Some good PS ideas.

[Kam]

1. What are missing from this game are the artillery cannons, the regular kind. I think what should be done is remove some of the bases that there are two of on a continent and create something like the fire support bases of Vietnam. The idea is simple. You have three large (160mm-220mm) artillery cannons in a triangle formation surrounded by high walls. The entirety of the actual walk in base would be underground, and there would be no vehicle terminals. The three cannons can rotate 360 degrees and move up and down between 30 and 90 degrees. There would only be one of these per continent and they would be near or in the center, so they could cover the entirety of said continent. Only CR 3-5 would be able to use these artillery pieces.
2. They need to add pull able artillery. Meaning, a harasser or vehicle like it, could pull a 100mm artillery piece behind it. It would then disconnect from said vehicle and deploy as a stationary gun that can rotate 180 degrees and move up and down 30 to 90 degrees. This could shoot different rounds depending on what the target is.
3. A third kind of structure is needed. There are the towers and main bases, but there is nothing in-between them. There should be medium sized bases that are small and well defended. Also, there should be bases on the tops of mountains that are only reachable by air vehicles and artillery fire (no orbital strikes either).
4. Another full sized continent is needed in the upper right corner (look on the world map).

I might have more later, tell me what you think. No flaming.

[Warborn]

You need to provide actual justification for your ideas. Why does there need to be an artillery spot? I think Planetside has enough impersonal, skilless ways to gain kills as is. This would only compound the issue of flails and liberations simply unloading ordinance and killing people without any real thought put into it. Similar arguments can be applied to your other recommendations. If there "needs" to be something, elaborate on why you feel it's important.

[Cryptica]

I agree. The ideas aren't entirely bad, and could even be cool in some cases (I like the new medium-sized base thing), but I don't see enough justification for the artillary. I get killed by friendly flails almost as often as I do by enemy flails.

[SilverLord]

The ideas arn't bad at all but I support the medium sized bases inbetween towers and bases much more than more artilery pieces.

[Lartnev]

I like the medium sized base idea a lot :D

The artillery ideas aren't really something I'd really want, people complain about the flail as it is :(

And the gap in the top right is for the chat window to go, SmokeJumper said so :)

[Kam]

Well the thing about actual artillery is that it's not always a one hit kill scenario like the flail, especially the pull able artillery pieces. Also the CR's would not get xp for using the large artillery pieces.

[scarpas]

Well the thing about actual artillery is that it's not always a one hit kill scenario like the flail, especially the pull able artillery pieces. Also the CR's would not get xp for using the large artillery pieces.


as the candians would say "eh?"

[Warborn]

Well the thing about actual artillery is that it's not always a one hit kill scenario like the flail, especially the pull able artillery pieces. Also the CR's would not get xp for using the large artillery pieces.

It doesn't matter if it's one hit kill or not. Right now combat in Planetside is for the most part reliant on weapons which take minimal skill to use to good effect. Tanks, Reavers, Heavy Assault weapons, Flails, Liberators, etc, all can be used to get a lot of kills by people who are mediocre at best. The last thing I would want to see is even more things which exacerbate the problem by making more ways to kill lot's of people that are stupid-simple.

[Kam]

I'm not saying this would be easy. The big pieces can only be used by high level CR's and they require a spotter, plus there would only be three per continent. The pullable artillery pieces would have thier own cert and it would take time and skill to set them up in a good spot. These pullable pieces also offer no protection to the user and can be hacked. They would not need a spotter.

[Headrattle]

It doesn't matter if it's one hit kill or not. Right now combat in Planetside is for the most part reliant on weapons which take minimal skill to use to good effect. Tanks, Reavers, Heavy Assault weapons, Flails, Liberators, etc, all can be used to get a lot of kills by people who are mediocre at best. The last thing I would want to see is even more things which exacerbate the problem by making more ways to kill lot's of people that are stupid-simple.


All of those weapons take skill. In some cases a lot of skill. While, not as much skill as a sniper, they do take skill.

Reducing the game down to snipers and medium assult wouldn't make for a fun game.

