Higby in China, plus some minor infos came out of the chat

[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by Thunderhawk

PS2 is now about attack... attack... attack as thats where the certs are and thats what people want.

I really don't understand why XP for defending a base was removed. Sure, you can add XP bonuses to tasks like repairing, killing, farming attackers, etc... but there was something psychological about seeing that XP pop up when a base was resecured.

I have a feeling even though you probably get around the same (if not sometimes more) XP now then you did before, it still affects people's mentality that there is no "Ding +XXXXP Base Resecured" pop up and thus people tend to not bother.

Its not all about the maths, its also perception.

I agree, but I have a feeling it was changed for the same reason a lot of other things were... to prevent people from AFKing and gaining certs/auraxium. I could see people just going to a tech plant or bio lab and AFKing in the spawn room waiting on defense ticks. They do need to make the 15% defense increase more visible so that people know actively doing things does give you a benefit while defending.

[Electrofreak]

Originally Posted by Thunderhawk

PS2 is now about attack... attack... attack as thats where the certs are and thats what people want.

I really don't understand why XP for defending a base was removed. Sure, you can add XP bonuses to tasks like repairing, killing, farming attackers, etc... but there was something psychological about seeing that XP pop up when a base was resecured.

I have a feeling even though you probably get around the same (if not sometimes more) XP now then you did before, it still affects people's mentality that there is no "Ding +XXXXP Base Resecured" pop up and thus people tend to not bother.

Its not all about the maths, its also perception.

Yeah but it also introduced some nasty XP exploits via baseflipping.

I can't help but keep humming the same tune that I've been humming since early Beta; using dynamic XP like was done in PS1 would be the answer to a lot of these problems. Maybe it's too much compute load now that we've got so many more players per continent, but if they could find a way to make it work, it'd be the best solution.

[Sunrock]

Originally Posted by Dragonskin

I agree, but I have a feeling it was changed for the same reason a lot of other things were... to prevent people from AFKing and gaining certs/auraxium. I could see people just going to a tech plant or bio lab and AFKing in the spawn room waiting on defense ticks. They do need to make the 15% defense increase more visible so that people know actively doing things does give you a benefit while defending.

Yea well... Some need to sit AFK on the flag to influence it and those players usually never get a kill anything as there are other players camping the spawn.

[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by Sunrock

Yea well... Some need to sit AFK on the flag to influence it and those players usually never get a kill anything as there are other players camping the spawn.

You shouldn't be "AFK" while capping a flag... .. you aren't helping your arguement.

[Sunrock]

Originally Posted by Dragonskin

You shouldn't be "AFK" while capping a flag... .. you aren't helping your arguement.

Well I did not mean latterly go AFK ofcourse . But you just sit there doing nothing for 5 min while every one else is racking in kills. And if you don't have maxed out all the influence on the flag it takes for ever for the bar to move...

[ThePackage]

Originally Posted by Sunrock

Yea well... Some need to sit AFK on the flag to influence it and those players usually never get a kill anything as there are other players camping the spawn.

Agreed, this is counter-intuitive to what the game is about. Sitting on a cap point is neither fun or engaging.

The entire way of capturing at the moment just seems so gimmicky and weird. Very rarely is their any sort of tug of war, the bases simply don't allow it. I think a MOBA style defensive system would work quite well in PS2. Where you have a long line of linear objectives that need to go down in order to finally hit the last objective. Some bases try to accomplish this, such as AMP stations, but fall flat because of their layouts. This might be the first time I've ever recommended linear style objectives, but I think it will work better.

Capturing a base should be in the battle, not standing around an "A" for 10 minutes. If I'm going to be standing around a letter for 5-10 minutes, give me something to do. Place objectives in towers with AA, AV, and AI turrets. Push them out of boring bases with no purpose and into useful areas. Turning a point gives you access to those benefits. Allow certain objectives to provide spawning, and give defenders a reason to defend certain targets.

I remember when holding "B" at the crown allowed people to spawn from the current crown spawn area. It actually made the crown attackable and much more fun than it is now.

Oh by the way SoE, these ideas aren't free......Patent Pending.....

[mObiusOne]

i think you guys need to reconsider the "no sanctuaries because it takes away from the action" mess you keep spewing out every time someone asks. When the continents are put in place, sanctuaries are still a better option then having a home foothold on each continent. Especially if you plan to out lockouts down the line.

[SGTalon]

Originally Posted by ThePackage

Capturing a base should be in the battle, not standing around an "A" for 10 minutes. If I'm going to be standing around a letter for 5-10 minutes, give me something to do. Place objectives in towers with AA, AV, and AI turrets. Push them out of boring bases with no purpose and into useful areas. Turning a point gives you access to those benefits. Allow certain objectives to provide spawning, and give defenders a reason to defend certain targets.

You know. It is actually a bit better than the capture mechanics for the Hack and Hold bases in PS1. There you had to stand around for 15 minutes. I seem to recall setting up and standing around for 15 minutes doing absolutely nothing just in case someone busted in to recap.

