Huge Outfits and PlanetSide 2 - Page 23

Tatwi · 2012-12-29, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Yeah, but what are we going to use FOR the blocks?

The map isn't divided by the grid anymore, so colored squares on a hex-map are going to be rather confusing...

Toggle one or the other. Problem solved. Besides, if you're going to call instructions it would be better to say the grid location rather than a hex.

Rockit · 2012-12-29, 02:41 PM

Hello all. What I think PS2 needs to do is shrink cont and pop size by 2 and then get in the habit of directed fights via some sort of lattice function.

robocpf1 · 2012-12-29, 06:16 PM

Mistake post, tried to post somewhere else, was on wrong page, I'm a noob.

Archonzero · 2012-12-29, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by Hamma

I had a great discussion on Twitter last night about this and wanted to bring it here.

First off let me start this thread by saying this is NOT an attack on specific outfits. I will not allow people to argue about specific outfits, this discussion is about the size of outfits in general and whether or not you think they hurt the game. Also, I don't want to hear bs like "ohh you're doing it wrong" etc.

This has bothered me since late beta and is becoming more and more of an issue (imo) as of late. I don't have solution for it because there really isn't one but I want to see what peoples thoughts are.

My outfit is smaller in size compared to most. We typically run about a half a platoon or so. We are finding it difficult to find a solid role for us in the game that isn't boring and doesn't involve getting steamrolled. This is becoming more and more difficult as time goes on. Huge outfits are able to put 100 or more people or more on an objective and essentially win with numbers in almost all fights. We are able to hold off, but it's simply a matter of time until we are struck down due to sheer numbers.

Smaller outfits are finding that they have to disband and join larger outfits if they want to even have fun, causing them to lose their own identity and be absorbed into massive teams because there are no recruits left to take. For me community is more important to a game than the game itself, hence why I've been doing this all these years.

Is having one massive outfit per empire what the developers intended? Is spam inviting every no outfit person in the game really a viable recruiting effort? How many of these people even know what they are joining?

What is everyones thoughts on this issue?

First time viewing this post as well the video discussion on the metagame, so please understand I didn't have time to review the 300+ posts before replying to the OP. An if my thoughts sound off from posts others have already made, forgive me.

Outfits, namely "large" mass recruited outfits. Simple "possible" fixes.

New outfits, limited between 48-92 players.
Logistic command.

New outfit certification system. A system that will only be available to Outfit leaders or enabled 2nd in command ranks.

This system could be leader/officer contribution only, or a tax%cert outfit contribution system.

Outfits wanting to expand beyond platoon strength (48 players) can unlock the outfit logistical tier system for additional squads/platoons.

Outfit Logistics 0/10

each tier would require a heavy amount of certification points. Depending on how it is implemented. I think the best way is, to have an outfit tax%cert system, so that every player in the outfit is contributing a small cert percent. This taxable slider setting can be set by the outfit leadership (leader/officers) an could be set from 0.1 to a 5% max. AS well players of the outfit should have an option to check/uncheck their willingness to contribute. Obviously this can determine whether they are kept or kicked from an outfit, other more democratic/casual outfits may view it as a determining factor to how they promote ranks in their outfit.
Each tier unlock could be (1000 certs x current cert level)x2 x 1.5?

example first unlock = 1000 certs (+1 platoon), second unlock(+1 platoon) is (1000x1)2x1.5 = 3000 certs, third unlock (+1 platoon) is (1000x2)x2x1.5=6000 certs, fourth unlock (+1 platoon) is (1000x3)x2x1.5 = 9000 certs, an so on

I NEVER liked large outfits in PS1, yet as proven in Starcraft an starcraft 2, the player that can bring the largest zerg to a fight the quickest usually wins, through sheer overwhelming attrition of numbers. Given the quick respawn, it's almost a guarantee.

