Essamir redesign is awesome, but lattice has made it incredibly zerg-centric

[ringring]

I started reading that zerg stuff but rapidly lost the will to live.

[KesTro]

Originally Posted by ringring

I started reading that zerg stuff but rapidly lost the will to live.

Such is life in Auraxis.

[EVILoHOMER]

The problem with the Hex system is the zergs never met.

[Natir]

Originally Posted by Stew

Actually i think you do not get the real signification of a Zergs , a Zergs isnt a unorganised large group of peoples , its the opposite , in star craft a zergs rush is actually driven by the player himself and he swarms hes opponent with a insanely large numbers of units

Actually a Ps2 zergs ( in Vs matherson ) or ( The enclave Matherson ) for refference are driven by the leaders , the zergs isnt a brainless Huge numbers of players with a tunel vision type of thing ...

The zergs are manipulated and driven by the leaders , The ps2 Zergs basically crash on anybases that need to be taken at any time and they redeploy the zergs in no time with great game mechanics that are ( exploited ) in these senarios

The Enclave was Before Vs matherson the only true Zergfits on matherson , capable of redeploying numerous platoon all at once on a single bases where the figths was already , 48+/48+ 48 % 52 % , and bang TE arrive TR jump from 52 % to 87 % lol and they simply broke then entire game making everything highly unresponsive spamming maxs and HA like no ends .. it is Horrible simply because the game tech do not suport such numerous players in the same area but also because playing 13 % to 25 % pops agains 87 % or 75 % isnt fair or fun by any mean , because if your goal is anything but kill farming , you will end up frustrated and anoye by this type of situations


Zergs and ( organised Zergs ) no matter how you want to call it , are infamous and break the goal of this game , that why so much peoples quit , thats why so much peoples think this game as no goal but either ghost capping ( boring ) or Zerging underpops , or been steam rolls by the zergfits

Yes, Stew, we know you hate The Enclave. Why don't you tell us more about why you hate us. PS: Don't worry though, we would never come back to PS2 under any circumstances.

You guys in this thread are funny though. The more you guys seem to talk about what defines a zerg, just about all outfits with more than one platoon of guys equals one. It also amazes me that if there is any amount of organization, you seem to completely write them off and just call them a zerg due to their numbers. This game is all about numbers. In order to take territory, most, if not all the time, you need more forces to overwhelm the other side, not superior tactics. Have you guys actually looked at the base design and continent design? There isn't much in the way of tactics outside of having people go to different points and setting up an AMS or two. But is that really tactical? Nope. This game is all about numbers and is nothing more than a large team death match right now. There is not rhyme or reason as to why you take territory or why you kill someone outside of getting a few more certs. IE: Team death match.

But even the lattice system is a failure in PS2. Is there an overwhelming force rushing one lane? Well, if you can't fight them, just go to a different lane and win.

Lets talk about Planetside Next. Did you guys know that they scrapped the reskin of PS1 for a free to play model that is Planetside 2?

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by Natir

You guys in this thread are funny though. The more you guys seem to talk about what defines a zerg, just about all outfits with more than one platoon of guys equals one.

Actually I'm trying to tell people here that "zerg" is defined from individual moment-to-moment gameplay and not from the amount of people participating. But frequently a large organized group becomes a zerg, because sheer numbers affect their capabilities, resulting in, for example, inability to take a base with 60% pop, while being able to take the very same base with 40%, just with lesser numbers.

But anyway, you do realise your post seems like another shot at starting the Enclave argument, right?

[Sledgecrushr]

I love big fights. This is exactly why I am playing planetside 2. For all you whiners moaning about having to fight lots of people I dont know what to say. Find a group? Find a bigger group? Shit, start your own outfit and go head to head with the zerg.

Fights that have 400 people blowing each other to smithereens is what I like and what this game has promised to me.

[Natir]

Originally Posted by NewSith

Actually I'm trying to tell people here that "zerg" is defined from individual moment-to-moment gameplay and not from the amount of people participating. But frequently a large organized group becomes a zerg, because sheer numbers affect their capabilities, resulting in, for example, inability to take a base with 60% pop, while being able to take the very same base with 40%, just with lesser numbers.

But anyway, you do realise your post seems like another shot at starting the Enclave argument, right?

Sadly there were many outfits way bigger than ours. Many outfits on Mattherson were bigger than us, active members included. So, if you guys want to make a thread that has Enclave in it, you already did that without any Enclave member posting in here. Did you notice what I quoted? Kind of sad that Enclave is still used when describing a zerg outfit when AoD fits way better. You guys really need to get new material, we haven't played since the end of June.

