Cont Lock finally?

[Obstruction]

Originally Posted by bpostal

It's going to be needed when (don't laugh) we get more continents. It also adds a sense of ownership and a goal for players to strive for.

definitely lol'd. and i still don't get it.

is it possible that people just want this mechanic shoehorned into Planetside 2 to satisfy nostalgia for Planetside?

if they put this in as it is being described they will have to redesign or remove many other systems, including large systems such as resources and alerts. i just don't see that happening. they can't even fix half the bugs in the game 18 months after release, or half of the ones introduced in the last 18 months along with their half assed attempts to address core gameplay issues.

in fact, i suspect that Continent Locking was nothing more than a half assed attempt to address a core gameplay issue that existed in Planetside, analogous to the Alert system in Planetside 2. and if so, it would be quite ironic that veteran players pine for it while decrying Alerts and No Deploy Zones, etc.

[Azzzz]

Whats interesting about No Deploy Zones is...not one person asked for them yet they implemented it anyways.

Then again that seems to be their MO, implement shit no one wants or if they do add something that people want, it's usually half-assed or mind boggling retarded.

I haven't played PS1 but from what I get from everyone else that has, it worked, in many ways. It had everything most people wanted (BFRs excluded) or something that added a tactical aspect such as cont lock but had ew graphics.

Now why can't PS2 have the same shit as PS1 but look way better? Is this such a difficult task to execute?

[Muldoon]

Originally Posted by Azzzz

Whats interesting about No Deploy Zones is...not one person asked for them yet they implemented it anyways.

It would be severely limiting if we only implemented things that people asked for. Personally I think No Deploy Zones were a positive change.

[Azzzz]

Originally Posted by Muldoon

It would be severely limiting if we only implemented things that people asked for. Personally I think No Deploy Zones were a positive change.

Apologizes then. I was going off what I generally hear from in game. Seems there was more negative comments towards it than positive. And I was more so referring to the no squad deploy inside bases instead of sundies but then I should have more so stated it more clearly.

[Mordelicius]

Originally Posted by Muldoon

It would be severely limiting if we only implemented things that people asked for. Personally I think No Deploy Zones were a positive change.

So far there's only one official reason why it was implemented: to make Attacker and Defender spawn equidistant to the cap point. And that's something that can be easily debunked as false equivalency (a logical fallacy).

The reason being is that attacker Sundy spawn can be blown up while defensive spawn is indestructible. Hence, attackers have to apply extra players to the Sunderer so it won't simply be blown up.

If the developers were simply worried about parking Sundies right next to the cap point, they could have easily adjusted the radius to around 10-20 feet. Instead, they had to make it large, again, to satisty the equidistance argument.

The negatives far outweigh the positive. The NDZ has been voted down at least 2:1 at the official forum (2000+ against vs. 1000 yeas). This mechanic restricts gameplay while reducing the unpredictability of game (a hallmark of PS2 up to that point). I made so many posts on how toxic NDZ is to gameplay (even before they finally decided to implement it).

Also, this is more of a philosophic battle about how PS2 should run more than anything.

"For NDZ": Developers should have tighter controls of mechanics leaving less decision to players. Something that I accurately predicted as a slippery slope. Since NDZ was implemented, they also disallowed players from dropping mines on Vehicle pads and mines on infantry jump pads.

Again, rather than letting players clear the mines themselves(which shouldn't take more than 5 seconds on most bases), the developers feel it's their role to be an invisible guardian.

All this does is make pvp stale. A player blowing up in vehicle pad is that player's fault because the pad wasn't checked for mines. In a middle of a fierce, contested Tech Plant fight, mines on the vehicle pads can mean a loss or a victory.

Instead, if you ask the PS2 developers, that meta fight for the vehicle pad shouldn't be even part of gameplay . This is one of multitudes of reason why I often say that the PS2 devs don't even play PS2. Alot of gameplay, meta and balance context is foreign to them.

"Against NDZ": Hands off. Let the players decide and fight it out. This is the type of philosophy the new SOE game, H1Z1 foster. When somebody asked Smedley if there will be a safezone, he answered "what is a safezone", meaning it won't be implemented. In, short they are letting players decide the gameplay.

