Gameplay: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent" - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: the reason your parents split up
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Idea Vault

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Thread Rating: 5 votes, 4.20 average. Display Modes
Old 2012-06-15, 01:57 AM   [Ignore Me] #1
Flaropri
Sergeant Major
 
Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


The "Continent" would be an archipelago. Islands, docks, drilling platforms, and maybe even inoperative hulks etc. Several islands I'm sure could easily be connected with bridges, but the defining characteristic of the Continent would be that at least half if not a majority of it would be water and ocean. My vote is tropical in environment, volcanic islands (active or dormant).

Each Empire Foothold would have ready access to a Shipyard (such as in an adjacent hex), and a few capture-able shipyards would be scattered about as it makes sense to do so.

Air-to-air and general naval combat would be the primary use of the Continent, though several large islands and connected island chains would still make good use of ground-based vehicles and various facilities would be more oriented towards infantry combat over vehicle combat.

Even in the absence of Shipyards and naval combat, an Archipelago could present interesting diversity in scenery, and allow for different tactics to be used due to the relative lack of land-mass and different structures that would be used in the region (such as the aforementioned drilling platforms out in the middle of the ocean).

Ships:
There are three to four types of ships that I think would be good.

1. 1-2 crew motorboats. Small motorboats with a light gunner position or something more like the Flash has for weaponry. Would be ideally a little bit cheaper at least than a single-crew aircraft, and would be used for scouting, personal transportation, and traveling rivers and lakes or other smaller bodies of water where larger ships wouldn't fit or would be impractical.

Possible modifications: Replace the light gun with something stronger such as a missile launcher or torpedo launcher at the cost of speed and/or toughness. Apply tools to remove water mines, or tools to jam radar, or similar.

2. 1-4 crew Fast Attack Craft. Ideally these would be faction specific, however I have not yet thought out what the specifics would be for differences. A crew of 1-4 players including Driver, Main Gunner, Ancillary Gunner, and AA Gunner. The types of weapons can easily be modified, possibly even reducing the number of crew positions available. For example, if made into more of a missile boat, an ancillary gunner might not fit in along with the missiles and AA or Flak guns. These ships would likely be the mainstay of naval combat.

Possible modifications: Aforementioned Missiles instead of a main cannon and/or ancillary cannon (for example, if a multi-warhead missile system). Torpedoes. Surface or Air radar. Mine deployment, etc.


3. 1-4 crew Transport: Kraken. Fulfilling a similar role to that of the Galaxy dropship or Sunderer APC in providing transit for infantry, the Kraken has several advantages. a) It can transport more troops, up to 16 soldiers and 4 MAX units not including the crew. b) It is even more difficult to destroy than a Sunderer. c) It has multiple access points. Soldiers can individually "bail" from the vehicle exiting through a top hatch (and thus standing on top of the ship by default), or the driver may send their cargo out through a front hatch onto a beach-head or dock for quick, safe egress onto dry land, including into sea-side caves or the beaches of a dense jungle island where Galaxies would have difficulty landing.

Crew consists of the driver and multiple light gunner positions to deal with light aircraft and ships, and one turret mounted cannon.

Possible modifications: Vehicle transportation, stealth systems, amphibious treads for limited ground travel, improved weapons, safety netting for those that go out the top hatch, Drop-Pod cushion to allow for squad deployment onto a Kraken, etc.

Possible replacement: Give the Sunderer amphibious capability as a modification.


The much more iffy one:
4. 1-7 crew Carrier: Leviathan. The Leviathan is an aircraft carrier. Due to it's size, it can only be built in specific shipyards. It has a large, flat deck on which other aircraft can land (say, 2-3). Likewise ground vehicles and infantry can also occupy the deck, though that is less practical for most situations, as the Leviathan cannot go safely into shallow waters near shores, or enter the smaller docks (also, it may be difficult for ground vehicles to get onto it). The Leviathan can function as a deployment zone when anchored, similar to a Galaxy, with the added benefit of being able to deploy single-crew aircraft such as the Mosquito or Scythe (but not the Liberator or other aircraft), however there is a longer delay between spawns than at a regular vehicle bay.

