Oh lord, playing PS2 is fucking depressing now

[libbmaster]

Originally Posted by BlaxicanX

If you want small-squad gameplay, play Gears of War.

idk. When I hear people complain about big battles in PS2, I think of someone complaining about not being able to use their hands in soccer.

I totally agree. Population imbalance is frustrating at times, but if you are not prepared for that, you are not prepared for the "planetside experience".

I'll admit I would like it if they could look into some XP systems or whatever to counter act it, but that's probably a never ending battle. In the end, the best thing they can do to attack the pop issue is to keep new players rolling in.


SoE has done things I don't like. They could have definitely communicated with the community better in regards to the release of the "kill map". I personally would like to see them forgo the "weekly updates" system to ensure more bug free patches. And there is considerable weight to the argument that much of this content should have been put together pre-release.


But with that said... I feel like criticism of this caliber is unwarranted.

[Edfishy]

I'm liking the whole "extra Overshield" to help aid population unbalance, especially if it applied towards vehicles as well. Would be fun IMO.

[Timithos]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

As far as population imbalances, I don't think that can ever be stopped. But SOE could end the days of zerg support. Zerg support, to me, is when a game provides exponential advantages to a higher population that go beyond the advantages that simply having a higher population would normally bring.

For example, if you have 20 guys taking a base and the enemy has 5-6 defenders, you might expect the defenders to at least inflict losses and delay the enemy. But because of endless revives, revive grenades, and just plain revives being so fast that you can bunny hop or a-d step while doing it to stay alive even under fire, if you have more players in a fight, just have a few medics(more for spectacular effect) and you won't take much losses (where loss is defined as being forced to respawn).

Get 15 enemies holed up in a flag building and 5 guys can't even permanently kill one of them due to revives and you see the point.

And then, where vehicles are involved, repairs are too fast/easy and overpowered as well and cause a very similar effect. Even solo tanks, when they take damage, can back out and repair with ease; but if you have just one engineer repairing (making you a two man tank basically even if you're a Lightning) then you can hold multiple AV without moving much.

So, zerg support is a real thing. Among the possible solutions:
1. Institute responsible limits on revives (ie, after 2nd/3rd death, must respawn)
2. Add nanite ammo to revives that has to be replenished at a sunderer or terminal
3. Require medics to stand still while reviving or it is interruped
4. Add 2-3 seconds to the time it takes to revive (especially MAXes)

1. Add a 2-3 second delay to the start of repairs if you jump out as a driver (to combat solo repairing)
2. Cut repair speed by 50% across all tool cert levels
3. Make the overheat occur faster
4. Limit the number of repair tools that can affect a vehicle at once

The problem isn't the class mechanics of medic and engineer. It is the non-defensiveness of the base. 5-6 defenders who own a base should cause havoc with 20 attackers, but they don't because the base isn't defensible enough until what we've recently seen on just a handful of bases on Amerish. Both sides have medics so that argument is null. Defenders can't pull vehicles to combat enemy vehicles, so it is a vehicle pulling problem, not an engineer problem.

Your suggested changes to medics and engineers are not minor tweaks that would preserve game balance, but are major nerfs that would upset the balance of the entire game. I'm not saying either of those classes need slight tweaking, but definitely not a whole bulleted list of radical changes.

[Timithos]

I don't understand why SOE doesn't institute one-way server transfer tokens from over-populated factions to servers with underdog factions, and to monetize it even. I don't understand.

And I don't understand why they can't make same server character freeze-outs of 3 to 5 hours, like PS1 with it's 24-hr freeze outs. People want to play other factions - I get it - so they'll learn to play on different servers. I know people can create multiple accounts, but most won't, and it will alleviate the problem of 4th factioning. It won't eliminate it, but it will certainly alleviate it to a good degree. And I have 4 characters from different factions on both Connory and Waterson. I'd be willing to "suffer" the 3-5 hour freeze-out to pick up my passive certs. I won't like it, but I'll see it as necessary. Heck. Since when does SOE not do things we don't like that are not necessary - like ADS prevention while jetting.

