Why fight for territory?

[picchu]

Originally Posted by RoninOni

It's a never ending war though.....

You can 'win' a continent anyways



in 1 small pointless battle that's meaningless

Ha
You seem to not understand that everything else has an ending. All games are pointless however they end or you see a "you win" / "victory". You see your accomplishments for that round, k/d, captures, team play, how you contributed to that goal, how your team/enemies did and so on. Then a new game begins.

P2 it just keeps going on this never ending cycle. Victory over wining a base is minimum seeing as they can be taken back so easily.

So you gain more tanks, weapons, stuff etc. It is so easy to obtain it is not a reward. I often have so much that I could spend hours none stop buying tanks,air etc.

It's like saying "hey in the Olympics we have no winners" we get to be on tv have sponsor and make money what else do you want?

The game should have something that makes it feel like you accomplished something (penalties, rounds?, human number limits?) or give you more of a reason. Unfortunately however I am sure the way it is now won't change.

Even wars end but not ps2

[RoninOni]

Originally Posted by Otleaz

More meaningful than PS2 at least.

If you feel that way, then continue enjoying your meaningless battles over the same 8 1sqkm maps while we fight over a dynamic war containing 64sqkm of meaningful bases then

[Toppopia]

Well, many people had cool ideas about not really end games, but ideas that add more to the universe, like the space race, just to name one, where factions 'build' rockets and whoever completes theirs first gets a bonus to resources production or something, all we need is some mini games for these "COD/BF3" people that seem to only like a game if it ends with a victory screen.

[RoninOni]

Originally Posted by Toppopia

Well, many people had cool ideas about not really end games, but ideas that add more to the universe, like the space race, just to name one, where factions 'build' rockets and whoever completes theirs first gets a bonus to resources production or something, all we need is some mini games for these "COD/BF3" people that seem to only like a game if it ends with a victory screen.

There are "victory screens" when you cap or defend bases...

and there are stats and everything else.

You will be able to look at how well you performed on the Battle for the Bridge on November the 5th (remember, remember.... ) even.

BUT... yeah... today's youth... ehhhhhh... short attention spans and regular praise and pat on the backs is all they know... can't blame em I guess.

Oh, and whoever compared VIDEO GAMES to the bloody Olypmics....... /doublefacepalm

Hate to break it to you but 'eSports' isn't a sport.

[picchu]

Originally Posted by Toppopia

Well, many people had cool ideas about not really end games, but ideas that add more to the universe, like the space race, just to name one, where factions 'build' rockets and whoever completes theirs first gets a bonus to resources production or something, all we need is some mini games for these "COD/BF3" people that seem to only like a game if it ends with a victory screen.

?Cod/bf3 people? That a joke? Honestly practically every game has some type of ending.

Just like my idea above on olympics...(why would you want that?) really you can say its great to kill (which it is) but a win should feel like a win. Game has no victory really. However do not get me wrong it is still great but lacks a more main stream drive to push on.

[RoninOni]

Originally Posted by picchu

?Cod/bf3 people? That a joke? Honestly practically every game has some type of ending.

Just like my idea above on olympics...(why would you want that?) really you can say its great to kill (which it is) but a win should feel like a win. Game has no victory really. However do not get me wrong it is still great but lacks a more main stream drive to push on.

But in BF3/CoD it's not like you achieved anything... in fact, the "victory screen" is there precisely because THAT'S IT.... that's the WHOLE game. now load the map over and do the same thing from scratch, but NOTHING you did in the last round makes ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER anymore.

How is that better in any way shape or form?

Because of an artificial victory screen?

Nothing will stop you from, after capturing, defending, or losing a base in PS2 and seeing it's "FACILITY CAPTURED!" popup with victory music, hop over to the web portal for some good indepth stats analysis of your last "round"

But see, that's the REAL difference here. The games you're comparing this to have short little rounds. then you go to the next round. Nothing links them together.

Here, it's persistence. The world never stops moving. You log off go to sleep, and come home from school and login and see that the battleline has moved, your faction has gained or lost some territories.

And, ultimately, the goal IS to conquer everything.

[picchu]

Originally Posted by RoninOni

There are "victory screens" when you cap or defend bases...

and there are stats and everything else.

You will be able to look at how well you performed on the Battle for the Bridge on November the 5th (remember, remember.... ) even.

BUT... yeah... today's youth... ehhhhhh... short attention spans and regular praise and pat on the backs is all they know... can't blame em I guess.

Oh, and whoever compared VIDEO GAMES to the bloody Olypmics....... /doublefacepalm

Hate to break it to you but 'eSports' isn't a sport.

Ug calling people "todays youth" to justify your way is childish to begin with.

Olypmics.... ah I was not comparing to games I was comparing to statements. Like you get this gun but you don't win as in you get this commercial but no medal. How ps2 feels. You get this but you do not win.

Honestly this is not something to argue over anyways. It will most likley remain.

It would be nice however if something could be added that hurts or gives incentive/penalties. Say you capture just about everything.. eventually players numbers decline/people slip threw enemy lines and a few days later most is taken back. I do not know maybe make it more difficult when pushed perhaps.. How to go about it I have no idea.

[RoninOni]

Originally Posted by picchu

Ug calling people "todays youth" to justify your way is childish to begin with.

Olypmics.... ah I was not comparing to games I was comparing to statements. Like you get this gun but you don't win as in you get this commercial but no medal. How ps2 feels. You get this but you do not win.

