simple perspective on TR balance

[Ducimus]

Ya i know, the dreaded B word.

I think SOE has balancing everything all wrong. They'll never get it balanced.

Its not about individual weapons compared to each other in relative power persay, but as to their attributes and physics.

Riddle me this, why does it take: ( oh and yes im TR)


15 TR players vs 10 NC players to field 5 tanks? Or even buggies?

15 TR players vs 9 NC playes to field 3 empire delivers?

Thats just the more pronounced examples. But the overall theme with SOE's design of the TR has always been:

More is better

This philosphy has extended into EVERYTHING in the TR inventory in some way, shape or form. From number of gunners, to number of rounds spewed per minute.

In a game where number of players you have means alot, and an arguably laggy enviorment where the shots you land have to count, I think this philosophy is fundamentally flawed.

[MrCovertMan]

Yeah every empires philosophy is flawed somehow
TR like you stated
they got the NC damage per shot down but they didn't take into account that the number of rounds being shot by a vast number of people might offset any "slower refire rate" or "shorter range"
the vs were supposed to be versatile but that meant having a weapon universally used against both armor and infantry *cough*lasher 2.0*cough* which ends up as "unbalanced" when you only need to field one weapon to counter any situation you may encounter

[Nalar]

Of course with good gunners, those extra people stacked into a prowler or the raider will chew through a vanguard or thunderer which is the point.

Its not about individual weapons compared to each other in relative power persay, but as to their attributes and physics.

Exactly the point, its not about balancing each weapon to each other. Obviously EAch empire has its advantage in different places which is the whole point. If they wanted to make each empires weapons balance each other, they would just give them the same weapon.

[Rbstr]

i don't see and balence problems with this game except for MA but that hardly matters for some people.

With the way the game goes, atleast on markov, any empire can win the day, it jsut needs to have a good star and some luck and it gains momentum and takes it. Ballence is not just weapon VS weapon of the same cert/place on teh other team, its as a whole as well, and i think it has been doen very well.

Part of it is the way things seem to go, monitoring the kill ratio, you do well and get a positive kill scoe but then you get spwancamped and loss it all while you try to find a better place to go, it seems to make alot of peopl feel they are in a constant state of loosing even if they realy aren't

[HawkEye]

wow another thread stating how overpowered The NC is. people just need to shut up and play.

[Ducimus]

Well, let me put it another way....

With 15 NC or VS you can field 7 buggies or tanks with one odd man out. TR can field 5 with the same amount of players. For the TR to match that 7, it would require 21 players vs 15.

So sony means to tell me, it takes 21 terrans to match the firepower of 15 NC? Whats wrong with this picture?

Lets take deli's. NC require, what, 3 per thunderer? 1 driver 2 gunenrs.
With 15 players, the NC can field 5 thunderes, right?
Whats the TR varaint take? 4 gunners 1 driver? That means 3 vehicles the TR can put out. In order for the TR to match that firepower requires 25 terrans verses the NC's 15.

Once again, what is wrong with this picture?

wow another thread stating how overpowered The NC is. people just need to shut up and play.

The point i'm making here flew so far over this guys head, i think it was at mach 3 at 80,000 feet. Look, ive played PS off and on for a long time. I know there's die hard NC fanboy's who've never geniunly played anything else, so i dont expect you to understand anyone else's views through your own rose tint'ed glasses.

I've learned along time ago that people who can look at anything objectivly without bias in this community (espeicaly on the offiical message boards) is rare.

I'm not saying anyone's overpowered (where did i say "Nerf the (Noobhammer/splattermax/phoneix, etc etc etc etc, hmmm? where? ), im saying sony's going about this balancing act all wrong, and so long as they persist in the way they are going about it, this game will always be out of skew.

EDIT:
and i havent even touched on weapon physics yet, this is just general empire attributes.

[I Hate Pants]

The problem with the TR are the players. We're strong in numbers. Hence the Raider, marauder, prowlers needing the most crew to operate. Are true strenghts is when we can actually fill up a vehicle.

But no, TR players would rather go gung-ho in a reaver or lightening or go run off with thier MCGs. And we have the nerve to complain of unbalanced gameplay.

[KIAsan]

Ducimus,

This argument has been around for a while. It resurfaced again when the raider was in development/test. Yup it suxs and shouldn't be this way. Nope, they won't change it. At this point, I am firmly against any new "empire specific" vehicles EVER being fielded again. Simply put, TR just doesn't have the manpower to effectively crew these vehicles. It is far better for TR to just stick to common pool assets and hope for the best.

