Fast Travel Poll (Thrustpad Poll v.2.0)

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Technically, that's my opinion as well. But why would you want to be teleported or flung across the base? That's what sprinting is for, and light assault jet packs. I just think that long range fast travel(one side of a continent to another) will hurt the game much less than short range fast travel. I mean, at this point I'm basically having to just tell my "it's only for bases, it's only for bases".

got you - you're saying no short range or long range teleporting. And I respect that view, totally.

What I'm saying is that I think that if one or two bases had short-range teleporters that the defenders only could use, and then only if they hold both ends of the route then I would see that as an acceptable addition to gameplay when attacking/defending a base. Opening it more than that would be boring (if all bases were the same) and a bit silly (hundreds of players flying around)

I hope to play PS2 for months if not years, and the more variety the better, I think?

[Vancha]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I know we were suggesting it, but are you saying it does work that way?

I was kind of hoping he'd reply before anyone else, but my point was that it could work that way for all we know.

People have moved beyond speculation and are now deciding whether or not these should be in the game or how they should work, while in a position of ignorance.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

got you - you're saying no short range or long range teleporting. And I respect that view, totally.

What I'm saying is that I think that if one or two bases had short-range teleporters that the defenders only could use, and then only if they hold both ends of the route then I would see that as an acceptable addition to gameplay when attacking/defending a base. Opening it more than that would be boring (if all bases were the same) and a bit silly (hundreds of players flying around)

I hope to play PS2 for months if not years, and the more variety the better, I think?

Sure, that would be better. Having a teleport at say,each end of the base but it shuts down if the destination point becomes held by the enemy.

I think the beta will prove teleport pads that are inside buildings at different ends of the base to be a better decision than jump pads on the roof, when jump pads/rooftops start getting farmed by air or tanks sitting on higher ground. And there's another thing. Engineers need to go up on those towers to repair the turrets, if people are constantly blasting at the rooftops(even after turrets are down) because they hope to get some kills on people coming for the jump pads, it will cause the engineers to have trouble doing their job in the midst of all that extra attention.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Engineers need to go up on those towers to repair the turrets, if people are constantly blasting at the rooftops(even after turrets are down) because they hope to get some kills on people coming for the jump pads, it will cause the engineers to have trouble doing their job in the midst of all that extra attention.

Being an Engy and trying to repair a turret in a PS1 base while it was being assaulted was about as easy as trying to repair a tank in the middle of a small BF map. i.e. impossible . And the new base design turrets are even more exposed on their wee platforms. I'm afraid they will be little more than pretty ornaments, or infantry-cookers during a base defence.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

Being an Engy and trying to repair a turret in a PS1 base while it was being assaulted was about as easy as trying to repair a tank in the middle of a small BF map. i.e. impossible . And the new base design turrets are even more exposed on their wee platforms. I'm afraid they will be little more than pretty ornaments, or infantry-cookers during a base defence.

ooooh, I just had an idea. What if the turrets that go up on top of a roof retracted into the battlement towers when either no one is using them, or when destroyed? Then engineers could repair them from inside the tower.

The turrets that are on the bottom floors could also retract, but horizontally instead of vertically.

Actually I love this idea, and it goes double for those standalone towers away from bases.

[Tikuto]

Yes, but more conventional FT method.
- Replace 'jump pads' with a 'hallway' or 'stairway' portal.

Visual Concept:
Base design would have a hidden enclosed dual carriageway leading directly, safely and speedily to the destination.
Animation: Your character enters this 'portal' pathway to the next area of facility's battlements.
You press [F] on this doorway into the limited-view stairway or hallway.

Gameplay Concept:
This is the fast travel that is more conventional.

• You simply press the [F] key to use it, wait a few seconds and you appear at the other side.
• Your camera viewing relocates to the other side waiting for your character to exit. This allows you to see what's going on as you exit, allowing to you make a tactical decision before your character becomes vulnerable.
• You'd be invulnerable when you enter this 'portal' hallway as your character is hidden in it.
• These portals can be locked or unlocked by any enemy;
• and unlocked safely by friendly Engineers or violently by anyone.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

ooooh, I just had an idea. What if the turrets that go up on top of a roof retracted into the battlement towers when either no one is using them, or when destroyed? Then engineers could repair them from inside the tower.

The turrets that are on the bottom floors could also retract, but horizontally instead of vertically.

Actually I love this idea, and it goes double for those standalone towers away from bases.

yeah, nice idea! Something like this came up in the AA thread the other day, and I think it's a neat solution.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by elfailo

Jump pads should stay because there's a lot of potential for fun.

Teleports are worse because they have no drawbacks, unless you count not being able to see if you're going to be camped on the other side.

