Sanctuaries for PS2 [Archive] - PlanetSide Universe

Phantomdestiny

2013-01-27, 03:52 PM

March - Continent Locking
In order to start laying the foundation for a proper metagame, we've been putting a lot of thought into continent locking. There are a lot of little snags and details still to work out, but the basic idea at the moment looks something like this:
Add the ability to capture a Warpgate.
This is accomplished by taking over all adjacent territory.
You won't be able tor take over an Empire's final Warpgate.
This restriction would go away if we ever pursue adding Sanctuaries.
Once a single Empire controls all territory on a continent, the continent enters a "locked" state:
All enemy units are removed from the continent and spawn in at an available Warpgate.
The continent can not be entered/attacked by enemy units for a period of time.

They are not simply saying no sanctuaries . We need to give them a reason to implement them .

From my part i say we can expand the role of sanctuaries for ps1. First we want them as an army coordination location and a safe place after cont locks obviously. Then a VR location for the training of new troop "newbies" or new outfit member in the case of a spec ops outfit.

Then secondly this is new :
the 21th century is the information age and this will probably convince the devs like in any MMO we need a Social place inside the game world where faction members can hang around/discuss/RP.

E-sports:
Maybe sancs could have inside the VR facility some sort of training pits which would allow for small 1/2/3 squads challenges for training or competitive proposes .

Command center :
A physical room/building where high certed officiers/outfit leader can discuss battle plans over a map of auraxis which they can draw on/ping .

The sanctuary idea can be pushed very far . And we can get the old ps1 sancs and more if we want it we just have to show it to the devs and give them ideas which make sense instead of crying over the game . We can change something

please give more ideas of what Sanctuaries could bring

GuyShep

2013-01-27, 04:23 PM

While changing your mind in light of new information or perspectives is fine and all, the issue is that SOE has spent an alpha and beta, both with player feedback, saying "No sancs" throughout. Even if sanctuaries do show up later on, it's gonna be a very bumpy ride because SOE hadn't done so earlier.

However, it's kinda nice that they suggested the possibility of sancs showing up later.

Crator

2013-01-27, 04:38 PM

I think sancs are important for immersion... The footholds work just the same as a gathering mechanic imo though. Unless I'm not realizing something with how the continents have to be connected to each other that require sancs...

As for VR training area they could very well put a door that loads you into an instance (just like in PS1) in the warpgate area just as easily as they can in a sanc.

MacXXcaM

2013-01-27, 05:01 PM

Devs y u no listen?

Everybody wants sanctuaries!

Sifer2

2013-01-27, 05:43 PM

They probably are considering adding Sancts now that their data shows so many people sitting AFK in the warpgate taking up pop cap lol.

Sancts should really come back along with the mission system so we can get back to how it was early in the PS1 days. Where you logged into Sanc an were immediately able to step outside an join one of several squads loading up into Galaxies.

It would also be cool since they could turn the footholds into bigger fortress like structures to create a big final battle to drive the faction off the continent.

Miir

2013-01-27, 07:17 PM

How's about something new this time around.

Instead of Sanctuaries have a continent that is primarily one large urban city. (Capital City)

http://s224245511.onlinehome.us/ps/capitals.jpg

p0intman

2013-01-27, 07:33 PM

are you suggesting they create conts for each empire to rally in that people might actually want to spend time in while forming up raids?

BLASPHEMY! THAT GOES AGAINST ANY SORT OF LOGICAL GAME DESIGN AND WOULD NOT DRAW THE BATTLEFIELD AND COD CROWD!

(Do it, SOE)

Sledgecrushr

2013-01-27, 07:43 PM

Luperza in one of her recent streams said thay they are starting to design sanctuaries.

p0intman

2013-01-27, 08:21 PM

Luperza in one of her recent streams said thay they are starting to design sanctuaries.
cite with a link or get her to come here and say it, or it didnt happen

CrazEpharmacist

2013-01-27, 08:28 PM

cite with a link or get her to come here and say it, or it didnt happen

This. We need a source for this!!!!!!!