[WolfA4]

Well, let me put it another way....

With 15 NC or VS you can field 7 buggies or tanks with one odd man out. TR can field 5 with the same amount of players. For the TR to match that 7, it would require 21 players vs 15.

So sony means to tell me, it takes 21 terrans to match the firepower of 15 NC? Whats wrong with this picture?

Lets take deli's. NC require, what, 3 per thunderer? 1 driver 2 gunenrs.
With 15 players, the NC can field 5 thunderes, right?
Whats the TR varaint take? 4 gunners 1 driver? That means 3 vehicles the TR can put out. In order for the TR to match that firepower requires 25 terrans verses the NC's 15.

Once again, what is wrong with this picture?



The point i'm making here flew so far over this guys head, i think it was at mach 3 at 80,000 feet. Look, ive played PS off and on for a long time. I know there's die hard NC fanboy's who've never geniunly played anything else, so i dont expect you to understand anyone else's views through your own rose tint'ed glasses.

I've learned along time ago that people who can look at anything objectivly without bias in this community (espeicaly on the offiical message boards) is rare.

I'm not saying anyone's overpowered (where did i say "Nerf the (Noobhammer/splattermax/phoneix, etc etc etc etc, hmmm? where? ), im saying sony's going about this balancing act all wrong, and so long as they persist in the way they are going about it, this game will always be out of skew.

EDIT:
and i havent even touched on weapon physics yet, this is just general empire attributes.

yup vehicle wise the TR get less vehicles, but you get more guns for the same amount of people either way. with 15 people you get 12 guns the NC get 10 guns with 15 people worth of deli's. so even though you get less vehicles you wind up with a greater number of guns capable of doing damage. now i dont have numbers to prove this, but im going to say theoretically 12 raider guns all firing on one target is going to kill that target quick, just like 10 thunderer guns will.

[7ruth]

I think that we have delved to far into statistics and never started with a simple concept of balance. Balance is best represented on a "Teter'Toter".

I'm going to try to represent TR to NC balance(relative to what I suspect).

We'll represent uniformity as
1-^-1 or 2=2 (damage output)
Equal Damage/Power(the value/weight), and Equal ROF(The distance from the center), Together they equate to the Damage output. The Higher the value, the higher the damage per shot. The farther from the center, the more shots in a second.

Lets think of some simple values for the Thunderer, and Raider.
-=Per gunner=-
Thunderer-
*ROF 1 (-)
*Power 9

Raider-
*ROF 4 (----)
*Power 1

***Balance Beam***
9-^----1 so 10=5 (apparently)
This gives us a 2 to 1 rating Damage Output for Gunner to gunner.

-=Vehicle to Vehicle=-
Thunderer 2 gunners-
*ROF 2 (--)
*power 18

Raider 4 gunners-
*ROF 16 (--16--)
*power 4

***Balance Beam***
18--^--(16)--4 so 20=20
Our simple math gives us 1 to 1 rating for total vehicle Damage Output.

So technically with these values the balance between the vehicles is good, in a situation where they go against each other. Full armor, start firing at the same time with all gunners, and every shot hits=).

The real issue here is that the TR need to devote 5 men for a vehicle per every 3 NC men for a vehicle to meet their firepower. So now we take our ratios and apply them to the plaoon/squad settings.

*Squad*
NC- Fielding 3 Thunderers (full squad)
*ROF 6 (------)
*Power 54 (18x3)
an odd man out for a ten man squad

TR- Fielding 2 Raiders (full squad)
*ROF 34 (--34--)
*Power 8 (4x2)
Every man needed

***Balance Beam***
54------^--34--8 so 60=40
Our math now gives us a rating, for the coherent squads, of 3 (NC) to 2 (TR).

Ok well im a little tired so for a platoon...

NC can field 10 Thunderers
TR can field 6 Raiders

So 180 to 120 for our damage output ratio.

To sum it up... The Raider requires 5 men to be as effective as a 3 man Thunderer crew. A platoon of TR all maning raiders can only be 66% as effective as A platoon of NC Maning Thunderers. Of course I guessed at the values i for the vehicles, so I could be totally off with my #s. Yet the general idea should still hold true, and now im going to go to bed.

