoor connected defences with choke points means its always a battle of pure attrition. Give me a fight where a small group of 12 people can dynamically hold a useful objective by reinforcing each other when they come under attack without being randomly picked off by snipers overlooking a base. At the moment bases sprawl so much and all chokepoints are so disconnected that you cannot reinforce each other without being picked off by a sniper/liberator/nme tank.

- Resources dont make sense. This isn't starcraft.
- Meaningful XP Bonuses for defenders
- XP Based on how long the person you had killed was alive/how many kills they'd racked up

Completely agree about the vehicles not being able to shutdown a base or outpost on their own. The spawn camping by libs/MBTs/lightnings is ridiculous.

Only 1 thing I'd like to add really.

Response Metagame/Vehicles
Bring back the response meta game to give us the option to not have to zerg or participate in the endless three way if we want.

However, do remember that the vehicle/armour specialists also have a part to play in the response meta game. It's not all about just the infantry/Gal Drops/Mosquito flying one man armies.

In PS1, we used to try to be the Vanu armour first responders to try to control the courtyard in our Magrider. Normally it was just me, chal and sometimes we'd have our flying wingman purplegarf giving us our air support.

Could never fly to save my life and inside a base I'm cannon fodder but in a magrider controlling the enemy vehicles in a courtyard we were the biggest pain in the ass you could ever come across.

We'd respond to the squads trying to open a continent and try to establish control of the enemy established spawn points by finding and killing their AMSes/Routers/Sunderers. I'd love for this role to be reprised in PS2.

This should be the vehicle role in planetside. Establishing the dominance outside of a base. If dominance was established easily then we'd go in on foot. Leaving our vehicles in the courtyard without having a stupid 5 minute timer on it so we'd have to abandon it if there was a really good fight going on inside.

Until CY dominance had been established that was our fight. If it was a hot base we'd have to fight for dominance. If heavy air was present we'd struggle until our flying response guys would come in.

Everyone has a role. But the important point is that neither us, the air cav or the other vehicles could take a base on our own. We all had to contribute to get the job done. At the moment a lib or tanks can camp the respawn while 1 lone soldier stands at a control point. This is bad bad base design.

[Mavis]

Back in the day on Werner we had an NC zergfit, anyone from Werner will know it's name. Yes it messed up, taking people away from where we needed to be and pushing the zerg where they wanted to be. But all the other outfits had a steady stream of players moving on from the zergfit once they learned the game and joining the smaller outfits.
With world wide communication being restricted to people who had grinded CEP the zergfits got talked down in comms. Because they never had the ability to push a people through as leaders. It meant that on Werner NC the zergfit would have maybe 1-2 CR5's giving commands. Most other outfits had between 5-10. This meant we could still direct the fights.
The problem isn't the big outfits it's needing a way to push control to the people who can do a good job. Most of us old CR5's from my outfit haven't bothered with the command certs, why bother? Anyone can get them. Beyond the few that are required for squad leadership no one bothers. Leadership needs to be earned, if that happens it will help sort out the lack of control we have over the Zerg.
Make a new currency, CEP, an SL earns that instead of certs and spends that on command abilities. Problem solved.
Just my thoughts.

[Whiteagle]

Originally Posted by Kate

Offensive and defensive holding of terrain needs to be more feasible, vehicles should not have influence on almost all terrain.

Bases should be more enclosed, and should provide better cover. Walls should be more useful, and jump pads and lifts possibly eliminated. Reducing exposure to the enemy better defining attack vectors would make massed troops easier and more interesting to take on, by making enabling defenders to encounter them in smaller and more managable groups at once.

Internalized/underground obectives and spawn areas could would be good as well. This would promote longer and more interesting battles, would delay the onset of farming the spawn, and again would enable a smaller defending force to engage attackers in a managable way. Currently at the spawn you can be instagibbed from almost any angle or distance, which is hard to counter as infantry and quite frustrating.