Honestly this is not something to argue over anyways. It will most likley remain.

It would be nice however if something could be added that hurts or gives incentive/penalties. Say you capture just about everything.. eventually players numbers decline/people slip threw enemy lines and a few days later most is taken back. I do not know maybe make it more difficult when pushed perhaps.. How to go about it I have no idea.

You'll have less territory to branch out from, and less resources at your disposal. Tactically and financially you're at a disadvantage by virtue of circumstance.

and also, lots of olympians will get commercials with no medal.... for whatever that's worth

Anyways, I just see no difference between winning a base, and winning a round in another game, except that in PS2, that win stays with you... until you lose it whereas in the other games, there is literally no consequence whatsoever... at all. You can lose matches ALL DAY LONG for days on end and actually still be ranking up from minor experience gain, whereas in PS2 if your faction loses base after base after base it's gonna hurt.

[picchu]

Originally Posted by RoninOni

But in BF3/CoD it's not like you achieved anything... in fact, the "victory screen" is there precisely because THAT'S IT.... that's the WHOLE game. now load the map over and do the same thing from scratch, but NOTHING you did in the last round makes ANY DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER anymore.

How is that better in any way shape or form?

Because of an artificial victory screen?

Nothing will stop you from, after capturing, defending, or losing a base in PS2 and seeing it's "FACILITY CAPTURED!" popup with victory music, hop over to the web portal for some good indepth stats analysis of your last "round"

But see, that's the REAL difference here. The games you're comparing this to have short little rounds. then you go to the next round. Nothing links them together.

Here, it's persistence. The world never stops moving. You log off go to sleep, and come home from school and login and see that the battleline has moved, your faction has gained or lost some territories.

And, ultimately, the goal IS to conquer everything.

You do not need or want a link in those games. A new game is like a new world. Battles can be a few minutes or hours not forever.

My guess and probably why others enjoy a game that ends is because for one you can say you win/ended and another is you do not have all day to play games.

Say your in a squad vs another squad you can win the game..however in ps2 you may when a battle but you never win the war. Who wins? Who is the better team? You fight over territories but in the end you never win. So a victory is never really decided.

I played ps1 a lot so this is not an issue but It would be nice if it was tweaked in some way.

[RoninOni]

Oh, and "War will not determine who's right... only... who's left"

[picchu]

Originally Posted by RoninOni

You'll have less territory to branch out from, and less resources at your disposal. Tactically and financially you're at a disadvantage by virtue of circumstance.

and also, lots of olympians will get commercials with no medal.... for whatever that's worth

Anyways, I just see no difference between winning a base, and winning a round in another game, except that in PS2, that win stays with you... until you lose it whereas in the other games, there is literally no consequence whatsoever... at all. You can lose matches ALL DAY LONG for days on end and actually still be ranking up from minor experience gain, whereas in PS2 if your faction loses base after base after base it's gonna hurt.

Yes I understand I just wish it was more of a "hurt". It has always felt/been minor. Winning almost everything to have it taken away quickly and sometimes effortlessly feels like you are always losing/never gaining. I and probably most do not need a "victory" but need more of a penalty. That push, that feeling to keep those areas under control, to keep your team up top.. which ps1-2 is lacking.

[RoninOni]

Originally Posted by picchu

You do not need or want a link in those games. A new game is like a new world. Battles can be a few minutes or hours not forever.

My guess and probably why others enjoy a game that ends is because for one you can say you win/ended and another is you do not have all day to play games.

Say your in a squad vs another squad you can win the game..however in ps2 you may when a battle but you never win the war. Who wins? Who is the better team? You fight over territories but in the end you never win. So a victory is never really decided.

I played ps1 a lot so this is not an issue but It would be nice if it was tweaked in some way.

You don't personally have to play all day... I work too... point is the war is being fought constantly.

I mean, if they link the continents with oceans, and add Naval combat, thus removing the necessity of "safe zones" so entire continents could be capturable and they'd need to pull off a DDay to get back on, then 1 faction could get wiped off a server, and later finally another faction win but I expect they'd be relatively rare.

Until they add connecting oceans, they could make it so if 1 faction controls every hex BUT the safe zones, then they win... but considering the speed of a warp gate attack vs sailing across the ocean where they'd likely spot any excessively large force advancing and be able to coordinate a nice welcoming party.

An option I don't think they'll go with is that the warp gates could become capturable if a faction held no other territories on a continent... and it should be 1 tuff nut to crack. That would allow factions to get pushed off a server and last one standing wins. Maybe even allow say the TR to take the VS warp gate back from the NC who are about to win the continent, and 'turn it back on' allowing VS to return to the continent. Why? Well... cause enemy fighting your enemies is a good thing :P

I think there will be stuff for people playing just an hour or so as well... things they can accomplish. Cause that's really the issue here right? When commanders can lay down missions, and casual players can just log in, select from a list of missions what they can and want to do, and go complete an objective and be rewarded for it. They've hinted at some very impressive meta game that's still a good ways off from implementation that should hopefully help both coordinate the massive size of the armies into more than a massive zerg, while also providing the less time invested player have goals that they can accomplish. Win win.

[Baneblade]

Don't be fooled, you are fighting over who is going to respawn or not.

[TheDAWinz]

This thread is redicoulous mods!

[Salad Snake]

Considering this is a F2P with deep cosmetic customization, a continent-dominating faction would probably get some kind of badge or hat made for them by SOE. I personally don't much care but that's my prediction on what would happen.