Crew: Driver plus 1-6 gunner positions, including heavy cannons, SAMs, and/or torpedoes Weapons would largely be focused on being good against larger targets, and not generally effective against infantry or small vehicles due to accuracy. The crew would enter the deck, then go to a given station. If the ship was boarded by the enemy they could hack to disable a given station (and the crew could exit back to the deck to fight them off as well). If hacked, the crew would need to re-hack the station to make it operable again.

Essentially, one potential strategy would be to board the ship from a galaxy drop or via a Kraken (through the upper hatch), disable it's weapons and/or drive and Rebirth stations, and then be able to more safely bombard it without worrying about as much incoming fire. Though obviously it is hard to say if that would work out.

The Leviathan would be the most expensive vehicle in the game to make, and the most difficult to destroy.

Possible modifications: A multitude of potential weapons including ship-to-shore artillery, ship-to-ship missiles, MIRVs, and a Rail Gun. Additional armaments at the cost of deck-space is also a possibility besides just replacing the standard weapons. Lots of potential for utility slots such as radar, radar jamming, mine deployment, faster aircraft queues, small boat spawning (the first boat suggestion in this list only), etc.



Why Float when you can Fly?

Obviously, aircraft obviates the need for ships for means of transport. However, ships are fun!

Also, ships can generally carry more armaments, be tougher, and attack from more horizontal and stable vectors than most aircraft can. The Liberator is great for vertical bombardment, but it can't match the potential of a warship's horizontal bombardment, aiming 4-5 heavy cannons at a single location. Ships can also (more easily) be bigger than most other vehicles, potentially allowing for combat on (or even inside) them instead of inside static buildings and ground terrain. Jumping up onto a Carrier and disabling key weapons systems for your own fleet to move in for the kill is something that doesn't happen with aircraft or tanks, at least not unless you put in an Air Fortress, which would also be awesome.


There are downsides to ships however.

1. I'm positive that the vast majority of design thus far has been without ships in mind. As such, it would need special continents and areas to be effective, such as the Archipelago. They won't fit into the current plans, and I don't expect them to try to fit them into them.

2. They can be larger than other craft. Large craft can be difficult to deal with properly when there are a lot of players, especially something like the Leviathan.

3. I'm not sure how well long-range artillery would go over. If you can shoot a few kilometers from shore to hit a nearby base, are people excited by that, or frustrated by being shelled by something that is potentially very difficult to get to and thus disable? The Liberator needs to be over it's target, and as such is more susceptible both to knowing it's location in the first place, and to being shot down. If a Destroyer fires off a MIRV from a Kilometer off the coast into your bases walls, would that be frustrating or fun?

4. Without long-range artillery Ships are very limited in their use. Other than the Leviathan which can act as a spawn location and airport, they don't offer much support for ground-based operations. They only operate as transports, which can be accomplished well enough with just aircraft without complicating things more with naval combat.

5. Related to the first issue, people who focus on Certs for ships will also be (more) limited on what type of combat they can pursue. While it's true that some capture points and locations favor one type of combat over another already, ships flat-out would not be able to participate in them, and those locations where certain types of vehicles are at best ill advised are still relatively limited, rather than covering a whole continent.


Anyway, in spite of the drawbacks that Ships would have, I think that the potential means it is worth looking into down the road. Something to consider if/when the 4th/5th continents are released, and possibly to implement then or with whatever maps may follow those.
Flaropri is offline  
Old 2012-06-15, 02:40 AM   [Ignore Me] #2
Sirisian
Colonel
 
Sirisian's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


I know you probably spent a while on this, but any concept which requires special continents and removes land warfare and the infantry, ground, and air trinity isn't going to work well in Planetside. It's on par with the numerous other naval threads and space combat threads where people introduced new vehicles to make their concept work and focused on primarily on powerful multicrew vehicles. Also I feel water should be a hazard and not something used for gameplay. (The fact that the VS can still possibly hover over it is bad enough and hurt your concept).

