Guard Duty - Page 2

Mongo · 2012-08-15, 05:21 AM

The difference between this game and the current one is the Lattices which directed flow and strategy on the map.

Also as seen from the Streams, the base layouts are rather poor and non defensible and lead towards a rather deathmatchy feel - what military creates defensive layouts?

While im not in beta for ps2 I can only postulate on how this will effect the game flow.

I suspect you will find random people capping bases and hexes in the middle of no-where completely negating the feel of taking and holding territory as it is fairly easy to flip in a capture and hold BF/Cod way from the official streams. So chances are you can play this guard duty role due to all the random attacks. I honestly just hope there are loads of people that like standing in an empty tower as without lattices random attacks in the middle of nowhere will be pretty common.

Scotsh · 2012-08-15, 05:23 AM

Originally Posted by Mongo

While im not in beta for ps2 I can only postulate on how this will effect the game flow.

Sorry, but in this case definitely: Nuff said.

ringring · 2012-08-15, 05:24 AM

Well, people are not posted and Bio Labs in PS! were diffent, but yes. It could in a sense happen.

For instance, because of the lattice which doesn't exist in ps2, you would have a fairly good idea of what the likely targets could be. (There'd be no point doing this as a simple matter of course, it would need a cetain situation in the strategic war where you'd predict your enemy was going to make a move.)
Anyways, so you would lay CE at the target bases and picket warpgates and try to at least discover an invasion within the first 2-3 minutes.

Sunrock · 2012-08-15, 05:54 AM

Originally Posted by Mongo

I suspect you will find random people capping bases and hexes in the middle of no-where completely negating the feel of taking and holding territory as it is fairly easy to flip in a capture and hold BF/Cod way from the official streams. So chances are you can play this guard duty role due to all the random attacks. I honestly just hope there are loads of people that like standing in an empty tower as without lattices random attacks in the middle of nowhere will be pretty common.

In one of the official videos on youtube I remember they explaining this game mech. briefly.

And as I understood it is that the more hexes you have surrounding an enemy hex the faster you could flip it. This of course means that if you try to take a hex in the middle of enemy territory it will be allot slower then at the front line. This will give you allot of warning time to come and defend it and it will be really easy to recapture.

So I don't think it will be too common that players try to take hexes behind enemy lines. Of course it will happen but I think it will only be good for is a tactical maneuver to lure enemy players from the front line as the man power to try to hold one of those hexes would be to big.

Scotsh · 2012-08-15, 06:03 AM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

In one of the official videos on youtube I remember they explaining this game mech. briefly.

And as I understood it is that the more hexes you have surrounding an enemy hex the faster you could flip it. This of course means that if you try to take a hex in the middle of enemy territory it will be allot slower then at the front line. This will give you allot of warning time to come and defend it and it will be really easy to recapture.

So I don't think it will be too common that players try to take hexes behind enemy lines. Of course it will happen but I think it will only be good for is a tactical maneuver to lure enemy players from the front line as the man power to try to hold one of those hexes would be to big.

This.

I imagine that this system can be tweaked in a way that it is far more effective and more fun than the lattice system.

You can see from TotalBiscuits videos how it works, so no NDA violation there. I captured this picture from his video about Biolabs and Towers (as posted here -> http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=47017)

In the middle you see two progress bars, one for NC one for TR (no barneys involved in this battle). The more capture points (A, B, C in this case) your faction hold the faster the progress bar fills up. The TR progress bar has a red block at the beginning, this is a bonus given for adjacent hexes controlled by the TR.

This can be tweaked quite nicely. They could make it that capturing a base without this bonus will take a really long time. For bases with 6 control points this bonus could actually enable you to take a base with only 2 control points.
Personally i hope they implement some kind of siege system that the if your faction has a base surrounded the bonus grows with each capture try. This would force the defending faction to break the siege at some point.

If it turns out backhacking will grow rampart and only annoying they could lock out capture tries if a facility to too far (say 4-5 hexes) from the nearest friendly hex.

Mongo · 2012-08-15, 06:35 AM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

In one of the official videos on youtube I remember they explaining this game mech. briefly.

Yup I remember this too and it's not in opposition to my opinion it will just take a little longer.

@scotsh While I am not in the PS2 beta I was in the planetside 1 beta, they only introduced lattices about 4 weeks before the end of beta as a way to fix the problem I have pointed out, and it WAS a problem. They also suggested to fix it by scaling time to cap depending on local influence much like the current system, this didnt work either. You would think they would have learned.

Lets just hope they tweak it in beta so that you cant realistically do this, otherwise you will end up with no "front" just around 40 odd small scale Futuristic BF style fights all over the map, with worse graphics... and people just switching between them with instant action.

