News: Amerish Revamp V1 Now on PTS

[BlaxicanX]

For what's worth, I don't agree with the notion that every base should be defensible. I think only certain ones should he heavily defensible, so as to act as "key points" on the map, and give players some kind of short-term goal for pushing or defending (For attackers, "if we can at least push to X base, that'd be good progress for our empire", versus defenders, "we'll fall back if we have too, but we draw the line at base X, because if we lose it it'll be a pain in the ass to get back").

As well, easily conquered bases are needed to give attackers forward momentum when pushing. If every base is a Biolab-esque "into the breach!" slog where your K/D for the day drops by 50% due to all the deaths you take trying to capture it, players will simply get burned out. There has to be a balance.

imo.

[Eggy]

Every base doesn't need to be super defend-able and every base doesn't need to be infantry only.
There are loads of games that offer squad based infantry combat. There are very few combined arms games.
If the vehicles in the game cannot contribute to base fights, captures and defenses then the only place they can fight is outside bases.
Infantry don't suddenly become crap outside. In fact for the most part a group of heavies/engis will dominate over a group of ground based vehicles.

If vehicles just become cert pinatas for infantry they may as well just be removed.
Infantry players are not required to use vehicles to move between bases. With squad deploy, instant action and re deploy they can just avoid the outside areas totally if they want.

Vehicle users should not be forced to abandon there vehicles in order to contribute at every base fight.

In PS1 I didn't mind deconing my tank and going inside because I knew it would be a good 15-20 mins before I needed it again. In PS2 base fights can be over before I have a new timer and/or resources to pull a new tank.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by Eggy

Every base doesn't need to be super defend-able and every base doesn't need to be infantry only.
There are loads of games that offer squad based infantry combat. There are very few combined arms games.
If the vehicles in the game cannot contribute to base fights, captures and defenses then the only place they can fight is outside bases.
Infantry don't suddenly become crap outside. In fact for the most part a group of heavies/engis will dominate over a group of ground based vehicles.

If vehicles just become cert pinatas for infantry they may as well just be removed.
Infantry players are not required to use vehicles to move between bases. With squad deploy, instant action and re deploy they can just avoid the outside areas totally if they want.

Vehicle users should not be forced to abandon there vehicles in order to contribute at every base fight.

In PS1 I didn't mind deconing my tank and going inside because I knew it would be a good 15-20 mins before I needed it again. In PS2 base fights can be over before I have a new timer and/or resources to pull a new tank.

Yea, I'd sort of agree.

There has to be a place for tanks. And not all bases need to be equally defensible, you'll recall in PS1 Bio Lab were not as defensible aa Interlinks for instance.

[ChipMHazard]

I wouldn't mind there being bases made for infantry only fights and have some open vehicle focused bases. Defensible and non-defensible. They would have to change their concept of combined arms fighting though.

[Blynd]

If they removed the timer on vehicles once you left them or put the, all at 20 minutes like the sundie then you could (like ps1). Just park in the courtyard and head inside for the infantry fight

[Mordelicius]

Originally Posted by Phantomdestiny

subterranean nanite analysis is insanely amazing , 3 underground level with a 4 level which the defends spawn room. but in order to get to the underground base you have to destroy a shield gen on the ground level

Thinking about these new base styles give me chills. I'm not sure though if it's enough to eclipse Indarside. The biggest obstacle (lol) Amerish have are these pointy and pointless mountains. They don't add any functionality. It's just one roadblock after the other and very ruinous to base to base battle flow. Aesthetically they are ok, but in terms of strategic use, they fall flat. Unlike Indar, practically every moutain and cliff can be used and has a purpose.

Anyway, thanks for the heads up. That Subterranean Nanite Analysis has a massive combat potential! I hope they read our 'reviews' on how to improve it even more.

Subterranean Nanite Analysis - This base has 3 floors down with the very bottom a spawn room. This alone is worth downloading the PTS patch.

Positive(s)
- Fully indoor, subterranean base. What else to say?
- The shield wall panels at the capture point room is a nice touch. I tried to visualize the fight going on here.
- Balcony at the first floor down. Wow, that is indeed a fine touch. They ought to shorten the width and add a second balcony on the opposite side of the room.

Right between the wide wall support and the column, there is a narrow space where a thin strip of balcony can be added. That would be excellent for a cross balcony fight. I imagine the attackers dropping in and jumping up the second balcony while they try to secure the generators. The defenders will be at the opposite side balcony, under the room and behind the back passage.

Currently, that wide balcony is too entrenched. Shortening the width reduces the firing angles across the room (esp if they add a new balcony). And what's great about this room is the attackers has an option to ignore the balcony and run straight down to the bottom. it's up to the defenders to follow suit. Can you imagine the war of attrition whether to rush the capture point or secure the generator? Now, it's possible that Generator unlocks the capture point. That makes it even more essential to add a second balcony on the other side. It gives attackers a chance hold and defend that area keep the generator from being resecured or repaired.

Negative(s)
- Excessive number of elevators. There's probably more elevators than needed.
- Some upward elevators are still half-functional, not giving enough directional lift to the next floor.
- Middle room is too bare. They require more covers.

