What Happened To The Bases...

[Boomhowser]

Originally Posted by Karrade

Its human nature to go where they will win, but beyond that, organised groups are going to go where they can make a difference. If Base C has lots of walls, and makes it difficult to attack against, why not make a stand there rather than the open, very tough to hold base?

Need to play beta before I can say for sure but I suspect it will be a resource thing something like you'll be getting resources to purchase aircraft whilst base is in your hands.. pretty pointless if you defending behind the walls, meanwhile the open area base your faction didnt bother defending will be granting the resources that make infantry assaults easier so your enemy now has an advantage as they attack you.. (hope that makes sense)

Again its speculation at this moment in time.. roll on beta so we can find out for sure!!

[lolroflroflcake]

I don't think a wide open base will be a pure team death match but it will fall quite a bit faster then a base with walls.

Attackers can litterly pour in from almost all directions and defenders will have less to work with, since they will be defending on the CC or what ever is the case in Planetside 2, therefore an enemy breakthrough will mean the loss of that part of the base rather then a signal to fall back to secondary defensive positions.

It appears that it has been decided that a large portion of the defensive play will be cut out for some bases. Then again maybe Zevran, the base we've seen the most of, is designed that way because its right smack in the middle and we will always be fighting over it.

I mean who can't say that they would have been happy if Cyssors design made the fighting progress just a little bit quicker so we weren't always fighting over it.

[Turdicus]

I can see a lot of people panicking over the lack of a traditional castle style base. It's true that those are much easier to defend due to the bottlenecks and kill zones and such, but I'll point something out.

Base defense is now going to be about holding strongpoints rather than holding the entire base. It's now possible to defend a base without even holding the entire thing since it doesn't revolve around one CC and one room. That being said the control point with the wall near it will be much easier to defend than one in a field.

The walls are built to allow shooting in two directions at once, towers are almost 360. Let go of the idea that the entire BASE needs to be defended and start thinking about defending points WITHIN THE BASE. I think that's the direction PS2 is going with.

[MrBloodworth]

Walls do not matter if you can just drop pod in right behind defenses.

[The Kush]

The first picture looks way better. They need more interior fighting room/levels, more corridors to go along with the open rooms, more protection, and like the first pic they need a perimeter around at least 50% of bases not 20%

[AThreatToYou]

I want a continent with a gigantic wall across the middle.

[Aberdash]

Originally Posted by The Kush

The first picture looks way better. They need more interior fighting room/levels, more corridors to go along with the open rooms, more protection, and like the first pic they need a perimeter around at least 50% of bases not 20%

Sitting at a base for 4 hours defending it by camping the corridors sounds about as fun as spending 4 hours trying to kill the people camping in the corridors.

It's usually the defenders farming kills until the attackers get enough maxes for a max crash. I don't see the fun in that.

[Baneblade]

Don't forget that spawn camping isn't going to be as common in PS2.

[SnipeGrzywa]

Originally Posted by Erendil

More importantly, the base spawns are right out in the open just begging to be camped by vehicles. My biggest concern is that such open bases will make even slight pop disparities the deciding factor in base conflicts, and if the defenders are at all outpopped they'll be quickly spawn camped by vehicles until they're forced to spawn elsewhere, like in the caves.

I'm pretty sure in E3 they weren't even using the main base spawns. Each empire had a permanent foothold just outside the base they were spawning at. These are the outpost(twrs) they keep talking about. For the demo purposes they made it so you couldn't capture them.

In Higby's stream he respawn edge at a tower (maybe considered one of the base spawns, not sure if the structure was attached). But he actually jumped through a hole in the floor that had a force field. Not sure if there were other ways in or not, but made it look like you won't be able to access freshly spawned players there.

[Eyeklops]

Originally Posted by Dart

What I think we all want to avoid is the "PS1 Amp Station" style capture where you get the base because you managed to camp the doors to the 'CC' rooms with Tanks. I like the combined arms combat and I'm looking forward to see open terrain tank battles, but I don't want to see vehicles camping troops inside tiny, one-room buildings.

1000% agree. Anti-door camping measures need to be designed into the maps from the start.

[SgtExo]

You might think having basses that are easy to get into like Zurvan will not be easy to defend. But think of it as if its attracting the attackers in, its the most obvious way inside so most ppl will go by that way. This means it is allot easier to plan for an ambush, let them come in and when the attackers are fully committed inside the base, the defenders can hit them from all sides in an ambush.

I also don't think that vehicles will be able to effectively camp the inside of a base without infantry support and isn't that what we want? If tanks go in alone, they will be kitted to death by infantry with AV weapons (I have seen happen in all the BF games). On the other hand, if you only go in with infantry, you might not have the punch that is needed to get a foothold in a properly defended base. So combined arms will be necessary in taking and defending a base, because if you go in as a one trick horse, you will be easily countered.

[Kayos]

I hope they have a bases like in the first picture, that looks really cool!

[Raymac]

Originally Posted by Erendil

The base is so open you can drive ground vehicles pretty much anywhere within the compound, meaning there is no solid defensible position for the defending empire to draw a line in the sand and stop an enemy advance, no place to safely repair/rearm their own vehicles upon retreat, and no place to safely rally up for a concentrated counterattack to push enemy forces out of the base.

That sounds exactly like the PS1 bases even with their walls. Vehicles could drive all around the courtyard. And you might want to take another look at the Zurvan base layout. The combination of hills and buildings limit the line of site for attackers tremendously. Now sure, if the base is completely surrounded then you are going to have a bad time, but the same is true for PS1.

Personally I'm really looking forward to the new design of the bases, both the variety and the use of terrain. I got tired of the repetative cookie cutter bases that lead to repetative cookie cutter gameplay. (take out turrets, push into CY, push into doors, push downstairs, rinse, repeat)

[SUBARU]

Originally Posted by Baneblade

Don't forget that spawn camping isn't going to be as common in PS2.

Why is this?

[Deadeye]

My favorite part of defending a base in PS1 is when we all get on the walls closest to the tower and a massive fire fight would erupt between us and the enemy outside and on the surrounding hills. It's so cool to peek out, get off a few shots, take a bit of damage and duck back behind the cover of the large plates on the wall.

It does make the bases feel like castles but hell, that's what I, personally, want: To defend a castle, hold the walls and make the enemy pay for every inch they get closer.