Plan C: We keep both, the Lattice AND the Hex

[ShadoViper]

Originally Posted by TheDrone

You can see the value of diversity in literally hundreds of games which took the effort of trying to cater to more than one kind of player.

Just focusing on one holds risks and simply isn't necessary. As far as I understand the Lattice needs much less work than the Hex. Some consider the Lattice to be virtually ready, as a concept.

There are more advantages than disadvantages.

First, I wanted to say that the lattice doesn't feel 100% ready to me, still needs work and quite a bit of extra things thrown at it to really flesh it out.

Now, for diversity in games... I can see what you're saying. But I don't agree with throwing in two mediocre game modes for people to play. It's not smart. The lattice was obviously not doing the job people wanted it to, or it would still be in. Therefore, It needs work. In one form or another, which would lead to the developers balancing the team between; Hossin, base redesign, lattice design, resource design for both systems, rush design.

Now, my main problem is this.

Lattice vs Rush

What is really different game play wise? wouldn't it be possible to achieve what both do in the lattice, with the right additions?

I think for now, it's just a waste of time to focus on it (Rush lanes). It's not the same thing as something like..

Capture the flag, capture the leader, domination, etc. Which would be adding something quite different to gameplay. (at face value)

Nor is it the same thing as adding in; Pve and PvP. (which is always annoying and takes extra effort and time to balance)

Right now, we don't have 1 system that is 95% solid, and to move on, is unacceptable to me. We need to have a firm foundation for the gamers to play on so they will stay before we move on and starting throwing more complications into the fray.

It's easier to fix a problem and assess it if you don't have 100 extra layers of crap going on.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by ShadoViper

First, I wanted to say that the lattice doesn't feel 100% ready to me, still needs work and quite a bit of extra things thrown at it to really flesh it out.

Now, for diversity in games... I can see what you're saying. But I don't agree with throwing in two mediocre game modes for people to play. It's not smart. The lattice was obviously not doing the job people wanted it to, or it would still be in. Therefore, It needs work. In one form or another, which would lead to the developers balancing the team between; Hossin, base redesign, lattice design, resource design for both systems, rush design.

Now, my main problem is this.

Lattice vs Rush

What is really different game play wise? wouldn't it be possible to achieve what both do in the lattice, with the right additions?

I think for now, it's just a waste of time to focus on it (Rush lanes). It's not the same thing as something like..

Capture the flag, capture the leader, domination, etc. Which would be adding something quite different to gameplay. (at face value)

Nor is it the same thing as adding in; Pve and PvP. (which is always annoying and takes extra effort and time to balance)

Right now, we don't have 1 system that is 95% solid, and to move on, is unacceptable to me. We need to have a firm foundation for the gamers to play on so they will stay before we move on and starting throwing more complications into the fray.

It's easier to fix a problem and assess it if you don't have 100 extra layers of crap going on.

Lattice and rush lanes are the same thing. The thing that wasn't doing the job as the hex system.

Different capture modes on base would be a good addition though.

[psijaka]

Originally Posted by TheDrone

The future for who? There's this assumption that everyone should have the exact same idea as to how the game should be played. PS2 would be just about the only game where this is true.

People currently can't vote. I know literally zero Hexers who condone the current Hex. Therefore it is an inherently unfair comparison.

That you do not know this is very telling.

People can vote and, as I posted, they are doing: with their feet. I wonder where all those people queueing by the Esamir warp terminals are going?

That you do not know this is very telling.

[TheDrone]

Originally Posted by Crator

So you're just going to spout off about an issue but not give the underlying reason for it? Never mind, I give up on this conversation... Good luck in your endeavors...

I'm desperately trying to avoid dealing with the pro's and con's of each system. You know why? Because as I've already stated more than once (check out the big blue text you missed on purpose) this thread is not, NOT, NOT, NOT, NOT, NOT about the pro's and con's of each system. Your question was an attempt at derailing this thread, the purpose of which is extremely, radically clear.
The flaws and advantages of each system obviously do not factor in what I am proposing.
Discussing such is pretty much going off-topic and I've already been lured into that direction a few times too many.

