Preventing Ninja Base hacks - Page 3

GoldDragon · 2011-02-21, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by Aractain

It would be a better design to 'lockdown' bases that wern't opened for battle (blah blah something to do with a lattice type thing whatever).
I.E. If you have no defenders, you can't open a base and you can't take an undefended base?

I assume the idea is to stop people from ghosting an entire continent at off-peak time etc?

Just want to expand on this thought...

I am one of those guys running around and loving being able to back-hack to pull troops from the main conflict. This is a strategy that I feel NEEDS to remain in game. However, I do agree that it should take a little more effort because after playing for so long and figuring things out "Ninja Hacking" a base is in fact quite easy.

The idea of Lockdown appeals to me because it adds an extra defense to undefended bases. This would encourage the introduction of new content such as welders, breech explosive, etc. Certifications that allow people to SPECIALIZE in breaching lockdown bases. As for having one person able to do everything needed to take a base, this is were I think a certification tree would be useful. Basically an extended version of the current cert system, every soldier can have a weapon, vehicle, and support specialization (ie. Light Weapons, Support Vehicles, and Breach Equipment) but to be fully specialized in one the others suffer.

What this all boils down to is to prevent ninja hacks, you have to limit player abilities while introducing new challenges that require teamwork to overcome. That's what I'd like to see happen, not the complete removal of back hacking.

kaffis · 2011-02-21, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Hamma

Well yea, but when it's to late..

Yep. This is why I'd like to see some kind of pro-active defense rewards cooked up. Being told "the base is under attack!" is, well, not currently productive.

Effective · 2011-03-12, 08:32 AM

If you don't want a base to be ghosted, you need to have people respond to the hack. NC are notorious for letting hacks on there homeconts go through.

Watching the map = Best idea.
Now, something could be introduced for say 1 person going along to multiple bases and just throwing hacks on the base over and over.

Edfishy · 2011-03-12, 11:08 AM

I love the teamplay mechanism for some hacks, that's pretty ingenious.

Bags · 2011-03-12, 12:16 PM

There's this thing called looking at your map. that's how you prevent ninja base hacks.

Traak · 2011-03-12, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by Lartnev

My first thought is "What's wrong with ninja base hacks?"

They necessitate something other than first person shooting: boring, stale, long-term base babysitting.

I would like to see the only two bases on a cont that are active and capable of being hacked, genblown, or whatever to be two adjacent enemy bases. Enemies of each other. All the others locked down and capitol domed.

I want to see battles where one guy can't drag everybody down the tubes of boredom with a gen drop or tube drop or virus.

And I do those three things quite a bit. If I don't like the fact they are in the game, no one else has any reason to, no?

I mean, it reminds me of the allied forces in Afghanistan now. One Hadji sneaks behind the lines and locks all the porta-potties. OMG! Now we have nowhere to crap! *allied forces have left the game*.

Ridiculous.

Make the front lines the only place you can kill anything or anyone. All other bases are domed and locked. The boring hours we spend either killing gens etc. or guarding and repairing them really deflate the fights we WERE enjoying.

In a boxing match, the opponents don't get to just hang around near their post and hurl insults at each other. They have to "mix it up." Well, I want to see that in PS:Next. Make it so the fighting is concentrated, not diffuse as it is now, because it can be quite boring for the support guys, like me, to be behind the friendly or enemy lines so far. I would really prefer there to be no advantage at all with being at Neti when the fight is at Yazata, but there can be, and that is BORING.

You flip a base, GREAT, the next enemy base is un-domed and you can now go fight over that, not to mention all the terrain between. But people even being able to get ON an enemy continent and drain and blow up bases? Shouldn't be possible.

Please, don't bother whining "OMG you suck, you should just do HA" blah blah blah. Some of us like support, and support is way more fun where the bullets are zinging overhead, rather than five continents away where someone has initiated a drain hack on Nexus. Who is going to fix that? The HA guys? Nah.

