Breaking Lattice - Page 4

Illtempered · 2013-08-18, 12:51 PM

....Other than that, lot's of good ideas in this thread.

Let's point at Rumblepit and laugh one more time though.

Taramafor · 2013-08-18, 01:07 PM

The problem wit lattice is that you can NEVER surround an enemy zerg.

You can't allow the zerg to advance while taking over the territory at the sides of them and then finally behind them and tighten a noose 'round its neck. Which is pretty much the only real defense against an enemy zerg unless you have your own large zerg. The lattice prevents us from making large scale flank attacks from bases as there are no bases on the sides sharing the lattice close by.

Overall I feel lattice has taken too much away form tactics and strategy. Ghost capping might have been a hassle but at least that had a chance of splitting up the zerg. 'Till it wasn't "ghost" capping and instead it turns out the enemy surrounded you instead and what you thought was only a few people is a full blown outfit which is now destroying your suns and engaging your tanks.

Unfortunately not many people have the brains to do that and so we're stuck with this. Blah.

PredatorFour · 2013-08-18, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by Taramafor

The problem wit lattice is that you can NEVER surround an enemy zerg.

You can't allow the zerg to advance while taking over the territory at the sides of them and then finally behind them and tighten a noose 'round its neck. Which is pretty much the only real defense against an enemy zerg unless you have your own large zerg. The lattice prevents us from making large scale flank attacks from bases as there are no bases on the sides sharing the lattice close by.

Overall I feel lattice has taken too much away form tactics and strategy. Ghost capping might have been a hassle but at least that had a chance of splitting up the zerg. 'Till it wasn't "ghost" capping and instead it turns out the enemy surrounded you instead and what you thought was only a few people is a full blown outfit which is now destroying your suns and engaging your tanks.

Unfortunately not many people have the brains to do that and so we're stuck with this. Blah.

Thing is, once we get more conts then we will have links where we can backhack with the lattice system.

We Need More Continents!
We Need More Continents!
We Need More Continents!
Incoming MAX Units!

KesTro · 2013-08-18, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by Wahooo

There are too many sub-bases and towers/outposts. The lattice as a concept isn't the issue it is the number of places tied to them.

He's got the right idea. What if the lattice was broken down to something like 8 links and each link would link to a cluster of hexes. Once you've captured every hex in that lattice cluster you unlock the next lattice link or something akin to that. This way we can get the best of both worlds. Thoughts?

fierce deity · 2013-08-18, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by KesTro

He's got the right idea. What if the lattice was broken down to something like 8 links and each link would link to a cluster of hexes. Once you've captured every hex in that lattice cluster you unlock the next lattice link or something akin to that. This way we can get the best of both worlds. Thoughts?

Interesting idea.

Taramafor · 2013-08-18, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by KesTro

He's got the right idea. What if the lattice was broken down to something like 8 links and each link would link to a cluster of hexes. Once you've captured every hex in that lattice cluster you unlock the next lattice link or something akin to that. This way we can get the best of both worlds. Thoughts?

But then you can't move on to the next base 'till every hex in the lattice is taken over and people might get bored and move on to other fights. Perhaps if you control just over half of the hexes before being able to take over the next lattice hex grid. That I can see working. That way you move to the next grid only when you have the advantage.

Would also encourage the zergs to spread out a bit more. I'm on board either way.

Rumblepit · 2013-08-18, 08:08 PM

The problem with the hex system is this. It dose not force a fight, meaning the players have to choose weather or not they will engage a defended location or go around.We all know how this played out.The players choose not to engage and would around every defended base.

Lattice created front lines, and gave the game the much needed battle flow that it was missing.Front line battles are a must in a game like this, it creates large and small fights all over the map. It also allows players who play support to be more effective. It creates the need for supply lines, ammo, repairs, AA and AV offence and defense, it also creates the opportunity for small op squads and outfits to be effective in many aspects of the game.

Why do you think that reinstating the hex system would create better gameplay than what we have now?It was by far the worst aspect of this game to date, it failed to produce anything worthy of remembering .

We did have a few good fights with the hex system, the players made that happen. But with the lattice system, there are epic fing fights everyday.

And why are you guys crying so hard about not being able to go around a defended base? You should not be allowed to go around a defended location ever.......How dose that even go down???"they have a good defense here guys, we better go around and hack that empty base"... L2P

Rumblepit · 2013-08-18, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by Taramafor

The problem wit lattice is that you can NEVER surround an enemy zerg.

You can't allow the zerg to advance while taking over the territory at the sides of them and then finally behind them and tighten a noose 'round its neck. Which is pretty much the only real defense against an enemy zerg unless you have your own large zerg. The lattice prevents us from making large scale flank attacks from bases as there are no bases on the sides sharing the lattice close by.

Overall I feel lattice has taken too much away form tactics and strategy. Ghost capping might have been a hassle but at least that had a chance of splitting up the zerg. 'Till it wasn't "ghost" capping and instead it turns out the enemy surrounded you instead and what you thought was only a few people is a full blown outfit which is now destroying your suns and engaging your tanks.

Unfortunately not many people have the brains to do that and so we're stuck with this. Blah.

Your right there, it took tactics and strategy to go around the enemy. The only base that we need to defend with the hex system was the warp gate.Because if you setup a defense anywhere on the map the enemy would go right around and continue to head for the warp gate.....We should bring this back, wtf was i thinking,,, im all for it

You have to look at it this way.
How will this effect battle flow?
How will this effect small and large fights?
How will this effect small and large outfits?
How will this effect solo players?
How will this effect support players?
How will this effect resources?
How will this effect combat during on and off hours?
How will this create a better quality of game play for the player base?