Rivenshield

2013-01-27, 08:32 PM

They probably are considering adding Sancts now that their data shows so many people sitting AFK in the warpgate taking up pop cap lol.
That's an excellent point. I hadn't even thought of that.

Devs y u no listen?
Everybody wants sanctuaries!

Everybody *here* wants sanctuaries. Most of the mass-market gamers -- I'm not being snotty; that's what they are, and they are the target audience -- over on the official forums don't even know what they are. But every time you explain what sancs are, and what a rotating warpgate is, and included screenshots from PS1 or similar visual aids, you get a very enthusiastic response.

Same personality types are flocking to the same empires; same kinds of group behaviors are emerging.... There's a whole new generation of gamers out there hungering for the same kind of fix we got ten years ago.

Luperza in one of her recent streams said thay they are starting to design sanctuaries.
There *has* to be a recording of this. Please.

Rockit

2013-01-27, 08:36 PM

These boards might explode if we got confirmation on Maggie's alleged comments.

Phantomdestiny

2013-01-28, 01:03 AM

I want that source so bad

Dougnifico

2013-01-28, 04:44 AM

Personally, I want sanctuaries to be bad ass. Not the sancs from PS1, but something entirely new and unique to each empire. What would be cool is a sanc that could be partially invaded (like a capital city with urban fighting) until an empire is backed into their safe zone. Once this happens, "emergency stockpiles" kick in and suddenly that empire gets a massive resource buff (maybe a few other things) to push back and retake their home.

Babyfark McGeez

2013-01-28, 05:17 AM

Luperza in one of her recent streams said thay they are starting to design sanctuaries.

Pics or it didn't happen.

Would be awesome if they finally realized what potential and dimension sancs would add to this game and dismissed their inexplicable agenda against them.

Qwan

2013-01-28, 05:49 AM

I think I know why they dont want to add sanctuary's.

As most can recall from PS they used a linking system from base to base. For you to hack this base you had to have a link to it. If your faction owned no bases or continents then you were restricted to your sanctuary. A sanctuary had three links to certain continents, so if you wanted to fight back you would only have these three links. Once you decided which warp gate you were going to use, you would end up one of the three continents inside of a protective warp bubble waiting for the rest of your team. In PS2 we have the Hex system (God help us) for them to have a sanc they would have to go to somthing similar to the link system which they dont want to do because they love there Hex system and in there minds it works fine. And as they said before the game released they refused to cut and paste anything from PS1 to PS2 except for the game name, factions, weapons names, vehicle names, concept, continent names, and base names.

See we the players are asking the wrong question, instead of asking:

Are you going to add sanctuarys.
We should be asking:

Why are you not adding sanctuarys.

Cause it seems to me this is what people want to see added to the game. So I ask the question " Why are we not adding sanctuarys to the game SOE" .....

PredatorFour

2013-01-28, 05:53 AM

Qwan

2013-01-28, 06:32 AM

They didn't want to add sancs because they said it slowed down gameplay. They said it took 5 mins to get into a fight. In the current system it would take a click on deploy to get into a fight. Soe just baffles me with their design decision making.

This is true but in PS1 there was a instance action button, as well as a orbital dropship which left like every 1 or 2 minutes. If you think about it they would have to add some type of linking system from sanctuary's if they added them. I mean if they had it set up like the old sanctuary's were there was three warp gates on each sanctuary then were would they connect to (Hence a link). I think that there so determined to not have a linking system that they don't want to add a sanctuary for that reason.

So what if they did add sanctuary's were would the warp bubble take you ?
1. To only one continent (that the warp gate is connected to perminantly) i.e. as in PS1
2. Give you the option of any continent with a active warp gate (this way the enemy will not know your destination) they'll never see you coming.

