Rivers and river combat - Page 3

Soothsayer · 2012-03-31, 02:35 AM

When they say beta in a couple months, I want that to mean 2 or less...

The best concept for why a river would be useful that I can think of would involve the hex capture method that I understand to be in place.

A river or lake could extend farther into enemy hexes which would allow faster capture (due to adjacent friendly territory) of multiple hexes farther in than the ones directly on the front between two factions.

This is going on the assumption that the more adjacent hexes you own the faster your capture rate is. Having a river would allow you to sweep a larger chunk of hexes quicker if you have the numbers to hold all of the additional capture points.

That's my 30 seconds of thinking idea for making combat on water useful...

MasterChief096 · 2012-03-31, 07:17 PM

I honestly don't see a point to naval combat unless its done in the oceans and far away from the continents for resources that are sea-based. Rivers aren't wide, long, or deep enough to substantiate using a naval boat over just a regular old vanguard or reaver. If there were harbor-like facilities on coasts that could provide outlets for naval combat on the high seas then I might be able to see it. Its also important to note that naval combat for a futuristic space-faring society takes place in space, not on the oceans.

Stardouser · 2012-03-31, 07:25 PM

Originally Posted by MasterChief096

I honestly don't see a point to naval combat unless its done in the oceans and far away from the continents for resources that are sea-based. Rivers aren't wide, long, or deep enough to substantiate using a naval boat over just a regular old vanguard or reaver. If there were harbor-like facilities on coasts that could provide outlets for naval combat on the high seas then I might be able to see it. Its also important to note that naval combat for a futuristic space-faring society takes place in space, not on the oceans.

On that point, what could be a resource that's that far away yet can affect battles anywhere in the game world?

If naval ships could travel from one continent to another, then naval bases would BE such a resource.

Stardouser · 2012-03-31, 10:38 PM

Another thing we could have to increase riverboat usage is make the rivers be very wide, and have destructible bridges that can force boat crossings of land troops.

ShockNC · 2012-04-01, 02:28 AM

Originally Posted by Skitrel

Going on previous gaming history, what would be the purpose of them? What's the motivations for players to use them? What's their role in the overall strategy of the game?

1. attack, transport, resupply point and that's just off the top of my head.

2. securing resources such as ocean resource platforms, Alien ruins, Island bases, etc. adding new game play beyond the land based one that we already have (oceanic based classes or abilities for oceanic gameplay for all classes).

3. securing resources and allowing a launch point to attack other areas (IE, like the Cave network in planetside 1).

Planetside has always had the need for a decent navy system but it never got put in while some other features got thrown in there which made little sense.

that and given the art style of bases in PS2, i would love to fight on a base styled off of Atlantis off of Star Gate Atlantis.

Timealude · 2012-04-01, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

On that point, what could be a resource that's that far away yet can affect battles anywhere in the game world?

If naval ships could travel from one continent to another, then naval bases would BE such a resource.

This ^ That would add a totally new feel for planetside and would be really excited to see that. Just picture 5 galaxies, the air escort flying above a fleet of futuristic ships to capture water side bases and then later on in the battle have ships provide artillery support from afar. That sound like a pretty fun game to me. Also I can see a ship taking place of a load star in that scenario.

Stardouser · 2012-04-01, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by Timealude

This ^ That would add a totally new feel for planetside and would be really excited to see that. Just picture 5 galaxies, the air escort flying above a fleet of futuristic ships to capture water side bases and then later on in the battle have ships provide artillery support from afar. That sound like a pretty fun game to me. Also I can see a ship taking place of a load star in that scenario.

You might catch a couple of flames for mentioning artillery, but I think that if artillery can only come from naval ships, it's balanced. Naval ships can't retreat behind base shields, for one thing. They also can't get any closer than the shore.

I think the ultimate battle scenario would be a naval landing invasion that may or may not be contested depending on scout intelligence. Another thing that would be awesome is, since the naval ships can fire about 1km or so inland, you send in advanced recon infiltrators that can laser designate for them.

Cosmical · 2012-04-01, 05:41 PM

I think naval battles could work, but in a similar capacity to battlefield. Basically you get a huge incredibly slow moving vehicle, probably funded by an outfit, and one per outfit. And they can be possitioned only in the water, and there job isnt to be an unstoppable sea based bombing machine, just as a relative safe heaven to resupply and deploy from. And being at see, it changes the battle strategy completely. Could essentially have a water base, seiging a ground base to get a foothold onthe cont that you wouldnt otherwise be able to get. But obviously the naval base can be destroyed, at the cost of all the spent resources.

Anything else added to naval combat turns the game into abit of a farse. Lets face it, you have command of the ground and the air already. Sea is actually a hugely limiting factor.