I understand continent over-population from organized factions through the various server/outfit alliances that get to a continent first and lock the others out. That is a Planetside tradition. But I don't agree with server over-populations.

[BlaxicanX]

Originally Posted by Timithos

5-6 defenders who own a base should cause havoc with 20 attackers

Why?

[Taramafor]

Originally Posted by BlaxicanX

Why?

First of all, it was probably a figure of speech.

Second, the side that defends should have the advantage, otherwise what is the point in defending anything at all? That's not to say it should be impossible for attackers to, well, attack with the same numbers, just that it should be more difficult.

[Baneblade]

I'm looking forward to finally getting BR 31 in PS1.

[Timithos]

Originally Posted by Taramafor

First of all, it was probably a figure of speech.

Second, the side that defends should have the advantage, otherwise what is the point in defending anything at all? That's not to say it should be impossible for attackers to, well, attack with the same numbers, just that it should be more difficult.

And so far what we've had before Amerish is 55% attacking numbers /faceroll /roflstomp their way through bases pressing the I-Win-Button. 55 attackers winning against 45 defenders who supposedly "own" a base is absolutely pathetic. This is supposed to be Planetside, not some arena FPS where a base is nothing but an airsoft/paintball arena with obstacles equal to both sides. We need to see a minimum 60-66% attacking numbers on the map before bases show themselves to be adequately defensible. Even Bio Labs with their unimaginative choke points are an automatic 62% faceroll for the attackers.

And forget about adding siege mechanics such as base power drain, armor territory dominance, and air zone dominance. None of that metagame stuff can be added or enjoyed with the current non-defensibility of bases. It'd be impossible or the biggest joke we've ever seen in this game so far.

[almalino]

I follow BF4 discussions and people complain there all the time the same way people complain in PS2 forums. Game is being dumbed down for COD crowd.

I do not play BF4 myself so cannot say is it true or not.

[BlaxicanX]

Originally Posted by Taramafor

First of all, it was probably a figure of speech.

Second, the side that defends should have the advantage, otherwise what is the point in defending anything at all? That's not to say it should be impossible for attackers to, well, attack with the same numbers, just that it should be more difficult.

This doesn't answer my question.

Originally Posted by Timithos

And so far what we've had before Amerish is 55% attacking numbers /faceroll /roflstomp their way through bases pressing the I-Win-Button. 55 attackers winning against 45 defenders who supposedly "own" a base is absolutely pathetic. This is supposed to be Planetside, not some arena FPS where a base is nothing but an airsoft/paintball arena with obstacles equal to both sides. We need to see a minimum 60-66% attacking numbers on the map before bases show themselves to be adequately defensible. Even Bio Labs with their unimaginative choke points are an automatic 62% faceroll for the attackers.

And forget about adding siege mechanics such as base power drain, armor territory dominance, and air zone dominance. None of that metagame stuff can be added or enjoyed with the current non-defensibility of bases. It'd be impossible or the biggest joke we've ever seen in this game so far.

You use a lot of hyperbole.

What methods would you use to make bases more defensible?

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Timithos

Both sides have medics so that argument is null.

Your suggested changes to medics and engineers are not minor tweaks that would preserve game balance, but are major nerfs that would upset the balance of the entire game. I'm not saying either of those classes need slight tweaking, but definitely not a whole bulleted list of radical changes.

5 guys having 5 medics can't use their revives against 20. They'd have no one to do any shooting. The 20 can have 5 medics and completely erase every death (not from stats of course). So the argument that both sides have medics certainly doesn't hold any water when we're talking about a 20 on 5 situation and whether or not the 5 should hurt the 20. And the rest of the time, it's just cheesy gameplay.