Now that being said, I don't think large outfits are all zergs either. I do feel the spam invite an open mass recruitment needs to have some sort of limit, or a tiered limit. That way the players that WANT a large outfit of 100+ members can setup their outfit or a contribution setting for the players in the outfit to add a %dump of certification points into a reward system that will open up the roster to more recruiting. Call it an optional cert tax system.

As for the metagame, there needs to be more clearly defined reasons to defend/hold territory, as well a better reward system. There should be a lattice unlock system to open up lines of attack to major facilities + requiring some form of adjacency to hexes for +/- speed to cap.

Capture systems are currently too quick, I agree on that, they need to be slowed down. Bring back the proximity recap system, if you cap the point an run out of proximity of it.. the facility will recap itself. This is especially important for facilities with multiple capture points. Facilities could be tiered with importance of player presence. Make these capture points require a minimum number of players present in order to maintain the capture of a point.

For example, in order to secure Indar Excavation Tower, points A,B and C require 2 players present on each point to maintain control of that point. Half a squad spread out over 3 points to secure that hex.

Get rid of the player stack to speed up capture process, or keep the stack speed timer%. Make it a set timer similar to a set timer based on facility types. Small (15 min), med (20), large (25), major facility (30 min) with the player presence on the cap points decreasing the timer%. I can't say this is the best solution, just ideas an thoughts to this brain dump. But there needs to be some major overhauls on the capture control an conquest system.

I'm really getting tired of groups bouncing to whichever continent has the largest friendly faction %, cause the one they're on is significantly outnumbered. The entire population of each faction playing musical continents is getting old FAST! Continental locking system (4 hour lockdown) with rival factions having a system to unlock that continent to an attack by., This is the one thing that PS1 did exceptionally well an I'm terribly disappointed that SOE didn't have this in play before launch.

Again, I really thought they were going to keep PS2 in beta until the end of 1st quarter of 2013. IMO they practically pulled the same stunt that happened with PS1 beta, so many PS1 beta testers were up in arms that they released an unfinished game early an the 1st year player base of retail launch suffered for it, as well took many years to actually come to shape, but it was already bleeding out slowly.. with each new expansion practically a stab into the healing wounds.

PS2 is a game I could easily an foresee ably see myself playing for years to come, if they can.

A) expand more continents
B) proper continental lock/unlock an control system
C) mitigate outfit zerg recruitment, at least manage some form of roster limitation an organization.
D) More infantry friendly defensive works to larger facility layouts. Don't just add more tank barriers, but actual structures, within structures.
E) Better spawnroom layouts, currently they are far too easily segregated by lockdown via mass vehicle camping. The only facility that has shown some measure of success for infantry counters are biolab spawn rooms. Every other spawn room facility is easily cut off by either vehicle bombardment, or massed combined arms focused on funneled exit points.

Archonzero · 2012-12-29, 09:19 PM

Vehicles. Current state, I think the vehicles resource cost is a poor reflection of their effectives, namely in chief the air vehicles are absurdly low in cost versus how highly effective they can really be. Using modern military costs to building/fielding airpower vs the cost to building/fielding AFVs shows us clearly that PS2's model on resources is an exact opposite.

Modern airborne weapons platforms are easily 3-5x the cost of any modern MBT.
In planetside 2, airborne weapons platforms are 0.80 the cost of any ES MBT.

^obviously they need to change this significantly. ESF's should be higher cost than a MBT an a bomber should be more than an ESF.

If SOE plans on keeping a resource based system in the game for vehicles/consumables an other future plans, the resource costs should be much higher. With smart pilots, this will force them to be less likely to be used as a disposable resource by driving them in to a situation without proper support. (obviously it isn't going to stop that from happening entirely)

Proposed idea.
Increase players personal resource pool from 750 to 1200(or 1500). DROP the 3 resource types an combine them into one resource, call it Auraxium. ALL vehicles/consumables are purchased with auraxium resources, simple period.