Unless youre into that, in which case. I think you're playing the wrong game. Also, boats mean youre drastically undermining the Vanu's floating over water technology, and theyve had it hard enough as it is. :P

KrazeyVIII · 2012-04-01, 05:56 PM

I can see how it would appeal to some to have some naval combat in the game in some way. I cannot, however, see it being put into the game in the near future. The core of the game has to be solid and adding naval combat is just something the game doesn't need right now, especially at launch.

I could see it having its uses when there are bridge fights, or bases nearby rivers/lakes so boats can harass the shoreline. The problem here is if I see a boat in a river/lake I will point and laugh and then walk/drive the other direction. If the game does eventually evolve over the next few years to have a naval aspect the boats/ships/whatever put into the game will HAVE to be amphibious. Also, the devs would have to design continents specifically designed around any type of naval combat to force a boats usefulness in fights. Someone had said that Cyssor would have been a great continent, and I agree, the problem is that it was basically the ONLY continent where it would of mattered. Unless you want maps with rivers absolutely fucking everywhere in PS2 then there halfway point must be met with anything that goes in the water can also go on land (amphibious).

Naval combat is NOT for everyone by any stretch of the imagination, I don't care what you say. If it is going to be put in the game then, going by how the game is being designed, the vehicle will need to have options to customize it to be better in the water than on land or decent in the water and decent on land. I don't see how naval combat can be truly implemented when the players that want it are so few.

Stardouser · 2012-04-01, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by Cosmical

Unless youre into that, in which case. I think you're playing the wrong game. Also, boats mean youre drastically undermining the Vanu's floating over water technology, and theyve had it hard enough as it is. :P

This is part of the problem. Planetside is THE game that these things are worthy of adding to. It's the only true MMOFPS other than WW2 Online. Which it may be worth mentioning, has these things.

Originally Posted by KrazeyVIII

Naval combat is NOT for everyone by any stretch of the imagination, I don't care what you say. If it is going to be put in the game then, going by how the game is being designed, the vehicle will need to have options to customize it to be better in the water than on land or decent in the water and decent on land. I don't see how naval combat can be truly implemented when the players that want it are so few.

It doesn't have to be for everyone. How many people don't use tanks or aircraft even though they could? How many people don't use squads and especially outfits, yet we're getting those.

I think there's no proof of it being "few" that want it, though. I can tell you this is something we had in BF1942, and DICE capriciously stopped doing it after that, and a lot of BF players want it.

And, just anticipating objections - no, adding naval combat doesn't make it Battlefield. Nor does it make BF1942 either.

JHendy · 2012-04-01, 08:31 PM

"I don't see how naval combat can be truly implemented when the players that want it are so few."

Hmm.

I don't think anyone would turn their nose up at naval combat in PS2 if it was properly implemented.

Yes, it's ambitious, but it is by no means infeasible.

Frankly, I think it's pretty damning that a lot of people who are supposedly passionate about gaming will actually go out of their way to discourage people who so much as conceptualise ambitious, innovative features like this one. On one hand, the gaming community complains bitterly about stagnation, and then on the other it picks to pieces any suggestion that is remotely outside the norm.

For the love of god, please chuck your ideas in or help to develop somebody else's, instead of immediately jumping to the conclusion that implementing 'X feature' isn't worth the effort because "it might be hard to balance!!!" or "100% of the playerbase can't enjoy or make use of this feature 100% of the time, therefore it sucks"

Destroyeron · 2012-04-01, 08:59 PM

I'd be fine with gunboats as long as they have the guns from Act of Valor.

Stormhall · 2012-04-01, 09:00 PM

I understand that Auraxis is a big super continent, right? And around this super continent is a ton of water, right? So you could add naval ships to make tactical insertions on coastal continents and have naval defenses on coasts to stop that from happening and that is where I see naval combat useful also space combat would be awesome but kind of pointless since naval combat would kinda have the same experience anyway.

cellinaire · 2012-04-01, 11:36 PM

A future continent specifically tailored/designed to accommodate sea/river aspect of warfare (in the same server). Or a specific set of servers that enable naval warfare or space warfare. Any ideas?

(and Higby didn't say naval combat will occur in existing continents, let alone the introduction of naval warfare. He, however, did say that he is fond of this idea. Just for clarification @_@)

And to StormHall : There's still no mega-continent from what I know.

KrazeyVIII · 2012-04-01, 11:44 PM

I really hope the rest of my post was understood. Even if it is put in, the amount of change the game would have to go through to allow it is ridiculous. Maps need to be tailored to allow naval combat in any form. Giving current vehicles amphibious options would be the best way to implement it, if ever.