Kwahtee South Pass - This is another underground facility. It's far more circuitous than the Sub Nanite Analysis. While SNA has basically open rooms, this base have connected rooms with plenty of side entrance, back entrances and looping flanks.

Positive(s)
- Multiple entrances, giving both attackers, options on how to approach defending and attacking
- Unique layout with the spawn room on top of the hilly mound.

Negatives(s) - This base obviously have much thought put into it, but there need to be much more tweaks needed.

- Defender pathways can easily suppressed by attackers. Both the elevator/tunnel path and the shorter teleporter path has to go up 2 flight of stairs to get to the Capture point. These stairs will be blasted and bombed by the attackers. The only other option of the defender is to go over the hill and enter from the ramp or that bushy side entrance. These defender exit points have be at least one floor higher to eliminate the requirement to up 2 stairs only to be easily slaughtered.
- Attackers have much easy access if they use the side entrance from the far side. Suggested fix. Add a generator on the main to open up the capture point room. A good place would be 2 rooms ahead of the main ramp entrance. If not, much of these rooms will be underused and wasted.
- The bushy side entrance is fairly redundant because it is close the main ramp entrance. The bush side entrance should go one room deeper (same room I suggested where the generator can be laid down. That would provide for better flanking options for both sides.

Again these new bases are amazing. It's up to the designers to package them as a whole, as a complex rather than separate entities.

If one looks at these example lanes:
Crossroads - Xenotech - Regent Rock
Crossroads - Broken Arch - Tawrich Depot
Coramed - Indar Bay - Quartz Ridge
Tawrich - (Tawrich depot, Tawrich, Tower, Tawrich Recycling)
Andvari Barracks - Andvari Biolab - Andvari South Banks - Jaeger's Fist
The Palisade - Crimson Tower Bluff
Indar Comm Array - West Highland Check Point
Snake Ravine Lookout - Allatum Botany Wing - (TiAlloys/Allatum Biolab)

These bases feel related to each other. And it's not just because they are connected. The transitions are always smooth. And it's a very natural movement going from base to base. Also, these lanes have battles in between bases!. It's like, it makes sense to meet at the middle to see who will be the stronger force suited for attacking.


Amerish do not have the same feel. The bases are interspersed at a great distance often accompanied by a need for geographic clearance. You often lose momentum or anticipation when attacking or defending the base.The only base I can think that has that same rhyme is Splitpeak and Auraxicom.

I have only seen a handful of the new Amerish bases, I'm asuming more surprises on many of them .

[BlaxicanX]

I think Indar's popularity is more a result of momentum than anything else. It was the first continent, it's what everybody played on, it was the first continent to have lattice, etc. Everyone is just used to playing on Indar, and we're creatures of habit.

I don't have as much faith in the intercontinental lattice as other people; I don't believe it will really deepen the "metagame", nor do I believe that it will serve as a form of accomplishment for players. But, I do believe that it's the only way to remove Indar-side. Literally forcing people to not play on Indar and try out the other continents is the only way to break their habit.

[Mordelicius]

Several more 'reviews' of the bases from the list:

Northgrove Post - Standard base with plenty of trees and boulders. Designer is obviously going for the infantry advance and defense on these trees.

Positive(s) - Ok, the tree cover fights will be interesting to see for sure.

Negative(s) - Some areas are well covered. Some areas are just bare (esp next to the outof bound area). The trees can be redistributed a little better. Bare areas provide for little flanking possibilities.

Stone Ridge Reserve - base next to the NW Warpgate

Negative(s) - There is a MAJOR flaw with this base. The defensible open gated chokepoint is facing(!) the Warpate. Why is Warpate camping being bolstered here? It should be the other way. The gate should be at the other side facing NE. It should be harder to defend against the WG while harder to take coming from the other side.

This points lead to a much superior WG base: The Jagged Alliance Mines.

The Jagged Alliance Mines - Base next to NE WG. It's a miniature goodness of a base. Compact, precise, efficient and well developed.

Positive(s)
- Simple yet tightly constructed layout.
- Crates are neatly placed and positioned.
- Pathways are cleanly tailored.
- Plenty of flanks, covers and alternate paths.
- Harder to take coming in from the outside. Easier to assault coming in from the WG. The Ammo dispensary is closer to the WG side making it easier to defend with vehicles.. And the secondary spawn is also on that similar side making it harder to hold facing the WG.
- Might as well call this the Jagged Alliance 'Garden' or a 'Park' because it doesn't look like an industrial mining facility . The balcony alone around the building is well put, overlooking a great fov of the Amerish expanse and vegetation and at the same time being extremely functional.

Negative(s)
- One negative is the Magriders will easily boost up the infantry path up the stairs landing overlooking the Capture point. That should be inaccesible.
- Vehicle spawn is facing the WG. But I guess it can be overlooked, since making it otherwise is awkward given the specific layout.

Silvers Valley Arsenal - It's quite a standard base with some turrets.

