Silos In Towers?! WHO REQUESTED THIS?! - Page 3

Robot · 2003-06-17, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by Tryndamere
What, do you have an IQ of 5?

There are TONS of tactics you can use in PS. The fact that you're too idiotic to realize this is your fault, not evidence of shortcomings in the game.

Anyone who has actually been involved in a large battle will realize tower NTU's will help game play.

Yeah, like rushing from the north. Or rushing from the south. Or rushing with reavers.

Sorry, but there's absolutely no room for tactics in planetside. This isn't socom where you say, "red leader, i'm working my way into the green room, over!" This is rush in, shoot the people before they shoot you, camp their spawn tubes and hack the base. Altering what door you run into or having an AMS nearby doesn't change the fact that you're always going to have to zerg rush to defeat an enemy

And I've been in several large battles. Adding silos to towers is just stupid because you can have the same effect by sending in a MAX unit to camp the spawn tubes, and you need a MAX unit to destroy a silo practically, anyways, so it's pointless

(Addenum: wait, let me clarify. yes, there are some tactics, but they mostly amount to sending in a hacker while the rest of the team distracts everyone and rushes the base. the main point is: all assaults require a copious amout of rushing, which is what towers were designed for)

MrVulcan · 2003-06-17, 12:36 PM

all of these changes are meant for one thing, to shift the battles away from the towers to the bases

If the tower takes power, has a 5min time limit before it can be hacked (more perminate structure now), the base gets more defences, and you can spawn at the base when it is being hacked, you get more big battles around the base where they should be.

Though I am not sure that I like the towers needing ant runs, I am sure that the devs have an idea what they are doing, and that if it dosnt work, they will change it.

Stimulate · 2003-06-17, 12:40 PM

Since they are adding this I hope that they make towers bigger. That 5 min hack time is going to be one pain in the ass, with those small ass tower stairs.

Robot · 2003-06-17, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by MrVulcan
all of these changes are meant for one thing, to shift the battles away from the towers to the bases

they're still going to happen at the towers because towers are easier to assault and require less manpower to do it. a good majority of the folks who play don't really enjoy wandering through an endless maze of hallways to capture a base so they can capture slightly different bases, whereas a tower is a simple structure that is easy to find and easy to assault and doesn't require any pre-requisites.

Hamma · 2003-06-17, 01:24 PM

This idea came up waaaaaaaaaay back in mid beta.

edit: shortly after they got inventory terms

Bad Mojo · 2003-06-17, 01:40 PM

Silo's at towers, good or bad, is going to mean more AMS usage. That means defending them more, having more of them, etc. It's also going to make mining chokepoints more of a problem to deal with.

In all, the overall changes are hard to just sum up in PS. Gonna wait and see how the changes really effect the game. If it really really sucks, SOE will change it, or I'll deal or I'll quit.

Pilgrim · 2003-06-17, 01:53 PM

I gotta say that a tower is easier to deffend then a base ATM

I have actually counted heads, as best as I could, and found that half strength force attacking from a tower can take a base. That is of course if the base deffenders do not try to sally forth.

The point is that 2 pounders, and a DC MAX with some engis behind them owned 30-50 NC attacking a tower, simply because they could. We could take one of them down, but not all of them in the tight confines of a tower.

Now don't get me wrong, more power to the TR for using good tactics, and setting up a good deffence, but this fight was dramatically more difficult then the base assault we were doing with half the numbers against significantly larger forces.

Towers should not be harder to take then bases, I am all for the NTU ussage, and STRONGLY against 5 minute timers, unless they significantly change the layout of the towers.

We'll see how it works out, I am looking forward to how these changes are going to change the game.

1024 · 2003-06-17, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by Jaged
Hey, it could be worse. Imagine if AMS's needed NTU.

My friend jaged here points out a very pointy point.

Kikinchikin · 2003-06-17, 02:25 PM

i dont like it, towers are fun! 80 people fighting for control in a small cramped place!!!

as for 5 min hack time NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

NapalmEnima · 2003-06-17, 02:26 PM

I like the idea, mostly. I'm not sure about the combination of NTUs and a hack timer, but we'll see.

With this change, I hope they also consider a change to the way NTU's can be gathered... maybe an NTU transport with a cert cost, or making ANTs available to everyone again.

Other than that, I'm Really Happy with all their proposed changes.

MilitantB0B · 2003-06-17, 02:31 PM

I won't have a problem with any of theese changes if they make this change as well:
With all these new challenges added to tower capture, towers ought to give base xp when capped (still working off the SOI thing of couse).
If they do that, I will be more then happy to defend that thing and fill it up on a regular basis.

�io · 2003-06-17, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by Revolver
Then, it hit me:

WHO THE HELL REQUESTED THIS?! AND WHY?!

Your post immediatly made me think of this :

As for tower silos i don't know yet how it will affect the game. In theory you won't have to fill them that often since nobody can by vehicles at a tower. We'll have to wait and see.

Airlift · 2003-06-17, 03:03 PM

To speak to the original point, I have no idea how the sum total of a 5 minute hack timer + NTUs will do to the towers. I can't even start to speculate, because (like Warborn says) we are missing too many variables. We may see more tower seiges (which the smart people do already instead of taking the tower and choking off experience), or we may see defenders rarely lose a tower because they can keep spawning there for five minutes (or until the spawn tubes are blown).

So now that I've added absolutely nothing to the real topic, I want to say that Robot doesn't seem like a very creative thinker to me. I see a very wide variety of tactics used to take bases and towers.

I also find it odd that SOCOM was used as the example of a game with a variety of good tactical options. I haven't spent much time with this game, but it seemed to me like a knock off Red Storm shooter with weaker AI. While there is a lot of small unit tactics (or more accurately small unit tactical puzzles with little replay value), there is nothing approaching the scale of even a small assault in planetside. Why then are you looking for micro-tactics to overcome macro-tactics? How is sending red team in to work their way into green room tactically sound or even missing from planetside? Have you ever even used teamspeak?

EarlyDawn · 2003-06-17, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by Warborn
You have no idea how quickly tower NTU's will be depleted, nor how the changes to the game between now and then will alter things. You're sitting on the sidelines, playing backseat developer, while they're working on the project and actually seeing how the game flow is changed by doing something like giving towers NTU Silos. In short, you're bitching about it way too prematurely.

pwn3d. I agree.

Peacemaker · 2003-06-17, 04:35 PM

Gonna have to go with the Devs on this one. This acctualy gives defenders more tactics to go with. lets say The attackers take Tower A to attack Base A and have AMS B and C as backup. AMS B is used to takeover tower A. While AMS C Is used to hold back backup from the base. Now the defenders have 3 seperate spawn points to take out. Well how about a liberator carpet bombs the shit out of a waypoint and now AMS C is dead. Now the defenders check the map and H-O-L-Y crap the enemys only respawn source of MAX armor is down to 15%. Two mosquitos are dispatched from seperate bases and going hunting. Mosquito A finds the ANT and calls for reaver support. The reaver comes and blasts the ANT. Now the Tower runs dry. No more MAX. The other moquito may or may not find another ANT or the last AMS. Lets say it doesnt. Without the MAX support the infantry fall apart giving a galaxy enough room to hot drop an ANT INTO the seiged base. Base produces a few tanks and they go AMS hunting. Battle over defenders win! The ANT if it had been in a convoy may have made it. Alternative to this is that the ANT is in a galaxy and is shot down by one of the mosquitos. Or the ANT reaches the tower and the attackers eventualy knock out the defenders spawn tubes or the generator or something.