Essamir redesign is awesome, but lattice has made it incredibly zerg-centric

[Levente]

Originally Posted by Malorn

One of the key goals of the resource revamp is to spread out those large fights a bit and give smaller groups indirect impact to the front. That's while keeping players relatively in the same general vicinity but not all mashed up in one spot.

Many players including me experiencing frequent crash to desktop without error message on super high end pc, is there gonna be a fix for this?

[Carver]

I prefer zerg battles on the lattice to the ghost capping, whack-a-mole game you get without one.

[Mox]

Planetside is all about zerging. If someone dislike it he should propably play something else.
I dont understand why SOE constantly try to softwash this unique feature pf ps2. There are multiple games on the market offering small scale battles. I dont think we need another one. That doesnt mean there shouldnt be some task to do for smaller groups (as Malprn mentioned). But these small scale actvities should always support the main zerg battles. It is important that small scale battles arent disconnected from global warfare.

[KesTro]

Originally Posted by Mox

Planetside is all about zerging. If someone dislike it he should propably play something else.
I dont understand why SOE constantly try to softwash this unique feature pf ps2. There are multiple games on the market offering small scale battles. I dont think we need another one. That doesnt mean there shouldnt be some task to do for smaller groups (as Malprn mentioned). But these small scale actvities should always support the main zerg battles. It is important that small scale battles arent disconnected from global warfare.

There's a time and place for big battles and it isn't at 'every' base. They quickly lose their wonder factor.

[Taramafor]

Originally Posted by Mox

But these small scale actvities should always support the main zerg battles. It is important that small scale battles arent disconnected from global warfare.

See, that's the thing. We can't have those small scale battles because everyone wants to be at the zerg to farm XP. It kind of ruins things when someone in your squad goes off to farm at the zerg when you're holding off a few tanks at a bridge with a small squad.

And as you said, I was indeed doing it to support the zerg. I was helping to carve out a front line and it did end up working but when people dessert (for lack of a better term) to the zerg, it decreases the odds of success.

[typhaon]

^Sounds like what you're saying is that most people prefer not to have these small battles.

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by typhaon

^Sounds like what you're saying is that most people prefer not to have these small battles.

Even if they do, there's an interesting paradox - the more people wanting a small fight join that small fight, the bigger it gets.

[Hmr85]

Originally Posted by KesTro

There's a time and place for big battles and it isn't at 'every' base. They quickly lose their wonder factor.

This is true. However, it is not hard to find smaller fights around the outskirts or even up another lane that people are looking for. Some people just don't care to look at their map or another continent even. Also, before I get the I just want to help out my faction at the alert or the facility etc where its taking place. There is plenty of things for smaller outfits to do to assist your empire outside of participating directly in the zerg.

Be it taking outlying outpost to Sundy hunting, AA,AV, etc...

[Rolfski]

Originally Posted by Mox

Planetside is all about zerging. If someone dislike it he should propably play something else.
I dont understand why SOE constantly try to softwash this unique feature pf ps2. There are multiple games on the market offering small scale battles. I dont think we need another one.

Zergs have never been the problem of this game, zergs not fighting zergs has always been the problem.

Asymmetrical warfare has never worked particularly well in PS2, which means that updated game mechanics should either try to finally make it work (i.e give small squads and edge against zergs) or discourage it from happening altogether (small squads vs small squads, zergs vs zergs stimulated behavior).

[Stew]

Originally Posted by NewSith

You guys need to chill and understand that there's gonna be a point when there will only be enough people to field, say, 3 continents, while there will be 6+.


Lattice will work wonders by then. I really hope devs figure that out before merging servers the second Hossin is out.

Actually nope , lattice do not create Continents pops imbalance , lattice create Zergs lines along the lattice itself , as much as iam on both side of the fence , it remain factual

lattice make it easyer to Zergs and outnumbers peoples steamrolling them along the lattice

I finally hate the Hex systhem for its anoying ghostcap and unpredictability , but i also hate the side effect of the lattice systhem wich lead to Zergs friendly tactics ...

Even with 1000 continents this wont change , this game need some in game mechanics that help to Spread the figth in a meaningfull way but also split the player based across the map in some decent figths or manageable figths , as long as the game dont have this type of mechanics we will have to face the zergsfest , the new ressources systhem will also not fix this issue since the it will be much easyer for a overpops zergs to come back with ANT transports and replenish their facility along the lattice , unlike a decent group who almost got lock by the zergs are most likely going to struggle and wont be able to get some Ant back to the bases to replenish ... so

An organised Zergs will still be efficient if not more with the newer systhem , so they really have to find a way to FORCE players to spread the figths across the regions and along the lattices

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by Stew

Actually nope , lattice do not create Continents pops imbalance , lattice create Zergs lines along the lattice itself , as much as iam on both side of the fence , it remain factual

lattice make it easyer to Zergs and outnumbers peoples steamrolling them along the lattice

I finally hate the Hex systhem for its anoying ghostcap and unpredictability , but i also hate the side effect of the lattice systhem wich lead to Zergs friendly tactics ...

Even with 1000 continents this wont change , this game need some in game mechanics that help to Spread the figth in a meaningfull way but also split the player based across the map in some decent figths or manageable figths , as long as the game dont have this type of mechanics we will have to face the zergsfest , the new ressources systhem will also not fix this issue since the it will be much easyer for a overpops zergs to come back with ANT transports and replenish their facility along the lattice , unlike a decent group who almost got lock by the zergs are most likely going to struggle and wont be able to get some Ant back to the bases to replenish ... so

An organised Zergs will still be efficient if not more with the newer systhem , so they really have to find a way to FORCE players to spread the figths across the regions and along the lattices

You just quoted my post that was the answer to what you're stating in your response.


