|
Directive loss update:quote:In simplest terms, when a zone crashes and players log back in immediately it puts their character in a bad state and removes progress. We are hopeful we've fixed the zone crash we've been seeing recently and are currently working on resolving the issue with characters. http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/2fdina/twitterradarx_for_those_of_you_still_impacted_by/ck8j2zz Would have been nice to update how long you should wait, I'd personally suggest at least 5 minutes.
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 09:25 |
|
|
Cabbit posted:I can't remember how Planetside 1 solved this, or if it even did. It didn't. Through the misty eyes of Nostalgia people will realize that PS1 was really "gently caress Interlink Facilites" the game that or the three bases on Cyssor we were stuck on forever. PS1 was a game where bases were either captured basically unopposed or you easily rolled Amp Stations and Biolabs due to their easy to take set up and then got your cock stuck in an Interlink or a Tech Plant if you were having a bad day until one side got completely bored and logged off or it went Neutral a few hours later. It sucked, but it was all we had so we worked around it. Imagine the forever wars over the T-Zone of bases on Indar, except worse and on every continent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
Fans posted:It didn't. Through the misty eyes of Nostalgia people will realize that PS1 was really "gently caress Interlink Facilites" the game that or the three bases on Cyssor we were stuck on forever. None of this is true. Ps1 had many problems but the meta (until BFRs) was not one of them. If you played late then yeah have fun with Cyssorside but that was because the game got really loving old and people left.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Yeah I was about to say, PS1 really didn't. It crammed zergs through the eye of a needle known as its poorly designed bases. The thing was you could make some really fun small fights ghost capping. Due to the large scale logistics roleplay, you'd only ever fight other players speced for rapid response / ghost capping. These players would look for each other. PS1 ghost capping is almost nothing like PS2 ghost capping in most instances because people had to fight - and sometimes that'd turn into an awesome actual battle. Capping bases in PS1 had one(1) strategy: bring more AMSes than your enemy brought orbital strikes, wait. What they should do to help directive reset players is give them an exclusive month "directive boost" that causes their kills to count for double to triple the progress or something. I tweeted dcarey earlier and he said they've been considering it. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Westy543 posted:Yeah I was about to say, PS1 really didn't. It crammed zergs through the eye of a needle known as its poorly designed bases. The thing was you could make some really fun small fights ghost capping. Due to the large scale logistics roleplay, you'd only ever fight other players speced for rapid response / ghost capping. These players would look for each other. PS1 ghost capping is almost nothing like PS2 ghost capping in most instances because people had to fight - and sometimes that'd turn into an awesome actual battle. That does fix it though. Hell zergs want every base to be Normandy. We've done this to PHX in PS2 and they THANKED us for it. So yeah cram them in and call it immersion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
For all the poo poo QRY gets I have never once been TK'd by one because I killed someone they were going after. PREY on the other hand, had killed me multiple times for daring to get involved in their sky duels.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
Arghy posted:You dont need physics or anything fancy in the sanctuary, it could be a glorified chat room that spread out server load--poo poo add a vehicle teleport option and make them free in the sanctuary. The entire goal would be to allow excess server pop somewhere to go without arbitrarily unlocking a cont that you worked hard to capture. Why have a Sanctuary when you have a VR? Outside of theme they're the same thing - a place to hang and try out new weapons/systems. Sanctuary is a lovely idea for other reasons. People love their group photo's, armor and air lines and generally gathering the troops. With the way current large outfits act as basically meat for better teams, the Sanctuary would only reinforce that behavior. I much prefer the Warpgate feeling of redeploy, get in your poo poo and get the gently caress out to battle. VR servers as a training ground much better than a Sanctuary would. Also bear in mind the amount of potential dev hours lost/spent on building this Sanctuary that could be better spent elsewhere. People toss out ideas that are impractical. The SOE dev team has limited resources to call upon. I like your idea about tying Battle Islands into global alerts. I was more thinking the opposite way, that once a continent locks the participating outfits with the highest contribution get to queue for the Battle Island. Once the queue is filled it tosses in two (or