By making bases sequential, and invulnerable until they are, it concentrates teh battles where they should be, in, above, hopefully under, and between bases, not on Old Oshur when the fight is on Solsar, or whatever.

Bags · 2011-03-12, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by Traak

rather than five continents away where someone has initiated a drain hack on Nexus. Who is going to fix that? The HA guys? Nah.

Actually it generally is DT / KOTOR / (in the past) 1CMM who do most of the resecuring.

demise14 · 2011-03-12, 09:34 PM

You all assume AI automatically means combat personnel running around freely.

What if you could get small robots or drones that provide support but don't attack? Similar to the CE already in the game but expanded to follow you around or stay mounted in one spot (but only provide things such as healing or repairing).

I think it'd be pretty cool to have some advanced engineers setup repair bots at the top of stairs of a tower behind some max units while it gets assaulted. Or deploying some vehicle repair bots in a courtyard that maneuver around repairing damaged vehicles.

I mean, every futuristic world has robots. So the only way I'd agree with weaponized AI is if they were robots or drones that are obtained somehow. Possibly being another layer to CE that costs a good amount of certs? Or something only commanders can obtain and deploy?

Oh and while on the subject - I always thought CE should be deployable indoors. It would make base defending a lot funner especially when outnumbered.

Effective · 2011-03-13, 04:46 AM

Originally Posted by Traak

They necessitate something other than first person shooting: boring, stale, long-term base babysitting.

I would like to see the only two bases on a cont that are active and capable of being hacked, genblown, or whatever to be two adjacent enemy bases. Enemies of each other. All the others locked down and capitol domed.

I want to see battles where one guy can't drag everybody down the tubes of boredom with a gen drop or tube drop or virus.

And I do those three things quite a bit. If I don't like the fact they are in the game, no one else has any reason to, no?

I mean, it reminds me of the allied forces in Afghanistan now. One Hadji sneaks behind the lines and locks all the porta-potties. OMG! Now we have nowhere to crap! *allied forces have left the game*.

Ridiculous.

Make the front lines the only place you can kill anything or anyone. All other bases are domed and locked. The boring hours we spend either killing gens etc. or guarding and repairing them really deflate the fights we WERE enjoying.

In a boxing match, the opponents don't get to just hang around near their post and hurl insults at each other. They have to "mix it up." Well, I want to see that in PS:Next. Make it so the fighting is concentrated, not diffuse as it is now, because it can be quite boring for the support guys, like me, to be behind the friendly or enemy lines so far. I would really prefer there to be no advantage at all with being at Neti when the fight is at Yazata, but there can be, and that is BORING.

You flip a base, GREAT, the next enemy base is un-domed and you can now go fight over that, not to mention all the terrain between. But people even being able to get ON an enemy continent and drain and blow up bases? Shouldn't be possible.

Please, don't bother whining "OMG you suck, you should just do HA" blah blah blah. Some of us like support, and support is way more fun where the bullets are zinging overhead, rather than five continents away where someone has initiated a drain hack on Nexus. Who is going to fix that? The HA guys? Nah.

By making bases sequential, and invulnerable until they are, it concentrates teh battles where they should be, in, above, hopefully under, and between bases, not on Old Oshur when the fight is on Solsar, or whatever.

No. If you make it so you can't drain bases, down gens, etc. You make it so if an empire gets sanc locked they have 2 choices, and at either choice they're going to get farmed pretty hardcore, with the way the current game is at least. Also forcing players to go to 1 spot is silly, players should be able to choose where to fight and where to go. If you don't want a bases gen dropped, boost the gen tubes, lay CE at is. Call for help if enemies show up.

Also, it's typically those "HA guys" are the ones who go and resecure ghost hacks, drains, etc.

DviddLeff · 2011-03-13, 05:45 AM

I would support having less warp gate links to reduce, but not eliminate back hacking.

Lonehunter · 2011-03-13, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by Lartnev

My first thought is "What's wrong with ninja base hacks?" If you leave a base undefended you deserve to lose it to your opponents.