There is only zerg because:
A) There is no way to lock a continent, no way to drive the enemy off completely.
B) The servers have 3 continents. The servers are relatively full. This means we're pretty much getting a two-king draw on each continent, since none of them remains inactive.


What I mean is - when there will be a situation where there's not enough people to create 3 big zergs (VS+TR+NC) on each continent, the lattice will shine brightly. It's population-related, not continentcount-related.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by NewSith

You just quoted my post that was the answer to what you're stating in your response.


There is only zerg because:
A) There is no way to lock a continent, no way to drive the enemy off completely.
B) The servers have 3 continents. The servers are relatively full. This means we're pretty much getting a two-king draw on each continent, since none of them remains inactive.


What I mean is - when there will be a situation where there's not enough people to create 3 big zergs (VS+TR+NC) on each continent, the lattice will shine brightly. It's population-related, not continentcount-related.

WOW continents locking will simply push peoples on the same areas , On my server matherson , No matters if the NC are 38 % of the pops on a continents , the VS still play as a massive Zergs when our pops is pretty spread evenly across the board while the VS are Zerging their way anywhere else from regions to regions

Continents pops isnt the true problems , pops in Each regions are ... the Zergs isnt there because they cant lock a continents lol

The zergs are there because its a easyway to get thing done and no matter what youll end up winning detroying your opponents by attrition and sheer numbers

Its a simple and infamous tactics , ( if we can call this a tactics ) its a no brainers one but still

Continents lock wont solve anything , populations cap wont solve anything , Zergs are Zerging because they can and they will ...

Lattice and continental lattice will make it easyer actually for Zergs to steam rolls their way to victory , if a overall servers pops is really unbalanced they will actually be able to lock peoples out with ease and the figth will end up been as bad as we experience on matherson now ...

The problems is in the REGIONS /BASES /AREA populations , also we cant have humongous Zergs meating each others in the same area the game break at this point if you have more than 150 players at crossroad watch tower , sorry but the infantry render distance will get broke up , the medic kit will start to break and thing become unresponsive and anoying grenade wont explode and so on ....

The game does not suport that many player all at once in the same area ... We need game mechanics that spread the figths




Can you explain HOW you think continental lattice and continent lock will help in any way with Zergs ?

And please Be precise and details your thinking thanks

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by Stew

Can you explain HOW you think continental lattice and continent lock will help in any way with Zergs ?

And please Be precise and details your thinking thanks

Short and simple - if you can drive an enemy out of a continent, all you need to do is capture territories with small groups, while the main zerg follows its lane. In the end the zerg will become disconnected in a single region, with warpgate being captured and all it will be able to do is defend until it's broken.

In this scenario basically the side that has even slightly less zerg wins. Don't forget that at some point it will simply boil down to two empires on a continent, it'll never be a forceful threeway 24/7.

[Cats]

Originally Posted by Mox

Planetside is all about zerging. If someone dislike it he should propably play something else.
I dont understand why SOE constantly try to softwash this unique feature pf ps2. There are multiple games on the market offering small scale battles. I dont think we need another one. That doesnt mean there shouldnt be some task to do for smaller groups (as Malprn mentioned). But these small scale actvities should always support the main zerg battles. It is important that small scale battles arent disconnected from global warfare.

Actually the point of it is that you can join the large battles. That is the virtue of a sandbox game. But it's a dumb thing to say that someone should play BF3 or something similar because they don't like zergs. There are many other features and moments of this game that neither BF3 or other shooters have. Many of those are possible because of the sandbox-like nature of the game. Large battles aren't the only thing this game has going for itself. For instance no one mentions the persistent and seamless world or the large variety of playstyles that are available (some of which are not as viable in a stalemated zerg-fight, SMG Infiltrator anyone?).

Eve is also a game that supports an even more absurd number of players in the same instance, but that doesn't make it the central feature. What is it then? It's the persistent and open world that makes those battles and many other things possible. If the only reason for sticking around in EVE was the large battles, it would be a hollow game next to what it actually is.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Cats

Actually the point of it is that you can join the large battles. That is the virtue of a sandbox game. But it's a dumb thing to say that someone should play BF3 or something similar because they don't like zergs. There are many other features and moments of this game that neither BF3 or other shooters have. Many of those are possible because of the sandbox-like nature of the game. Large battles aren't the only thing this game has going for itself. For instance no one mentions the persistent and seamless world or the large variety of playstyles that are available (some of which are not as viable in a stalemated zerg-fight, SMG Infiltrator anyone?).

Eve is also a game that supports an even more absurd number of players in the same instance, but that doesn't make it the central feature. What is it then? It's the persistent and open world that makes those battles and many other things possible. If the only reason for sticking around in EVE was the large battles, it would be a hollow game next to what it actually is.

Agree , but i should say i like big battles and i was enjoying big battle in eve as well but the thing is i dont like when thing get broken , in EVE or In planetside 2 sometime when you have to much peoples in the same area , thing get broken unresponsive and make everything struggle ...

I like big figths but manageable big figths i mean if planetside 2 could have a tech to render 500 or 1000 players in a 1 square kilometres then i would enjoy that , but Ps2 simply do not support this amount of players in the same area , yes it suports it on a single continents 64 square kilometres ,figth to be fun need to be manageable , the performance , hit registration , frame per second , etc. have to be at the rendez vous if not it become discusting and anoying