Whichever we get, pads or ports, I hope there is variety in base designs. i.e. not all bases will have pads/ports, some will have traditional walls and shielded areas.

[Snipefrag]

Was it just me, or didnt Higby say that there are going to be no generators in PS2? I asked about cloakers and black ops behind enemy lines in one of the QA reddit sessions and from what I remember that was his response.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by elfailo

Also, repairing turrets should expose the engineer to risk (snipers, air, tanks, cloakers, everything). If you can just sit there repairing it safe inside a tower, there's no point in even bringing them down.

V-D-T

The downside of that approach is that turrets are useless after the first MBT turns up outside your base. With a repair facility the defenders would get more use out of the turrets.

[IMMentat]

For exactly that point I support ideas of FT lines not working between points controlled by opposite factions and being able to disrupt them even between friendly points by blowing up generators at one of the points in question. FT per se does not cause issues like that rather the way it is implemented.

So to keep a steady stream of reinforcements from one part of the base to another attackers and defenders would have to keep both points under control and generators in both areas operational. I personally think that the side that manages to meet these conditions should be rewarded by being able to FT from these points back and forth.

Defenders would start with having all FT lines functional and would have to fight to keep them that way while attackers would have to capture at least 2 points with gens intact to be able to take over single FT line. I find that reasonable. Anyway I don't advocate too many of these lines 4 to max 8 around the perimeter of the base would be more than enough imo.

This.
Thanks for saving me some typing.

The downside of that approach is that turrets are useless after the first MBT turns up outside your base. With a repair facility the defenders would get more use out of the turrets.

Nice to see someone other than the devs know the turret versus MBT engagements before its been shown in a video, spoken about in an interview or seen in beta. For the uninitiated, this was sarcasm.

[LancerNC]

the only form of Fast Travel (FT) I like is thrustpads.

This poll is a little unfair, there are more FT options than thrustpad options. I am for fast travel being disabled if the generator is down, but not against thrustpads at the same time. There are several conditional FT options that do not include thrustpads. I like the elements of gameplay that thrustpads bring, there is a risk in using the pad because you make yourself available to be shot. Furthermore, Considering the travel is not instantaneous it allows people by the landing spot to react. Those are my thoughts on this matter.

I really hope they keep them in game.

[Immigrant]

Originally Posted by elfailo

Jump pads should stay because there's a lot of potential for fun.

Teleports are worse because they have no drawbacks, unless you count not being able to see if you're going to be camped on the other side.

I hope that this game will provide other methods of having fun. TP potentials of being a nuisance for some players are much greater than being fun for some imo. Also those who won't like them couldn't just not use them since that would result in being less mobile and thus having a serious disadvantage when battling.

No need for drawbacks when it comes to FT since is meant to compensate the vastness of the bases not to provide new gameplay element. Small bases don't need FT at all.

Originally Posted by Snipefrag

Was it just me, or didnt Higby say that there are going to be no generators in PS2? I asked about cloakers and black ops behind enemy lines in one of the QA reddit sessions and from what I remember that was his response.

Info thread is your friend.

Originally Posted by InfoThread

Question: Bases still have generators?
Higby: Yes, but not the same as in PS1

Originally Posted by LancerNC

the only form of Fast Travel (FT) I like is thrustpads.

This poll is a little unfair, there are more FT options than thrustpad options.

Faceplam. Read again what you wrote. TP are a form of FT. Also read my opening post (especially p.s. part).

[IMMentat]

Fixed position FT options.

Tunnels - safe, slow, take loads of people out of the fight, ground only (skytunnels? interesting but ugly).

Teleport pads - safe movement, easily abused by both sides.

Bridges - unsafe, slow-ish, counters plans for more open base design, opens too many firing positions up in a carefully designed base.

Ziplines - unsafe (obvious route), medium speed, otherwise sensible.

Lifts - safe?, slow?, ugly, limited capacity/bottleneck.

Jump-pads - safety relative to base ownership, medium speed, forces people to use certain firing positions.
The main argument for is that they are inconspicuous and a good middle ground.
The main argument against seems to be that they could be over-used (valid) and don't fit in the setting??? (batchit crazy response IMO)

[Stardouser]

I submit that jump pads are far more abusable than teleport pads. At least with teleport pads if someone uses them to get away, you can give chase in relatively safety, jump pads will be quite risky to chase an abuser who's playing peek-a-boo with them, because of this:

If the guy you're shooting at is about to die, then he has nothing to lose if he jump pads away from you and then gets shot down. You, on other hand, if you chase after him, could find yourself shot down. Therefore, if someone's about to die, there's absolutely no reason for them to abuse the pad in an effort to get away, they've nothing to lose and it might result in their killer getting blasted off his tail.