[EVILoHOMER]

Yeh I mean it's the whole reason to play Planetside, without the big fights there are much better FPS games out there. I can think of nothing worse than cruising around looking for a single fight, in fact that's exactly what it was like before they merged servers. It's also what it's like when it isn't prime time, so IMO they need to force players together all the time.

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by EVILoHOMER

Yeh I mean it's the whole reason to play Planetside, without the big fights there are much better FPS games out there. I can think of nothing worse than cruising around looking for a single fight, in fact that's exactly what it was like before they merged servers. It's also what it's like when it isn't prime time, so IMO they need to force players together all the time.

I play PS2 for variety. I don't give a crap about the size of fights. No game out there offers that much variety, not even BF, although it's the closest game to it. So I, aswell as many other players want variety in how big the fights are. Is that line of thought wrong?

[Crator]

The problem with the hex is that big fights were too few and far between and there was a lot of ring-around-the-rosy. I agree with NewSith that variety in size of fights, small/med/large sizes are ideal for all players. The problem is, how do you implement a system that allows for that variety where one option doesn't dominate another for too long? It's kind of a catch 22 if you ask me...

[Taramafor]

Originally Posted by Crator

The problem with the hex is that big fights were too few and far between and there was a lot of ring-around-the-rosy. I agree with NewSith that variety in size of fights, small/med/large sizes are ideal for all players. The problem is, how do you implement a system that allows for that variety where one option doesn't dominate another for too long? It's kind of a catch 22 if you ask me...

Well fixing it so that everyone isn't cramped in a small base and spawn room camping would be a nice start.

Or rather, a way to spread out the zerg over multiple smaller bases to, you know, take over multiple bases without leaving a single base exposed once they move on. Of course, that tactic shouldn't apply to say tech and bio labs because they're so F-ing big. Yet bio labs do have multiple bases connected of sorts with those teleporters.

What we need is more base connection I think. Where tacking/holding one base affects another in a big way like the teleporters at the bio labs.

[Kerrec]

Size. Always. Matters.

Fineprint:
1) unless you are facing 2:1 or worse odds, stuck in spawnrooms as you lose base after base after base in a lane (hours of frustrating gameplay), until your faction decides to do something. And then,
2) you are fighting with a 2:1 or greater advantage, camping spawnrooms to get a shot at opponents - that become fewer as they move somewhere esle to have the numerical advantage - trying to break out as you take base after base after base in a lane (hours of boring gameplay).

[Taramafor]

Originally Posted by Kerrec

Size. Always. Matters.

Fineprint:
1) unless you are facing 2:1 or worse odds, stuck in spawnrooms as you lose base after base after base in a lane (hours of frustrating gameplay), until your faction decides to do something. And then,
2) you are fighting with a 2:1 or greater advantage, camping spawnrooms to get a shot at opponents - that become fewer as they move somewhere esle to have the numerical advantage - trying to break out as you take base after base after base in a lane (hours of boring gameplay).

Exactly my point. Now the size always matter slogan should still apply, but that size should be spread out, not clustered into a tiny area all the time.

Of course, that mainly applies to smaller bases. Tech plants and towers and a few other places and places in between places need the large zergs. But in most if those places, it won't be clustered and so not cramped and campy.

[CrankyTRex]

Originally Posted by Crator

The problem with the hex is that big fights were too few and far between and there was a lot of ring-around-the-rosy. I agree with NewSith that variety in size of fights, small/med/large sizes are ideal for all players. The problem is, how do you implement a system that allows for that variety where one option doesn't dominate another for too long? It's kind of a catch 22 if you ask me...

By creating territorial advantage mechanics that strongly encourage players to flow towards certain points at certain times, but not outright forcing them to, and with capture mechanics that make it possible for a sense of accomplishment both on the micro level and the macro level, which ultimately discourage "ghost capping" as an impractical choice.

Unlike the brute force method of the Lattice, that requires several interlocking parts, none of which are necessarily quick fixes, which is likely why the Devs ultimately went with the flow of PS1 players demanding it since that is simply faster to put in place.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by CrankyTRex

By creating territorial advantage mechanics that strongly encourage players to flow towards certain points at certain times, but not outright forcing them to, and with capture mechanics that make it possible for a sense of accomplishment both on the micro level and the macro level, which ultimately discourage "ghost capping" as an impractical choice.

Unlike the brute force method of the Lattice, that requires several interlocking parts, none of which are necessarily quick fixes, which is likely why the Devs ultimately went with the flow of PS1 players demanding it since that is simply faster to put in place.

Everyone should also factor in the fact that in not many months hence we are due to get Hossin, Nexus plus another two Battle Islands and the inter-continental lattice.