Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

GU9 lattice system in!

SysFailSysFail LondonPosts: 375Member

I've not played for awhile, but after seeing that the lattice system is in on Indar, it's time to roll once more!

GU9 and lattice update.

Comments

  • BeanpuieBeanpuie Norfolk, VAPosts: 812Member Uncommon

    even in its bare bones form it is providing big fights as promoted, and less platoons or people capping bases for easy xp.

    making plans to play through the lettuce some more later tonight.

  • BeanpuieBeanpuie Norfolk, VAPosts: 812Member Uncommon

    Alright here are my impressions:

     

    bottom line, i approve and welcome the lattice (lettuce) even in its  bare bones, flawed state, It greatly promotes the games core feature;  big, giant battles.

     

    Some concerns , such as issue of  "lack of tactics/strategy"  that people bring up are subjective, and tend to extremely find ways to have different definitions and beliefs from various people.  therefore what i will list will be things that the lattice offers as well as what it is lacking:

     

    1. The lattice frowns upon ghost capping

    with the lanes having pre determined directions of where to go,  usually 2 to 3 choices of directions, this eliminates the options of small squads or less, to jump around the map, cap territories and continue on their way without the obligation of defending said territory.  now they do have a choice to hunker down and defend, but in most cases they opt to avoid the enemy as much as possible, and take land for quick xp/certs.

    the lattice, instead  funnels people into the fight,  again with predetermined directions to go, the overall battle flow is set, putting groups of soldiers in areas where they either have to defend, or advance-  so bridge battles, combined arms, multiple counter attack situations are FAR more visible and FAR more frequent. 

    This also gives commanders a chance in building front line defenses, or legitimate counter attacks to throw at the enemy, as for scouts and logistic oriented individuals, this makes their job alot more easier focusing alittle less on what direction(s) the enemy may attack from and more on what the enemy make up they may be facing.

    2. The lattice punishes small squads

    Unfortunately, the lattice in its current state, punishes small squads.  small squads/outfits  as a whole still have a function, but they are in most cases tied to the hip of the zerg simply due to having no alternatives of attacking the enemy except head on.

    in pure speculation, if the lattice continues to be used and built upon, i do forsee the potential of  bases having greater importance of funneling resources around the territory.  much like  generator lockdowns in the first planetside,  it wouldnt be far fetched if Bases that:

    A. have key refinery benefits that help accumulate resources (air,infantry vehicle) faster or more in large bonuses

    and

    B. having resources be funneled via lattice including said benefits depending on which base gives them.

    I beleive if that option is ends up becoming possible down the road, then small squads would have a great importance of severing resource lattice's  via a "resource generator".

    nothing worse than having your zerg lose their supply line- attrition sets in, and things fall apart.

    again, all speculation.

     

    3. the lattice still gives potential backhacking

    much like the hex, if any left over territory is still in the hands of the enemy, then they still have the ability of regaining their lost land back without the connection of their warpgate

     

    4. unstable netcode

    with GU09 and the lattice, well....big battles unfortunately bring big consequences, from  several no hit bugs to people disappearing and reappearing in front of you, the server ..and the hamster, im certain has exploded into a million pieces, twice last night and the night before. imo it was to be expected, but im sure they got alot of data/notes from the insanity.

     

    Overall, I enjoyed all the fights involving the lattice, the strong ability of logging in, getting into a fight with little down time brings alot to the game.   now if only scarred mesa can get hit by a meteor also.

     

  • MadAceMadAce AntwerpPosts: 2,461Member

    Quite simple. I was promised a hex and a sandbox.

    I'm getting an MMOFPS on rails and a theme park.

     

    If I could get my money back I would.

     

    There's a reason why PS1 had a HUGE problem with player-retention. If the hex goes, I'll go.

     

     

    I'm not angry. I'm very level-headed and very rational about this.

  • PurutzilPurutzil East Stroudsburg, PAPosts: 2,923Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MadAce

    Quite simple. I was promised a hex and a sandbox.

    I'm getting an MMOFPS on rails and a theme park.

     

    If I could get my money back I would.

     

    There's a reason why PS1 had a HUGE problem with player-retention. If the hex goes, I'll go.

     

     

    I'm not angry. I'm very level-headed and very rational about this.

    Yes because one change suddenly changes the way the game functions drastically to change it from 'sandbox' to 'on rails theme park'. Its a very rational conclusion.  After all if you just take say SWTOR and then suddenly make it an open world, its sandbox with that logic and makes sense. Not to mention its rational to quite over one change that isn't really a massive change at all compared to stuff other games tend to do.

     

    /facepalm.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    Planetside while a great game was never a sandbox.

  • BeanpuieBeanpuie Norfolk, VAPosts: 812Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MadAce

    Quite simple. I was promised a hex and a sandbox.

    I'm getting an MMOFPS on rails and a theme park.

     

    If I could get my money back I would.

     

    There's a reason why PS1 had a HUGE problem with player-retention. If the hex goes, I'll go.

     

     

    I'm not angry. I'm very level-headed and very rational about this.

    would it make more sense to say  "hex and a themepark and then rails and a themepark"  since one core aspect of the game, taking territory, has changed to promote more fighting and big battles vs. taking the path of least resistance and the crown? once again, human behavior proved that the majority of players favoring easy wins outweighed the players looking for a fight. Why play by the rules "fairly" when one can just soak up xp and certs without little effort?

    additionally when you did have players looking for a battle, anyone on the defending side packed up and left due to lack of reward/incentive and left to greener pastures, a.k.a. the nearest farming biolab , or ran towards the nearest platoon or zerg to join in on the ghost cap convoy.

    Planetside 1 ran with the lattice system the majority of its life span , and of that time it had the foundation of  LLU's , gen holding tactics and cut off points due to predicting where the enemy was going to attack next but before  the Bending, before Aftershock and BFRS ever made the seen,  lattice was around and the playerbase was there too, having it to be the sole reason of the IP's horrid player-retention would need further explanation. 

    personally, The hex was salvagable, but the way the game behaves let alone its player base,  the Hex system was eventually going to end up too convoluted, either ridden with further exploits that various outfits constantly found during its life cycle in beta, or tightened with so many restrictions that they'd might as well put in the lattice system, or perhaps something far more sinister; like lobby rooms. with all that said, i still believe the hex system can work, but in another role.

    sparing details, I believe in a Lattice x Hex hybrid system.

Sign In or Register to comment.