So it isn't all that bad. So far there has not been much in the way of organized assaults on bases on the Waterson server. I have yet to come across an actual defense setup at any time that I have been attacking... or defending a base. Not like it was in PS1 anyways.

[ThePackage]

Originally Posted by SGTalon

You know. It is actually a bit better than the capture mechanics for the Hack and Hold bases in PS1. There you had to stand around for 15 minutes. I seem to recall setting up and standing around for 15 minutes doing absolutely nothing just in case someone busted in to recap.

So it isn't all that bad. So far there has not been much in the way of organized assaults on bases on the Waterson server. I have yet to come across an actual defense setup at any time that I have been attacking... or defending a base. Not like it was in PS1 anyways.

I couldn't imagine standing around more than you currently do in some bases right now.

One thing's for sure, the current capture mechanics don't feel right. Perhaps it's the lack of points in large bases such as tech plants and amp stations. I think too much emphasis is placed on organized large platoons attacking or defending a base. The vast majority of players are in smaller squads which simply don't have the resources to turn the tide of battles. If they increased the amount of capture points per base it would allow smaller groups to make a larger impact on the battles, while still maintaining the usefulness of a large platoon.

Whatever they decide, the points need to have more meaning than influence over a base flip. The points need to be interesting and useful.

[CaptainTenneal]

Originally Posted by EVILoHOMER

Also because there are so many conts and servers and no restrictions to any of them, all the population during the rest of the day is so spread out the game is unplayable.

I don't get it why SOE went with this lame multiple server system.

Is there a technical or design reason to have characters bound to a server? Because of my work schedule, I only get to play during the day. All the east/west servers are empty then. If we could pick a server *per session* that would guarantee some action, and it would be good for new players to not be underwhelmed.

[ShadetheDruid]

Originally Posted by ThePackage

Perhaps it's the lack of points in large bases such as tech plants and amp stations.

Mm, now that you mention it, it is a bit weird when tiny outposts (and even towers) have more capture points than the giant main bases.

[Figment]

Hey they are all nice folks to talk to, it's just that there's a vision difference based on an experience and expectancy difference.

[basti]

Originally Posted by Pella

PS1 lattice system promoted "OUTFIT" Play. Re-secures/Back hacking, Ninja LLU runs. These where perfected by outfits and the sole reason why we all played PS1 for so long.

PS2 does not promote that style of play. And only caters for Zergfits that roll 40 Tanks and camp a outposts all night.

If i see a Bio lab under attack. I dont think dam i need to defend that for the sake of the emipre! I think of the farm potential. Not my doing its how the game has been designed.

The Lattice didnt promote outfit play, generators and lattice transmitted base benefits did.

The Lattice in PS1 only promoted zergs, by giving them a clear direction where to go, and where to defend. That may sound good, but once you notice areas like the Akkan Baal Dagon Triangle on Ishundar, or the whole Cyssor clusterfuck, you see how terrible the lattice actually is.


The hex system is actually a better starting point, but it needs improvment. For example, we need proper targets for outfits again. Generators at techplants, those who actually give out the benefit, would work wonders. Amp station and biolab benefits dont matter, they are pointless to being with.
Then, we obviously also need the continent metagame and sanctuarys with it (the two can only exist together. You cant have the continent metagame without sanctuarys).
With this, we actually have proper stuff to do, and fixed the Jojoing thats currently happening on every continent (and it got boring before release...)

Then, later, obviously outfit bases.


As for the base flipping: First of all, we need to get rid of this crappy capture mechanics. The whole "stand at the point and do nothing" is not helping.
We need hack and hold again. A simple, easy to read timer till the base flips, starting to count down once the base got hacked. Time depens on how many surrounding territorys you owned when the hack started, and the timer doesnt change counting down even if you loose all surrounding territorys.
That would allow resecures again, especially those awesome last second resecures.


We shouldnt have left beta, it clearly was to early. But it propably couldnt be helped, so theres no point arguing about that now. Lets just try to get the game in the right direction.

[MrBloodworth]

Proximity Capturing and Mass on point is stupid. ( That's the most constructive word I can use here )

Bring back hacking. You hack a console, its hacked, no need to sit next to it, no need to put mass on point to make it go faster. Hacks take a set amount of time. Its up to the users to defend it, or not. ( Creating a window of opportunity for Defenders )

Also bring back instant hack reversals. Why in the world you would think its fun to have defenders, that are already at a huge disadvantage, have to sit on a point to STOP THE HACK for as long, or longer than the attackers is beyond me.


@Basti, The lattice is for the zerg. Always has been always will be. This is not a flaw, or a bad design. The lattice was more readable to know where to go than the hex system. Providing a focus is not a bad thing. The hex system can stay, but a lattice layer over top, that is dynamic would help.

[MrBloodworth]

.....