In order to deny a faction from fielding/spawning specific vehicle types on a continent, make these facilities linked only, but not entirely limited to the Warpgate link. Just cause it is "cut off" from the warpgate linked territories shouldn't mean you can't still spawn that vehicle type from it, it just means the warpgate linked territories can't. Make vehicle patterns linked to specific facilities not MAJOR bases, but other facilities. For example a facility like Scarred Messa could be the requirement for liberators, while tech plants or towers could be required for ESFs/MBTs. Currently it's far to easy to pull an AMS sundy for everywhere, start limiting them to specific facility types (ie mid/large outposts + major facilities)

Vehicle resources would need to be revamped
ATV - 50
Buggy -100
Lightning - 200
MBT - 300
Sunderer - 400
ESF - 400
Liberator - 600
Galaxy - 450

GAMS+SS (galaxy Advanced mobile spawn + support system) needs to be back in the game with severe limitations. SQUAD only spawn (similar to how beacons works) GAMS needs to be TETHERED to a passive Galaxy NTU system, that drains with each respawn until empty. Thereby limiting it's long term effectiveness.

NTU (passive cert 0/12) - stock power 12, each cert adds in sequence + power (2,2,3,2,2,3,2,2,3,2,2,3). NTU can only be recharged at a warpgate.
GAMS (0/3) unlock system, 1st unlock +equipment terminal, 2nd unlock SQUAD only respawn, 3rd unlock PLATOON only respawn.

james · 2012-12-29, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by Archonzero

First time viewing this post as well the video discussion on the metagame, so please understand I didn't have time to review the 300+ posts before replying to the OP. An if my thoughts sound off from posts others have already made, forgive me.

Outfits, namely "large" mass recruited outfits. Simple "possible" fixes.

New outfits, limited between 48-92 players.
Logistic command.

New outfit certification system. A system that will only be available to Outfit leaders or enabled 2nd in command ranks.

This system could be leader/officer contribution only, or a tax%cert outfit contribution system.

Outfits wanting to expand beyond platoon strength (48 players) can unlock the outfit logistical tier system for additional squads/platoons.

Outfit Logistics 0/10

each tier would require a heavy amount of certification points. Depending on how it is implemented. I think the best way is, to have an outfit tax%cert system, so that every player in the outfit is contributing a small cert percent. This taxable slider setting can be set by the outfit leadership (leader/officers) an could be set from 0.1 to a 5% max. AS well players of the outfit should have an option to check/uncheck their willingness to contribute. Obviously this can determine whether they are kept or kicked from an outfit, other more democratic/casual outfits may view it as a determining factor to how they promote ranks in their outfit.
Each tier unlock could be (1000 certs x current cert level)x2 x 1.5?

example first unlock = 1000 certs (+1 platoon), second unlock(+1 platoon) is (1000x1)2x1.5 = 3000 certs, third unlock (+1 platoon) is (1000x2)x2x1.5=6000 certs, fourth unlock (+1 platoon) is (1000x3)x2x1.5 = 9000 certs, an so on

I NEVER liked large outfits in PS1, yet as proven in Starcraft an starcraft 2, the player that can bring the largest zerg to a fight the quickest usually wins, through sheer overwhelming attrition of numbers. Given the quick respawn, it's almost a guarantee.

Now that being said, I don't think large outfits are all zergs either. I do feel the spam invite an open mass recruitment needs to have some sort of limit, or a tiered limit. That way the players that WANT a large outfit of 100+ members can setup their outfit or a contribution setting for the players in the outfit to add a %dump of certification points into a reward system that will open up the roster to more recruiting. Call it an optional cert tax system.

As for the metagame, there needs to be more clearly defined reasons to defend/hold territory, as well a better reward system. There should be a lattice unlock system to open up lines of attack to major facilities + requiring some form of adjacency to hexes for +/- speed to cap.