Also you make a comment that "ships are fun" which is extremely subjective. I don't find driving a boat in a game enjoyable at all.

Your list of downsides should have given you a hint that something locked to only water is going to have problems in a game with ever-shifting front lines. You also don't want vehicles to be useless in most of the continents.

Also as much as I hate jumping to conclusion your designs sound more overpowered than a BFR.
Sirisian is offline  
Old 2012-06-15, 06:44 AM   [Ignore Me] #3
AssassinGT
Private
 
AssassinGT's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Originally Posted by Sirisian View Post
I know you probably spent a while on this, but any concept which requires special continents and removes land warfare and the infantry, ground, and air trinity isn't going to work well in Planetside. It's on par with the numerous other naval threads and space combat threads where people introduced new vehicles to make their concept work and focused on primarily on powerful multicrew vehicles. Also I feel water should be a hazard and not something used for gameplay. (The fact that the VS can still possibly hover over it is bad enough and hurt your concept).

Also you make a comment that "ships are fun" which is extremely subjective. I don't find driving a boat in a game enjoyable at all.

Your list of downsides should have given you a hint that something locked to only water is going to have problems in a game with ever-shifting front lines. You also don't want vehicles to be useless in most of the continents.

Also as much as I hate jumping to conclusion your designs sound more overpowered than a BFR.
That.

To reiterate on "that." I also think driving boats are retarded. For example in BF3; if you need to take the boat to get to land.. most people just shoot themselves in the head and hope the team has already capped a ground point to spawn on.

I think Naval warfare.. underwater warfare, & space warfare.. all that jazz sounds great and good fun but.. let's not forget that they'd probably almost have to make an entirely new game basically to jam even one of those in. It would require a full set of vehicles, rebalance of all classes/weapons for naval shit and just a whole lot of work. And unless they can prove to the men upstairs writing the checks that this is a solid use of company funds.. that idea is going nowhere in a hurry.

I think your writeup is great.. I did read quite a bit of it but I can see where you're going with it. To be honest I'd support it too but at this point the game just needs to come out and we can only hope that Higby is on board to make this sort of idea into some sort of an expansion. Cause honestly if that were the case and he took it seriously; I think he could get some traction with the concept.
AssassinGT is offline  
Old 2012-06-15, 09:44 AM   [Ignore Me] #4
Flaropri
Sergeant Major
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Since it may have been missed in that long write-up, I want to reiterate that this idea is not meant to be something I would expect to see on launch, but something for future patches down the road. For launch, I absolutely think that the developers should focus on the 3 continents they already have, and not worry about ships or boats at this time.


Originally Posted by Sirisian View Post
I know you probably spent a while on this, but any concept which requires special continents and removes land warfare and the infantry, ground, and air trinity isn't going to work well in Planetside.
The only reason it would require special continents is the lack of design to allow for naval warfare currently. Ultimately, as I said in my above post, it wouldn't remove land warfare entirely, it would simply be that there was less land warfare locations on that given continent. It would still be very much available on the continent, just at fewer locations.

I am in no way advocating taking away from something, only adding.

It's on par with the numerous other naval threads and space combat threads where people introduced new vehicles to make their concept work and focused on primarily on powerful multicrew vehicles. Also I feel water should be a hazard and not something used for gameplay. (The fact that the VS can still possibly hover over it is bad enough and hurt your concept).
Well, water can still be a hazard if that's what people want, I've made no mention of whether or not you can swim in water for example, and as far as VS Magriders, you could have a utility for the other two main battle tanks to become Amphibious to counter-act that somewhat. They still wouldn't have the strafing capability of Magriders and would be less manueverable on water, but it would alleviate some of the concerns related to that.

Alternatively, Magriders could be limited to shallow water such as rivers, lakes, and shores, and be unable to go further out into the sea.

Also you make a comment that "ships are fun" which is extremely subjective. I don't find driving a boat in a game enjoyable at all.
Of course it is subjective. "First Person Shooters are fun!" Is also subjective. Whether you personally find driving a boat, aircraft, tank, ATV, or whatever fun or not is entirely up to your preferences (and how well driving mechanics for those are implemented). I personally don't get very excited with tank play, but that doesn't mean that others don't find it a very enjoyable and satisfying part of the game or that they shouldn't have been put into the game.