Positive(s)
- Turrets are a good addition because it's a base very open to tank bombing

Negative(s)
- Magriders will hump the infantry path at the southside ridge that is away from the turrets.
- Secondary spawn is redundant. I understand the logic that if the main spawn is camped, the other will be alleviate the blockade. But it's moot since the building holding A is very defensible. It's the Biolab-type where you just shoot down the stairs. While the main spawn can be suppressed at the open crossroads, the defenders coming second spawn will be supressed by the building itself.

It's better if they move the auxillary spawn across the streat next to the wall structure/boulder. That way the defenders have to fan out and not to easily concentrate all forces on side and stifle all resistance and movements.

Lastly, provide the Main spawnroom access to the area where the second spawn is so the players won't always be funnelled to the crossroads area which is essentially a death trap (shot from all sides and elevation). That way the second spawn can be moved.

[Levente]

whats with lattice? is there lattice on AMerish yet?

[ringring]

Originally Posted by Levente

whats with lattice? is there lattice on AMerish yet?

No not yet but the bases seem to be built with lattice in mind, they are very large and more defendable than those on Indar.

[Snoopy]

After having seen what they've done with Amerish....

Please go back and re-do Indar!

End of the day, the game will still revolve around Indar so if we can't change that... let's change Indar!

[bpostal]

Originally Posted by BlaxicanX

For what's worth, I don't agree with the notion that every base should be defensible. I think only certain ones should he heavily defensible, so as to act as "key points" on the map, and give players some kind of short-term goal for pushing or defending (For attackers, "if we can at least push to X base, that'd be good progress for our empire", versus defenders, "we'll fall back if we have too, but we draw the line at base X, because if we lose it it'll be a pain in the ass to get back").

As well, easily conquered bases are needed to give attackers forward momentum when pushing. If every base is a Biolab-esque "into the breach!" slog where your K/D for the day drops by 50% due to all the deaths you take trying to capture it, players will simply get burned out. There has to be a balance.

imo.

I'd personally enjoy it if all the facilities were a pain in the ass to take, towers slightly easier than facilities and outposts were a pain in the ass to defend. I can understand why that might lead to accelerated burnout though.
We already have some chokepoints on the lattice, Indar Ex and Scarred Mesa come to mind, but a few more couldn't hurt as well.

From a base defensive standpoint, the CY is where the most work needs to be done to allow for better interplay between infantry and armor. To me, that's where the combined arms aspect should really come into play.

These are some of the reasons the latest FNO was so interesting to me because Clegg walked the stream through making a base (and a railroad! Fuck yeah!).

The flow overall on the new Amerish is much better but I haven't had enough time to really play on it yet

Hint: https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/...-trial.169293/

[ChipMHazard]

Bases being a pain to take is a good thing, when you have a resource system that makes sieges possible.

[Timithos]

Originally Posted by ChipMHazard

Sadly I don't really see what they mean about having made the spawn rooms more isolated, for the most part.
Not counting the one base with an underground spawn room, and a few others where it's harder to do, they are still out in the open and every easy to camp. This is one area where they obviously haven't learned the lesson, or they haven't made the change yet.
Thankfully they've put more capture points inside infantry only areas, so that's most certainly an improvement.

They did three things to many of those horrid fishbowl spawn rooms (other then sink them into the ground like they should like Spawn Room C of Freyr Amp Station.) They raised the terrain level, hemmed them in with rock columns, and put in a tree or two for cover. They're still exposed to air camping though.

[Timithos]

Originally Posted by BlaxicanX

For what's worth, I don't agree with the notion that every base should be defensible. I think only certain ones should he heavily defensible, so as to act as "key points" on the map, and give players some kind of short-term goal for pushing or defending (For attackers, "if we can at least push to X base, that'd be good progress for our empire", versus defenders, "we'll fall back if we have too, but we draw the line at base X, because if we lose it it'll be a pain in the ass to get back").

As well, easily conquered bases are needed to give attackers forward momentum when pushing. If every base is a Biolab-esque "into the breach!" slog where your K/D for the day drops by 50% due to all the deaths you take trying to capture it, players will simply get burned out. There has to be a balance.

imo.

The problem is that before PTS Amerish our level of choices for base defense elsewhere is poor, very poor and down right shitty. As the current game of SteamRollSide stands now, you just bring a 55% attacking force and punch that I-WIN button against floundering defenders. We're not asking for super defensible bases now (not until they introduce new ways for attackers to gain victory conditions - vehicle siege captures, base drains, base destruction, etc.) We're asking for logical, sensible bases that provide just mediocre defense that we don't even have yet, and that prolongs the fight a little longer for forces from both sides to arrive at least.

When it takes 60-70% attacking forces to overcome a base, then you have a base that's decently defensible. If they exceed 70%, then you can start giving attackers strategies like say, a slew of generators and control consoles that take down shields, all turrets, elevators, defender jump pads, ammo towers, vehicles terminals, and dare I say a linear generator hunt that takes you all the way to the spawn tubes themselves. But because we don't have defensible bases, we can't put in wonderful mechanics, strategy and metagame that players crave.