Ghost capping zergs - air domination everywhere else - wordt 2x event ever. - Page 9

Flycutter · 2012-12-28, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

The OP isn't crazy - I've observed the same behavior lately, especially late at night. I like to occasionally join random squads and try to be a typical casual player and see how different types of players and outfits experience the game.

This is what I typically see in larger groups - players roll around in a blob from territory to territory getting capture XP and avoiding the enemy. When the blobs meet it is by chance, not intent. When players try to stop the blob they usually get rolled and have little choice but to find their own team's blob and roll with it. Larger outfits have the numbers to chance this behavior, which is why I don't see it on ops. Seen several reddit threads pop up about this sort of thing too.

Seems to be a combination of playing the territory control game + path of least resistance....but it isn't fun...at all. Its the exact opposite of what I experience in outfit play where we intentionally go after the enemy and pick fights because that's where the entertainment is.

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 zerg has too many different directions to go and since capture XP is the most obvious reward that is where they go.

My suggestions aren't perfect and they are just off the top of my head and not all of them are related to the game's current problems. Some of these may seem ridiculous, but hopefully they will foster some new ideas and discussion from the PS2 design team.

I would take the major bases and increase the size of the surrounding territory to include some of the small outposts. With less paths to take the zerg will have to attack each other. The main base itself would be an impenetrable fortress but the outposts would have objectives that would help open up that fortress to the attackers.

The base benefit would be maintained by a gen that could be taken down, removing the benefits but without flipping the ownership of the base.

The outposts surrounding the bases would have SCU's that would not stop the defense from spawning but would increase their respawn timer. You would need to take down these SCU's to make the defense more manageable. The defense has one way teleports to protect these outposts.

Increase all vehicle resource costs by 25 to 50%. Don't nerf the damage just nerf the availability. The first tech plant that a empire owns provides them liberators and MBT's. The remaining tech plants that they own on other continents would provide a cost reduction to pulling vehicles worldwide as long as they maintain a link.

The more certs you have in a vehicle increases its resource cost.

Nothing on the ground can get through base shields. Galaxy drops and liberators are used to soften up the exterior base defenses while tanks and infantry take the outposts. Once the shields are down the fight moves inside the main base while smaller squads continue to hold the outposts.

Base XP is granted both on offense and defense based on the size of the fight.

Players that switch empires on the same server would have some sort of timer or stiff punishment to prevent them from immediately TK'ing.

Up to 25% XP boost for the under populated empire. This coupled with the worldwide tech plant resource benefit would hopefully spread the fight to other continents.

Special artillery (Flail) that can shoot at a zerg formation from about 1km away. Requires a 3 man team to operate with 30sec to 1 min reload. Two infiltrators designate a target while the driver operates the vehicle. Puggers will have a hard time blindly firing this weapon but a small squad can slow down the zerg's progress. It can carry AV or AI ammo but not both at the same time. I see it as basically a ground based liberator.

The skyguard becomes a two person air killing death machine and requires the same resources as a MBT. Two weapon systems are available, either the current flak cannon or a lock on missile launcher.

Any major changes to a particular weapon in the game gives players a cert refund for that weapon only.

Spawn tubes are moved to the larger buildings hopefully preventing or reducing the current spawn camping by vehicles. I would rather break a defense by crushing their spirit than just spaming my HE prowler. Yes, I spawn camp and yes it feels cheap.

stordito · 2012-12-28, 12:36 PM

i can't say anything new except that there is no reason to defend.

no reason

-because if you are the "defender" means you are outnumbered already, therefore you need a "fort" to hold position.

-because you are basically defending a spawn, not a facility, you don't understand what you should die for. (not enought incentives)

-because you don't "feel" being protected by anything, you just feel to bail to save your virtual life.

because defending has been surgically removed from this game
from windows & doors with no shield/IFF (useless infiltrators?), to sensible objectives that spread the already outnumbered defenders, from the huge CY with a lot of obstacles and useless walls to Huge choke points placed to move the conflict outside the bases.
In PS2, since early beta, i NEVER EVER HAD the feeling of being protected or holding something that could protect me.