You would realize this if your objective was a civil and constructive discussion.

This is not your objective.

Originally Posted by psijaka

People can vote and, as I posted, they are doing: with their feet. I wonder where all those people queueing by the Esamir warp terminals are going?

That you do not know this is very telling.

So where do they have to go if they want to vote for a future Hex system that currently doesn't exist but they believe could be implemented?

They would be able to vote if the option they prefer already existed. It does not. Until it exists there is literally no way whatsoever to vote.

I have already explained this, it is excruciatingly simple to understand and the only reason why you don't is because you don't want to.


Also, it's not because most people in BF3 play game-mode A (being either Rush or Conquest) is more popular that Dice should get rid of game-mode B. That would be a really dumb thing to do.

For future reference, in case you'll want to retry the popularity card, check out argumentum ad populum.

[Crator]

Originally Posted by TheDrone

I'm desperately trying to avoid dealing with the pro's and con's of each system. You know why? Because as I've already stated more than once (check out the big blue text you missed on purpose) this thread is not, NOT, NOT, NOT, NOT, NOT about the pro's and con's of each system. Your question was an attempt at derailing this thread, the purpose of which is extremely, radically clear.
The flaws and advantages of each system obviously do not factor in what I am proposing.
Discussing such is pretty much going off-topic and I've already been lured into that direction a few times too many.

You would realize this if your objective was a civil and constructive discussion.

This is not your objective.

Are you kidding man? Your big blue text doesn't even exist on your original post. Which I went to several times to understand what you are trying to get at here. And no, my question is not an attempt to derail this thread. I'm trying to understand the objective you are trying to accomplish with better understanding on the reason of why. That is not derailing your thread.

I am very against intermingling of the two type of systems, hex and lattice. I've stated it in another thread before you even posted this thread and I see you put that in your FAQ section in the OP. My suggestion to have 2 different types of servers is still valid because they can offer character transfers for those that really want the hex system. It's probably invalid however cause the work the devs have to do is doubled to keep two types of systems in place. It most likely will not happen. For this same reason, they most likely will never have both types of systems, hex and lattice, even on the same server.

[psijaka]

Originally Posted by TheDrone

For future reference, in case you'll want to retry the popularity card, check out argumentum ad populum.

Then what is the point of voting other than to gauge the popularity of a proposal?
Edit - and yo're wrong to quote argumentum ad populum in any case; completely inappropriate when we are talking about a game that relies upon popularity to succeed.

Anyway; back to your proposal to run with a lattice and a modified hex system:

I was a strong supporter of the hex system initially, believing that any problems with ghost capping/finding a fight were due to low population levels and fine tuning. But time has proved me wrong - the hex system as it was regularly failed to deliver the promised "truly epic, massive combat".

The modified Hex system trialled on the test server is nothing more than a lattice dressed up to look like a hex system; any differences are purely a matter of detail and presentation. I would have been just as happy for this to go live instead of the lattice - but not both.

To spend time developing a new hex system in parallel with the lattice would be a serious distraction and a ludicrous waste of valuable development time; this is the reason that I am fundamentally against your proposal.

I would much prefer that SoE concentrated on refining and expanding the lattice, as well as working on issues such as base defensibility, the resource system, more continents, intercontinental warfare, spawn system; any one of the many things that could benefit from some creative thinking and hard work.

And not waste time trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by TheDrone

NOT about the pro's and con's of each system.

But it is about the pros and cons about keeping both. Yet you seem to want to ignore any post about that in favor of trolling your own thread.

[basti]

Originally Posted by TheDrone

So where do they have to go if they want to vote for a future Hex system that currently doesn't exist but they believe could be implemented?

