Preventing Ninja Base hacks

[Sentrosi]

Originally Posted by Hamma

but command systems built a bit better to allow commanders to see what is going on behind their front lines would also help this. IF they received some kind of a warning to a base they were monitoring so their squad could respond quickly - that would be cool.

Hmmm, an idea sprung to mind on this subject. Through a sort of Command Tree interface a continental CR5 could designate a base that is going to be watched by a squad/platoon leader? The CR5 would have to be at an Interlink base on the continent to use this ability. The Command Tree would show the CR5 such information as squad strength, general position, etc. Now he could receive updates while in the field, but he could only designate bases with Interlink bases.

[Hamma]

Indeed that would be interesting. I really think that is key to PSN. Having more tools available to decide where you want to go next rather than all sorts of crazy additions to base defenses and the like. The more AI added the less interesting PlanetSide becomes so why not offer more tools to the players to decide how to respond?

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Sentrosi

Hmmm, an idea sprung to mind on this subject. Through a sort of Command Tree interface a continental CR5 could designate a base that is going to be watched by a squad/platoon leader? The CR5 would have to be at an Interlink base on the continent to use this ability. The Command Tree would show the CR5 such information as squad strength, general position, etc. Now he could receive updates while in the field, but he could only designate bases with Interlink bases.

This is definitely the kind of additions to command that I would appreciate seeing (I can't help but wonder how awesome Planetside could be if it drew on some of the strategy/command elements in Allegiance; I have no idea how you'd select/control who gets to do the commander roles there, as having a bad commander is a seriously crippling blow in Allegiance. In Allegiance, it's handled by a tight community where commander reputations are well known and instanced servers, both things that do not/we hope don't apply to PS), but I just wanted to pop in and point out that there still need to be incentives for that squad to listen and "watch" the base. Why? Because, at the end of the day, it's boring patrol duty whether somebody told you to go do it or you just decided to on your own.

[DviddLeff]

Doesn't the red alert system and the tactical overlay already do the job of telling us when a base is under attack?

[kaffis]

If you ask me, preventing ninja hacks should be about two things:

1) Restricting the available options of what's hackable to each side. The lattice system was an attempt at this, and, for bases, was more or less successful at this part of the solution. The lattice focuses the fighting down to a manageable (provide the server/continent has population) battlefront. The only change to be made if you think ninja hacks are still a problem is perhaps put some restrictions on tower hacks?

2) Encourage defenders to man vulnerable bases that are currently quiet. This is the part PS fails miserably at, and I don't blame them, as it's a hard problem to tackle. Quite simply, for most people, manning static defenses or patrolling when there's no nearby enemy activity is pretty boring. So it doesn't get done. What I'd like to see is for there to either be a reward/incentive for doing so (this gets tricky when it comes to making it abuse-proof; you could do things like award periodic xp for "defending" a friendly base with a vulnerable lattice link, but then you'd have people AFKing, etc.), or to make it so that if a commander/squad makes a gamble and says "we think base X is going to see some action, soon, so let's man its defenses and be ready," they get a payoff if/when the enemy shows up. So, risk some boredom and be rewarded for the gamble.

Perhaps the squad can accrue "defense points" that then can act as a bonus or multiplier for the first 5 minutes of an assault when the enemy finally does arrive?

[Grimster]

Yeah agree I think PSN should be kept AI free apart from the turrets then maybe.

[Effective]

If you don't want a base to be ghosted, you need to have people respond to the hack. NC are notorious for letting hacks on there homeconts go through.

Watching the map = Best idea.
Now, something could be introduced for say 1 person going along to multiple bases and just throwing hacks on the base over and over.

[Edfishy]

I love the teamplay mechanism for some hacks, that's pretty ingenious.

[Bags]

There's this thing called looking at your map. that's how you prevent ninja base hacks.

[demise14]

You all assume AI automatically means combat personnel running around freely.

What if you could get small robots or drones that provide support but don't attack? Similar to the CE already in the game but expanded to follow you around or stay mounted in one spot (but only provide things such as healing or repairing).

I think it'd be pretty cool to have some advanced engineers setup repair bots at the top of stairs of a tower behind some max units while it gets assaulted. Or deploying some vehicle repair bots in a courtyard that maneuver around repairing damaged vehicles.

I mean, every futuristic world has robots. So the only way I'd agree with weaponized AI is if they were robots or drones that are obtained somehow. Possibly being another layer to CE that costs a good amount of certs? Or something only commanders can obtain and deploy?

Oh and while on the subject - I always thought CE should be deployable indoors. It would make base defending a lot funner especially when outnumbered.

[Traak]

The fundamental thing I'm looking for is everyone either shooting or supporting someone, directly, who is shooting. Not supporting the thing that the game does if it's a new moon and the tides are right, and the NTU is full and the gen is repaired and the Vanu didn't put a drain hack on it that might some time, if they get back to that base this week, be in some way useful to someone somewhere who is actually shooting, but that is not for sure.

I mean, shooting or directly supporting shooters. That's what I ask for.

[Lonehunter]

Originally Posted by Traak

The fundamental thing I'm looking for is everyone either shooting or supporting someone, directly, who is shooting. Not supporting the thing that the game does if it's a new moon and the tides are right, and the NTU is full and the gen is repaired and the Vanu didn't put a drain hack on it that might some time, if they get back to that base this week, be in some way useful to someone somewhere who is actually shooting, but that is not for sure.

I mean, shooting or directly supporting shooters. That's what I ask for.

What if that base your friendlies where draining and taking was the enemy's only tech plant? I think Shooting at Threshers is a big direct change from shooting at Magriders

[waldizzo]

Lonehunter is right. Dropping generators or otherwise damaging bases not on the front lines can have a direct impact on the base that is on the front line. This tactic is often the reason why a hours long stalemate is finally broken.

Why even have a persistent world if players can only be effective at one location? May as well just play whatever run and gun fps is popular at the time.

Taking away the ability for players to think and play outside of the zerg would be detrimental to the game.

[Lonehunter]

Originally Posted by waldizzo

Why even have a persistent world if players can only be effective at one location? May as well just play whatever run and gun fps is popular at the time.

I love you, I was thinking the exact same thing, just more complicated lol.

[Sentrosi]

Amen. Gen drops and ninja hacks are an essential part of Planetside. Traak, the world you are describing is Call of Duty/Battlefield/modern day FPS to me. And I've done support in that game too.