Ghost capping zergs - air domination everywhere else - wordt 2x event ever. - Page 4

BorisBlade · 2012-12-22, 10:12 PM

First, no lattice, so no focus, or much real strategy, which means you can go anywhere. Fights have no focus or real meaning. Makes no sense to go to a big fight when ghost caps give far more and are just as easy, and have no penalty.

Second, you give lots of xp for capping empty bases. The xp should be almost nothing if there is no fight, like ps1. Back capping should be more tactial, less xp focused unless the enemy shows up.

Third, defense is not realistic, no walls, no clear lines to keep the enemy out til defenders regroup. Even bases with walls have so many holes, gaps, tunnels, doors, stairs, jumpads, teleports, gates, etc etc that the walls are pretty meaningless. The ways in need to be drastically reduced, esp when light assault negates walls entirely anyway, not to mention LA and lame beacons, etc. There should be options but not 10+ ways in on top of LA and air drops. Also turrets are pathetic, low armor, mediocre firepower, on a sitting duck target. Turrets should be menacing. Its not like they can hide or take cover, they are a joke to take out esp with a bazillion infantry and the cheezy solo MBT's. The defenders also spawn way across from defense points while attackers spawn next to them, terrible design. The far too low TTK does limit greatly having very many players because you die too fast if there are more than just a few players, but things must be less spread out or its just not feasible to realistically defend. Its also not fun to try to cover 15 different openings and cap points.

Fourth, no legitimate way to defend a cap unless you are already there. Cap times are too quick, you dont have time to respond. You cant really tell whats goin on where, you cant see clearly marked hack alerts with the timers like in PS1. You have very little idea on whats goin on. Combined with no lattice and complete chaos on the hacking, bases just constantly flip back and forth all over the map so it feels meaningless to secure one because the other 10 are gonna flip anyways. Again, the attack options need to be more limited to several targets not all bases at once. There needs to be some rules and a lattice. Obviously not like ps1, more complex with an updated system, but a lattice none the less.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but ps1 already did all this right, I know the game has gotten bigger but the same basic ideas should have been learned already but somehow ps1's successes are totally ignored constantly, almost nothing of ps1 is even in ps2, its like it never existed. Most every problem in this game was already solved in ps1. Dont feed me the line of "its a different game, that stuff wont work" cause yes, it will, some is nearly cut and paste, some is more complex but the basic ideas can be implimented and modified as necessary to make ps2 a far better game and something that is actually a sequel and not just yet another BF game but with more people.

Revanmug · 2012-12-23, 02:30 AM

Originally Posted by DjEclipse

NC (as well as TR) need a dedicated main gunner ASAP; you either driving or you gunning with the design of these tanks. Fun times in a Magrider, effortless getting the first shot off on an NC tank driving by.

The Magrider is perfect don't nerf that either. Just saying In a Vanguard it is not fun!! As you go from driving to operating the turret as it slowly turns and you know you gonna die YOU KNOW IT. But you try anyway.

NC and TR tanks could be much better deterrents against zerg waves if they worked like a true tank. Not to bring up PS1 like a little bitch but many a time the tanks helped push back the zerg thanks to a driver/gunner team.

Driver/gunner is not going to change the really big thing that hurt track base tank over the special case Magrider. No, I'm not talking about his strafing ability but the main gun handling.

Every little bump your track tank drives over will fuck your main gun aim like no tomorrow. This isn't much a problem for the Magrider as everything is just much more smoother when moving around giving a better experience when firing.

I feel like driver/gunner is just going to show this problem even more and not really fix the problem the way you might think.

On the XP matter, I'm not sure why people would just go around capping DURING a 2x XP event. Base cap, weirdly, don't give double XP meaning killing people in your own base (for the 5/10/% defense bonus) is several time better than just ghost capping since one ain't affect by it.

Blynd · 2012-12-23, 02:48 AM

there should be a minimum xp level given for capping an undeffended base or one with few deffenders - it should take into account the size of the defenders and the size of the attackers groups and give a small amount if there is hardly any fighting - if there is a good 30 minute battle for a base both sides going hard at it and it gets capped then there should be a ton of exp for the attackers similarly if the defenders resist the attackers then there should be an equal amount of exp as it is to cap it based on the fight over the base ( to eliminate the 1 man hacks and re hacks) that way its just as profitable exp wise to deffend and deffend well as it is to cap a base in the first place. I cant understand why there is no exp for defences

Subedai · 2012-12-23, 03:14 AM

My first thought is the crown - having only one profitable farm for defenders means that half the population of the server can be stuck in one place for weeks. The crown needs to be easier to take.
Conversely the other bases need to be more easily defensible. There should be ways defenders can farm the attackers equally.
More xp for the longer a fight is - for defenders as well. Ie if the defenders take back the point quickly little or no xp, if the defenders get it back after an epic counter attack and defence, they should get a reward for it. Not just a timer but how many people died/fought over the base - similar to PS1. You got more xp for a big drawn out fight compared to a steamroll.