Show me just one idea for the hex system that wasnt tried already. Go, show me.

Hint: you wont find it. The hex was tried for months, it failed, story over.

Kill it with fire now.

[Falcon_br]

I think we can make a pool. I really think 99% of the people will want lattice on.
But right now, people that don´t like lattice can enjoy the hex system on Esamir and Amerish.
Maybe, just maybe, after we got like 6 maps, we can keep one of then with the hex system, for the 1% that didn´t like the lattice!

[NewSith]

As per Off Forum:

Let's Just Face It, Both Territory Systems Are Incomplete

Because Hexes don't provide enough incentive for players to respond to the hacks and defend them...
(Resources don't mean ****, and there's no way to fix that. To make territory mean something, you need to have better and more notable bonuses provided. Example: "Scarred Mesa Skydock ownership allows you to install Rocketpods on your ESF")

...and the Lattice focuses fights, reducing the impact a smaller force can have on the outcome of a battle.
(Backhacking mechanics can solve that issue just as easily.)




But guess what you're all gonna say:

[Hex Fan 1]: No, I count resources everytime I go to a different Continent to obtain them!
[Hex Fan 2]: No, I paid for these rocketpods, why should I be incentivized to fight by devs' restricting their usage for me?

[Lattice Fan 1]: No, I don't want any backhacking, because a large fight is the only fight allowed in PlanetSide. Go play BF3 for small scale battles, because you don't know what you want to play
[Lattice Fan 2]: No, small scale battles exist in PlanetSide, it's your fault you come online during alerts and primetime

So what I am trying to say here is that if Hex system or LAttice system was complete, there would be much less QQing in the first place. But nobody agrees to that because everyone WANTS to QQ. And in that QQing, everyone just fails to see that the LAttice is about to fail, just as hex system, because judjing from the Esamir interview the devs still don't understand what it is "Spec Ops" want.


Bottomline - I'm fine with either system only if each one is complete and perfect. But Lattice is more preferable for me. Call it bias.

[Fara]

imo I'm really enjoying the Lattice lines on Indar and can't wait for Esamir/Amerish to be updated. It gives a clear flow of combat.

Small scale combat can either be performed on an alternate route (as basti said there can be up to 7 paths) or when they add meaningful Empire benefits from bases Black Ops can reenter the game.

The hex system for me was far too disorganized. As an attacker the 2 main opposing zergs would bypass each other and then dissipate into any of 6 potential directions. While as a defender it was impossible to know where the main thrust would attack because after the loss of 1 outpost the enemy could go anyone of 6 possible directions.

[Sunrock]

Those that want "spec ops" just have to find an other game to play.

[Fara]

Originally Posted by Sunrock

Those that want "spec ops" just have to find an other game to play.

Depends entirely on what your interpretation of spec ops is.

To me its preventing incursions away from the "main" front or back attacks. Its also the Generator hack and hold system of benefit denial which was one of the best features of PS1 (yes I mentioned PS1).

Not saying lets turn this game into PS1 but limited strikes behind enemy lines or last second re-secures are some of the toughest and most rewarding actions a highly organized squad can perform. I know for a fact this is something Outcasters used to do.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by Fara

Depends entirely on what your interpretation of spec ops is.

To me its preventing incursions away from the "main" front or back attacks. Its also the Generator hack and hold system of benefit denial which was one of the best features of PS1 (yes I mentioned PS1).

Not saying lets turn this game into PS1 but limited strikes behind enemy lines or last second re-secures are some of the toughest and most rewarding actions a highly organized squad can perform. I know for a fact this is something Outcasters used to do.

Absolutely

[Sunrock]

Originally Posted by Fara

Not saying lets turn this game into PS1 but limited strikes behind enemy lines or last second re-secures are some of the toughest and most rewarding actions a highly organized squad can perform. I know for a fact this is something Outcasters used to do.

We still do that in PS2 too. But that is not what people have defined "spec ops" in this thread.