I dont know how they would set it up, I just hope like alot of gamers who play PS2 that they consider adding sanctuary's. :groovy:

bpostal

2013-01-28, 08:19 AM

My one, overriding thought on Sancs is the question: What are we supposed to do when a faction gets zero based once the footholds are gone? Sit in a hundred+ person queue to get back to our 'home' cont/foothold?

Dkamanus

2013-01-28, 08:21 AM

They didn't want to add sancs because they said it slowed down gameplay. They said it took 5 mins to get into a fight. In the current system it would take a click on deploy to get into a fight. Soe just baffles me with their design decision making.

WOW! 5 WHOLE FUCKING MINUTES? OMG, THE HORROR!

It seems like most of them don't even play games where preparation can take up to an hour, like EVE Online, a game smedley says he plays a lot. 5 minutes, with all the drop podding, instant actioning and all other forms of travels is a ridiculous amount of time, and losing the sanc for those "horendous" 5 minutes is just stupid.

EVEN more so, if it actually kills gameplay because of it. Players can deal with 5 minutes. 30 minutes would be pushing it, but up to 5 minutes is not a problem.

Phantomdestiny

2013-01-28, 10:31 AM

sanctuary help to give the feeling of persistence to the game . Also we could expand the game so much with the sanctuaries . Specially on the side of social interaction.

Qwan

2013-01-28, 11:14 AM

Phantomdestiny

2013-01-28, 11:31 AM

How's about something new this time around.

Instead of Sanctuaries have a continent that is primarily one large urban city. (Capital City)

http://s224245511.onlinehome.us/ps/capitals.jpg

i love that idea because it really brings a feeling of something to die for. but i'm scared of the cpu bound problem we already have. Maybe later on we could have vehicles that can only be build in sanctuaries like the bastion . They would need specific building like a space port which would only be present in the capital city of the sanctuary and would require a day to week to make with a lot of resources and a specific blue print.

nurizeko

2013-01-28, 11:45 AM

Phantomdestiny

2013-01-28, 12:53 PM

http://flygirlgamers.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/planetside-2-environmental_concept_1.jpg

just to remind people of old concept art . they devs did think about urban areas for combat. maybe when hardware gets better on the cpu side. :)

i am wondering are those soldiers attacking a fortified/urbanized home continent foothold/warpgate or a sanctuary? :p

" note the fleet carrier on top " :eek:

robocpf1

2013-01-28, 01:12 PM

Let us not forget that warpgates don't even work the way they're supposed to yet. Higby made a "warpgate terminal" where you go to a menu and select the continent you'd like to warp to. You still can't take vehicles between the warpgates yet.

With that in mind, sanctuaries wouldn't work - yet.

I am glad they are seriously discussing including them in the near future - but now that we've played through tech test, beta, and the first months of launch, I can see why they didn't spend precious time and resources creating sanctuaries.

When you consider the balancing, optimization, leaderboard functionality, metagame and vehicle issues they are still having, it seems like a very small issue to worry about designing entire continents and working warpgates when they have quick ways to get into the fight on any continent.

Is it perfect? No, but the devs know that and they're working on upgrading and changing a lot of things - just look at the Roadmap.

I understand the reluctance to worry about sanctuaries at this stage. I am glad they are thinking about putting them in soon.

As far as Planetside 1 goes:

1) Warpgates. Which you had to fly to, warp to the other continent, and then fly from that warpgate (almost always on the edge of the map) to the fighting. It did take some time to move Galaxies, AMSes, Lodestars, etc if the fighting was far from your warpgate.

2) Instant Action. Hit Escape, click Instant Action, wait 10 seconds and it will spawn you at a hotspot. This was completely uncontrollable, and not a reliable method to get into a specific fight. It was more an "I want to shoot something" button that would spawn you somewhere enemies were.