[Warborn]

All of those weapons take skill. In some cases a lot of skill. While, not as much skill as a sniper, they do take skill.

Reducing the game down to snipers and medium assult wouldn't make for a fun game.

Everything takes a degree of skill, that should be a given. What I mean is that there is very little room for improvement with these vehicles/weapons, and that even a very poor player can do well with them simply because of how they're designed. Maybe I'm being elitist, but I think weapons which are easy to pick up and shoot but have enough quirks to them that it leaves a lot of room for improvement would be ideal. For example, HA weapons have large clips, large areas of effect (lasher orbs lashing, jackhammer/mcg spray), don't require you to control your fire to maintain accuracy, and are literally unmatched by any other weapons an infantryman can carry indoors. There is very little room for someone to improve in the field of actually firing a HA weapon effectively, because they're such simple weapons to use already.

So that's what I don't want to see more of. Weapons that any idiot could jump into, point, click, and score kills with a degree of frequency. Once upon a time HA weapons blew and people used MA a hell of a lot, and unlike now, you had to actually be reasonably good at firing a weapon to kill someone. PS was a lot more fun back then.

[Kam]

What about what I just said?

[Warborn]

What about what I just said?

Does it offer players the ability to attack other players from relative safety and with large, explosive ordinance which doesn't require any aiming beyond the initial setting up of your aim? If so, then I don't like the idea, but we've got artillery and bombers so maybe the developers would like it.

[Kam]

I said it would require a spotter, and just like real artillery it doesn't hit the same spot every time. The pullable ones would have to have ammo fed to them as they would not store their own like vehicles.

[Warborn]

I said it would require a spotter, and just like real artillery it doesn't hit the same spot every time. The pullable ones would have to have ammo fed to them as they would not store their own like vehicles.

All of this is irrelevant. It does not take skill to private message someone "aim more to the right and a little forward", nor does it take skill to feed ammo into something. You're missing the point. Teamwork is great, but some jackass with a pulse killing lot's people even though he's an inept moron simply because the game allows it via horrible vehicle designs is what I'm against. If the person pulling the trigger and getting the kills does not have anything more than pointing and clicking to do, we have a serious problem on our hands.

[Kam]

Then why do you play PS, cause that's what everything is like. Especially the VS weapons.

[Lartnev]

VS weapons are not I don't honestly understand your argument Wartorn? That we shouldn't add new weapons because any person can get kills with it?

And believe it or not, some of the VS weapons do take skill to use.

[Warborn]

Then why do you play PS, cause that's what everything is like. Especially the VS weapons.

<3 bolt driver

Plus I have faith that the developers will improve things eventually. I am very pleased with their most recent announcements.

VS weapons are not I don't honestly understand your argument Wartorn? That we shouldn't add new weapons because any person can get kills with it?

My argument is that they shouldn't add more weapons which require virtually no skill by the weapon's user in order to gain kills at a reasonable rate. As I've said previously. PS is plagued with weapons that are simply to pick up and simple to master. There needs to be more stuff that takes a while to really get the hang of, and always has a lot of room for improvement with.

Though I hate to use it as an example, Counter-strike is extremely popular because it is so dependent on skill. Anyone can pick up a weapon, point it, and shoot it at someone, but the real pros know how to control their fire with specific weapons (as they all differ) and get headshots frequently due to their exceptional aim built up over lot's of practice. You can play it for years and still get better at the game. For most of Planetside's weapons, if you used them for years, you'd probably be pretty bored with it after a while. If Planetside didn't have weapons which were so easy to pick up, point, shoot, and get kills with despite having little skill yourself (HA weapons chiefly), I think it would be better.

[Kam]

It will never happen, the devs take to long to do anything.

[Warborn]

It will never happen, the devs take to long to do anything.

I like to be more optimistic. But I think the key is actually getting the message across. Plus, there's no guarentee the general playerbase would go for drastic changes to HA and some other vehicles. People may be too infatuated with these easy to use weapons which give them the perception that they're talented because they are getting numerous kills, and may resist the changes.

Anyway, this thread is derailed, and I apologize for that. Let's try to steer it back to your ideas and away from my opinions.