Exactly

I personally knew quite a few people in the good'ole days that where fast response outfits for situations just like this. Those little skirmishes where a another unique type of fight in PS. It could even be the catalyst to a continent battle for the whole population.

As a long time cloaker I also think the "ninja base hacks" are ok. If I'm bored enough I will totally destroy a base and CE the hell out of it and drop a hack. My boomers, hacked turrets, AMS, router, and all around hit and run stealth tricks have helped me get my own base against 1-5 people before. 5 Minutes after the hack went through I was overrun by enemies, but it was awesome to accomplish.

One of Planetside's traits is the persistent online world. This means not every fight is going be balanced with numbers. Not every playing field is going to be fair. It's going to be decided by the playerbase. Using a numbers requirement to assault an objective seems too similar to smaller server-restricted FPSs to me. I don't really want every fight to be designed on even teams, or requiring a certain sized group to be there first. If I'm soloing, I like starting the next battle with 1 little hack.

Edit: Lets also remember the current hack and hold system sucks anyway, and should be tossed. What if the time on hack was sped up/slowed down depending on the friendly/enemy ratio? So one cloaker hacking a base with no enemies will take 20 minutes, but 20+ could make it a quick hack if no resistance.

Azellon · 2011-03-15, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by Effective

No. If you make it so you can't drain bases, down gens, etc. You make it so if an empire gets sanc locked they have 2 choices, and at either choice they're going to get farmed pretty hardcore, with the way the current game is at least. Also forcing players to go to 1 spot is silly, players should be able to choose where to fight and where to go.

I agree with the above that it sounds ripe for abuse. How about this: the lattice network allows Sanctuaries to spread around a bit of their power or whatever. However, when they're not diverting power (or whatever..not here to come up with the lore reason for it) they can provide a special type of equipment that allows players to override or pass through a capitol dome. Basically, if you do become Sanc locked, you can then blow absolutely any base on any continent. If you want to send out twenty guys to blow twenty bases on several different continents, so be it. It gets your troops back out into the fight right away, and they can ONLY do so if they've been Sanc locked.

While I agree that 1 base vs 1 base is pretty extreme, using the rest of the idea but otherwise maintaining the lattice network would be a great compromise. Basically any base directly on the lattice to an enemy base can't be domed, but every base that is attached only to other friendly bases is domed. It adds strategy.

Traak · 2011-03-16, 02:49 PM

The fundamental thing I'm looking for is everyone either shooting or supporting someone, directly, who is shooting. Not supporting the thing that the game does if it's a new moon and the tides are right, and the NTU is full and the gen is repaired and the Vanu didn't put a drain hack on it that might some time, if they get back to that base this week, be in some way useful to someone somewhere who is actually shooting, but that is not for sure.

I mean, shooting or directly supporting shooters. That's what I ask for.

Lonehunter · 2011-03-16, 11:10 PM

Originally Posted by Traak

The fundamental thing I'm looking for is everyone either shooting or supporting someone, directly, who is shooting. Not supporting the thing that the game does if it's a new moon and the tides are right, and the NTU is full and the gen is repaired and the Vanu didn't put a drain hack on it that might some time, if they get back to that base this week, be in some way useful to someone somewhere who is actually shooting, but that is not for sure.

I mean, shooting or directly supporting shooters. That's what I ask for.

What if that base your friendlies where draining and taking was the enemy's only tech plant? I think Shooting at Threshers is a big direct change from shooting at Magriders

waldizzo · 2011-03-17, 03:03 PM

Lonehunter is right. Dropping generators or otherwise damaging bases not on the front lines can have a direct impact on the base that is on the front line. This tactic is often the reason why a hours long stalemate is finally broken.

Why even have a persistent world if players can only be effective at one location? May as well just play whatever run and gun fps is popular at the time.

Taking away the ability for players to think and play outside of the zerg would be detrimental to the game.