[SandTrout]

the raider is an exelent weapon. Why? Because you have 5 gunns that can all be pointed at the same thing. The cooridnation the raider allows makes it one of the most powerful weapons you can field. It is one of the few vehicles that can go against an empire tank and come out on top.

The marauder is gimped, I'll give you that, but that's because it's weapons blow, not necisaraly that it requires 3 people.

The prowler does not even require a 3rd person to use effectively. the 100mms can proform some AA if the machine gun is unmanned, and most tanks concentrate on ground targets regardless. the machine gun basicly adds a harrasser's firepower without wasteing someone else on the driver's seat.

As for the viehicles you can field:
10 TR fielding 5 tanks can take on 10 NC fielding 5 tanks. the 5 machine gunners also let you take on those pesky reavers and mosquitoes flying about.

10 TR fielding 2 raiders can take on 9 NC fielding 3 thunders and their reaver/mossie buddy, rather easaly at that.

[Incompetent]

10 TR fielding 2 raiders can take on 9 NC fielding 3 thunders and their reaver/mossie buddy, rather easaly at that.Put the crack pipe down, the Thunderer's have a whole nother hull's worth of HP, and six of those Thunderer cannons battering away at something will kill it alot faster then eight 15mm stubguns. I'd break down and find the extra man to field a pair of Thunderer's (or even stock Dels) rather then one Raider in just about any given situation.

If anything, the use of the Raider is detrimental to the empire as a whole as it sucks up good troops that would be better deployed in damn near any other fashion. I know several time today if the morons in the Raiders would have just dismounted and broken out there cyclers we would have been MUCH better off.

[Ducimus]

Honestly, i think from an individuals perspective this is all going to come down to what you experience ingame.

To me, numbers on paper are just that, numbers on paper. Thats part of the problem with sony. I think they're relying too much on whatever raw data they collect and less on actually playing the game, or acutal ingame results.

Frankly i love planetside, but it's far too frustrating most of the time. Fighting against, and losing to certain empires, 90% of the time, is just not fun. I've acutally cancled this game about a month ago. What got me to post, was the 10 day trail and some of my old outfit mates coming back to try it out. Most of whom, all quit the game too, over frustration of fighting against, and losing to an empire 90% of the time.

So im trying to be objective here, cause after awhile, you start to ask yourself why. Yes theres alot of problems with the players within the empire itself, but it goes much farther than that. Sony just refuses to acknowledge it. And i think the Raider is the pinnacle of their "eyes wide shut" game design. It should not take 4 cannons to be compedative with 2. Now im not bitching about the raider itself, im bitching about sony's mentalty for the TR. Their concept, for the TR, is a broken one.

Now, i know many will think im full of shit, and thats fine. But sony IS losing players because of their inablity to see the forest for the trees. Arguably, entire outfits- but thats just a guess from other's that ive seen quit as well.

Oh well, i had my say, not that it will accomplish anything.

Have fun, im outta here.

[BadAsh]

The TR can be absolutely devastating if they get their act together and quit whining. On Markov this last weekend the TR totally dominated both the VS and NC day and night and had the medium population level.

They organized better and crushed everything in their path. At two separate instances the world almost went completely RED. The NC with 40% of the world population were pushed back to just 3 bases at one point while the TR were simultaneously smashing both the NC and VS.

In the midst of all the whining you never hear any touting the TR�s strengths. So let me enlighten you some. After the death of surge, the quad shot �fix�, and the shot gun ammo nerf of nearly 50% capacity per ammo box the JH is no longer the �King� of HA.

That title goes to the MCG + Personal Shield combo. Outside the MCG will spank the JH or Lasher with ease. And in any tower fight an alert TR will be a VERY tough opponent. Before you can get to optimum JH range you will be shredded.

Every time I duel there are always players on both the NC and VS sides that are using looted MCG�s now. Where the old standard was the Jack + Surge. The Jack is useless at any range but point blank. Some of the better NC players are forgoing Rexo armor and using Agile to have a chance to close the distance to their target. So please stop crying about the MCG.

Then there is REDX�s Prowler tank formation guide where you use formations of Prowlers with main gunners and drivers only along with Skyguards. This dominates the battlefield completely and only the NC can field enough armor to stop this TR armor column. The VS have no hope, but can flee across water� LOL. So please stop the crying about your armor. It�s been proven effective.