Your list of downsides should have given you a hint that something locked to only water is going to have problems in a game with ever-shifting front lines. You also don't want vehicles to be useless in most of the continents.
Of course I'm aware of the potential problems, however, I think the fact that there are numerous threads commenting on naval warfare in one form or another shows that there is interest, and that it may be worth looking into down the line in spite of the inherent logistics problems with ships.

Also as much as I hate jumping to conclusion your designs sound more overpowered than a BFR.
Fair criticism. Having not played the game personally it is hard to say what is overpowered or not and what the standard of balance will be will no doubt go through changes both in Beta and after release, however, I would absolutely expect any and all of these things to be subject to balance and heavy modification to ensure that they work and work fairly. The Leviathan idea is also highly experimental, and I grant it is not the most likely to see play... but it has potential to be very awesome, so I included it anyway.

Last edited by Flaropri; 2012-06-15 at 09:53 AM.
Flaropri is offline  
Old 2012-06-15, 10:35 AM   [Ignore Me] #5
Saifoda
Sergeant Major
 
Saifoda's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Flaropi, I gotta say I usually don't care for the naval aspect of games (lots of people want inter-continent i.e. oceanic battles) but I can actually get behind what you're saying here.



I imagine a continent much like Cyssor, but with the islands having less land mass, making the separation distances from each other even larger. This would allow, and even necessitate, the use of water craft to effectively move from island to island.

To the naysayers so far, I would point out that this isn't the whole game -- just one continent. And to those (it hasn't been said yet) who will say "it will lower the population on the continents themselves" I would ask you, do you know what the player population is going to be? There might be so many people playing planetside 2 that we could have all three starter continents locked up during peak gameplay. We just don't know those numbers yet, so I really don't find it a valid argument. Not trying to be a dick, just trying to be a little preemptive with what I'm pretty sure will be said eventually
Saifoda is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 03:44 AM   [Ignore Me] #6
Wandering Mania
Private
 
Wandering Mania's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Originally Posted by Sirisian View Post
I know you probably spent a while on this, but any concept which requires special continents and removes land warfare and the infantry, ground, and air trinity isn't going to work well in Planetside. It's on par with the numerous other naval threads and space combat threads where people introduced new vehicles to make their concept work and focused on primarily on powerful multicrew vehicles. Also I feel water should be a hazard and not something used for gameplay. (The fact that the VS can still possibly hover over it is bad enough and hurt your concept).

Also you make a comment that "ships are fun" which is extremely subjective. I don't find driving a boat in a game enjoyable at all.

Your list of downsides should have given you a hint that something locked to only water is going to have problems in a game with ever-shifting front lines. You also don't want vehicles to be useless in most of the continents.

Also as much as I hate jumping to conclusion your designs sound more overpowered than a BFR.
Originally Posted by AssassinGT View Post
That.

To reiterate on "that." I also think driving boats are retarded. For example in BF3; if you need to take the boat to get to land.. most people just shoot themselves in the head and hope the team has already capped a ground point to spawn on.

I think Naval warfare.. underwater warfare, & space warfare.. all that jazz sounds great and good fun but.. let's not forget that they'd probably almost have to make an entirely new game basically to jam even one of those in. It would require a full set of vehicles, rebalance of all classes/weapons for naval shit and just a whole lot of work. And unless they can prove to the men upstairs writing the checks that this is a solid use of company funds.. that idea is going nowhere in a hurry.

I think your writeup is great.. I did read quite a bit of it but I can see where you're going with it. To be honest I'd support it too but at this point the game just needs to come out and we can only hope that Higby is on board to make this sort of idea into some sort of an expansion. Cause honestly if that were the case and he took it seriously; I think he could get some traction with the concept.
If you guys do not like driveing boats who sais "you must play Planetside2 on this contanent olny no others will be able to be fought over."? No one thats who.
If you fellows do not like fighting over water then go to Ishundar I hear the place is verry dry more like a desert.
But evean in the future water is important. No water, no life. At least no human life.
I think this would be a great addition to the game. Not olny could there be just multi-man ships.

