No sanctuary's. Could it cause a problem? - Page 4

Vash02 · 2011-07-14, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by Raymac

Good point, but it's a reality that is unavoidable to a certain extent. The same thing happens in PS1.

Operational Security will always be important in a massive pvp game like this. We can do the same thing in PS2 as we do now. Form up somewhere, but not give the target until you are formed up and ready. I assume we'll be able to warpgate from one continent to another.

Then why have the footholds if they are going to be inneffective for their purpose?

Also theres the end of the fight where the empires just sit there having a staring competition through the impenetrable barrier. Just like that mossie you chased into a WG in PS1.

IMO its just better to have a single segregated staging area from which to launch raids. Less confusion and easier to control and muster forces.

Raymac · 2011-07-14, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by Vash02

1) Then why have the footholds if they are going to be inneffective for their purpose?

2) Also theres the end of the fight where the empires just sit there having a staring competition through the impenetrable barrier. Just like that mossie you chased into a WG in PS1.

3) IMO its just better to have a single segregated staging area from which to launch raids. Less confusion and easier to control and muster forces.

1) That feels like a big leap in logic, or more likely, I just don't understand what you mean. Sancs would be no more effective with OpSec than a Foothold.

2) There's a couple issues I have with thie point. First, we don't know what the Footholds look like, so we may never have a situation of the old Warpgate staredown just because of the layout. Second, we don't know what the maps look like, so it may be insanely difficult and rare to push an empire locked into their Foothold. We just don't have enough information yet.

3) One of the lessons I took out of the Core Combat expansion is that creating a whole seperate zone doesn't nessessarily improve gameplay, in fact, by splitting the forces so much, you start to lose the massive scale that is the fundamental core of Planetside. Plus I don't think "Rally at Searhus" is any more complicated than "Rally at Sanc".

basti · 2011-07-14, 04:10 PM

Im pretty sure the idea is to have big fights on every continent. While i cant see how they will manage to have that during night time, i clearly see the idea behind those bases rather than sancs.

Gonna really just be able to wait and see how this turns out on a full server, im pretty sure they could manage to get a few thousand guys in the same for several days yet. Means they just have their idea, and no way to really test it real.

After all, Planetside had no lattience for some time, causing back hacks all the time. They once added the lattience, maybe they will add the sancs this time?

Vash02 · 2011-07-14, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by Raymac

1) That feels like a big leap in logic, or more likely, I just don't understand what you mean. Sancs would be no more effective with OpSec than a Foothold.

2) There's a couple issues I have with thie point. First, we don't know what the Footholds look like, so we may never have a situation of the old Warpgate staredown just because of the layout. Second, we don't know what the maps look like, so it may be insanely difficult and rare to push an empire locked into their Foothold. We just don't have enough information yet.

3) One of the lessons I took out of the Core Combat expansion is that creating a whole seperate zone doesn't nessessarily improve gameplay, in fact, by splitting the forces so much, you start to lose the massive scale that is the fundamental core of Planetside. Plus I don't think "Rally at Searhus" is any more complicated than "Rally at Sanc".

1) The purpose of the footholds from what i gleamed was to get people into the fight quicker (as if the few seconds to click instant action wasnt fast enough). If raids are going to have to be formed on another continent than that of the intended raid target then why not just have the single sanctuary?

2) I think it would be bad to just have an endless fight for each continent. I liked the win feeling when you lock down a cont in PS1.

3) Your argument also works against having multiple continents. I mean why have 5-6 conts when it just divides the forces?
"rally at searhus" has the problems of people getting to searhus either travelling through multple WGs or having to find a spawn tube to spawn to searhus. with the single sanc you can just recall and bang your there. simpler, easy for the new guys.

I do believe this is where the KISS principle should be prominent.

Raymac · 2011-07-14, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by Vash02

1) The purpose of the footholds from what i gleamed was to get people into the fight quicker (as if the few seconds to click instant action wasnt fast enough). If raids are going to have to be formed on another continent than that of the intended raid target then why not just have the single sanctuary?

2) I think it would be bad to just have an endless fight for each continent. I liked the win feeling when you lock down a cont in PS1.

3) Your argument also works against having multiple continents. I mean why have 5-6 conts when it just divides the forces?
"rally at searhus" has the problems of people getting to searhus either travelling through multple WGs or having to find a spawn tube to spawn to searhus. with the single sanc you can just recall and bang your there. simpler, easy for the new guys.

I do believe this is where the KISS principle should be prominent.

You're making some very valid points, and I appreciate your tone and perspective. Frankly, I never thought Sancs were a huge problem, certainly not the main problem, so I'm kind of playing the role of devil's advocate. I have a feeling we'll just have to agree to disagree and see what the Footholds are like.

1) Personally, I didn't use Instant Action for the first few years because it would always send me to some random tower out in the boonies. Now that there is basically 1 fight going on at a time, Instant Action works a little better, but it sucked for years.

Also, if you form a raid on say Searhus, and the enemy finds out about it, well they still don't know if you are going to raid Searhus, or jump to Hossin, or anywhere else. But if you do decide on staying in Searhus, well you are already right there. No need to zone. That's why I say it is faster and better.

2) In a persistant mmo, you can't have a major win situation. For example, in WoW, the Alliance will never destroy the Horde and vice versa. Just like I say to the arguement that you can't "win" in PS1, the game is filled with hundreds of little victories and losses, except the computer doesn't stop and say "Yay, you win!". If I want to win rounds, I'll play BF or COD. For persistance, I come to Planetside.

3) You're right my arguement does work against mulitple continents. The devs should hopefully find a balance. They want us to fight for every square foot, so we'll see how many continents we get at the launch. Also, you mis-understood my "Rally at Searhus" example, but I've rambled enough.

ShowNoMercy · 2011-07-14, 04:54 PM

I have a question, who says the footholds that have been mentioned are stationary bases? did anyone catch that comment about how the tower in the trailer has landing struts. Call me crazy, but smed is telling us that something is going to move. IDK if its just a tower or an entire base but its something.

Also not sure how a movable base would be incorporated, but I agree that the feeling of finally taking a continent is pretty sweet. Additionally, since they are incorporating resource points, covertly dropping back behind enemy lines to try and take a resource point away from the enemy seems awfully like a gen hold. Who didnt like gen holds? they were awesome. Since they are removing the lattice system the resource rich hex's will be perfect locations to "gen drop"

Lastly, the sancs can go as long as there is an easy way to drop back to a predetermined location (im thinking binding here). An example being that you log in do an instant action kinda deal and join a sqaud. Your squad already has a bind point and you now have a new spawn location to choose from. When you SL calls for a recall you can meet up there.

P.S. dont you all remember drooling over the idea of fighting in the sanc? face it, no matter what safe central spots are lame and eventually you want to be able to fight there anyways.