The Marauder is just flat out wicked as is a fully crewed Raider. The Raider�s strength that is overlooked here is that it is hands down the BEST against enemy air power. The NC and VS equivalents can�t hit anything but hovering enemy aircraft (i.e. n00b pilots). And there is the obvious strengths/advantage of having every person in the Raider with a position to drive OR gun. No empty passenger only seats. This tends to make Raiders completely full and crewed so that when they pull up to an enemy base or tower they end up delivering more troops. Regular Delivers and NC/VS variants tend to have empty seats. If one remembers that the Deliverer and it�s variants are TROOP TRANSPORTS then this makes the Raider the most effective at that. Add it�s anti-air capability and you have the best 5 man transport in the game.

Ever Fly against the TR? With Burster MAXes insta-gibbing aircraft without the tell tale lock on warning the NC and VS AA MAXes give, the Raider AA capability, and every TR grunt equipped with a Striker (hands down the best AA AV in the game) the TR are highly formidable opponents and CAN GAIN TOTAL AIR SUPERIORITY if they focus their efforts. No other empire can be so effective at AA and still be diversified.

Guess what happens to the empire that can field Reavers, Mosquitoes, and Liberators while denying the enemy the same? Multi-continental domination on several simultaneous fronts is what happens.

So the next TR whine slogan will be what? �We win all the time, it�s no challenge� sniffle.. the other empires have challenges so the game is still fun for them!�

[Rbstr]

See Badash i htin kthe problems stems from the fact that the servers are different, I have the exact POV as you do, and many many other morkovians, and that is that the game is basicaly ballenced, in the past week i've Seen VS and TR and NC all dominate at some point in time

[JetRaiden]

shut up whiner, until the TR have like 4 bases on the planet consistently, there isnt really a problem. I play all 3 Empires and I havent noticed any serious gimps.

[Peacemaker]

There is no way the TR can effectivly use liberators compaired to the other empires. Flying a lib over a Terran base is childs play when it comes to AA fire. Fly straight and go to camera view, watch for flack and bank when you need to. The only thing you need to worry about is the enemy aircraft.

Over an NC or Vanu base you also have to worry about 2-6 missle streams rising up to meet you.

NC and VS pilots can easily drag an enemy aircraft to friendly MAXs and have them blown away. A Terran pilot has to ALWAYS watch were he engages the enemy, CANNOT drag the enemy back to friendlies for a garunteed kill, and will die if he presues an enemy aircraft over a base.

[JetRaiden]

There is no way the TR can effectivly use liberators compaired to the other empires. Flying a lib over a Terran base is childs play when it comes to AA fire. Fly straight and go to camera view, watch for flack and bank when you need to. The only thing you need to worry about is the enemy aircraft.

Over an NC or Vanu base you also have to worry about 2-6 missle streams rising up to meet you.

NC and VS pilots can easily drag an enemy aircraft to friendly MAXs and have them blown away. A Terran pilot has to ALWAYS watch were he engages the enemy, CANNOT drag the enemy back to friendlies for a garunteed kill, and will die if he presues an enemy aircraft over a base.

every pilot has to always watch where hes engaging. sure, a sparrow and starfire can take out any light aircraft at long range, but the burster can shred anything within 200m. also, with the abundance of strikers (1 out of every 7 or so, Im guessing) they can do alot of combined damage. when you fly a liberator over a crowded TR base, chances are there are at least 5 or 6 strikers within attacking range of you. so basically it follows the whole system of the TR having strength in numbers. Burster isnt great at long range, but the very popular striker makes up for it.

[BadAsh]

Over an NC or Vanu base you also have to worry about 2-6 missle streams rising up to meet you.

NC and VS pilots can easily drag an enemy aircraft to friendly MAXs and have them blown away. A Terran pilot has to ALWAYS watch were he engages the enemy, CANNOT drag the enemy back to friendlies for a garunteed kill, and will die if he presues an enemy aircraft over a base.

This of course of omitting the 178,906 TR grunts running around in any good zerg all equiped with Strikers.

Also of minor note is that the MCG is the best HA against low flying enemy aircraft. I've downed several reavers with a MCG, but never with a Lasher or Jack...

Having played all 3 empires to BR20 I can tell you that the TR are the hardest to fly against. VS and NC grunts caught in the open are helpless Reaver bait. Not so for groups of TR troops... they break out the Strikers and kill or chase off the enemy aircraft.

Let's break this AA capability down a little...