On briggs atleast the easiest solution would be to delete the crown so the noobs have to see the rest of the game.

p0intman · 2012-12-23, 04:32 AM

[03:17:36] < P0INTMAN >so i noticed there are actually a lot of very bad players in day-z and other arma2 mods.
[03:18:15] < P0INTMAN >im actually suprised that people are shocked when I return fire
[03:24:25] < P0INTMAN >its so unsatisfying though, it isn't fucking persistant.
[03:29:44] < P0INTMAN >it would be fucking fantastic if there were an mmofps where being infantry was viable.

the last part is where emphasis should be.

do something about this horrifying situation I find myself in Malorn, so I can bring myself to press log in again.

Rago · 2012-12-23, 04:49 AM

Like we told them 100 Times before removing point for defending base´s and removing the Teleporters out of the Spawn room was not the best idea,...

So what wrong with the Game ?

--Defense is worthless, and even got more worthless for casual and players without a Outfit.

--Introduction and basic Game Functions are not explained for new Players(it even more chaotic being in a droppod for them) imho

--Graphical Problems from Time to Time

I really love Planetside and i like those Planetside scale Battles but really they should make it WORTH defending stuff.
I understand that this i kind of experience for them that they need, but counting 1 plus 1 is a thing that everybody should be able to do.

Why are so many Players frustrated ? Right because this is basic "core" Game which is essential for everybody.

Arkanakaz · 2012-12-23, 05:01 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Any feedback from the PSU community on contributing factors to this behavior? I have my own thoughts but I'd like to learn what y'all think is going on here.

The problem I have as an individual is that unlike in PlanetSide 1 where there was the 'tactical overlay' and the base alert system (yellow, orange and red). In PlanetSide 2 it is much harder to tell where the enemy is.

My goal is like yours, as in to find a fight. If I want it to be a good fight then no side can have more than say 70% of the population in that area. If either empire has 70% or more then the one side isn't able to fight back and the fight is over too quickly - often before I can get there.

I try to make the most of the 'enemy activity' feature and the population reveal that each hex gives but I find it hard to see where there is going to be an even, and therefore prolonged fight. I like to think as a PlanetSide 1 veteran I am better than most at interpreting the continental map but I still find that I end up traveling for some time to reach an area only to find that we are either overwhelming with our numbers, or the enemy is overwhelming us with theirs. I suspect others have the same problem of trying to track both friendlies and enemies so that they can see where the balanced fight is going to be.

I feel if information on enemy and friendly population movements were more accurate it would make it easier for the blobs to find each other. It would also mean that defense would be more worthwhile as you could have a better guess at where the enemy is going to attack next. At the moment it inset worth guarding a location as it is too hard to tell if somewhere is going to be attacked and you don't want people standing around doing nothing. Also only start to defend an area when it is already being captured and the blob already has a grip and small groups and individuals turning up are going to be easily defeated. This causes very few to turn up as no individual or group wants to spend time traveling there only to find they are the only ones from their empire that has turned up to defend.

So more information on friendly and enemy movements to help people find the even fights would be my suggested solution.

SUBARU · 2012-12-23, 07:39 AM

How can you stay and defend a base,when you dont know if it will be attacked???????

PS1 you knew what would be attacked and where to go to defend.PS2 is just a mess

Cadia · 2012-12-23, 08:46 AM

I experienced this "air Camping" a lot yesterday on amerish.
geting farmes by a BattleRank 30+ in his Lib. This requires no Fu**** Skill at all. just spend 1000 SC in a better gun or GtA Missils. And the certs flow. this is realy frustrating, and I´m not this kind of player who takes dying in a game to serious.
Aircraft´s OP? .. May be.. I´m not shure about this. There are some realy good Pilots out ther, earning respekt. on the other hand there are too many killwhores in Airplanes out there. And bad Base design helps them farming again and again.

