PS2 Base Design - Page 4

Whiteagle · 2012-12-14, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Yeah, but that's why they're better off designing the buildings NOW, then first creating more continents that will need to be overhauled one by one. :/ IT's doing the work twice and is going to cost a lot more time.

True enough, but this will delay development on new Continents, leaving us with the OLD Continents until they are done...

Hence why I am focusing on quick building asset swaps for spawns; they won't fix the issue outright, but they will make it slightly better until the Devs can go back and do a complete overhaul.

Originally Posted by Figment

I know, I wasn't saying it wouldn't fit there, I was saying it wouldn't work as well there (they'd have to move it anyway, which would cause a lot of reworking).

Actually, not really...
All the small spawn boxes appear to be stand-alone structures that sit by their lonesome, so it just be a matter of deleting them and replacing them with the Mushrooms.

It would probably take less then a hour to replace one, meaning an entire Continent could be done in a couple of days.

Originally Posted by Figment

I understand the concept, could work as a stand in. Problem is as with anything else, nothing is as permanent as temporary. Good chance they'll call it a day after that as resources are shifted by managers. :/ They'd first have to dedicate themselves to that redesign process really.

Indeed, but they'd first have to get the go-ahead for the redesign process in the first place...
My Mushrooms would hopefully be the first of many more Building assets created for the new designs, it'd just be the easiest to swap with its current counterpart due to their stand-alone nature.
Preferably they and the bases their on would be replaced later on by much better Outpost Fortifications, thus freeing them up to be used as Platoon Spawn Deployables.

Figment · 2012-12-14, 08:53 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Actually, not really...
All the small spawn boxes appear to be stand-alone structures that sit by their lonesome, so it just be a matter of deleting them and replacing them with the Mushrooms.

No, I'm refering to their placement being horrible currently. They "have to rework the entire base layout", for it to be a proper base in general. Being at the edge, stand alone just makes is a lot more easier to camp. So I understand your point, I'm just refering to the work they have to do eventually anyway.

So yes, it would replace it, but the flow would still be bad.

Rivenshield · 2012-12-15, 12:10 AM

Originally Posted by Rahabib

is it just me or does SOE like that its so easy to capture now. They seem to go out of their way to make it easier for bases to be captured.

Yeah. If you haven't heard all the bland statements about 'active defense' and 'keeping the game moving' you haven't been keeping a finger on the official forums. 'Defense' is apparently a code word for 'farming.' And that's bad, mmmkay?

Figment · 2012-12-15, 04:29 AM

Originally Posted by Rivenshield

Yeah. If you haven't heard all the bland statements about 'active defense' and 'keeping the game moving' you haven't been keeping a finger on the official forums. 'Defense' is apparently a code word for 'farming.' And that's bad, mmmkay?

Ironic, since that is exactly what attackers do now. If this is "active defense", is this also called "passive offense" then? Makes sense, probably why I get so bored attacking.

Wahooo · 2012-12-15, 04:33 AM

Active Defense? If that means just giving up and attacking an empty base on the other side of the continent they nailed it.

Whiteagle · 2012-12-15, 02:13 PM

Must be, considering half the time I try to defend an Outpost I end up getting steam rolled by five Magriders, three Scythes, and a couple of Sunderers...

Beerbeer · 2012-12-15, 05:09 PM

All of these are good ideas, which makes me wonder about the next continent...

Will it be the same in regards to outpost and base design or different? Will vehicles play any role in taking over an objective other than trying to get to the base or repel people away, like it should have been all along?

The burden should always be on the attacker, it's the other way around now.

Sturmhardt · 2012-12-15, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Must be, considering half the time I try to defend an Outpost I end up getting steam rolled by five Magriders, three Scythes, and a couple of Sunderers...

Yeah... when I'm defendin a tower INSIDE I get killed by vehicles or airplanes, not infantry.... very strange :/

Whiteagle · 2012-12-15, 09:45 PM

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

All of these are good ideas, which makes me wonder about the next continent....

Well I'm hoping they'll wait and give us the next few Continents in one big bunch.

I mean, the Meta game isn't going to improve until we have at least four more, if we replace Sancuaries in my old Diagram's Figure 5 with "Home Continents":

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

Will it be the same in regards to outpost and base design or different? Will vehicles play any role in taking over an objective other than trying to get to the base or repel people away, like it should have been all along?

The burden should always be on the attacker, it's the other way around now.

Here's hoping...

I mean, Amerish IS better in this regard, right?
You actually have to get out and capture points, while spawns are put in a position where they can't just be driven up on to camp.

Beerbeer · 2012-12-15, 10:04 PM

What I don't get is that the current base design actually encourages people not to defend. I don't get it? It's not fun for the attackers swarming an indefensible, empty base anymore than it is for the defenders getting vehicle spawn camped. It's about as illogical as it can get.

Whiteagle · 2012-12-15, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

What I don't get is that the current base design actually encourages people not to defend. I don't get it? It's not fun for the attackers swarming an indefensible, empty base anymore than it is for the defenders getting vehicle spawn camped. It's about as illogical as it can get.