[Lartnev]

and get headshots frequently due to their exceptional aim built up over lot's of practice

Or hax ;)

I agree people play counter-shite for the perception of skill, which is more of a requirement than Planetside (due mainly to the fact that if you don't get better, you spend most of your time watching those who are). But personally I see that as a plus as well as a negative. It means the game is more fun and accessable to more players. If people brag about kills then I let them brag because I frankly couldn't care. I have more respect for an ANT driver than tank gunner, an advanced medic than a HA user. But you always need cannon fodder :)

I don't mind adding weapons, like deployable heavy weapons, artillery pieces and things like that which would be easy to use and get kills from as long as they required team work to accomplish, and have weaknesses which an opposition team would be able to counter.

I don't think the thread is entirely de-railed, since it's on the discussion of should we be implementing artillery pieces.

[Kam]

Yes, pls return to my original post, I want some actual thoughts on that.

[Sputty]

Warborn, won't happen. You want the devs to change the core gameplay of PS. This isn't CS, or BF, it's more comparable to halo if anything mixed a bit with BF and T2.

[Spee]

Warborn wants more UT2K4 in his PS.

Anyone can use a rocket launcher of Flak Cannon. But when you can get insane kill streaks with it time after time, youve gotten good with it.

And holy shit, I love the UT sniper rifle.


HEAD HUNTERRRRR

[Lartnev]

mmmm redeemer... :drools:

Anyway... I was thinking about the whole artillery thing and I think it wouldn't be so bad to have some more artillery in the game. Personally I don't think towed artillery will go in, simply because you might as well use the self propelled stuff. You'd also need to put in a lot of code to get the physics of pulling something on a towbar right. But adding self propelled stuff which is easier to get than the flail, but far less powerful wouldn't be such a bad idea.

As for the artillery firebase, you'd have to put them within range of existing bases to make them worthwhile, since in planetside the only thing that people fight over, apart from bridges, are the bases.

[Onizuka-GTO]

http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22134

This is a previous thread that was discussion the idea of portable, crew serviced machine guns, self-propelled & towed artilery and howitzers.

Pictures are included for extra incentive. (very pretty too i might add.) :love: :groovy:

as on a personal point, i love artillery, nothing like sitting back in the relatively safety behind some big guns and pound your enemy into submission before getitng in and driving to a new location before being counter barraged. :D

Fear the Steel Rain Grid-Square Denier!!

Ah sorry. I just had to say that. :lol: ;)

[JetRaiden]

I like that idea too. Im also for the deployable machineguns. they made DoD awesome they can make planetside more awesome.

[AltaEgo]

I like that idea too. Im also for the deployable machineguns. they made DoD awesome they can make planetside more awesome.

I agree. Early last month there was a discussion on Artillary Cannons, I'd see it more like a flail; on wheels (Not as powerful of course, or ancient tech like). A big mobile cannon, only 1 troop drives it, gets out and has to deploy it (like AMS) and then fire. He also has to grab ammo from the trunk and put it into the front turret; so having a squad could help him out alot with the loading and acuiring targets etc. Encourages teamwork, would help in many situations. Its defenseless undeployed, so squadmates again would have to escort it to destinations. What dya think? Ideas?

[Onizuka-GTO]

yes. I like that idea too.
Except it isn't energy based, it will be good old fashioned 155mm solid explosive shells. :D

Though I suppose one driver/deployer/gunner would be all it would need. It wouldn't hurt to put a secondary seat for a puny 15mm gunner/reloader would it? i mean it can be a last ditch defence for it, as it moves...hell you could put a twin-linked 15mm, it won't make a difference as the prowler tankers know far too well.... :rolleyes:

p.s: since you mentioned "wheeled" self-propelled artillery, this kept popping up on my scree-erm, mind. :)

(of course with wheels instead)

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/rascal/images/rascal1.jpg

But frankly it wouldn't hurt if they have it like:

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/as90/images/as90_1_a.jpg

as90 Braveheart. isn't it beautiful? Leave it to the British to make the big guns! ;) :p

[Lartnev]

I don't think it should have a secondary gunner, I'm a fan of artillery being vulnerable and uses its range as its defence.