3) The HART shuttle. This is like the drop pod deploy button we have now, except you could drop anywhere on a contested continent except for inside a facilitiy's SOI. It did not come every 1-2 minutes - the timer was nearly 4 minutes long with a lengthy loading time to allow players to get into the shuttle. When you consider, for PS1, that towers can flip in a matter of 12 seconds and facilities took 15 minutes (or less, with an LLU), 5 minutes is a heck of a long time. If you take too long loading up your Galaxy, you may miss the opportunity because of the travel time. It was a problem, we just had 10 years to learn the best ways of dealing with it, and we sort of ignored it after a while because it was part of the game.

Rockit

2013-01-28, 01:23 PM

Mox

2013-01-28, 01:23 PM

Sancs would be nice to have. But i believe it when i see. His grace John "stubborn" Smedley announced several times that he hates sancs. His thrall Higgles wont do it without a royal pardon....

Crator

2013-01-28, 01:56 PM

2) Instant Action. Hit Escape, click Instant Action, wait 10 seconds and it will spawn you at a hotspot. This was completely uncontrollable, and not a reliable method to get into a specific fight. It was more an "I want to shoot something" button that would spawn you somewhere enemies were.

I really like what they did in PS2 with this. Which is they took away the PS1 random selection and let you select a hotspot you want. The only issue now is the hotspot system needs to be tweaked in a bit in PS2...

Phantomdestiny

2013-01-28, 01:58 PM

I think a lot of it gets back to their comments early on about wanting to have every square inch of land contestable. Obviously sancs don't come anywhere close to being in that conversation. It's probably one of those community requested changes they just couldn't ignore forever, at least I hope that is the case.

depends how stubborn we get by trying to get them to do it .

Rivenshield

2013-01-28, 02:32 PM

I think a lot of it gets back to their comments early on about wanting to have every square inch of land contestable. Obviously sancs don't come anywhere close to being in that conversation
Of course it does. If everything is contestable, it is possible to shove the enemy completely off the battlefield. That implies you have somewhere to shove them *to.*

And as far as the Five Minute Wait goes, that's about how freaking long it takes me to find a good battle anyway. I see some flashing hexes and a little flame marker on a base, and I mouse over it, and it tells me NO ENEMIES DETECTED. When I finally find some ENEMY PLATOON(S) and drop into it, nine times in ten they've already boxed the defenders into the spawn-outhouse with their High Speed Dynamic Esports Zerg and I get liquidated upon landing. Then I have to try respawning two or three different places to find the survivors and band up with them. Or sit and plink through the force field and wait haplessly for the base to flip and get farmed through the wall with high explosives. Yeah, man. That's DYNAMIC. Hell's bells.

In the old days you could drop anywhere outside a base's SOE as often as you pleased, subject only to cont locks and the 2:00 HART timer. Another proven game mechanic left by the roadside in the weeds.

EDIT: Come to think of it, what happened to Spheres Of Influence? I recall Higby talking about that in early beta, but nothing seems to have come of it. It isn't in the six month plan, either.

His grace John "stubborn" Smedley announced several times that he hates sancs.
I honestly don't understand why that dumb grinning bastard still has a job, after the hash he made of SW:G. In the IT industry, you foul up a major software development project that way, you get ushered out the door. I guess the gaming industry is different.

I gave him the benefit of the doubt for awhile, but no longer. His greasy fingerprints are all over every bad design decision that's been made in this game -- including the appallingly early release. I find it impossible to believe that the devs were their own masters in that.

Climhazzard

2013-01-28, 02:34 PM

What would be cool is a sanc that could be partially invaded (like a capital city with urban fighting) until an empire is backed into their safe zone.

"Attackable sanctuaries" was requested throughout the history of the original game. While I thought it was a neat idea, I came to the conclusion that it was pointless.

A faction's sanctuary (or their warp gate, currently) is their safe zone. If you've been pushed back that far, things are already desperate enough. If you're then going to cut that safe zone in half, you might as well just make the new safe zone the actual Sanctuary. Oh, but you want to increase the sense of desperation, so you cut that safe zone in half. It has to stop somewhere, and it should stop at the Sanctuary's "border".