While in other "hold the position" games i feel like every secured position must be patrolled, here in PS2 my attitude comes from years of competitive FPS arena games like Unreal or Quake.

Here the only mean of defending yourself is to avoid the need of defense.
Attacking empty bases, scouting with a mossie and rocketspamming atvs,or just follow the zerg for easy meat grinding while it lats.
Even the zerg is not a real zerg. it looses direction and has no scope.
the first base it's 100 soldiers, the next base 50 have choosen another path, and conflicts just randomly occur.

Devs, you must give players a chance to resist and defend.
Give player motivation (bonuses,clearer capture mechanic,better battle flow) and instruments to do so (AKA: better defenses, shields, IFF doors & windows,safer CY with less crap in it, for a change).

just my 2c.

stordito · 2012-12-28, 12:41 PM

i can't say anything new except that there is no reason to defend.

no reason

-because if you are the "defender" means you are outnumbered already, therefore you need a "fort" to hold position.

-because you are basically defending a spawn, not a facility, you don't understand what you should die for. (not enought incentives)

-because you don't "feel" being protected by anything, you just feel to bail to save your virtual life.

because defending has been surgically removed from this game
from windows & doors with no shield/IFF (useless infiltrators?), to sensible objectives that spread the already outnumbered defenders, from the huge CY with a lot of obstacles and useless walls to Huge choke points placed to move the conflict outside the bases.
In PS2, since early beta, i NEVER EVER HAD the feeling of being protected or holding something that could protect me.

While in other "hold the position" games i feel like every secured position must be patrolled, here in PS2 my attitude comes from years of competitive FPS arena games like Unreal or Quake.

Here the only mean of defending yourself is to avoid the need of defense.
Attacking empty bases, scouting with a mossie and rocketspamming atvs,or just follow the zerg for easy meat grinding while it lats.
Even the zerg is not a real zerg. it looses direction and has no scope.
the first base it's 100 soldiers, the next base 50 have choosen another path, and conflicts just randomly occur.

Devs, you must give players a chance to resist and defend.
Give player motivation (bonuses,clearer capture mechanic,better battle flow) and instruments to do so (AKA: better defenses, shields, IFF doors & windows,safer CY with less crap in it, for a change).

just my 2c.

MrBloodworth · 2012-12-28, 12:52 PM

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.

Sure.

Cert gain seen as the "Fun" of the game. By design.
Base design cripples defenders. Askes them to cross an entire base and fight a better equipped attacking force to even defend. Then it asks them to defend for longer ( No instant re-secures ) then the attackers did in the first place.
No direct, unmistakeable gain from defense ( Does not matter if its there, people do not know. )
Due to air and Vehicle proliferation, Infantry play suffers ( MBT being one man is a huge part of this ), also base design.
No direction on a global/empire wide level indicator for where fights must/need/should go. Its just to easy to avoid all forces, with no downside.
XP gain for attacking is not attached to how much fighting occurred in the area, its a flat rate. ( Other than discrete actions )
Spawn camping is the first thing that happens in a base assault, only those that want to get blasted every time they step out the shield wall will respawn there. Game over on action one. Bad counter play. Fresh spawns are worth as much as a long life player.
Vehicles able to capture points. WTFISTHAT?
A lack of GOD DAM DOORS.

I'm sure I could go on, but at this point, I am repeating things I said in beta.

Seafort · 2012-12-28, 02:06 PM

Not much else to say what hasn't already been said.

The bases especially defending needs a complete redesign if SOE wants PS2 to have any longevity.

There needs to be consequences for losing an important base i.e. tech plant u lose the ability to spawn MBTs from anywhere including the warp gates.
A base should be added for ESFs as well so you can't spawn them if you don't own that certain base.