Capture systems are currently too quick, I agree on that, they need to be slowed down. Bring back the proximity recap system, if you cap the point an run out of proximity of it.. the facility will recap itself. This is especially important for facilities with multiple capture points. Facilities could be tiered with importance of player presence. Make these capture points require a minimum number of players present in order to maintain the capture of a point.

For example, in order to secure Indar Excavation Tower, points A,B and C require 2 players present on each point to maintain control of that point. Half a squad spread out over 3 points to secure that hex.

Get rid of the player stack to speed up capture process, or keep the stack speed timer%. Make it a set timer similar to a set timer based on facility types. Small (15 min), med (20), large (25), major facility (30 min) with the player presence on the cap points decreasing the timer%. I can't say this is the best solution, just ideas an thoughts to this brain dump. But there needs to be some major overhauls on the capture control an conquest system.

I'm really getting tired of groups bouncing to whichever continent has the largest friendly faction %, cause the one they're on is significantly outnumbered. The entire population of each faction playing musical continents is getting old FAST! Continental locking system (4 hour lockdown) with rival factions having a system to unlock that continent to an attack by., This is the one thing that PS1 did exceptionally well an I'm terribly disappointed that SOE didn't have this in play before launch.

Again, I really thought they were going to keep PS2 in beta until the end of 1st quarter of 2013. IMO they practically pulled the same stunt that happened with PS1 beta, so many PS1 beta testers were up in arms that they released an unfinished game early an the 1st year player base of retail launch suffered for it, as well took many years to actually come to shape, but it was already bleeding out slowly.. with each new expansion practically a stab into the healing wounds.

PS2 is a game I could easily an foresee ably see myself playing for years to come, if they can.

A) expand more continents
B) proper continental lock/unlock an control system
C) mitigate outfit zerg recruitment, at least manage some form of roster limitation an organization.
D) More infantry friendly defensive works to larger facility layouts. Don't just add more tank barriers, but actual structures, within structures.
E) Better spawnroom layouts, currently they are far too easily segregated by lockdown via mass vehicle camping. The only facility that has shown some measure of success for infantry counters are biolab spawn rooms. Every other spawn room facility is easily cut off by either vehicle bombardment, or massed combined arms focused on funneled exit points.

Putting number caps on outfits will not do anything. You just make several outfits vs one.

Hamma · 2012-12-29, 11:33 PM

Originally Posted by topher

First of all, getting steamrolled has nothing to do with one's outfit size.

What?

Dkamanus · 2012-12-30, 01:15 AM

I say again on the point I said before: Quality will overcome quantity. Yes, quantity will win battles, but won't win the war if the big majority of this quantity is brain dead (which tends to happen A LOT). And Yes, in the midst of that MINDFUCK which are Large zergfits (which are the HUGE majority of the game), small organized outfits shine, even with the zergfits take the credit. To illustrate my example: I'm a fucking hardass on my outfit members, and the great majority likes it, cause it helps them learn better the game (out of 184 people that got inside the outfit, only 3 went online and left). The example I give is bio labs, where zergfits stupidity glows like a beacon. EVERY single time we focus on destroy the SCU generator and SCU. THOSE are the main objectives on a biolab.

I see all those stupid players shooting and going straight to points, forgeting the enemy is respawning right inside the base, and they start to be pushed back, mostly because they don't know the phases on places. More so, people are dieing like zombies on the outside 'cause most leaders throw every fucking meatbag at the problem as possible. Why do I say quality over quantity? I think 12 organized player (and by that I mean the damn squad leader using them as if it was a RTS, knowing all abilities possible per class) can kill 24 unorganized players easily. I've seem outfits on waterson need 2~4 PLATOONS to take 1 base (biolabs for instance).

If you need to throw 192 players at one problem (1/4 of the continent), you aren't a good outfit. Period. Will you win the bioloab? Yes, you will, and most likely lose the continent. Instead, if you cut this to 1 organized platoon, you'll have three left to go hit other objectives. Hell, I've hit biolabs with similar or larger numbers against us and have taken them with 2 squads, maybe 3 tops. Leaders barely know how to properly attack places, and that reflects on the poor use of use of troops. I keep seeing outfits with 3 platoons on the field and they can't lock the continent. WTF?