Is it a suprise to anyone why that type of Laissez Faire gameplay is what makes games like H1Z1 very popular?

In PS2, they operate in another direction, there's too much gameplay interferance mechanics that the Devs sprinkle inside the game.

Instead, they should just give players more tools. A Spawn Jamming Sunderer would have sufficed, rather than a No Deplay Zone. Deploy a Spawn jamming sunderer. Any enemy sunderer caught within the AOE radius cannot spawn players. That would have been a much better alternative. And that's something that have been suggested way before they implemented the NDZ.

One of my many, many posts about the NDZ (this one after it was implemented): http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=55971

Related: Suggested fixes to Spawn Camping/ Sunderer Wipes: http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=56877

[Muldoon]

Originally Posted by Mordelicius

All this does is make pvp stale. A player blowing up in vehicle pad is that player's fault because the pad wasn't checked for mines. In a middle of a fierce, contested Tech Plant fight, mines on the vehicle pads can mean a loss or a victory.

Personally I disagree with a lot of your post, but this was the biggest one I disagreed with. There are lots of new players playing Planetside each day, and are learning how to play. The game is already really hard to learn, and having a new player blow up on a vehicle pad is a quick way to getting them to uninstall. Without new players, the game dies.

Call it hand holding or what have you, being able to place mines on the vehicle pad is one of the cheapest things you could do and added very little to the game.

[bpostal]

Originally Posted by Muldoon

...There are lots of new players playing Planetside each day, and are learning how to play. The game is already really hard to learn, ...

At the risk of going off topic, while I may complain (a lot) this is one of the reasons I'm not as angry as I would otherwise be when it's mention that Planetside had much more depth. Especially with the latest free release of Planetside it's become obvious that the game isn't new player friendly.

As more and more mechanics are added to PS2, such as the intercontinental lattice and cont locking, the game must remain easy to get into. Of course, these same mechanics need to provide the depth, the meat, that veteran players need to keep us engaged.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by Muldoon

Personally I disagree with a lot of your post, but this was the biggest one I disagreed with. There are lots of new players playing Planetside each day, and are learning how to play. The game is already really hard to learn, and having a new player blow up on a vehicle pad is a quick way to getting them to uninstall. Without new players, the game dies.

Call it hand holding or what have you, being able to place mines on the vehicle pad is one of the cheapest things you could do and added very little to the game.

It's not something that I worry over particularly although I would agree. The game is hard for new players. I have some of friends who were really good ps1 players and found it hard to get into ps2. Actually a lot of my old ps1 friends and colleagues gave ps2 a try and gave up pretty quick.

Anyway, if someone says 'it's like this to make it easy for new players' I'll generally be supportive.

[Edfishy]

Originally Posted by ringring

It's not something that I worry over particularly although I would agree. The game is hard for new players. I have some of friends who were really good ps1 players and found it hard to get into ps2. Actually a lot of my old ps1 friends and colleagues gave ps2 a try and gave up pretty quick.

Anyway, if someone says 'it's like this to make it easy for new players' I'll generally be supportive.

It can't be done now, but I personally think they should split the game into two player types: Grunts, and Elites.

Using Titanfall as a model, you essentially have the Grunt/Pilot dynamic. Grunts play to jump between zergs and have less clutter to deal with, meanwhile Elites are the players playing for tactics, working in outfits and determining the shape of engagements.

[Mordelicius]

Originally Posted by Muldoon

Personally I disagree with a lot of your post, but this was the biggest one I disagreed with. There are lots of new players playing Planetside each day, and are learning how to play. The game is already really hard to learn, and having a new player blow up on a vehicle pad is a quick way to getting them to uninstall. Without new players, the game dies.

Call it hand holding or what have you, being able to place mines on the vehicle pad is one of the cheapest things you could do and added very little to the game.

I don't recall using the term holding hands, nor it's in that spirit lol.

Think of another game, say, basketball. A referee would draw random circles on the ground where offense can't step on. After watching the offense dance around like clown just to get off a shot, the ball changes hands and now it's the other team to do it on the other side.

Now, would I call that 'holding hands'? Would you call it holding hands? My guess, no. What I would call it is gameplay degradation, increased predictability, messed up flow, unnecessary rules and overall an overreach by the officials.