Dynamic XP for capturing and defending bases has to be introduced ASAP.
I'm guilty of this as anyone else. I come in to a base 5-10 secs from being captured and I get full XP for doing nothing. That's just wrong.

SOE get it out of your heads this is a console centric game like CoD/BF3.
This is PS2 a PC centric game which should have strategy, metagame and some bloody consequences.
Many of us don't want easy mode XP gain but we do want some substance to the game. What happened to all the tactical play from PS1? The metagame? I know this is F2P but that doesn't mean it should be dumbed down so a 5 year old could play it.

Most of us do have some tactical intelligence so stop treating us like we are stupid.

Pimm · 2012-12-31, 02:34 AM

Oh so you don't want people ghost capping in huge roaming zergs.

Then you need to do two things

1) Reduce the cert point cost of items (I can't afford a sub [ I love this game i really do I WISH I could afford a sub i would do it in a second] nor can I afford more than a few bucks a month in SC so I can't just "pay to win" for all the good equipment that is owning me on the battlefield (IE I have been getting mowed down with LA carring shotguns and i really want one but survey says "no money to buy SC so no shotgun for Pimm", I HAVE (read as I have no monetary recourse to buy whatever I want) to fight for my gear)

2) Provide some sort of exp/cert bonus for successful defense of a base. Why would ANYONE (notable exception here: the crown) want to waste time defending a base when they get no real tangible reward for it. A few kills does not equal the amount of certs you can get zerging these empty bases. Already even in platoons that are operating "as we intended them to" they will often discuss defending and pass it up because defending gives them no real reward for actually doing it and could potentially be a protracted war of attrition (read as faceplanting the wall of attackers and adding ot their cert point collections) with the d losing as many others have stated here.

IN ADDITION TO THAT: These zergs are in fact helping to provide resource gain for their factions. So it isn't like taking these bases actually ONLY serves to gain quick easy certs.

Look I know you set cert point unlocks high so you can get more people in the pay to win store. Some of us can't pay to win so the best strategy for us is to do these zergs and farm as many easy, quick certs as possible (while stocking up on prox mines, c4, tank mines, grenades and an occasional max kit or two) to pay those 1k cert points for this or that item.

If you don't want these zergs then you need to reconsider the business model or stop whining about them. Your choice really. (<.<)

p0intman · 2012-12-31, 02:42 AM

give me a fucking rek and stuff to use it with. proper jammers too tbh.

VaderDSL · 2012-12-31, 05:38 AM

Would love to see better spawn rooms in big bases, rather than some tacked on building outside of the main facility, at least if you had an exit into the facility that vehicles can't spam then you'd have a better chance at a coordinated push out (flak armour

)

As it is as soon as a couple of tanks/libs start covering the spawn room I simply leave the area and go somewhere else, I refuse to be in a meat grinder just because a few vehicles are spamming HE at the shields.

Back in PS1 the enemy could have had hundreds of tanks and aircraft at the base, but it came down to boots on the ground. In PS2 it's whoever gets air power/armour to the spawn room who wins.

Sadly I think the only thing we'll end up seeing is shields covering the entire base due to the limitations of the game engine (not currently possible to make underground structures)

Fear The Amish · 2012-12-31, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

Yea it sounds like the concept of planetside is not for you as you want a game with no vehicles nor utilities.

seems like PS in your opinion is only for people that want to roll vehicles... so WoT and WoWP is that way us that want a COMBINED arms game will be here.

p0intman · 2012-12-31, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

Yea it sounds like the concept of planetside is not for you as you want a game with no vehicles nor utilities.

You must be new to the idea of combined arms...

Misato · 2012-12-31, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by Flycutter

The zerg has too many different directions to go and since capture XP is the most obvious reward that is where they go.

Nothing on the ground can get through base shields. Galaxy drops and liberators are used to soften up the exterior base defenses while tanks and infantry take the outposts. Once the shields are down the fight moves inside the main base while smaller squads continue to hold the outposts.