If I had 144 players under my command (21,6%) of the continent, how the hell wouldn't I be able to lock the continent? Leaders don't know what to prioritize. They travel as a big, useless blob which is VERY slow to attack and is completely useless while waiting for the caps. 48 decent players can make a HUGE dent on any zerg, if they know what to prioritize and WHICH PLACE to defend, rearmament towers being the most effective place to stall huge zergs (handing out nice XP as well). Leaders are clueless on when to fall back and when to advance. I've a certain admiration towards outfits like Devil Dogs, mostly because of the organization, at least what I think might be their organization.

Another example of clueless leadership. Today I was defending Eisa Tech Plant with my squads and a lot of smaller outfits aournd as well. We were being pushed away by a huge mass of TRs, while there were a LOT of guys from two of the "largest" oufits on NC in waterson today. I asked "where are you at the moment" and silence. Asked a second time. Ask a third and ONLY then got a response that the major zerg was on Mani biolabs, capping it. Meanwhile I was making the point of the situation as grim as possible, and we started losing Eisa. Stayed a while, then saw it was pointless and went back to Esamir Munitions Corp, in order to defend and avoid the TR zerg from eisa to go towards Freyr with impunity.

We went there, started to rebuild turrets, manning them then we see the TR zerg coming towards us again. I asked AGAIN for support, three times no less again, for them to say they were STILL on Mani Biolab. The zerg hit us, we hold them quite some time, but it was just too much, since we were only one squad and the defenders weren't able to organize themselves (I was killing people coming from those stairs like a mad man with the dual scatter max, but I was alone, waiting for more NC to help me there, while the rest of my squad was with their hands full defending the other stairs and the upper floor + AA and AV turrets).

Lastly, when I saw the battle was lost, I ordered all of my platoon to go back to freyr and asked again for help, three times again, always rasing the voice in order for people to actually speak. Just to know they finished capping Mani and are now MOVING towards the warpgate to mount another zerg to go to Freyr.

I simply gave up on support and issue an order for people to protect those gate house generators, or else those 14 prowlers on the outside would butt rape us badly. Thankfully, people at freyr did listen (plus we were focusing on those two gens specifically), and, after a LOT of bases lost, including MANI BIOLAB, the NC zerg came and killed the TR Zerg, after we made a sucessful defense of the base (no, we werent ROFLStomped by tanks, because people knew what to do).

One last story. It was we (16~20) man squads going for Howling Pass Chekpoint, trying to cap it. A HUGE TR Tank zerg (cant call those columns) blasted us away and raped us. Fine. Fall back. To any decent commander, the LOGICAL choice would Crimson Bluff Tower. Mostly because its either that or NS Material Storage, but Crimson is more easily accesible and a juicier target to help get Rashnu Biolab.

We went there and started mounting a defense. All AV turrets pointed at the road that lead from the Howling Pass towards the Crimson Bluff (East Road), mined the road, pulled 1 AP/ML85 Vanguard and waited. As expected, we were hit with the full force of the zerg. 16-20 guys + a few straglers from NC. We destroy at least 80% of the zerg before being overwhelmed by it due to an oversight of mine, and some errors of ours. The forces outnumbered us 4 to 1 and we destroyed most of them. Smart play and quality WILL get you by a LOT of problems and can be able to stall, if not stop, a zerg. Only the willingness of outfit leaders/officers to make this change, otherwise, it's simply a zergfit, which will be easily destroyed by a more organized, smaller force.

p0intman · 2012-12-30, 02:07 AM

Originally Posted by topher

First of all, getting steamrolled has nothing to do with one's outfit size.