Outposts and towers should have internals which are safer from air and armor, and structures should maybe be more linked. It'd maybe be cool if the tower was physically linked with its curtilage buildings and they had content of strategic importance in them, or if outpost buildings had underground tubes or something. IMHO, the elevators are lame and encourage wild flailing and spraying and hopping about, but I may be wrong about that.

Yeah, we've been rather vocal about defensibility, so hopefully new Building Assets will be created first so they can be implemented when designing the new Continents.

Mainly for this reason:

Originally Posted by Assist

That's a hell of a list. I like most of the changes you propose, but as you said I think 99% of that will not happen. For one, most of the changes you propose are content being added which takes a lot of dev time. I'm all for everything you propose though, call smedley up and get the ball rolling.

It will be far easier to create better, more defensible building assets now, build new Continents with those assets, then go back and overhaul the old Continents at the developer's leisure.
While this might delay new Continents, it will save them the trouble of having to overhaul EVERYTHING.

I don't quite agree with your opinion on Elevator Pads, just because they are a very practical means of vertically transporting player characters without resource intensive staircases, but the beams themselves could definitely uses some cover in places like the Towers.

Jump pads are a bit cheap, but they were a more reliable alternative to the mechanically similar teleporter in Beta...

Originally Posted by Kate

AI automatic but gimpy turrets. Makes defending a little easier, gives air less uncontested air, makes back capping more interesting, gives small groups a target or role.

Hmmm... I don't know...
On the one hand, I kind of assumed the reason Automatic turrets weren't included was due to the Developers not wanting any computer controlled content in the game as well as possible server-side issues...

...On the other, I would rather like a Spitfire or two for my Engineer...

Since no one really wants to sit around defending a base all day, I personally wouldn't mind auto-turrets, but to be on the safe side I'd limit them to:

1. Slow firing Anti-air Missile Batteries, like the ones featured in the Bastion concept art.
These roof-top turrets would automatically fire on any enemy aircraft that loiters around in range long enough for them to get a lock.
Their automatic target reacquisition isn't fast enough to pose a threat to even a single aircraft, but multiple emplacements should make it much riskier to fly over enemy territory.
Like the original Planetside's turrets, they can be manually operated to decrease their tracking time, but even then are still around the same speed as a Heavy Assault's Lock-on Rocket Launcher.
Since they are accessed from beneath the roof they are mounted on, these Turrets could go on the tops of Tech Plants, Spawn Buildings, and some type of bunker/pillbox building asset, allowing them to be easily repaired safely but still killing an operator when they are destroyed.
They would also be hackable, save the ones whose access points are in Spawn Rooms, which would give Infiltrators a much needed role in team play.

2. Spitfire Sentry Turrets.
Basically, a fixed robotic machine gun turret that shoots any enemy it sees in its limited field of view.
They would be placed around Secondary Objectives, like Shield Generators, so that they could kill anyone stupid enough to just walk in towards the objective but their low health would make them easily sniped by Infantry at range.
Of course, they'd also have a blind spot, so again Infiltrator's would gain a greater team role by hacking these Sentries so that they fire on the base's Defenders instead.

Originally Posted by Kate

Bringing back PS1-style CE would be awesome. I also think pillboxes, bunkers, weapon emplacements, trenches, and tank traps would be great (not constructable stuff, but CE related). Why? It slows down the zerg, makes defending more viable, and could be interesting for large and small oufits.

Agreed, from what I've heard Combat Engineering would be right up my ally; laying minefields and auto-turrets in strategic positions so that when an enemy push showed up, they'd be sorry.

While there are trenches and tank traps in the game right now, it could use more, and it's rather baffling why they didn't already have more defense-minded building assets to begin with instead of mostly open shacks...

I've even suggested deployable Barricades for Engineers, to help set up roadblocks that would require Infantry to flank and destroy.

Originally Posted by Kate

On capture mechanics:

I agree with what others have said about the possibility of instant resecures, hack and hold, LLUs or CTF, maybe requiring >2 to start a cap, and no capping by vehicles. They'd add some variety, ease defense, and empower smaller units.