three!) "teams" compromising of the better players online at the moment. You basically have an alert-based "competitive" environment ala Server Smash (Faction Smash?) that, as all of you who have participated in any competitive PS2 events, know is a pretty drat intense PS2 experience. Meanwhile, on the continents you have middle-of-the-road players who can butt heads all they like. A big thing would be polishing up the Mission System and pushing more towards guiding new players into basically doing what better outfits do all the time - non-conventional stuff. I proposed a more refined Mission System during the Shark Tank panel at SOE Live, but I didn't get an audio recording. There's lots of ways SOE can expand on these systems: Missions, continental locking, inter-continental lattice, Battle Islands and outfit capture/ownership improvements. I'm more towards people playing the game and getting their name out there for that "awww shucks" affect than re-iterating on old Planetside 1 metagame poo poo that I truly believe won't work with the mindset of current gamers. Outfit base capture was the first of what I hope to be many steps that SOE will push towards. edit: if I had to pick one feature from PS1 to port directly into PS2 it would be non-lattice based Towers. That poo poo was legendary. kidRiot fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
kidRiot posted:Why have a Sanctuary when you have a VR? Outside of theme they're the same thing - a place to hang and try out new weapons/systems. Why not just rename VR to Sanctuary, lose the godawful filter that makes everything after like 100m pitch black, have you load into there by default when starting up the game, and throw a big screen in there that shows continent populations (and more importantly the pop XP bonus)? Minimum chance of breaking anything (although  would find a way), would appease the people who want Sanctuaries back, and might give people more reason to go to different continents rather than staying on the one they load in on.And to be fair, when/if we get the continental lattice, we need some starting point for each empire, and sanctuaries would fill that role. Icedude fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:For all the poo poo QRY gets I have never once been TK'd by one because I killed someone they were going after. PREY on the other hand, had killed me multiple times for daring to get involved in their sky duels. Don't let that fool you QRY is just as autistic, just not as skilled as PREY. Shooting them down in "unapproved" ways will result in rage TKs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
I like the idea of taking small outposts off the lattice. Make them critical to the new resource model but decrease the number of major facilities and increase their size and number of cap points. Bases become insanely hard to take but accommodating of hellzergs (because they'll have to spread out all over the base footprint), defenders can get tons of teleporters and tunnels to actually give them the edge for owning the base, and ghostcappers or smaller outfits can fight over non-latticed secondary facilities that could be the source of nanite fill-ups for ANTs or whatever. A lot of small facilities are things like mines already anyway, just have them all be mines, refineries, fuel depots, charging stations, and so forth. Give them all ANT charging stations, make them cappable in a slightly different way (maybe a temporary lock on ownership so they're not flipping excessively), bam, done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:Except Tomcats have been the way they are for, what, 1.5 years? Tomcats have had a lot of changes and I wouldn't put it past them to gently caress with them even more. Beta: Huge reticle, huge lock on range, fire and forget. If you wern't using them you were just giving up free certs. These combined with a medicore vortek accuracy meant you could kill basically anything as long as you got the drop on them. Reverse Maneuver was known only to a select few. Highlight of this era was the reticle was so big you could attain lock and fire your missiles in third person with little effort. Launch: Slightly smaller reticle, less lock on range, fire and forget. Not as good anymore but still potent. This remained unchanged until just prior to the ESF update. Like a virus Reverse Maneuver began to spread. Third person lock-ons no longer viable, you actually had to aim now. Dark Days: ESF widely panned as "OP" various nerfs to ESFs and buffs to AA turn ESFs into the flying coffins we know and love today. Rocket Pods get nerfed a half a dozen times. Render issue of infantry/max units never addressed. Somewhere in between: Lock On Warnings introduced. No longer will the first missile impact be the only warning you get. Pilots begin to learn to ditch missiles into mountains. ESF update tweak #1: In a effort to appease the legions of reverse manuever enabled skygods they nerfed the poo poo out of A2A missiles. Less lock on range, longer lock on timer, and now you had to keep the reticle on the target until the missile hit. Widely panned as making the weapon useless this tweak didn't last long. Reverse Maneuver is widely accepted and even