No, it doesnt directly.. its when numbers, and only numbers equal a win. it happens to small outfits that like to do their own thing more than large outfit zergs. losing all the time is not fun, for anyone.

when did outfit size become equal to having fun?

when you stand no hope of mattering in a fight and personal skill plays no role whatsoever, it makes you feel like your outfit simply doesn't matter at all. that in and of itself isn't fun.

Stew · 2012-12-30, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by Hamma

thoughts on this issue?

First of all i know some of you have huge hopes from (( malorn )) wich is a Enclave member since ever i think , the enclave is one of the most Zergy outfits ever on Matherson those are like 40 to 100 all toguether most of the time doing exactly whats you think is wrong , i mean steam rolling half empty continents with 60 % pops and then lock it and jump on anothers ones ... malorn havent proove anything to me so far , hes idea if those are the already metagame implemented as create more than some issue the (( techplant metagame elements )) as create even more imbalanced and more problems about Smalls vs large outfit since large outfit steamrolls techplant and few of them can camp it with heavytanks and denied the (( weak side )) from been competitive

Most not all of those zergy outfit have, pretty damned bad players but it make no difference they are so many and they spam so much units tanks and aircraft thats you cant catch up , most of the time we kill at least 10 to 20 (TE) before we die once but still we just need to be spot and then kill by one of their 10 000 aircraft or ligthning or etc...

We do not participate in the zerg most of the time and we pay the price for it ,

The metagame as been done toward achiving the exact same thing as Planetside 1 wich was a mistake to me , (( malorn )) drive the metagame to meet planetside 1 (( total domination )) stuff wich is exactly whats create this MASSIVE ZERGS

The (( malorn )) contribution as created this issue so far , this is what i think because this mentality of wanting to conquer a continents and lock it drive the massive zerg to steamrolls continents where they can actually lock and then moove to another ones saying (( we just lock the continents )) ...

Ressources as to MOOVE and to DEPLEATE and change location , this systhem is the only way to make planetside areas of the maps figthable all across the continents , if the ressources moove the figth will force the players to moove , some will have to stay in defense the others will be forced to go in atack if they dont want to ran out of ressources ,

If the aircraft ressources stay in a particular area for a cetain amount of time and have a (( harvest limites )) i mean if the players farm a certain amount of ressources on this particular regions , the ressources will be depleated and will pop out in a certain regions wich can be already to a certain empire , the missions sythem will drive players toward those multiples worthy ressources spot and figth will take place all over the maps and their will be strategies ans situational awarness involved

The total domination idea is bad unless we have over 12 continents and a playerbase to fit it , the techplant thats provide the vehicules bonus are unfair and stupid sicne not all techplant are fairly spread across the maps NC ones get screw up most of the time and TR as the high ground in term of tech plant , anyway

i understand your concern and share some of them , but i do not want to see the tower corridor camping from planetside 1 back , the (( older version of the techplant )) was exactly thats and it was not fun , it was a farming festival really anoying

thats pretty much it Peace and happy holidays

Archonzero · 2012-12-30, 04:39 AM

Yea I wasn't saying my ideas would reshape the game better, they were just thoughts an ideas off the top of my head on the subject.

40 -100 players is more or less 2 platoons of an outfits organization ability. When organized + coordinated not really a zerg, my idea of a zerg is a mass of non-organized randoms fighting in the same zone. I'm guessin when a disciplined military force like say 2 companies of marines, must be a zerg on the battlefield?

Yes it would/could breakup a "larger" outfit into small outfits linked in a TS chain of command. Yet there could be incentive design/reason to suggest the idea of an unlockable roster expansion for outfits. If SOE expanded upon the Leadership certification system by adding more content trees, features like orbital strikes (strong vs vehicles), EMP blasts, Artillery barrages (HE aoe, avg vs all), Air fragmentation bombardments (weak vs armor, strong vs infantry), fortifications (temp/manable), Orbital supply drops, Orbital drop forward vehicle respawn (temporary), Drop deployable shield barriers, Drop deployable repair fields, Drop deployable defense structures, tank traps, mine fields,et cetera. Features that would require a large resource/cert cost to unlock an use, certs/resources that are linked to the outfit an not the individual.