Electrofreak · 2012-12-23, 08:56 AM

Trying oh so hard not to mount my soap box and go on about the benefits to using dynamic XP for base captures.

...trying so hard....

igster · 2012-12-23, 09:20 AM

*wave* to Malorn. Nice (as usual) to see the dev team interacting with the community.

Tactical Failure
Biggest issue for me is the Map. Please SOE Dev team, objectively consider how you have designed your map. From an objective user interface point of view it doesnt help the user get a strategic overview of what is happening.

More precisely, it gives me some view of where the enemy are at. (but only if i hover over the area which is bad UI design)
It gives me no overview of where my friendly forces are at.
It gives me no indication of the status of a base.
It doesnt tell me if the base is capped.
Are the outposts capped?
Is the shield Gen down?
Is the SCU down?

When a big zerg is coming down the West of Indar, should I go to reinforce it or is our zerg farming the NC at Tarwich? You have no idea. Tactically it does not support the squad leaders to co-ordinate defences since you have no tactical overview of what forces to redeploy. Do we have a massive over population at one base and a smaller population trying to defend against a large zerg?
There is no visibility of this. If you are running on guess work, the strategy and meta game come down to guess work. Even using the leader channel to try and ask people where they are... the leader channel is across three continents. To find out where people are you have to ask on leader channel because of the failure of the map.
Overall terrible support for coordinated gameplay. I believe because of these shortcomings some outfits are setting up teamspeak servers to try and co-ordinate this stuff... but really... is that necessary.

Bring back the tactical overlay from PS1. Press M to bring up map. Map T button to Tactical overlay and you give your squad leaders an instant view of where the threats are, where the zergs are and where we need to respond.

Bring back proper status indications on the map so I dont have to visit a base to see which of the outposts have been taken. What status the gens are. What status the SCU is at.

Give us the tools to make the game live.

Properly revisit the map. Dont make us hover over things to try and find what status they are at. Show us first.

Let us reduce the intensity of the hex colours so that we can actually see indicators on the map. Hell let us overlay a tactical view of where the populations are over the top of the map so we can see both who owns the hex (e.g. in PS1 the base ownership) and also see the status and the amount of population on it.

People don't understand the importance of this tactical play, but it makes all the difference in the world. Allows for squads to get an overview of what they are going up against so that they can prepare an attack or a last minute resecure. Even the lonewolf can use his intuition to support a squad that they see going to resecure a base. But for outfit squads it makes them ten times more effective.

Defensibility.

The bases are just not defensible. I actually liked the base defenses at the tech plants because with a stubborn defence you had to work out strategies or rushes in order to gain the base. At the moment it is throw enough waves against the defence that you will win due to respawn strategies.

SpunkyKuma · 2012-12-23, 10:11 AM

I totally agree with the title, nothing but air now and it's not any fun and AA is a brutal waste of time.

I hope SOE identifies the issue soon.

Beerbeer · 2012-12-23, 10:29 AM

I like how Malorn at least takes the initiative to try and see things from different perspectives.

I sometimes get the feeling that everyone at Sony sits in an ivory tower and is completely disconnected with their customers.

SpunkyKuma · 2012-12-23, 11:07 AM

My outfit is guilty of capping empty locatioins and we end up falling back when we do meet the enemy. There's very little you get out of defending a base anyways, let the enemy take the base and then retake it after which yields much better xp/certs thand efending does and not to mention much fewer deaths.

There's a ton of flaws in PS2 I'm seeing but that's not a topic for this thread, PS1 was just a much better experience overall.

Bocheezu · 2012-12-23, 12:50 PM

I think the maps are just way too big. They could cut the map size in half easily.

For Indar, move Suarva to where the J908 Impact Site is now and just junk the entire northwest side of the map. Get rid of the myriad of outposts by the warpgates and make it so there's only 1 outpost between the warpgate and a big base. This would be like moving the NC warpgate to where Feldspar Canyon is now.

Make it so there's only one outpost between big bases. This would get rid of that line of VS crap between Vanu Archives and Peris (Highlands Solar Station, Ayani Labs, NS Research Lab). Galaxy Solar Plant, East Canyon Checkpoint, Abandoned NS Offices, Howling Pass Checkpoint (I know they just made it, but nothing happens there), all gone. Keep the Crown and Crossroads.

The population cap per continent is just too small for the map size and it causes people to concentrate in one area and leave another area completely vacant.