average pilots are starting to get a handle on it, however default afterburners are nerfed. You now need fuel tanks to spin circles around you adversaries. This further cements using the nose gun only as the way of the Skygod. ESF Update Tweak #2: In a effort to appease people who bought the A2A missiles fire and forget was reinstated. Skygods lament but have now have the Coyotes to whine about now so A2A remains as it is. Coyotes now make Skygods cry and are considered poor form. Hilariously instead of nerfing them they were actually buffed to reload faster. What the future holds for aircraft who knows. Most people hate ESFs/Libs and the dev team knows. Look at how hilariously under powered the Valk came out of production and what happened to the poor, poor dedicated lib pilots during their update.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
General Probe posted:Don't let that fool you QRY is just as autistic, just not as skilled as PREY. Shooting them down in "unapproved" ways will result in rage TKs. I want to create a situation in which we have some players kill them with A2A, then fly to and park the scythes near FRZA players in deployed (stealth, hidden) prowlers and wait for the TK scythes to hover for the kill. e: whoops this isn't the PGS thread. Well, swap nouns as you see fit! Sard fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
As I already have the empire-specific plasma lockon for my Scythe that I can't remember the name of, are Tomcats worth getting instead? edit: vvvvvv uh, then what are these? http://planetside.wikia.com/wiki/Photon_A2A_Missile_Pods or is that a comment on just how bad they are? Icedude fucked around with this message at 22:31 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Icedude posted:As I already have the empire-specific plasma lockon for my Scythe that I can't remember the name of, are Tomcats worth getting instead? There are no empire specific lock-ons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
Those are the VS version of Tomcats, you're already using the right thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
wei posted:Those are the VS version of Tomcats, you're already using the right thing. Oh. For some reason I thought the NS ones that weren't the Coyotes were the Tomcats.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Icedude posted:Why not just rename VR to Sanctuary, lose the godawful filter that makes everything after like 100m pitch black, have you load into there by default when starting up the game, and throw a big screen in there that shows continent populations (and more importantly the pop XP bonus)? Minimum chance of breaking anything (although Yeah the point is to reinforce the aspects of continents being owned not just giant death match maps. If you have enough pop to occupy 3 conts and your pushed back to loving 1 cont? yeah you deserve to sit in the loving VR with the rest of your faction. The BI's could act as release valves with full platoons queuing up to attack them so if your faction is loving terrible you can get a platoon of good players and win a BI and open another cont for your terrible faction to spill into. You can do vehicle teleporting by pulling a vehicle from the sanct which is then free when you spawn on the cont you wanna go to so you'd encourage people to attack a new cont in a wave. The entire point is you dont want abunch of idiots dog piling into a cont being lone wolves while you were pushed back into your last cont. You want people to spawn into a giant meeting area and think, HEY MAYBE I SHOULD JOIN A PLATOON/SQUAD? When your attack wave gos off you want people being loving hyped and focused on taking that cont not just dicking around.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
Arghy posted:If you have enough pop to occupy 3 conts and your pushed back to loving 1 cont? yeah you deserve to sit in the loving VR with the rest of your faction.. What a great way to make people not play your game 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Arghy posted:If you have enough pop to occupy 3 conts and your pushed back to loving 1 cont? yeah you deserve to sit in the loving VR with the rest of your faction. The first time I'm forced to spend to more than a couple of minutes in queue to get into a continent to play at all because of pop is the last time I boot up the game. Between the boot up load, the log in load, and the initial spawn load, it already takes too much loving time to get going.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:What a great way to make people not play your game 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
Planetside 2: MLG Pro Ultimate Turbo-Nerds Only I'd rather we stop coddling a demographic that wants this game to be balanced around a competitive scene that does not and will not ever exist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