Empire Deliverer variants:
TR vs Air = excellent
NC and VS vs Air = Bwahahahaha

Empire AV Weapons:
TR vs Air = excellent
NC and VS = Bwahahahahaha

Empire Assault Buggies:
TR vs Air = Ok
NC and VS = Bwahahahahaha

Empire AA MAX Units:
TR vs Air = excellent (no warning, just instagib)
NC and VS = good (instagib, but with a warning that allows escape for the wise pilot)

*This is just my opinion based on my reaver piloting experience. Anytime I get killed by a NC or VS MAX is because I ignored the warnings and tried to finish my attack run... a fatal mistake on my part. The Burster MAX however kills you without any warning so it's more of a matter of who sees who first and the reaver in the open sky is easier to spot than a MAX somewhere down below...)

Empire Tanks:
TR vs Air = crap (unless the crew is smart and jumps out with Strikers...)
NC vs Air = Ok
VS vs Air = excellent

So the TR troops dominate in AA capability in all aspects except for their main battle tanks... Smart TR formations have crews with Strikers and a few SkyGuards in the ranks to easily make up for this. See REDX's Prowler Column Guide.

Add to this the best all around HA weapon and implant combo (MCG + PS) and you have one tough force to deal with.

[TheN00b]

Some of the TR should seriously stop whining, at least a little bit. Let's break down our Empire Specific stuff, as opposed to the other Empires:

Medium Assault: This certification is pretty damn balanced. As of now, I feel that the Pulsar has a slight edge over the Gauss and Cycler, but I'm kewl with that, since the Lasher is so inneffective at range.

Heavy Assault: This certification is also pretty damn balanced. In fact, the MCG is downright excellent. The Jackhammer still owns you at very close range, and the Lasher can probably spam indoors a little bit better, but the MCG is an excellent standoff and medium-range weapon.

Anti-Vehicular Assault: The Striker is a thing of beauty against aircraft, and isn't too shabby against vehicles. The Lancer and, especially, the Phoenix are better against vehicles, but the Strikers awesome AA capabilities make up for that disparity.

Assault Buggy: Who gives a shit?

Main Battle Tank: This is probably a mildly unbalanced certification. It's very frustrating that the Devs decided to give the Vanguard a small profile, the highest armor, the best gun, and the best speed. In my very humble opinion, the Prowlers 12mm should become coaxial, and the Prowler should also get a speed buff, so that it can actually bring its main guns into play more often.

Anti-Infantry MAXes: Unfortunately, this category has been downright shitty to the TR. The 'Congs got an amazingly powerful shotgun, with almost non-existent TTK, and the Barneys got a higher-TTK, excellent accuracy, jumping monster. But the TR got some weak chainguns with huge COF...

Anti-Vehicular MAXes: They all suck. But that's for another thread, and another time

Anti-Aircraft MAXes: I believe that the Burster should get a small range buff, but the no-lock on fire is so powerful that no major adjustments should be made.

So, in conclusion, looking at all of this data, are the TR really that gimped? No.

[HawkEye]

demicuz i have a TR guy thats Br12 Cr1 and i play it. my fav empire to go against is the NC. i also have a BR10 VS so i have played other empires.

[scarpas]

TR inventory .


even that has been nerfed. we have to carry at least 1 extra box of ammo, which takes up space for things such as cuds, aces, party balloons, ect. with our empire specific weaponry (mainly the mcg)

[SandTrout]

even that has been nerfed. we have to carry at least 1 extra box of ammo, which takes up space for things such as cuds, aces, party balloons, ect. with our empire specific weaponry (mainly the mcg) How did your inventory get nerfed? There is nothing forceing you to carry extra ammo.

[Lartnev]

I think he means the fact that you need to carry 2 boxes of ammo to fill the MCG's clip. Guess you could unnerf it by halving the MCG's clip size... then it'd be a box per clip :D

[TheN00b]

I think he means the fact that you need to carry 2 boxes of ammo to fill the MCG's clip. Guess you could unnerf it by halving the MCG's clip size... then it'd be a box per clip :D

Ha ha? It ain't that funny. It would be kewl if the 9mm boxes could carry 75, not 50.

[Lartnev]

As long as it was slightly funny :p

[TheN00b]

As long as it was slightly funny :p

It wasn't.

[JetRaiden]

flying a liberator over any enemy base gives you the same chance of being shot down. period.