SpottyGekko · 2012-08-15, 07:03 AM

If there isn't an effective method (like the lattice system) to limit back-hacking, I imagine it will be rife.

PS2 is F2P and should have a MUCH larger population than PS did. That will bring a lot of solo'ers into the game.

In a furball fight, solo players are at a huge disadvantage, because their "mad skillz" are negated by the fact that there are so many possible vectors of attack. A solo player cannot watch 360 degrees (and the sky) simultaneously, but a squad with good comms can because they work together.

But "behind-the-lines" infiltration is ideal for a solo player. Someone with good FPS skills can do a lot better when faced with 3 enemies than they would fighting in amongst 30 or 40 hostiles.

As the beta population rises, it will most likely become apparent what the impact of back-hacking will be. There is still a lot of time to fine tune this aspect.

Nemises · 2012-08-15, 08:22 AM

It will be hard to infiltrator solo cap 6 points and hold them for the 10 mins (?) or so it needs to take a base without some crew of vengeance filled yocals gal dropping you into the pit..

..how it used to work in PS1
- small long fight for local tower
- the zerg gathers....
- massive long protracted fight for the main base
- finally the hack is on!
- the zerg (from both sides) pisses off to the next fight, leaving a couple of squads left to nurse the hack...(this part is guard duty)

So yah OP, actually it used to happen all the time

VaderShake · 2012-08-15, 09:11 AM

I think "guard duty" is the wrong ideology and term to use. I think as the battle moves and flows there will be opportunity to take a tactical defensive position that will make sense anticipating an attack from the other factions in a less active region.

Like cutting off a flanking route, by setting up an ambush and waiting for an enemy to try and sneak by on a quad or hot drop some troops at an outpost behind the lines. I don't see it as "guard duty" to play off the line and anticipate attacks on resources or areas.

vVRedOctoberVv · 2012-08-15, 12:14 PM

I personally don't mind "guard duty", but I'm definitely in the minority. 95% of people would be running around all pell mell heading to the nearest clusterfuck. And I can't really blame 'em. If at least a few people would stay on guard, it would make enemy raids behind the front lines more difficult, but I don't really see it happening much.

Nordan · 2012-08-15, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by RoninOni

PS1 was a bit different because it used what was called the "Lattice" system instead of the new open map hex system.... there was no worry about territories that were fully behind the front line.

So who knows. Maybe there will be some sort of teleporter system (ie; respawn at another base by going through a spawner or something).

And usually defending has it's advantages... but not enough to overcome truly overwhelming numbers. 10 won't likely hold out against 100 very long. But defending air raids with AA will likely be fairly rewarding if you manage to place yourself in the right places in the right times.

In real life you always bring twice the number when attacking an enemy position at the least, otherwise it is likely that they will be repelled. I wonder if this rule of thumb will apply to planetside 2 as well.

Majik · 2012-08-15, 02:09 PM

I use to love to sit in a tower or near a base gen waiting for the TR 'covert ops' to show up thinking they were doing something where no one would be.
Surprise Quasar!!!!!

RoninOni · 2012-08-15, 02:17 PM

Patrols will be more important than Guards really.

Patrols will be active in seeking out enemy approaches... where guards are only helpful if they're in the right place at the right time.

If you and your buddies want to play "guards" then what you'd prolly do is get a couple guys on patrol in fighter aircraft with the rest ready by a waiting Gal to quickly respond to any trouble areas.

Boone · 2012-08-15, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by Nordan

In real life you always bring twice the number when attacking an enemy position at the least, otherwise it is likely that they will be repelled. I wonder if this rule of thumb will apply to planetside 2 as well.

Since when do people in "real life" bring twice the amount of people needed to get something done all the time? Seems silly.

Vencher · 2012-08-15, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by Boone

Since when do people in "real life" bring twice the amount of people needed to get something done all the time? Seems silly.

Since people realized that in real life you dont get to respawn, and it doesnt take half a magazine to kill someone, just a couple rounds will do it just fine.

Not to mention in a siege you had to bring twice as many soldiers. if it were even numbers at the start of a siege, the army laying siege would falter much sooner than the defenders. after the first assault the attackers would be fewer in numbers, thus unable to maintain a proper siege. you bring more when attacking because you have to stuff the maw with bodies until it chokes. then you spill over. it sounds harsh, but thems the facts. Even in modern combat scenarios, if a group is assaulting a defended position, they are still going to use as many people as possible to take it. and if that might be too costly, they just blow the whole thing up. Attackers have to use Overkill to get things done. be it an overwhelming show of numbers, or one piece of ordinance that will level an area.