Arghy posted:Yeah the point is to reinforce the aspects of continents being owned not just giant death match maps. If you have enough pop to occupy 3 conts and your pushed back to loving 1 cont? yeah you deserve to sit in the loving VR with the rest of your faction. The BI's could act as release valves with full platoons queuing up to attack them so if your faction is loving terrible you can get a platoon of good players and win a BI and open another cont for your terrible faction to spill into. You can do vehicle teleporting by pulling a vehicle from the sanct which is then free when you spawn on the cont you wanna go to so you'd encourage people to attack a new cont in a wave. Arghzan of the Spergs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
Most PS1 ideas sound either plan old bad or like something that could only possibly work in a P2P model like it was. If it isn't P2P reliant it's probably "lovely gunplay and glacial TTK" dependent. What's the point of a sanctuary? We already have a place where all factions can intermingle and speak freely without killing being involved, and it's called "the official forums." Other than that it's just a glorified deployment screen and we've already got those.Nookovian-Red posted:ESF stuff Man, I remember when rocket pods did full damage out to like 8m and could 3-5 shot an MBT from behind. That and release Zephyr spam did this game no favors Arghy posted:The entire point is you dont want abunch of idiots dog piling into a cont being lone wolves while you were pushed back into your last cont. You want people to spawn into a giant meeting area and think, HEY MAYBE I SHOULD JOIN A PLATOON/SQUAD? When your attack wave gos off you want people being loving hyped and focused on taking that cont not just dicking around. So instead of lone wolfing one at a time they just move as a giant blob into an owned continent all at once from a single spawn point and into the jaws of a defending force that is fully aware of their arrival thanks to the BI victory being obvious?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Servicio en Espanol posted:A lot of people claim (or claimed) to like that kind of small-scale squad-on-squad combat. "Our outfit is a rapid reaction air cav special ops squad" stuff and that sounds a lot like ghostcapping/anti-ghostcapping to me. Adapting to it is easy: you show up, kill them and their unprotected spawns, and they run along to the next unoccupied hex. Most of them are awful and you never get a real fight* because they ditch immediately. The issue is that it's almost always an unfun time drain to counter. But, you're right; I'll adapt by fully ignoring ghostcapping instead of just mostly (ignoring low pop/terribly imbalanced continents). * Occasionally DA or AC do it and a decent 12v12 or so skirmish develops, but it's rare. Cabbit posted:I like hellzergs, because it's easy and fun to stalk the edges like a machine-pistol wielding vulture. What I don't like is when one side is spread out, and the other is hell-zerging-- what the game needs, more than anything, is even fights of every size. It needs more incentives to meet an enemy force with a proportional response. When I say hellzerg, I don't mean 100v100 since usually that's still fairly playable (but pushing it, seems like somewhere around 200+ players in the same hex starts really hurting game performance). When it's so high that enemies (and friendlies) start popping in and out of existence because the game can't process the size of the battle, that's what I mean by hellzerg. If they could improve their server-side tech to support more without degradation, I'm game for absurd scale fights. Davethulhu posted:Directive loss update: Fart Car '97 posted:What a great way to make people not play your game But, you know, internet vidjagames are serious business... so... gently caress casuals.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
If this game isn't a substitute for the career or family missing from your life then you should stop playing altogether
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
I play this game for big fuckoff fights and bringing 48+ GOONs into those fights with big fuckoff beautiful tanks and missiles that go SCREEE and blow things up and then the shotgun MAXes stomp around in followed by Canrassers turboing off of and into everything right before 3 squads of Reavers descend on the base in a hellstorm of Breaker rockets and collision debris. And the SCREE, always the incessant SCREE. That's Planetside 2 motherfuckers not this 12v12 private server scrim poo poobUm posted:Exactly my thoughts reading that line. I get annoyed enough when I get stuck in VR during weekend primetime for 5-10 minutes because all four continents have queues (or 45 minutes the time I tried to join the GOON platoon on Alert Indar [started ~80th in queue] without first hopping to a shorter queue continent so I could at least play while waiting). I try to put us all on a lower pop continent and then not move us whenever it's a 4-cont pop lock situation but it doesn't always work like that 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
Davethulhu posted:Directive loss update: So in other words if I knew the sundie hex crash exploit I could say tail QRY or some other such spergfit and just constantly crash them and wipe their directives? EDIT: RE: I don't want to be locked in VR if my faction gets wrecked. Just give put in a flat 50km chunk of land devoid of anything outside of warpgates. The warpgates only have the spawn tubes and terminals for vehicles. Call this map Valhalla. Put like 20 in game so people can fight when their faction sucks so much they can't keep hold of a single continent. Leal fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