Well I like the ideas of instant resecures if you have enough people to completely cover all control points and "hack and holds" where the hold time is based on how much adjacency influence you had when you started the hack.

I don't know about LLUs since I didn't play the Original, but needing more then two people to start a capture does seem like a bit much, at least for single Control Console Outpost...

I'm also pretty sure you can capture with a Vehicle anymore, as I've had the control tally clearly change when I got on and off my Flash, but I'm not 100 percent on that.

Originally Posted by Kate

Cap/def completion score being mostly based on actions during the cap/def and for a few min after would be better I think. Also, maybe you should still gain exp from the actions part of that even if you've left SOI. This would discourage swooping in or hanging around for exp, and would reward attacking and defending even if the player had to go elsewhere prematurely for strategic reasons. (Maybe bonuses up front would be better though, and that'd reward hanging on even if being eventually overrun was inevitable?)

Eh, I don't know about this...

I mean, how is the system going to calculate how much Experiance you should get if it has to factor in where you've been, what's happening there, and what you are doing now.

I think Dynamic XP based on how much action actually took place within a base, as well as an announced set defense bonus, would be far easier to implement, even if they don't prevent leeching.

Originally Posted by Kate

RE lack of resource scarcity, and vehicle abundance.

I think vehicle costs should increase, but gain from sanc and other conts should increase a little to give factions a chance to push out if gated. Possibly boost veh kill exp, or add some for causing severe damage. Effect: While vehicles still powerful, they become rarer and more valued. Large swarms still possible, but an endless vehicular onslaught becomesless feasible. Deterring vehicles becomes more tangibly rewarding, and more lucrative for smaller groups. Note: Being able to warp vehicles might make pilots and drivers more okay with this, and could make this less of a burden for smaller outfits with limited resources.

Eh, I don't know about increasing Vehicle Resource cost...

I'd rather decrease the amount of Resources available on a Continent overall, then increase the stipend given by owning a Warpgate and allow a percentage of other Resources to come in from other Continents...

...Being able to transport Vehicles from one Continent to another will certainly alleviate the "steamrolling" effect of Continental domination though, and we REALLY need more defensible bases which segregate Vehicular and Infantry Combat first

I've also seen this problem approached from another angle; making Vehicles less profitable for killing Infantry.
This really doesn't solve anything, but it does make killing Infantry with Vehicle weapons feel less cheap.

Originally Posted by Kate

Organization:

Create a system whereby platoons may be linked with the other outfit squads and platoons, and allow for a command team to direct and see them. Create a similar system for alliance-level coordination. Helps make outfits more coordinated, promotes teamwork.

Yeah, it is rather odd that there isn't any higher level organization setups beyond "Platoon"...

...Then again, that is 48 people out of, what, 666 per Continent?
Rather hard to figure out how you'd manage more then 1/14th of the map population...

Originally Posted by Kate

Create Outfit listings ingame with links for leadership contact, stats, a summary, and recruitment. Reduces relative influence of spam invites, gives a starting point for outfit cooperation.

Yeah, it would be EXTREAMLY helpful if we could access Outfit information in game...

...Too bad in my experience MMO's don't give that much of a crap about Guild info...

Originally Posted by Kate

FFS, make an option to let SLs change leads and kick, make their WPs visible to PLs maybe and let PLs swap squads between a/b/c/d, or even set color, or name other than alpha/whatevs. Letting PL's drop smoke or use SL cmd chat would be nice, as would being able to directly set yourself as SL when PL, or maybe being able to give SLs ordered targets.

Oh YES, more Platoon/Squad Leader interaction is a MUST!

Originally Posted by Kate

Make outfit roster searchable and sortable, and more informative. Improves outfit management, promoting better community experience.

This as well, it's rather annoying that I have to manually scroll through the entirety of my 40+ Outfit just to find the three people who are online.

Originally Posted by Kate

Outfit decals (and maybe related swag) would be nice. Fun and cool, improves identity and cohesion, advertisement too?

Indeed, it is rather odd that Outfits don't have any means of identification outside of a three character tag...