Though I never seen it in action, I am pretty sure the shield diffuser on the sundy is exactly what that is designed for, to get 12 people through a base shield, or is there any other vehicles that can get through shields. I hardly ever see them utilize. Everytime I go to a tech plant, you see a line of armor waiting for the infantry to take down the shield generators. I was contemplating in seeing how well this works with 2 surrenders full of peeps I would like to keep that though that's just me.

AS for Galaxies, we did a drop when teh NC and VS were duking it out over a tech plant and we took the plant out from under them. It was a last minute kind of let's do something crazy before logging. Have an infiltrator hack the terminals and spawn an ams sundy and it was game over. only 12 of us, and yes the pilot bailed as he was light assault. SO I love Galaxy drops, just pick your targets wisely

Speaking of liberators, they have a special place in **** when I am running infantry lol and I think they are fine they way they are.

The problem I see is incentive. There is no incentive for defending, until that part is addressed defending will be a moot point right now. Don't get me wrong, I have racked up some great xp during a defense, but really I could have gotten the same from the zerg if I wish to participate in the zerg but at a much faster rate. NOt all points need to be defended but the important points like MBT plants for example as you pointed should be an incentive to defend.

p0intman · 2012-12-31, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by Misato

Though I never seen it in action, I am pretty sure the shield diffuser on the sundy is exactly what that is designed for, to get 12 people through a base shield. I could be wrong though.

thats exactly what its used for, and you can actually get through both the main gate sheilds AND the inner superstructure shields of an amp station with a diffuser if done correctly and at high speed. do it with enough people and you can seriously fuck people over inside bases. very few people expect it still.

Misato · 2012-12-31, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by p0intman

thats exactly what its used for, and you can actually get through both the main gate sheilds AND the inner superstructure shields of an amp station with a diffuser if done correctly and at high speed. do it with enough people and you can seriously fuck people over inside bases. very few people expect it still.

yea, I was wondering what certs I was going to get next for my sundy and I am going to give that a whirl tonight. So far I was told its not effective and I was like really because it seems like you can bust through an amp station with no problem lol. Thanks

StumpyTheOzzie · 2012-12-31, 04:45 PM

Last night it seemed to me that there were two games going on. One was "Capture Amerish and Esamir so we get mad benefits and the planet is mostly blue" and the other one was "kill kill kill kill kill"

The cap game was just irritating. Some lone VS-with-a-scythe was running around capping points but not staying to defend. We were capping as a squad and waiting it out so that we actually scored. My score/hour was about 13k doing this which is pretty lame. (subs, boots and double xp)

Finally, after we capped them both, we all poured into the crown and I got 13k score in about 10 minutes before I got the shits at 000000000000000000000000000's cheating so I logged off.

Since the only benefits to capping Amerish and Esamir is a 10% reduction in costs, there's zero incentive for me to fight there. Indar is where the high scoring fights are - but then 000000000000000000000000 comes in and ruins the game totally...

So why play at all?

Pimm · 2012-12-31, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by Misato

Though I never seen it in action, I am pretty sure the shield diffuser on the sundy is exactly what that is designed for, to get 12 people through a base shield, or is there any other vehicles that can get through shields. I hardly ever see them utilize. Everytime I go to a tech plant, you see a line of armor waiting for the infantry to take down the shield generators. I was contemplating in seeing how well this works with 2 surrenders full of peeps I would like to keep that though that's just me.

The reason why is because it takes up the utility slot AKA the same slot that is used for the AMS. What would you prefer a 12 person drop inside the shield where most of you and your sunderer probably will die.... or a mobile spawn which you can park outside, spawn as needed from AND resupply at. personally I would take mobile spawn over the shield disruptor. Shield disruptor is a cool idea, but not as versatile or useful as the AMS.

Where it might be handy is if you have multiple sunderers one for ammo one for deploying and one with the shield disruptor.