bUm posted:Exactly my thoughts reading that line. I get annoyed enough when I get stuck in VR during weekend primetime for 5-10 minutes because all four continents have queues (or 45 minutes the time I tried to join the GOON platoon on Alert Indar [started ~80th in queue] without first hopping to a shorter queue continent so I could at least play while waiting). I play this game for the high impact aire to aire dogfighting maneuvers where people fly as one would expect WW2 aircraft, hardcore logistics roleplay, and the strong metagame (which I can't actually define, sorry) backed by even stronger territory worth. Mechanics that make people want to quit a game whose success relies on a lot of people playing are really going to make PS2 successful, I think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 01:46
|
|
|
Davethulhu posted:Directive loss update: Have they said anything about people getting back their lost progress or is that never going to happen?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
Westy543 posted:I play this game for the high impact aire to aire dogfighting maneuvers where people fly as one would expect WW2 aircraft, hardcore logistics roleplay, and the strong metagame (which I can't actually define, sorry) backed by even stronger territory worth. Mechanics that make people want to quit a game whose success relies on a lot of people playing are really going to make PS2 successful, I think. Edit: I will give some credit to the WWII aircraft argument though. WWII dogfighting > modern dogfighting in every game I've ever played. I would not mind seeing SOE revamp how flight in PS2 works (I think the BF franchise shows well how much better suited old-school flying was to modern flying in the combined arms environment), but refusing to play to the current implementation (even if pushing for an overhaul) is just pathetic. bUm fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Periphery posted:Have they said anything about people getting back their lost progress or is that never going to happen? quote:Let me try and word that differently. We are still discussing what we are going to do for folks impacted. We won't make any of that available until we are sure it's fixed. http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/2fdina/twitterradarx_for_those_of_you_still_impacted_by/ck8qu6z
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
Westy543 posted:and the strong metagame (which I can't actually define, sorry) I know I'm an old but when did metagame replace the word "strategy"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
Coredump posted:I know I'm an old but when did metagame replace the word "strategy"? When MOBAs became popular.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
Strategy and metagame are completely different concepts. Strategy is part of a metagame, but they aren't the same thing. A metagame is both the current standard strategies and playstyles, and the mind games that come from a strategy that toys with those expectations. It's been used in this way since at least Starcraft 1. edit: Apparently metagame means a whole ton of poo poo, but in the context of games it all boils down to trends, and external information beyond what's in front of you. Pomp fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
Sounds like what they've been doing in chess for years. Doubt they called it "the meta". 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:41
|
|
|
Coredump posted:Sounds like what they've been doing in chess for years. Doubt they called it "the meta". Calling everything the "Meta" avoids the endless "Tactics vs Strategy" debate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
Pomp posted:Strategy and metagame are completely different concepts. Strategy is part of a metagame, but they aren't the same thing. A metagame is both the current standard strategies and playstyles, and the mind games that come from a strategy that toys with those expectations. Yeah meta and strategy are completely different. To put it in simply, you strategize to achieve a meta. Tech plants take strategic priority because, from a meta standpoint MBTs are overpowered and the side that posesses more of them usually wins.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
Phoenix nests are a strategy used to achieve the meta of scouring Auraxis of all PPA from total safety The lockdown AP Prowler is a weird hyper dimensional organism that eats metas and shits metas we cannot even comprehend
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Phoenix nests are a strategy used to achieve the meta of scouring Auraxis of all PPA from total safety Those metas are huge steaming piles of certs 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 09:25 |
|
|
Epic High Five posted:Phoenix nests are a strategy used to achieve the meta of scouring Auraxis of all PPA from total safety Lockdown Prowlers are Lancer food. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 04:31
|
|