I could go on and on. Hex system failed across the board, we tested it for long enough to know it wont work in a game like this.

Taramafor · 2013-08-18, 09:55 PM

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

And why are you guys crying so hard about not being able to go around a defended base? You should not be allowed to go around a defended location ever.......How dose that even go down???"they have a good defense here guys, we better go around and hack that empty base"... L2P

Because, believe it or not, some of us actually prefer using smaller numbers to surround the enemy while bigger numbers keep them busy. The problem with the oh so mighty lattice is that more often then not there's only ONE choice. The ONLY choice. We don't get to decide how to fight at all. It's into the meat grinder or nothing.

And it's called flanking. Do you storm that turret on the road or go around before engaging? What Kesto is suggesting is a way to put in choice with the forced march that lattice is making us do. As players, we should have some choice of where to fight in an area.

Right now it's lattice and points A, B and C which while epic at times is always the same formula. Always the same path. Always one of only two outcomes. Push them back or be pushed back on that route and no other unless you move to another base. Which will of course result in losing the base you got pushed back too. No surrounding. No flanking (which is a battlefield tactic). A hex grid in a lattice system would be a good compromise for everyone I think. Provided you control 51% of the grid to have the lattice move forward. If you need to control the whole grid a single hacker would ruin the whole system.

BlaxicanX · 2013-08-18, 11:40 PM

Originally Posted by Taramafor

Because, believe it or not, some of us actually prefer using smaller numbers to surround the enemy while bigger numbers keep them busy.

And unfortunately, that's something that people are just going to have to live with, because ghost capping by any other name is still ghost-capping. Avoiding the larger fight in favor of surrounding its flanks and cutting it off so that it has to scatter is just ghost-capping for a tactical reason rather than the generic ghost-capping out of cowardice.

Anyway, I've spent about 5 hours today and another 5 Friday playing on Amerish, and I've yet to see any of the "tacticool" bullshit Evilpig and others have been talking about in here going on at Amerish. Amerish, lacking the lattice, is generally 30 bases simultaneously being capped/decapped around the continent while any squad or platoon with more than a dozen guys in it effortlessly crushes every base because there is no concentration of forces anywhere. Problems the lattice tries to fix.

Wahooo · 2013-08-19, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by Taramafor

And it's called flanking.

You can flank without controlling the territory. But what you are talking about with the hexes wasn't flanking... because flanking infers going around to the back side to attack your enemy. What "flanking" is in the Hex system, is just changing the color of territory for no reason or with no impact whatsoever.... oh winning.

I am waiting for the resource overhaul. I have some slight ideas about changes to the lattice, but long and short the resource overhaul, as well as if a continental lattice could do away with the forced 3-way then there would be much more tactics able to be used in the lattice.

Rumblepit · 2013-08-19, 12:41 AM

Just to elaborate on what Whaooo said.

Just because you cant cap or own a base dose not mean you cant use it to your tactical advantage.If you think about it, its the best place to setup shop.Hack terms, setup a FOB,most of the time it will be behind enemy lines so you will be in a good place to flank.
Im not gonna hold your hand ,and tell you how to play game, but think outside the box,and use your imagination.You will find there are unlimited options when it come to tactics and lattice.

You guys flank from bases you already own???Flank from the bases they own ,and you will get to see a very surprised enemy.

EVILPIG · 2013-08-19, 02:08 AM

Since this spiraled into a whinefest and some apparently can't read English, I'll remind you that this thread is not about reverting to Adjacency, it's about adding Adjacency events, that would mix it up and give you Lattice and non-Lattice play. Anyone oppose variety? Please attempt to intelligently state why.

Obstruction · 2013-08-19, 02:25 AM

The problem with the hex system is this. It dose not force a fight, meaning the players have to choose weather or not they will engage a defended location or go around.We all know how this played out.The players choose not to engage and would around every defended base.

you can talk all you want, but this is because defending basically sucks and is a losing endeavor, due to base design. most of the problems you mention that have "been fixed" by lattice have actually been addressed by fixes after lattice that were never tried in hex. the reason some say amerish works as-is, is because mostly, it does. due to many of the changes made separate from the lattice system.

the devs on map level strategy elements are like the 3 blind men trying to figure out what an elephant is.

what really gets me is that they ruined good back and forth facility and crown fights, claiming that they didn't want all or nothing struggles that required a whole faction to break. then they turned right around and created exactly that at nearly every tower base on the lattice.

the first thing i saw when they put it in was a 12 hour fight at Regent Rock.

12 hours

they need to make ONE change at a time, see how it plays on live, evaluate, tweak, then make another change. you don't just take a system this complex and try any old thing based on what you think people will do with it.

Taramafor · 2013-08-19, 02:59 AM

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

You guys flank from bases you already own???Flank from the bases they own ,and you will get to see a very surprised enemy.

Except that moving a sun into enemy lines is most likely to get noticed. That's why you need the friendly bases, to have somewhere to get support from.

Defend. Attack. Support. Defend. Attack. Support. Break the link and it all falls apart.

The only problem with this is that people will be in the spawn room under the illusion that they can actually hold out when the guns are pounding on the doors. Some people will take advantage of the nearby safe havens to strike the enemy from another direction though and with luck some of the zerg will follow that lead. It's happened once or twice and should happen more.