A roster/logistics cert system for outfit feature farming. The more players contributing to the outfit pool, the more likely to be unlocked/utilized for the battle.

A finite/respawn moving harvestestable resource system is an interesting approach.
Would this be AI controlled harvesters, or player driven harvesters that would be defended by convoys of players?
Would these nodes only appear alongside adjacent territories?

EVILPIG · 2012-12-30, 04:46 AM

For all of my support of PSU, I have to say that Hamma's Tweet that 1600+ member outfits are "trash" is higly offensive. I am rarely frank, but, this is completely ignorant and it may suck that a large "zergfit" is ruining your fun on your server, but that does not represent others. Sure, I know they are out there. I have many alts and I get random outfit invites on them, but don't lump all large outfits together. Planetside 2 is about offering the large scale and that is fuking cool. Find your role, but dont b1tch because you cannot stop the 600 guys moving on you. Honestly, <3 Hamma, but this is so whiney it's crap to even respond. Get creative, grow some balls and farm those fuks. We do not bitcch, we equip to win and overcome.

p0intman · 2012-12-30, 04:54 AM

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

For all of my support of PSU, I have to say that Hamma's Tweet that 1600+ member outfits are "trash" is higly offensive. I am rarely frank, but, this is completely ignorant and it may suck that a large "zergfit" is ruining your fun on your server, but that does not represent others. Sure, I know they are out there. I have many alts and I get random outfit invites on them, but don't lump all large outfits together. Planetside 2 is about offering the large scale and that is fuking cool. Find your role, but dont b1tch because you cannot stop the 600 guys moving on you. Honestly, <3 Hamma, but this is so whiney it's crap to even respond. Get creative, grow some balls and farm those fuks. We do not bitcch, we equip to win and overcome.

says the dude that literally wouldn't know tactics save for random quotes from a book written 2200 years ago.

igster · 2012-12-30, 08:04 AM

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

For all of my support of PSU, I have to say that Hamma's Tweet that 1600+ member outfits are "trash" is higly offensive. I am rarely frank, but, this is completely ignorant and it may suck that a large "zergfit" is ruining your fun on your server, but that does not represent others. Sure, I know they are out there. I have many alts and I get random outfit invites on them, but don't lump all large outfits together. Planetside 2 is about offering the large scale and that is fuking cool. Find your role, but dont b1tch because you cannot stop the 600 guys moving on you. Honestly, <3 Hamma, but this is so whiney it's crap to even respond. Get creative, grow some balls and farm those fuks. We do not bitcch, we equip to win and overcome.

Of course Evilpig - its not a problem is it. 23 pages of forumposts mostly agreeing with it.

It doesnt exist. None of us have ever seen three large zergs on each continent not fighting each other ever. It just never happens.

Kudos to Hamma for speaking up. Same for Malorn.

Here's a tip to the 'celebrity' evilpig:
Don't grow any balls : go read a book and educate yourself on how to contribute to a coherent discussion.

One other tip:
Try and contribute to a discussion rather than this 'man up' shit that you just spouted. Sometimes its better to just not post rather than to show up your ignorance.

MuNrOe · 2012-12-30, 09:37 AM

Wow guys seriously when did this degenerate into name calling and bigotry. Chill the fuck out. Focus on suggesting elements to the game to make it more playable for smaller outfits.

Base design that sorta thing.

Leave the name calling and school yard stuff in the gutter where it belongs. That stuff belongs on the official PS2 forums with the rest of the sess pit filled junk that goes in there.

Almost everyone here is a PS1 vet and we should be working together to fix these issues not doing our best to put each other down. Its up to us to bring back the potential in PS2 that was found in PS1 that we all know can be achieved. But it wont be unless we work together.