Originally Posted by Kate

Bonus and/or optional somewhat shared exp/resources with squads, platoons, outfits, and alliances. Promotes teamwork and maybe proximity, gives people in thankless support roles some reward so they're happy and don't complain/want exp from every possible action.

Well I'd certainly like being able to trade a squad-mate some of my unused Resources for a chunk of XP.
Certainly would make pulling a Sunderer a lot less risky of an investment.

Originally Posted by Kate

Some sort of continent and global command chat, with an easier to access read-only level. Should be accessable to more than just OL, but also with standards (e.g. no single person outfits, no spam, slurs, or recruiting, some form of moderation). More coordination and community, less mobs/zerg.

Yeah, it is somewhat annoying that I can't read /Leader when I haven't lead a squad yet...
I do like to be informed of what our leaders are doing you know...

Originally Posted by Kate

Outfit points or challenges for outfit objects or abilities, maybe computed by per capita with some things. Promotes teamwork and reduces value of spam inviting?

Well Dungeons and Dragons Online implemented something called "Guild Renown" which is sort of an XP system for Guilds.
While it and its decay are used as a means for determining which Guilds can have and maintain in-game housing (Air ships where various temporary Guild buffs are kept), I think Outfits would be better served by a static leveling system where constantly gained Commendation Points can then be spend on temporary Outfit XP and Resource buffs.

Originally Posted by Kate

Targets and roles for smaller outfits and spec ops teams:

Give all territories some sort of special/unique bonus/ability/facility/trait, which if not posessed may be hampered by breaking things, hacking, occupying a building, or stealing things. Add some objects to mess with. For example: Place a well you can blow up, harvesters you can sabotage, a cache you can destroy or steal from, or a comms station you can hack or occupy to debuff the enemy's logistics, or mildly tweak the enemy's intelligence (delay cap progress bar display slightly, change "Platoons" to Platoon"). This gives more meaning to territory, and would make for an interesting side game appropriate for small groups, with strategic value.

Well I did have a Resource Pipeline Network idea, where bases would be connected through a series of tu- Nanite pipelines that would explain how Resources are automatically transported to the Warpgates.
There would then be "maintenance nodes" somewhere on the lines between Outpost that could be sabotaged by enemy Spec Ops to cut off the flow.

Other benefits could then be easily integrated into this hardwired infrastructure, letting enemy saboteurs choose between denying their foes Resources or preventing them from learning of an oncoming invasion force.

Plus, it would explain what those damned pipes you see everywhere are actually DO!

Originally Posted by Kate

Rare resource metorites and downed satellites (modules). Every once in a while (30m-a few H?), one will randomly drop on the map. "Cool off time" after which it can be picked up and transported will vary. Depending on "weight" (value) it cannot be held by a Gal and a Sundy must take it. The bigger, the slower the vehicle can go. May or may not be extremely volatile. Must be taken to a base for processing, then maybe a facility for placement. Can be stolen by opfor on the way or after install, or maybe expended for a special ability, gives significant xp. May need replacement over time. Maybe meteors can only be spotted while inbound while landing if a tracking station equipped territory is owned, which will be a target for competeing enemy teams. Maybe rarely some could be used offensivelf for buffs, or to nuke areas. Effect: Sounds like a fun competative side game, which might appeal to small teams.

Hmmm... I think you might as well use an entirely new vehicle for this, some sort of slow flatbed crawler or something...

Other then that, I could see this as a sort of Capture the Flag event, where you need to take a particular meteorite or crashed Space Probe to a corresponding Major Facility.
You could then take it to a friendly Facility for a Faction Buff and a Reward... or play keep-away with it to prevent enemy Factions from gaining it.

Originally Posted by Kate

AI automatic but semi-gimpy turrets - It's something useful to blow up and might be interesting.

As I mentioned before, I don't know if the Devs will fold on this, but I wouldn't mind automatic Sentries guarding Secondary Objectives or slow-firing, roof-mounted Anti-Air Missile Turrets.