[Rbstr]

This of course of omitting the 178,906 TR grunts running around in any good zerg all equiped with Strikers.

Also of minor note is that the MCG is the best HA against low flying enemy aircraft. I've downed several reavers with a MCG, but never with a Lasher or Jack...



I took 2 libs on emerals once with my Br4 that had only MCG, it started attacking out AMS and i charged it, laoding up AP ammo, it was sweet

also who says you need more ammo just because you have a bigger clip, it not like is flies much faster than a cycler.

[KIAsan]

flying a liberator over any enemy base gives you the same chance of being shot down. period.
Not true. Try it sometime if you think so. Barring enemy air activity, libs live an incredibly long time over TR bases vs NC/VS.

The problem is not so much the bursters ability to hit at that altitude, its the high skill required. Since most of your maxes are lower BRs, they just don't have the skill. VS/NC maxes have that lock ability and can easily down a lib. Bursters required an extreme amount of finess to lead and kill a lib at altitude (tracking, locking down at the right moment, unlocking, moving to a new firing position, tracking and locking down again, ALL while leading your target). As such, most VS/NC AA maxs are eager to engage a lib (more than one of these maxs on a lib and it's toast), but most TR bursters don't even try to hit libs, since they become easily frustrated and have decided they can't kill libs.

What I'm saying is that this is really a psychological issue, caused by a difficult to use weapon. The burster is actually quite leathal to all air, however, the difficulties imposed by this weapon system require such a high learning curve, most players are just not going to attempt to get good with it.

[JetRaiden]

Not true. Try it sometime if you think so. Barring enemy air activity, libs live an incredibly long time over TR bases vs NC/VS.

The problem is not so much the bursters ability to hit at that altitude, its the high skill required. Since most of your maxes are lower BRs, they just don't have the skill. VS/NC maxes have that lock ability and can easily down a lib. Bursters required an extreme amount of finess to lead and kill a lib at altitude (tracking, locking down at the right moment, unlocking, moving to a new firing position, tracking and locking down again, ALL while leading your target). As such, most VS/NC AA maxs are eager to engage a lib (more than one of these maxs on a lib and it's toast), but most TR bursters don't even try to hit libs, since they become easily frustrated and have decided they can't kill libs.

What I'm saying is that this is really a psychological issue, caused by a difficult to use weapon. The burster is actually quite leathal to all air, however, the difficulties imposed by this weapon system require such a high learning curve, most players are just not going to attempt to get good with it.


leading targets isnt as painfully difficult as you decribe it. the burster may have a harder time engaging liberators, but the striker makes up for it. Pheonix missles usually explode before they reach the lib at maximum altitude and lancers arent powerful enough per shot to effectively damage one. the fact is, strikers are the best for engaging air targets at maximum flight altitude.

[Sentrosi]

strikers are the best for engaging air targets at maximum flight altitude.


Sorry, no. You cannot even get a bead on most aircraft at altitude. And if you do, it just afterburns away, which most good pilots do. I know if I'm flying over an NC/VS held base I have to start my reaver rocket runs at flight ceiling and make a 45degree down angle to my target, then afterburn away and hope I catch them by surprise.

The TR Burster, as you said, is lethal at 200m. What is the flight ceiling again? Oh yes, 500m. So, Striker range < 500m + Burster effective range < 200m = gimped AA.

It is this reason that if I ever play an air character I am flying at the flight ceiling patroling around our attacking/defending base and attempt to jump Liberators/Reavers before they come in. But, I am only one person. When there are 4 or 5 Liberators flying around and given ground based cover on their return flights from the bombing run, it makes for a really hard AA defense of any base.

[Indecisive]

Yeah...the mentality that all max's are low BR, and that all low BR's are newbs and inexperianced, and thats why it dosent work is bull.

[Incompetent]

burster may have a harder time engaging liberators, but the striker makes up for it.|the fact is, strikers are the best for engaging air targets at maximum flight altitude.Bullshit, just absolute total bullshit. That is completely and utterly false and only a total fucking moron would say that. The only places the striker has a prayer of hitting a flier and flight ceiling are Cery and a few bases on Searhus. Nothing but an AA max and possibly a Skyguard (not sure, i'm usually in the tank, but i'd imagine it suffers from burster syndrome if it is able to) can reach ceiling.

