Bridges - I like them, but is there a point to them? - Page 3

RoninOni · 2012-08-14, 08:53 PM

Originally Posted by Duskguy

is it me, or is everyone here misunderstanding the OP?

he is saying that he feels the birdges dont seem to create bottlenecks.
he is saying that the ground around the bridges in the videos look plenty navigatable, making them pointless
he wasnt actually asking what bridges are for in general, he was asking what is the point in PS2 if you can easily go around.

if indeed the ground is as navigatable as they appear then tanks could go around/under the bridge and get across as easily as going over the bridge. and if it is like that, why have the bridge there at all. <-- THIS is what OP wants to know.

if i was the one misinterpreting OP, disregard this, but i think i'm right

I saw a Galaxy landed and parked as an infantry spawner beneath a bridge, but the bridge was most DEFINITELY still being fought over.

I can't imagine the attackers trying that hard if it was so easy to go around.....

People zerg... but I don't think they could be THAT stupid....

Getting a vehicle down INTO the canyon is relatively easy... getting it out can only be at certain points

SixShooter · 2012-08-14, 09:56 PM

Originally Posted by Duskguy

if indeed the ground is as navigatable as they appear then tanks could go around/under the bridge and get across as easily as going over the bridge. and if it is like that, why have the bridge there at all. <-- THIS is what OP wants to know.

I think it seems pretty obvious from the videos that some of these places are not as easy to navigate/go under/around, that's why the bridge is there.

I would be more than happy to stand at the top of a ridge lobbing AV fire down at you guys while you try to scale a canyon wall with a vehicle. Cheap kills from stuck drivers that did not use the bridge makes kittens smile

.

Revanmug · 2012-08-14, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by SixShooter

I think it seems pretty obvious from the videos that some of these places are not as easy to navigate/go under/around, that's why the bridge is there.

I would be more than happy to stand at the top of a ridge lobbing AV fire down at you guys while you try to scale a canyon wall with a vehicle. Cheap kills from stuck drivers that did not use the bridge makes kittens smile

.

Indeed. Not sure where this idea that the bridge is useless since people can cross it under it. Hell, Higby had problem climbing at several area as an infantry so don't even bother with a tank...

Can you cross that canyon farther away without the need of the bridge? Yeah sure but that require more time and it is a lot less direct to the tower that was sitting next to bridge meaning to possibility to get kill before getting there is higher.

What is wrong with that?

Duskguy · 2012-08-14, 10:13 PM

i dont think there is anything wrong with hard to get out of ravines under the bridge, and i dont think the OP does either. i have only watched the first live stream fr the closed beta, so i cant speak for what the bridges and ravines look like, and OP said he hasnt seen all the streams, so he cant comment on all of them.

if the ravines are hard to get out of, good, and i would say that would answer this whole thread.

SpcFarlen · 2012-08-14, 10:23 PM

Originally Posted by SixShooter

I think it seems pretty obvious from the videos that some of these places are not as easy to navigate/go under/around, that's why the bridge is there.

I would be more than happy to stand at the top of a ridge lobbing AV fire down at you guys while you try to scale a canyon wall with a vehicle. Cheap kills from stuck drivers that did not use the bridge makes kittens smile

.

Exactly.

From the looks of it there only seemed to be two ways on that one side of the base besides the bridge. A narrow ravine on the left, doubt many vehicles like a Sunderer or MBT could use. Or the road on the right, which brought you up closer to the base and that has its own issues.

Many bridges may not have a real reason for being there other than just... to bridge two points (ironic eh?). Not everything in a game needs to have a specific purpose like getting from A-B faster or A-B safer.

RoninOni · 2012-08-14, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by SpcFarlen

Not everything in a game needs to have a specific purpose like getting from A-B faster or A-B safer.

Not to over criticize...

But the bridge is there precisely in order to facilitate getting from A-B faster

Just nitpicking though

I agree with everything you're saying.

MaxDamage · 2012-08-14, 11:16 PM

Bridges occur when critical mass of love is achieved.

Ertwin · 2012-08-15, 01:07 AM

It might just be a psychological thing. When presented with a bridge, most people will take it regardless of the spanning terrain. It's just a subtle way to guide players. Lore wise the bridge is probably just there for ease of transport.

Eggy · 2012-08-15, 03:41 AM

Originally Posted by Duskguy

is it me, or is everyone here misunderstanding the OP?

You are correct. Its a combination of this being the internet and also planetside. You dont need to read the OP to respond, plus its cool to get your post count up it doesnt matter if your post has any relevance. Its even better if you just repost what someone else has written in CAPS or pretty colours, this proves you have leadership skills.

Bridge battles in PS1 were fun. Bridge battles in PS2 will be fun.

andehh · 2012-08-15, 06:54 AM

I remember some epic bridge battles from PS1, I would be very disappointed for them to be diluted down by just walking through the ditch the bridge spans.

Really fun watching people try and rush across the bridge supported by FF over their heads to clear a path through them.

Hamma · 2012-08-15, 08:56 AM

Squad spawn makes it so bridges aren't as big of a deal sadly. This may change though, Higby has already mentioned squad beacons instead of squad spawns.

VaderShake · 2012-08-15, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by RoninOni

Not to over criticize...

But the bridge is there precisely in order to facilitate getting from A-B faster

Just nitpicking though

I agree with everything you're saying.

Haha, thank you....exactly, it's just a quicker way to get from A. to B., or a flanking route, just another option, another place to fight, welcome to the sandbox.

I think we need in this game already when we are reduced to being critical of bridges haha.

vVRedOctoberVv · 2012-08-15, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by VaderShake

Haha, thank you....exactly, it's just a quicker way to get from A. to B., or a flanking route, just another option, another place to fight, welcome to the sandbox.

I think we need in this game already when we are reduced to being critical of bridges haha.

I think bridges are OP and need to be nerfed.

Boone · 2012-08-15, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by Hamma

Squad spawn makes it so bridges aren't as big of a deal sadly. This may change though, Higby has already mentioned squad beacons instead of squad spawns.

They should do that. If they decide to keep squad spawn just allow it on the leader, but also let us have beacons.

Nordan · 2012-08-15, 11:53 AM

Of course there is a point to them, they provide the shortest possible route to your destination and will thus always be of interest. I guess you could try to find your way through the ravine but I imagine you'd be very exposed down there and it would add many minutes of travel time. Bridges are typical bottle necks and if the developers design the maps correctly conflict should happen naturally there.

Originally Posted by Hamma

Squad spawn makes it so bridges aren't as big of a deal sadly. This may change though, Higby has already mentioned squad beacons instead of squad spawns.

But you can't spawn vehicles when fighting on the fray, right? So bridges should be important to allow a steady stream of reinforcements to arrive. I imagine transport trucks carrying troops and combat vehicles will make good use of them.