Originally Posted by Kate

Defensive NPC drones/vehicles that aren't *too* bright - See above.

NPC harvester/worker robot vehicles - Killable, hackable, with a few bits of resources to loot.

...This however I think is out of the question, if simply for the huge amount of technical problems such a system can cause.

I'd much rather have static interactables, like Resource Harvesters and Reservoirs, then NPCs that end up running into walls...

Originally Posted by Kate

Raidable/hackable NPC supply convoys - If you have a comms tower hacked or whatever, you'll get notified of them. They meander from base to base, and are modified sundies with lame automatic turrets. Ambush and blow them up for points, then salvage the resources it carried with engies and pick them up (holding them makes you slow and defenseless or only able to use a pistol), return to friendly processor in base with them for reward (sooner deposits for all maybe, or extra resources, atd exp). Alternatively, hack them and drive them home, or just slap C4 on the back of them, which will kill the enemy processor when they arrive eventually. Losing a convoy causes delayed deposit or mild reduction in next deposit. There could be ANT convoys as well, or maybe some of them would blow up like gas tankers and could be used as IEDs. IHNFI. Effect: Another potentially fun side game, and a way for underdogs to steal resorces.

Yeah, automated convoys I can see going badly VERY quickly, which is why I came up with a static infrastructure system instead.
Still, that doesn't mean there can't be player operated ones!

I thinking they bring back the ANT as a means of transporting Resources from Pipeline Reservoirs, to both speed up Faction Resource gain AND help steal Resources from enemy bases.

Originally Posted by Kate

Here and there, maybe add a few cappable small emplacements with ammo stations and terminals, but no spawns or limited spawning probably, and rarely give them light vehicle terminals. Hide them away and have them be staging spots for groups behind enemy lines. Design them to be very small, and maybe built into terrain like bunkers. Could give them a modest resource benefit or ability, and make them subtle/not shown on the map. Not effected by influence, doesn't cause influence. Effect: Kinda cool spots that help fill empty but interesting areas, and allows for resupply and regrouping. Subtle and meant for small group usage.

Actually, considering an S-AMS has Equipment Terminals on it, all you'd really need is a safe place to park a Sunderer.

Figment already came up with something like this.

Originally Posted by Kate

Also, the last legit English class I had was in 6th grade and I wrote this on my phone, so there may be typos.

Props!

*Continued in next post...*

[Whiteagle]

*...Continued.*

Originally Posted by igster

- Map Sucks & is form over function. Doesnt support anything more than the zerg.
o Need to know where our population is as well as nme population is.. so that the tactically minded people can make informed decisions about how much force is needed to respond to the enemy on the map.

Well it'd certainly be helpful when deciding where to reinforce.

Originally Posted by igster

o tactical activity overlay from PS1 is all that is needed - the one that a lot of PS1 players didn't realise was there and often didnt know how to use. Malorn please give the map UI designer a demonstration of how amazing the tactical population overview was in PS1 since I have a suspicion that he has never seen it in operation. Then you can ask him to rip up the whole 'hover over a hex to get population information' concept and replace it with a population map overlay.

Mind posting a picture of this overlay for those of us who've missed out?

Originally Posted by igster

o The radar/detection meta game was great in PS1 where setting off CE would create a 'trace' of enemy activity on the tactical map. We crave for some of this depth in PS2. Bring back the Sensor Disruptors!

Yes!
My Radar Flash is nice, but it doesn't help find the ONE Infiltrator sneeking around a nine hex territory...

Originally Posted by igster

- Lack of indoor connected defences with choke points means its always a battle of pure attrition. Give me a fight where a small group of 12 people can dynamically hold a useful objective by reinforcing each other when they come under attack without being randomly picked off by snipers overlooking a base. At the moment bases sprawl so much and all chokepoints are so disconnected that you cannot reinforce each other without being picked off by a sniper/liberator/nme tank.

Indeed, it does make one wonder why Military forces are fighting over what are basically a bunch of tin shacks...

There is no defensive value to them, so why are these contested points of interest?

