Originally Posted by SpottyGekko
If there isn't an effective method (like the lattice system) to limit back-hacking, I imagine it will be rife.
PS2 is F2P and should have a MUCH larger population than PS did. That will bring a lot of solo'ers into the game.
In a furball fight, solo players are at a huge disadvantage, because their "mad skillz" are negated by the fact that there are so many possible vectors of attack. A solo player cannot watch 360 degrees (and the sky) simultaneously, but a squad with good comms can because they work together.
But "behind-the-lines" infiltration is ideal for a solo player. Someone with good FPS skills can do a lot better when faced with 3 enemies than they would fighting in amongst 30 or 40 hostiles.
As the beta population rises, it will most likely become apparent what the impact of back-hacking will be. There is still a lot of time to fine tune this aspect.
|
As already mentioned, adjacent territories are a major influence in capping.
Back capping will be easy to defend against because they have NO adjacent territories while the defenders have 6. Not to mention that larger, more significant bases have like 5 capture points... and it's when you have 1 that the battle for that hex begins. So you cap a point with your friends and the enemy holds 4 to your 1 cap point, WITH a 6 to 0 border advantage, meaning they barely need to slow you down at all.
The only caps that will be really possible are small outposts that only give a spawn point (no resources) to the holding faction.... and the team who own all the surrounding territory will be able to cap it back in a fraction of the time.
This system will allow for back attacks, forcing defenders to respond to it, hopefully weakening their front line so your main offensive can push forward.
These kinds of tactics are not possible within the Lattice system.
The Hex system much more accurately depicts territory trading in real war. There is no reason you can't capture and hold territory behind enemy lines, but it's going to be rather difficult. Success could prove quite advantageous and even failure could prove a valuable distraction or feint.
Originally Posted by Anabuki
Not so much sit-around-and-wait guard duty, but I definitely wouldn't mind patrolling along the edges of owned territory, provided it served a purpose like being able to put down some sort of marker on the continent saying ATTACK IMMINENT! and estimated enemy force size or something like that  |
I'm hoping the mission system will allow players to accept "Patrol Missions" in which they are given the ability to make broadcasts of spotted enemy and awarded XP for completion of patrol (reward based on distance & time. Air patrols would be different from ground patrols in reward per km).
There could also be forward observer missions for scouts to post up and signal back on incoming enemy columns so that ambush missions could be more successful.
Of course, if any of this sounds boring to you, there will be plenty of other mission types, from Air support, main tank assaults, air assaults, galaxy transport, Infantry base raids, and they'd be all married together in larger offensives. (ie; couple guys sign up to be the Gal pilots for the Infantry signing up to perform a raid on a tower post, the entire mission being part of a larger coordinated effort.)
2012-08-15, 11:47 PM
Linear Mode