Also, it would not upset the balance of the game, the balance of the game is upset right now. Of course, those who like to zip off behind a rock and erase substantial damage in a few seconds will not agree; bearing in mind that in this game if someone is 50 meters away and their tank goes behind a rock, they can be repaired in 5 seconds and yet it takes you well more than that to get in position to fire again.

Also, the bullet list was not a list that I meant ALL things should be done, but merely a list of things to choose one or two from. Nanite ammo, for example, might be enough to bring revives to balance.

[Timithos]

Originally Posted by BlaxicanX

This doesn't answer my question.



You use a lot of hyperbole.

What methods would you use to make bases more defensible?

I use hyperbole, because constantly spewing out specific ideas about base defense is exhausting and obvious to me. I'm so tired, I'm not even going to put much mental effort into this. No proper grammar for you.

Ok, this is not rocket science. SOE apparently discovered 3 tools only on base defense: Choke Points (Bio Labs), Walls (Wallsamir), and Elevation (Amerish).

Spawn room fracturing: I can solve the spawn camping problem on 70% of the outposts on all of Auraxus. Place Spawn Room C of Freyr Amp Station into every small outpost on Auraxus. It is sunken into the ground with roof egress and 5 teleporter/tunnel exits. Spread the exits out 50-100 meters apart from eachother around the base. Make them come up into buildings with no line of sight to the doors. Each building has 2-5 exits. Armor and air would have to literally camp 20+ exits points which is virtually impossible. Only an organized outfit or extremely overwhelming zerg could cover the 6 infantry exits. It is NOT armor and air's job to camp the spawn room. It is their job to suppress the attacker's avenues on their way to capture points, vehicle terminals, and generators. DONE. #1 biggest base problem solved. (Because one above ground spawn room and one above-ground teleporter DIDN'T WORK on Esamir SOE!)

More turrets, more variety. Better range of motion. Better placement.

ADS camera firing at head level so we can actually take advantage of cover. You stand on top of a wall, and you can't see the attacker below you, but he can pop you in the head, because your "chest camera" is obstructed by the wall or some crate.

Modules that you can install into your facility that enhance it's usefulness and power (like more bonuses, tougher turrets, etc.) This is a PS1 concept.

Put cat-walks and stairs on the defender side of walls only. And since we don't have the chest camera problem anymore, we can actually use them.

Design sloped terrain where defenders can EASILY get out of a base, but attackers can't easily get in. One-way drop off catwalks are a good idea too... the ones in Esamir in that ONE base, you know?

HUD and Mini map information for facility owners ONLY! Don't show attackers that a generator is overloaded or destroyed. Make them check! Make them communicate. It's the defender's facility. We have the data - not the attackers.

Trenches that are insidiously sized to trap, wedge, and disable lightnings, vanguards and prowlers. Ever been driving along and suddenly fall into a trench and you can't drive out? Facility defenders should have dug these defenses to size. Don't want to get trapped? Stay away, or drive at higher speeds at an angle.

5 attacking classes can overload a generator, but only one defending class can repair it when blown. It take 3-4 seconds for 5 attacking classes to initiate blowing a generator, but 15-20 seconds for a defending engineer to repair it. How is this remotely fair for defenders?! Either flip flop that crap, or equalize the situation.

Change the size of the capture point radius. The defenders get a larger circle to spread out and DEFEND. The attackers get a smaller circle.

Tweak the capture flip timer too. Defenders is shorter, attackers is longer.

A.I. facility turrets that fire at 50% effectiveness, limited range, and no target leading. (Again, another PS1 concept that worked.)

Since I solved the spawn camping problem in 70% of the small outposts everywhere. Attackers might not want to venture out to "suppress the spawn". Better defend the capture point, because they'll have a steady stream of defenders coming at them so it WON'T be boring. Oh and since that is the most viable attacking strategy, you can bring back 0/6-6/6 capture mechanics that speed the capture.

***********************

Gosh, and once bases are actually defensible, we can add all kinds of attacking components:

Armor siege capture mechanics for holding a dominating a swath of land.