I also had put some thought into this.

1. Submarienes Crew 1: Single person submarienes that would be more useable by infiltraters. Olny destroyers with sonar, other subs and aircraft with a sea based scanner upgrade could see them then point them out to team mates or just kill them themselfs. with torpedos or on the destroyers depth charges.

2. Aircraft Carriers: Aircraft Carriers could be more like the New Galaxy acting as 3 jobs in 1. A moble base, transport and spawn point for infantry and aircraft olny. (it is an aircraft carrier after all)

3. Destroyers Crew 1-4: With lots of firepower aggenst subs and smaller naval vessals like frigates. Thay pack more punch but are less durrable in the armor department. Thay can have upgrades that range from more armor to revealing enemy subs.

4. Frigates Crew 1-3: The smallest and fastest of the bunch would be this. With less fire power and armor than the rest but it is alot faster. Also it is the olny ship with AA guns to be in the role of "Skyguard" on the water.

5. Battleships Crew 1-10: The battleships could be biggest, slowest, most heavly armed and armored of them all with a crew of up to an entire squad of 10. Massive artillary cannons and the ability to properly guard the aircraft carrier from other ships. It can target other ships outside of line of sight with the help of an upgrade to the submarienes. The draw back to this one is that is is verry slow and big so it can easly be targted.

Last edited by Wandering Mania; 2012-07-29 at 04:14 AM.
Wandering Mania is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 06:38 AM   [Ignore Me] #7
Noxey
Private
 
Noxey's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Would be awesome, but I get sea sick ;(
Noxey is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 07:07 AM   [Ignore Me] #8
Gugabalog
Major
 
Gugabalog's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Any significantly sized warship will be instantaneously orbital striked,
Gugabalog is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 11:18 AM   [Ignore Me] #9
MorioMortis
Corporal
 
MorioMortis's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Originally Posted by Gugabalog View Post
Any significantly sized warship will be instantaneously orbital striked,
True, both from an in-game and fluff standpoint, they make a very inviting target.
MorioMortis is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 02:38 PM   [Ignore Me] #10
Phisionary
Corporal
 
Phisionary's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Add naval vessels, remove orbital strikes. That problem: solved.
Phisionary is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 03:10 PM   [Ignore Me] #11
KimJongLulz
Banned
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Just imagine....High orbit ship combat...

Two ships locked in combat....fighters duking it out...batteries firing back and forth, boarders...

OH MAN!

I guess sea ships would be cool...but SPACE SHIP COMBAT WOULD BE AMAZING!
KimJongLulz is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 03:20 PM   [Ignore Me] #12
berzerkerking
Second Lieutenant
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


I see where you're going with this thread,and
berzerkerking is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 03:50 PM   [Ignore Me] #13
Rodel
Sergeant
 
Rodel's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


So a brand new game?
Rodel is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 03:59 PM   [Ignore Me] #14
Phisionary
Corporal
 
Phisionary's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


I don't know what that means... What an odd meme

Anyway, I very much support the idea of archipelago continents. I very much liked it from aesthetic and gameplay fronts in games like Far Cry, Crysis, hmm, Just Cause 2. The 'tropical jungle' environ can be a lot of fun to fight in, too.

Tanks rolling up the sandy beaches, footsoldiers mucking about in deep jungle growth, air combat all around, trying to gain a foothold on an island with entrenched defense trying to hold off the push. Sounds like fun. +Support.
Phisionary is offline  
Old 2012-07-29, 06:47 PM   [Ignore Me] #15
Gugabalog
Major
 
Gugabalog's Avatar
 
Re: Naval Warfare and Potential "Continent"


Originally Posted by Phisionary View Post
Add naval vessels, remove orbital strikes. That problem: solved.
Orbital strikes are announced in game. And will almost certainly not be removed.
Gugabalog is offline  
 
  PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Idea Vault

Bookmarks

Discord

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:54 AM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.