I think a lot of it gets back to their comments early on about wanting to have every square inch of land contestable. Obviously sancs don't come anywhere close to being in that conversation.

Well, the current warp gates don't fit into that conversation, either, and for the same reason sanctuaries don't fit into that conversation. It's just not possible to have "every square inch of land contestable" unless you're willing to allow an entire faction to be essentially booted from the server.

Rockit

2013-01-28, 02:37 PM

Well, the current warp gates don't fit into that conversation, either, and for the same reason sanctuaries don't fit into that conversation. It's just not possible to have "every square inch of land contestable" unless you're willing to allow an entire faction to be essentially booted from the server.

Well within reason. You need some sort of safe zone for organized ops to form up but when you are talking about having the designers spend time on a cont sized safe zone, that is what Smed and folks were referring to. Bring on the sancs!

Chaff

2013-01-28, 03:29 PM

.
Just becasue something was in PS1 - does not mean it is automatically required, or outdated.

I liked The Sanctuary. I miss VR. It would be a better way to test "new" weapons SOE wants to sell. If Sancs come back, make some improvements. In VR, it would be great if they had Empire Tactical Training. Outfits could suit up Squads to practice tactics against each other (your vet Outfit mates would play as enemy opposing empire(s).

Flight training (or at least Practice) was a no-brainer in VR. It would be even better, if we could pull armor, or air (in my case), and practice agaisnt AI from either (or both) opposing Empires. I'd much prefer to develop some flying skills against an AI opponent, than geting powned in 10 seconds in-game .... then wait 15 minutes to pull the same air vehicle .... and get quick-powned again. THAT is not a good way to learn to fly. Certainly ain't fun. It's also BS XP for air vets. Bring back Sancs with some fun improvements.

Instead of shooting stationary targets at the VR shooting range, let players suit up as any empire & train tactics & weapons functionality.
.
.

nurizeko

2013-01-28, 05:49 PM

They didn't want to add sancs because they said it slowed down gameplay. They said it took 5 mins to get into a fight. In the current system it would take a click on deploy to get into a fight. Soe just baffles me with their design decision making.

I can see how 5 minutes might seem like a long time for the ADHD CoD kiddies, but aside from the fact it didn't (you had plenty of means to get into battle quickly), the most memorable thing in Planetside other than the big memorable battles were the preparations for them.

When your outfit/faction is regrouping at sanc and pulling vehicles and waiting for a few minutes for everyone to get together and CR's to call out the target, it feels awesome.

I couldn't care for the hex system, it's proven itself to be flawed, by diluting fights. Why protect a base when you can just go somewhere else?

It's one of the big mistakes that SOE made with PS2.

The game isn't out of beta.

Methonius

2013-01-28, 10:15 PM

If they do end up bringing in sanctuaries they should all have very unique building with unique architecture based on the faction that you're playing. This would make it much cooler than just placing some random boxed buildings all around.

Also they should make an event that if you cap their home cont on certain time periods it actually gives you the chance to attack the enemies sanctuary. I think they should have Empire Specific point defense turrets at Sanctuaries for this to be even more epic like the vanu having a giant all seeing eye tower that shoots a massive laser at anyone in its range and also give them wall turrets that shoot giant lasher orbs. NC should have giant artillery cannons within their sanc walls and Rail guns as their turrets. TR would have huge mortar launchers that explode tiny bomblets all over at any nearby enemies and have quad barrelled turrets lol.

Babyfark McGeez

2013-01-29, 02:26 AM

So now the devs will tell us some more 2489 times sanctuaries won't be coming because they "are bad for the game" and "this is ps2", just to eventually realize it is a feature that is needed for various (countless times stated) reasons. And then they will add them.