Air siege capture mechanics for dominating the air in the zone.

Power drain/ANT tactics.

Linear generator/control console shut down pathway mechanics like... I don't know... 10 freaking generators/consoles that finally lead all the way to destroying the spawn tubes.

Another linear destructible debris path that leads to the spawn tubes. Yup, destructible bases.

But since bases or so pathetically designed, we CAN'T HAVE ANY OF THIS!

I'm exhausted. I broke my promise.

[Taramafor]

See, it's not just me yelling for better base defense and proper cover. >_>

[HereticusXZ]

Better base design IMO is just band aid solutions, we've been given better base design every major update, every continent revamp, all ever sense the first Indar revamp....

It still hasn't changed the core problems...


Build walls, move the spawn-room, add underground complexes and it still doesn't change the fact that this base has no relevance beyond a glorified paintball arena.

Bases need real mechanical relevance beyond XP or Resources gain.

Ask yourself "What relevance does X facility bring to my Empire that impacts me in a very real way?"

Answer: Only the Tech-Plants control over Main-Battle-Tank production.... and that's arguable over how relevant MBT's are for impacting the war effort.

One of the largest problems to PS2 is the lack or absence of incentive "Why do we fight?" beyond the generic fact that it's a video game, dakka for the sake of dakka. XP Is quite literally the only reason anyone goes to any fight.

Tactics and Strategy, Choosing the right base to attack/defend should be more important then Zerg to X base because it has the most XP.

[War Barney]

Originally Posted by HereticusXZ

Better base design IMO is just band aid solutions, we've been given better base design every major update, every continent revamp, all ever sense the first Indar revamp....

It still hasn't changed the core problems...


Build walls, move the spawn-room, add underground complexes and it still doesn't change the fact that this base has no relevance beyond a glorified paintball arena.

Bases need real mechanical relevance beyond XP or Resources gain.

Ask yourself "What relevance does X facility bring to my Empire that impacts me in a very real way?"

Answer: Only the Tech-Plants control over Main-Battle-Tank production.... and that's arguable over how relevant MBT's are for impacting the war effort.

One of the largest problems to PS2 is the lack or absence of incentive "Why do we fight?" beyond the generic fact that it's a video game, dakka for the sake of dakka. XP Is quite literally the only reason anyone goes to any fight.

Tactics and Strategy, Choosing the right base to attack/defend should be more important then Zerg to X base because it has the most XP.

Aye the *why* is one thing this game really lacks, theres no story to speak of, just some lore you can never know if you don't look for it and bases how no meaning except to gain exp unless its an alert.

If anything alerts highlight what you're saying, that bases need relevance, alerts are fun because they give you a purpose, its fun getting a platoon together and planning out a strategy to reach a base you need to capture to win (though its boring how it more or less forces you to 1 place you might not enjoy or fight over certain bases you don't enjoy). It would be nice if this idea of purpose was more constant.

The problem really is how though, making more vehicles tied to it wouldn't help as I don't enjoy vehicles so wouldn't give a crap still, same as a lot of people, tying it to guns would be very complex, make no sense and just annoy people.

One simple idea which I think you've already suggested in other threads would be to make every base have a purpose, perhaps defence bases that make it take longer to cap other bases, towers with radar on top (which can be disabled by a gen) that give minimap vision to the bases next to it on the lattice, bases that are covered in AA and AV turrets giving control of routes to other bases.

The sad thing is I don't even think this would help.. it would make you focus certain bases first but there'd still be no grand reason for it. Whats needed is things like this AND some kind of intro for players to get them hyped up for fighting for their faction, and perhaps some kind of reward if you lock all the continents something BIG like 2k certs for everybody or chose a free gun (perhaps not that big..) that way people would know what they are fighting for! a faction with goals they now understand and a reward which is hard to get but worth it when you do. Is there even a bonus for locking a cont other than it flashing up obnoxiously? I've never noticed so if there is its obviously really pretty negligible.