The paladin is quite nice, don't know the size of her gun though. Only problem is they are prone to blowing themselves up :)

[Rbstr]

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/as90/images/as90_1_a.jpg


HAve you ever seen the USA's tracked Arty?

Or the new prototype that can fire 6 shot and have them all land at the same place at the same time?

[Lartnev]

Or the new prototype that can fire 6 shot and have them all land at the same place at the same time?

Not quite sure what the application of that is. Artillery is normally deployed either as a direct single strike, or as a barrage to several different places to pummel an area.

6 shots in the same place would make a nice big explosion though :)

[Kam]

I want artillery, now. Make them give it to us. :evil:

[Lartnev]

/me runs over Kam in a flail ;)

[Onizuka-GTO]

HAve you ever seen the USA's tracked Arty?

Or the new prototype that can fire 6 shot and have them all land at the same place at the same time?


Bah i don't care.

It's not the size of your cannon that matters, but how you use it.
;)

go go! Royal Artillery! :lol:

[Kam]

America will always have the bigger gun.

[Onizuka-GTO]

so?

All it means is that the Americans have less of an excuse to miss. :rolleyes: :p ;)

[Majik]

I would rather see the flails removed, than more artillery put in. Artillery is more of a danger to your own empire than the enemies the way people in this game use it.

[SilverLord]

I would rather see the flails removed, than more artillery put in. Artillery is more of a danger to your own empire than the enemies the way people in this game use it.
I agree. I also wish the Flail look more like real artilery and not something out of Aliens.

[Onizuka-GTO]

I would rather see the flails removed, than more artillery put in. Artillery is more of a danger to your own empire than the enemies the way people in this game use it.

I agree.

They need to remove it and put in some artillery that requires a crew. Meaning you won't be able to operate it or fire it properly without help. A real multiplaying teamwork vehicle.

Sure one man fighting vehicles are great, but really im getting tired when one of those gun-ho cowboys mess up everything because they think they can take on an entire zerg.

Plus with practice, a well placed unsuspected hidden artillery crewed with ecperienced soldiers, you can stop a Zerg right in it's path taken out hundreds of them at a time! :love:

[Lartnev]

Flail is as good as it is for two reasons.

1)You need to have Core Combat to use it
2)You need a vehicle module linked base to get it.

Artillery in all of its forms has a potential to pummell your own troops. The US Army have many documented cases of their Artillery hitting their own troops and it's probably true of other military forces as well. Artillery is indescriminant. Whether it's a single user in a flail or a gun crew for towed artillery. The problem is not with the flail, but with the people who use it incorrectly.

[hex222]

i'll admit that i havn't read any posts since the first but anyway...

i find that CR should not be used to say who can use what in terms of weapons and vehicles, BR should be used.
someone who understands using machinery would have br so there should be a br limit of 10 or 12.
people with a CR of 3+ should be able to do planning and laser pointing, terminals for these uses could be placed in or ontop of the base.

oh yeah, and the idea for the semi-mobile turrets, sorta sounds like a trebuchet, which basiccally is what a flail is, right???

[Lartnev]

hehe trebuchets in the future :D

The flail is self propelled artillery, which means that it's basically a tank with a really large gun. The trebuchet was a siege weapon which would be transported in bits and assembled where needed. Towed artillery is something which is attached to the back of another vehicle and is ready to fire as soon as it's moved into place. It's basically half way between the trebuchet and the flail :D

[Onizuka-GTO]

*:love: for Self-propelled Artillery*

Its for this reason i bought 1942 Battlefield simple for the Artillery in Desert Mod.

I only play the MLR and the 155mm howitzers which are truly crew-served vehicles with a driver, gunner, commander and spotter, and spotters they are the most important, you can't do any effective artillery without spotters to guide your rounds/missiles.

But unfortunately Battlefield 1942 seriously lack TEAMPLAY :mad: if only they have the same level of co-operation that we have in P.S...

:rolleyes:

[Lartnev]

Probably do in clan matches :)