So can't we just skip this whole crap this time and they implement them right away? We won't say "we told you so", i swear.
But this stubborn attitude to actively ignore completely logical and valid requests for no good reason (seriously, what's their point?) just to turn around 180° eventually because they re-discovered their common sense is getting tiresome.

Qwan

2013-01-29, 06:09 AM

I
As far as Planetside 1 goes:

1) Warpgates. Which you had to fly to, warp to the other continent, and then fly from that warpgate (almost always on the edge of the map) to the fighting. It did take some time to move Galaxies, AMSes, Lodestars, etc if the fighting was far from your warpgate.

Good point, its the same in PS2, you start at the warp gate (which is at the edge of the map) and you fly to were the fight is.

2) Instant Action. Hit Escape, click Instant Action, wait 10 seconds and it will spawn you at a hotspot. This was completely uncontrollable, and not a reliable method to get into a specific fight. It was more an "I want to shoot something" button that would spawn you somewhere enemies were.

Its the same with the instant action in PS2, sometimes when I use the hotspot button I end up in a totally different location then the one I clicked.

3) The HART shuttle. This is like the drop pod deploy button we have now, except you could drop anywhere on a contested continent except for inside a facilitiy's SOI. It did not come every 1-2 minutes - the timer was nearly 4 minutes long with a lengthy loading time to allow players to get into the shuttle. When you consider, for PS1, that towers can flip in a matter of 12 seconds and facilities took 15 minutes (or less, with an LLU), 5 minutes is a heck of a long time. If you take too long loading up your Galaxy, you may miss the opportunity because of the travel time. It was a problem, we just had 10 years to learn the best ways of dealing with it, and we sort of ignored it after a while because it was part of the game.

Your right about the HART, its been a while. Towers in PS2 flip just as easy as they did in PS1, take Tawrich tech plant, it has a small tower to the north, just stand next to the flip point and give it about 30 seconds and it flips. I never saw the hack and hold method as a problem, neither did SOE, because its still a hack and hold, the only thing that will determine the time is the influence and how persistant the enemy is, so a 15 minute hack and hold can be like a 1hour hack and hold if the enemy keeps taking B and C or A, and you have low influence.

PS1 had its issues just like PS2 does, and your right they had 10 years to learn from there mistakes. Now its like there not taking those lessons learned and there just making either the same mistakes, or making new mistakes, so it looks like another 10 years of learning all over again.

Ruffdog

2013-01-29, 07:03 AM

Sanctuaries are so ten years ago...

Orbiting space citadels!

See - not a copy and paste

Snipefrag

2013-01-29, 07:31 AM

Sancs need to come back. The whole 'it delays getting into battle' is bullshit. It takes longer to find a decent server for battlefield 3, wait in queue and then load the game than it would to push instant action on the map. The pro's FAR out weight the cons, heres a list weighing them up:

Advantages

immersion, instead of the cookie cutter sancs from PS1 you can really add depth to the game by making the Vanu one all techy and clever. The TR one very militaristic and the NC one a sort of ragtag mercenary cluster fuck of groups.
Adds continental warfare and a sensible meta game, ability to completely lock a continent at all times without any caveats like the ones proposed in the road map.
A place to put VR training.. This adds to immersion, if they implement this without it.. What will you do? hit a sodding button on a UI? cmon..
eSports area.. A physical place where you can go to take part in eSports, outfit tournaments etc.. Like WoW where you go to an area to queue up for a battleground in a captial city.. It looks like a battlefield, adds immersion !
global tactical center.. As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, could be a nice addition. Ability to plot battles and share details ingame with other commanders.
training areas, as someone else said in this thread. Its useful to be able to train for tower battles.. Maneuvers etc in a place where you arnt going to get blown up by a lib.
A place to form up raids that allows you to keep the destination hidden until the last moment. This gives commanders a new tool in their arsenal, surprise.
A place to put AFK people to take them off conts before logging them out (remember PS1 would put you there is you didnt pick a spawn point and it times out. ). Planetside.. Size matters, the size of the AFK group on the cont definitely matters at the moment !