True enough...

...I remember coming into the Beta wondering why all these militaries had were Pre-fab shacks trying to pass themselves off as office buildings...

...Really it makes one wonder why they didn't have more fortification type building assets like Figment been suggesting to begin with.

Figment · 2012-12-16, 10:12 AM

My bet is they looked at it as a generic shooter and therefore looked at how other generic shooters without tanks and aircraft and randomised spawn design and no conquest goals or protection goals set up their levels and then forgot that instead of a linear fixed approach route there's a 540 degrees approach route. They didn't look at it as a RTS game at all, even though at its core, PlanetSide is like a self-running RTS, just without one person strictly controlling the units.

On top of that, looks like they wanted each base to be unique, so they made every building modular so they could easily build new layouts with different terrain and modules. They just forgot what disconnecting modules does to gameplay (see above).

You can clearly see this 2D thinking in a 3D world when you look at the position of spawnpoints often being at the edge of an outpost, while the objectives are at the other end or in the middle, while the far end is quite open for attackers to get in. They probably hoped that this would encourage fights from one side of a base to the other, while forgetting you can also just drive around or come from the other side and immediately start camping.

SturmovikDrakon · 2012-12-16, 10:20 AM

Originally Posted by Mechzz

Sad thing is, the original PS2 base designs DID allow for progression. Do you remember that awesome picture of a Mossie hovering over the new Zurvan, with its walls and force fields? And I remember Higby describing a progression-based fight with the ability to capture the CY and move forwards.

Now, the PS2 Tech plant was still a LESSER base design than most PS1 bases, even though they were more defensible. The PS1 bases gave you feeling of real urgency when you were rushing up from the spawn to the CY. Sometimes you'd be fighting just outside the walls (for the tower), then pushed back onto the walls then into the CY then into the building and eventually back to the spawns. Even when losing it could be totally awesome.

I understand why they wouldn't want every base to play like that, but to take away one of the two that did occasionally produce a longer fight is just plain silly on SOE's part.

the design could have allowed for progressive capture over the two front courtyards, moving into the facility itself, and finally ending at the back (or the main structure)

either way, a missed opportunity

Also... I actually like the way the walls/towers looked here, they were simple and didn't look like they took up any extra, unnecessary space

Whiteagle · 2012-12-16, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by Figment

My bet is they looked at it as a generic shooter and therefore looked at how other generic shooters without tanks and aircraft and randomised spawn design and no conquest goals or protection goals set up their levels and then forgot that instead of a linear fixed approach route there's a 540 degrees approach route. They didn't look at it as a RTS game at all, even though at its core, PlanetSide is like a self-running RTS, just without one person strictly controlling the units.

On top of that, looks like they wanted each base to be unique, so they made every building modular so they could easily build new layouts with different terrain and modules. They just forgot what disconnecting modules does to gameplay (see above).

Actually... no...

I mean, in this post-Halo age, most generic FPS' worth any salt at least keep in mind the concept of defensible positions...

Even the modular building isn't an excuse, since as I said before they should have had more fortification assets to begin with!

Originally Posted by Figment

You can clearly see this 2D thinking in a 3D world when you look at the position of spawnpoints often being at the edge of an outpost, while the objectives are at the other end or in the middle, while the far end is quite open for attackers to get in. They probably hoped that this would encourage fights from one side of a base to the other, while forgetting you can also just drive around or come from the other side and immediately start camping.

That's not even 2-dimensional thinking, linear layouts like that are more 1.5D...

...And it's still baffling, as even linear map layouts (Primarily my experience with most TF2 modes) would have places for both attackers AND defenders to entrench themselves.

Originally Posted by SturmovikDrakon

Ok, those are awesome, but I can see why they didn't make it into the final product...

Originally Posted by SturmovikDrakon

Also... I actually like the way the walls/towers looked here, they were simple and didn't look like they took up any extra, unnecessary space

...Namely that the walls and towers here look VERY resource intensive...

Not that they don't look awesome, it just looks like each is a building in its own right, and probably would require a great deal of "Hand-crafting" to fit correctly.

...Plus are those sticks poking out of it suppose to be Phalanx Cannons?!

Anywho, had some thoughts on improving the current Major Facilities if anyone wants to hear them...

SturmovikDrakon · 2012-12-16, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Ok, those are awesome, but I can see why they didn't make it into the final product...

Why not?

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

...Namely that the walls and towers here look VERY resource intensive...

Not that they don't look awesome, it just looks like each is a building in its own right, and probably would require a great deal of "Hand-crafting" to fit correctly.

...Plus are those sticks poking out of it suppose to be Phalanx Cannons?!

Anywho, had some thoughts on improving the current Major Facilities if anyone wants to hear them...

I don't see how, considering it looks like they are less detailed and more flat compared to this

I just hope that as the game becomes more optimized, and people will upgrade their hardware, we can come back to these more densely packed, streamlined bases