Now, back to Planetside 2. The No Deploy Zone does the same. Anything and everything that can happen when a basketball player steps on the circle will NEVER happen because it is prohibited. Anything and everything that can happen when a Sunderer parks in that zone will never happen because it is prohibited.

So, If I drive a Sunderer in a risky desperation move to park and nail it on a side of a wall, under fire inside NDZ will never happen. And any and all chain of events happening as a result will never happen EVER! That's my point about reducing gameplay variety and unpredictability.

It's a simple rule of reciprocity. Defenders are allowed to park Sundies, hence offense should be allowed to park. Defenders use shotguns, offense is allowed shotguns, etc etc.

Secondly, about the mines on the vehicle pad (and I understand how important the newbies are). I believe there are far worse things in PS2 than that and most of them involve gameplay balance. It's something we've been warning the Devs since the beginning. Example: (Dec. 17, 2012 http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...000#post868000)

Originally Posted by Mordelicius

Faction balance first before promotions.

Gameplay balance first before promotions.

They may lure in alot of new players but all these imbalances will simply enfuriate them.

Faction balance - Overpowered Vanu camps Esamir so they can spam overpowered Magriders. NC and TR leaves for Indar. whoever is losing that fight goes to Amerish. So you got a 3 different faction concentrated on 3 different continents. Then, all 3 factions will switch continents for easy capping on empty bases, rinse and repeat.

Gameplay balance - Air units need to be nerfed or be more expensive. I've never used air units before because I prefer infantry, but these units get too much kills and advantage.

Small/Medium base spawn rooms needs retooling to allow infantry to get out and not get farmed by air or mechanized units as soon as they step out. Give them 3 double-width doors. Open up the roof with shields so players shoot the hoovering aircraft right above the room while their nose is pointing just outside the door.

They can grab all the players they can with these promos but they will simply leave once they realise the game balance is out of whack.

I think it is exaggerated how these mines affect newbie experience. Most of the vehicle pads are located about 5 feet from the console. I assume most players have use of at least one eye. And it's no different that laying AI mines on stairs or doorways.

Instead newbies are leaving because of gameplay imbalances: The Zoes, the lolpods, the Harassers, the Prowler HEs of yesterdays etc etc. Newbies are also leaving because the Developer solutions eschew the basic gameplay, such as allowing Sunderer spawn to wipe easily, coming from the buffed Liberators and is the main reason why stopped logging on (http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=58093).

But, I'll give an example of a current imbalance that the Devs are trying to solve heavy-handedly (same way as the NDZ, vehicle pad, jump pad solutions). It's Sniperside. Before Sniperside, Snipers are this way:

Ranged advantage + low Detection advantage (stealth) + Can't 1-hit

After much circle-jerking at the official forum, the Developers decide to change Sniper abilities. And despite warnings of how they are being gamed (read, I'm referring to Sniper posts at the official forum btw: http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...199#post948199 )

Originally Posted by Mordelicius

[COLOR="DarkOrange"]

...SNIP...


Nanoweave and Snipers

- I'll wait for the actual post, but these Snipers complaining about nanoweave want low risk/high reward situations. Snipers are already kill-streakers. The current system is fine. All these guys do is deploy spam until they get to a high cliff, high mountain, high building, top of tower, top of antenna, top of tree, then snipe with impunity with very low risk and high rewards. And they still want some more?

They don't need to fix what's not broken. All these buffs to Vulcan, HE etc. weren't necessary at all in the first place. All they did was break stuff for months. Just go to any Youtube videos of Snipers killing nonstop and you'll see there's nothing to fix.

Despite that, the Snipers are changed to:

Range advantage + low Detection advantage (stealth) + 1 hit kill head shot.

Hence, this crazy, advantage has been used to farm newbies. What's the Dev solution? Death Screen. In a similar vein as the NDZ and such, it encroaches unnecessarily on player gamespace. It's not player action that is telling where people are, but the Dev indirection action.

A better Sniper solution would be simple, well thought balance pass: Remove stealth ability from Snipers!

Finally, I reiterate that this is a philosophic battle whether the Devs should jump in or keep their hands off gameplay and leave player interactions to just the players. I still say that all the former does is make Planetside 2 fights less exciting and more bland and cumbersome.