Disadvantages

SLIGHTLY longer time to get into battle
If not explained properly it might confuse newbies (ingame tutorials should sort this out, a quick google and someone with half a brain cell can figure it out).
The possibility of being sanc locked, people dont like being sanc locked. This will force commanders to think sensibly and play tactically. Like in PS1 if someone was hacking your home conts and you ignored it to stay in the good fight on Hossin you would lose everything. If you fuck up your meta game or made bad/stupid decision you will be spending some time in sanc, deal with it.

Anyone got anymore to add to either point? Hopefully this is the sort of feedback that will convince the devs we need Sancs.

Dougnifico

2013-01-29, 08:52 AM

"Attackable sanctuaries" was requested throughout the history of the original game. While I thought it was a neat idea, I came to the conclusion that it was pointless.

A faction's sanctuary (or their warp gate, currently) is their safe zone. If you've been pushed back that far, things are already desperate enough. If you're then going to cut that safe zone in half, you might as well just make the new safe zone the actual Sanctuary. Oh, but you want to increase the sense of desperation, so you cut that safe zone in half. It has to stop somewhere, and it should stop at the Sanctuary's "border".

Touche my friend. Touche...

As for space stations... +1

Dkamanus

2013-01-29, 08:57 AM

Ive played with Azures Twighlight quite a bit on PS1, they used Sanc to work on tower missions and to show new troops the ropes. It can have its uses than just being a hang out area. Im just saying I think it would be an exellent addition to PS2.

I've been using some warpgate buildings in order to simulate a biolab gen room in order for people to understand how to invade it =x

Well within reason. You need some sort of safe zone for organized ops to form up but when you are talking about having the designers spend time on a cont sized safe zone, that is what Smed and folks were referring to. Bring on the sancs!

It doesn't have to be that big anyway. 1 km per 1 km is MORE then enough for the faction to start their pushes. We are not asking 16 per 16 km maps for the sanctuary, but for the metagame, there is no way around it besides sanctuary. Most people will love it, a few will hate it, but we aren't asking them to take any of the current options out, we want MORE options in.

They want to make this game function for 25 years, they better get some stuff from the older game, they worked.

hashish

2013-01-29, 09:36 AM

There is so much that can be done with sanctuaries which can make this game 100x better..

I personally think devs are just being lazy :/ Also looks like a quite a big and thoughful process to correctly implement sanct's but imo its MUST BE DONE..

Hamma

2013-01-29, 10:09 AM

I've not heard they are building sanctuaries.. so wherever the Luperza comment came from I haven't seen or heard it.

Rockit

2013-01-29, 10:13 AM

I've not heard they are building sanctuaries.. so wherever the Luperza comment came from I haven't seen or heard it.

Well now don't be a party pooper. Although one thing for sure, sancs aren't on any 6 month plan I have seen. Probably gonna take more conts and then a substantial meta-game to make them more of a possibility but I wish they would hit the gas on things like this than MLG but I digress.

Hamma

2013-01-29, 10:32 AM

I don't think Sanctuaries are totally off the table but it's unlikely.

Phantomdestiny

2013-01-29, 10:38 AM

I've not heard they are building sanctuaries.. so wherever the Luperza comment came from I haven't seen or heard it.

If they are not . we really have to push them to . If they want community feedback they will get it . And +1 to the orbital station idea

Dkamanus

2013-01-29, 02:39 PM

If they are not . we really have to push them to . If they want community feedback they will get it . And +1 to the orbital station idea

Make it this way. Have a capital city, that is connected to the warpgate system on the planet, that IS conquerable. If it is taken, the Orbital Station is the only option for your faction. Of course, we are including space combat here, where the station can't be destroyed or taken, but imagine reinforcements from space, via drop pods, tranports and etc need to retake the capital city for THEN to restart the conquest of the planet?

That way we have a complete capital take over, but no server boot of a faction.