Originally Posted by igster

- Resources dont make sense. This isn't starcraft.

Well technically a Resource Meta-game DOES make sense, Nanties need raw materials to build your shit out of after all...

...But yeah, I'm not much of a fan of dumbing down they did in Beta, where Catalyst, Polymers, and Alloys were greatly simplified into "Mechanized", "Aircraft", and "Infantry"...

Hell, maybe they should go the other way, where each consumable and Vehicle has a price composed of a mix of Resources instead of just the Orange, Green, or Yellow ones.

Originally Posted by igster

- Meaningful XP Bonuses for defenders

Agreed, I'm thinking 40% of the capture bonus myself...

Originally Posted by igster

- XP Based on how long the person you had killed was alive/how many kills they'd racked up

Eh, unsure about this...

Originally Posted by igster

Completely agree about the vehicles not being able to shutdown a base or outpost on their own. The spawn camping by libs/MBTs/lightnings is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by igster

This should be the vehicle role in planetside. Establishing the dominance outside of a base. If dominance was established easily then we'd go in on foot. Leaving our vehicles in the courtyard without having a stupid 5 minute timer on it so we'd have to abandon it if there was a really good fight going on inside.

Until CY dominance had been established that was our fight. If it was a hot base we'd have to fight for dominance. If heavy air was present we'd struggle until our flying response guys would come in.

Everyone has a role. But the important point is that neither us, the air cav or the other vehicles could take a base on our own. We all had to contribute to get the job done. At the moment a lib or tanks can camp the respawn while 1 lone soldier stands at a control point. This is bad bad base design.

Indeed, there needs to be more segregation between Infantry and Vehicle Combat, instead of Infantry being stuck with the grunt work of capturing points while Vehicles do all the killing.

[topher]

Originally Posted by Hamma

My outfit is smaller in size compared to most. We typically run about a half a platoon or so. We are finding it difficult to find a solid role for us in the game that isn't boring and doesn't involve getting steamrolled. This is becoming more and more difficult as time goes on. Huge outfits are able to put 100 or more people or more on an objective and essentially win with numbers in almost all fights. We are able to hold off, but it's simply a matter of time until we are struck down due to sheer numbers.

Smaller outfits are finding that they have to disband and join larger outfits if they want to even have fun, causing them to lose their own identity and be absorbed into massive teams because there are no recruits left to take. For me community is more important to a game than the game itself, hence why I've been doing this all these years.

Is having one massive outfit per empire what the developers intended? Is spam inviting every no outfit person in the game really a viable recruiting effort? How many of these people even know what they are joining?

What is everyones thoughts on this issue?

First of all, getting steamrolled has nothing to do with one's outfit size. Secondly, the game is what you choose to make out of it. Personally, zerg is a zerg is a zerg which I dislike and I'll much rather join in a smaller outfit. That's me. You enjoy belonging to this massive zerg and thus making no difference? Good for you.

Regarding getting "struck down due to sheer numbers..." Well, soon or later it happens to everybody. Yet it doesn't make the game less fun. Sometimes I have fun following the zerg yet sometimes I have more fun playing together with a few friends or as a lone wolf. Mostly the latter. I may dominate the sky, go pew pew in my Prowler, play as 100% support class or even go into full dick mode with rl buds and go Infiltrator behind enemy lines and mess shit up. Bottom line is, it doesn't matter as long as one is having fun.

It may sound cocky but all I'm trying to say is that the game is what you make it to be. If everything one enjoy is flying ones Galaxy then maybe it's time to try something else. I can see how the game will become dull if one basically is a one trick pony and keep doing the same stuff over and over again (which is also a decent description for insanity lol) but when did outfit size become equal to having fun? So, you got struck down, didn't you at least have some epic fun defending the base?

Go get the zerg and bring 2000 infantry to cap a base, will it affect cap time? No. Only those 6 men on the cap point and the surrounding territory will. Bigger bases will take time to cap no matter what. Put up a spawn beacon if you don't want to get pinned down at spawn and go have that fun. If you ask me, it is moments like those that are the most fun.