[Muldoon]

Originally Posted by Mordelicius

I don't recall using the term holding hands, nor it's in that spirit lol.

Think of another game, say, basketball. A referee would draw random circles on the ground where offense can't step on. After watching the offense dance around like clown just to get off a shot, the ball changes hands and now it's the other team to do it on the other side.

Hockey for the longest time had something like this. It was called the goalie's crease. An opposing player wasn't allowed to score while in the crease. It made it so the goalie had a buffer zone of not being interfered with. The No Deploy Zone is also similar to a modern offsides. It prevents you from goal hanging, which is similar to placing a sunderer directly on the capture point.

Originally Posted by Mordelicius

I think it is exaggerated how these mines affect newbie experience. Most of the vehicle pads are located about 5 feet from the console. I assume most players have use of at least one eye. And it's no different that laying AI mines on stairs or doorways.

Instead newbies are leaving because of gameplay imbalances:

Exaggerated or not, it adds very little to the game vs the amount of cheap and cheese for players who like to mine the pads. A variety of cheese is still cheese.

The reason most noobs left was because of performance until OMFG. After that, it's usually one of these: not being able to find a fight, or dying a lot. Some players have no idea how they're dying and the feedback the game gave was very sparse and difficult to understand. That's one of the reasons we added the killcam. Personally, I wanted to go further with the killcam, but what we have is still pretty good.

Originally Posted by Mordelicius

Finally, I reiterate that this is a philosophic battle whether the Devs should jump in or keep their hands off gameplay and leave player interactions to just the players.

There's no "we keep hands off gameplay." Everything we do has some hands on or design direction. For the best games out there, it's really hard to notice the designer's hand in the game, because it all flows so smoothly. There are some rough edges where you can see the designer's hand, but I don't agree with your solutions to fix that roughness.

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by Muldoon

Personally I disagree with a lot of your post, but this was the biggest one I disagreed with. There are lots of new players playing Planetside each day, and are learning how to play. The game is already really hard to learn, and having a new player blow up on a vehicle pad is a quick way to getting them to uninstall. Without new players, the game dies.

Call it hand holding or what have you, being able to place mines on the vehicle pad is one of the cheapest things you could do and added very little to the game.

If mines were not quite so powerful or able to be placed so close together, it wouldn't be a problem.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Baneblade

If mines were not quite so powerful or able to be placed so close together, it wouldn't be a problem.

Where have I seen BOTH been done? >.>

[Stanis]

Originally Posted by Baneblade

If mines were not quite so powerful or able to be placed so close together, it wouldn't be a problem.

I hope at some point for an engineer class revamp.
In which we get the option to deploy a minefield and deny area.

In a way mines are missing their actual purpose massively. It shouldn't be about sneaky traps on a vehicle pad or getting one in position.

It's supposed to be about shutting down a section of road until clear.
It's like most static defences : missing the point.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by Obstruction

definitely lol'd. and i still don't get it.

is it possible that people just want this mechanic shoehorned into Planetside 2 to satisfy nostalgia for Planetside?

if they put this in as it is being described they will have to redesign or remove many other systems, including large systems such as resources and alerts. i just don't see that happening. they can't even fix half the bugs in the game 18 months after release, or half of the ones introduced in the last 18 months along with their half assed attempts to address core gameplay issues.

in fact, i suspect that Continent Locking was nothing more than a half assed attempt to address a core gameplay issue that existed in Planetside, analogous to the Alert system in Planetside 2. and if so, it would be quite ironic that veteran players pine for it while decrying Alerts and No Deploy Zones, etc.

No cont locking was not 'half-assed' as you say. It was very important and it drove the entire game.

Alerts do fine for what they are and are the most interesting part of the game as it is. But they have a big flaw. That flaw is the reward to the winner. If you want the reward (and PS2 is built on xp gain as the motivation) then you have to be on the winning side to benefit most and the result of that is population swings.

This was obvious from launch on Miller. TR population jumped as events started and grew throughout. TR therefore won the alert often with dominating victories which then in turn reinforced the impression that TR will most often win alerts.

Back in ps1 we did have alerts of a kind and different to those in ps2, but when they occurred we normally decried them because they were a distraction from the main event, ie 'the war'.