[igster]

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

*...Continued.*
Mind posting a picture of this overlay for those of us who've missed out?

Wiki Link to the Tactical overlay

It always shows you a heat map of where your allied troops are but if any members of the opposing forces generates a radar signature within your detection area (i.e around friend troops or bases) it shows them as a blip on the map. The more troops the bigger the blip.

So if your big blob of Red troops encounters a big blob of purple, you can see it on the heat map.
If a snarky little assault sets of some Mines or CE around a smaller base, you get a bit of a blob on the map to indicate that there is an enemy force hitting the base.

It is just miles better visually. Tone down the transparency of the purple/blue/red overlay of the empire control so its in the background and overlay very solid opaque heat map of big splodges of red blue and purple to indicate where the detected populations are.


This also relies on the radar meta game which would massively improve the depth of PS2. How to take bases without setting off radar detection. Make radar detection a benefit etc.

[igster]

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

*...Continued.*
Mind posting a picture of this overlay for those of us who've missed out?

Wiki Link to the Tactical overlay

It always shows you a heat map of where your allied troops are but if any members of the opposing forces generates a radar signature within your detection area (i.e around friend troops or bases) it shows them as a blip on the map. The more troops the bigger the blip.

Note the splodges on the map are players not territory control. The ownership of the bases is on the map rather than part of the overlay.

So if your big blob of Red troops encounters a big blob of purple, you can see it on the heat map.
If a snarky little assault sets of some Mines or CE around a smaller base, you get a bit of a blob on the map to indicate that there is an enemy force hitting the base.

It is just miles better visually. Tone down the transparency of the purple/blue/red overlay of the empire control so its in the background and overlay very solid opaque heat map of big splodges of red blue and purple to indicate where the detected populations are.

[Whiteagle]

Originally Posted by igster

Wiki Link to the Tactical overlay

It always shows you a heat map of where your allied troops are but if any members of the opposing forces generates a radar signature within your detection area (i.e around friend troops or bases) it shows them as a blip on the map. The more troops the bigger the blip.

Note the splodges on the map are players not territory control. The ownership of the bases is on the map rather than part of the overlay.

So if your big blob of Red troops encounters a big blob of purple, you can see it on the heat map.
If a snarky little assault sets of some Mines or CE around a smaller base, you get a bit of a blob on the map to indicate that there is an enemy force hitting the base.

It is just miles better visually. Tone down the transparency of the purple/blue/red overlay of the empire control so its in the background and overlay very solid opaque heat map of big splodges of red blue and purple to indicate where the detected populations are.

Yeah, something like that would be great...

Only problem I see is how to implement it with the current hex-based map and "all enemies ping RED" detection we have currently...

[thegreekboy]

Originally Posted by Kate

Cool. It's always interesting to run into you guys, you're kinda like our rival or frenemy...

Yea, I really like the thing we have going. It's always fun to fight you guys.

[igster]

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Only problem I see is how to implement it with the current hex-based map and "all enemies ping RED" detection we have currently...

Don't think it's that difficult. Tone down the hex ownership opacity so that you can overlay the heat map over the top of it.
It's not a problem with enemy's pinging red - was the same in PS1. The tactical overlay was much blockier than individual units. I think the block would only be visible if there was more than one detected unit in an area. When there were more than one type of enemy in an area it would turn yellow indicating that there was potentially an area of conflict (see screenshot above.... A small TR tower in NW of map with NC reacting to it. with VS presence up at Girru fighting at the two NC owned bases at Hanish (SW and Irkalla SE) You can see from the map there is more fighting at Irkall since there are more yellow blocks.

You'll notice that it is very analogue and gives you a feel for where the friendly and enemy population are currently playing.

[Whiteagle]

Originally Posted by igster

The tactical overlay was much blockier than individual units. I think the block would only be visible if there was more than one detected unit in an area.

Yeah, but what are we going to use FOR the blocks?

The map isn't divided by the grid anymore, so colored squares on a hex-map are going to be rather confusing...