Now, i'll be the first to admit, we've got the best close in AA. The TR is a pain in the ass to rocketspam. However, we've got shit for range, which means we're almost always operating under near total enemy air superiority. The Burster is decent for blasting stupid reavers who sit still, but it doesn't have anywhere near the same ability to dominate as a couple starfires hanging out on top of a tower. So yeah, we can put a dent in that reaver before he kills us and make him fly back to an air tower, but the other empires have the equipment to trash him before he even starts his run.

TR infantry gear is fine as is, and our tank is passable even if it's the worst, but our MAXes, buggies (which is important because it comes with the Skyguard, which is the only really good AA we've got) and empire Dels are shit. What piece of NC equipment would you rate as total shit compared to it's counterparts?

[KIAsan]

I completly disagree that the Burster is so bad. If you spend time in all three empire AA, you will find that, yes, it is far easier to master the sparrow and starfire, than it is to use the burster. The problem with the burster is the high learning curve in order to use it as effectively as the other two AA. Combine that, with the technical challenge of lockdown mode, and you have an AA that can be quite deadly, but is not being used to it's full potential.

The problem is, I don't know how to fix this, without seriously redesigning the burster into something else. As to those who disagree about the burster, I would suggest spending some time as a TR burster and see what we are talking about. Then come back and tell me that leading a lib at altitude is easy.

And Gohan, please re-read my post and think a little about what I'm saying. It's not a slam at new people or noobs or any such thing. It's an attempt to explain why Bursters don't engage libs as well as NC/VS. From my experience, most newer players cert unimax since you live a little longer in battle and can get kills. Once a player starts gaining BR, they tend to dump unimax in favor of specializing. The problem as I see it, is we need some of those folks to continue to specialize in maxes. However, the high learning curve of these maxes, it doesn't give new folks the same gratification you get from, say a reaver. So you don't see them keep unimax long enough to gain the needed skills.

[SandTrout]

Neither the Starfire or the Sparrow can even lock on to air targets at a range of 400m(which is the flight cieling, not 500m) to my knowlege, but most bases are signifigantly above sea level with allows lock on by these maxes. I can estimate that most AA targeting against cieling libs is done around 300ish meters, which is pretty close to even in the ability of each of the MAXes to kill a target. Sparrow wont even get off enough shots at a passing lib to kill it, and the starfire needs to maintain lock.

[Lartnev]

The striker will not hit a ceiling lib when it's moving. You'd either lose the lock (which can happen with the starfire as well to be fair) or the missiles will run out of steam.

The burster has two problems when engaging ceiling liberators, and both are made easier by the sparrow and the starfire. The first is being able to engage straight up. Whilst none of the MAXs can actually elevate their weapons a full 90� upwards, the lock on of the sparrow and starfire still actually achieves acquisition.

The second reason is that of skill to lead a target, which gets easier the more you do it, but still it still requires a bit of luck that the pilot stays on the same heading (which they tend to do on carpet runs).

What I'd like to see implemented (and this can go further than just flak weapons) is leading target acquisition. Basically it's a little marker that shows you where to fire to hit your target (you normally get them in spacefighter games). It'd still be difficult to hit fast moving targets or targets with eratic flight patterns, but that's the countermeasure to it, it'd just make things a little easier for new MAX users (and better for us veterans ;))

[SandTrout]

Unfortunately, I dont think they could add target leading Aquisition because you'd need a targeting system where you select what you are attacking. The strain on your computer from haveing to calculate all the trajectories would probably lag most people up when dealing with multipule air targets, which they usualy are.

They scraped that idea(in a form) for the thumper, and propably wouldn't do it for the burster for the same reason, though I'm not sure what it was.

Don't get me wrong though, I would love to see it in game.

[Onizuka-GTO]

perhaps, leading target function could be an limited activated special for TR AA maxes along with 50% faster firing?

It will only be displayed for those aircrafts within a little box around the centre, or something?

[Poopy_Pants]

If the TR are so much weaker than the other 2 empires, then how come when we raid a TR base where the TR have poplocked, we are FORCED to Blow the Gen everytime, because it is impossible to take the spawn room.

Hmm?

[Onizuka-GTO]

I though that was standard practice? I mean its commendable that the TR's continue to fight to the last soldier.

Just because it seems like there are alot of people on one side, doesn't excuse for the overall population.

Because the empire with the most people, will at certain times, have far more people then any other and during that time they will dominate the whole map.
Then there are the times when the people log off, and the other empires choose the time to reconquer the map.
You cannot say a nation with a large amount of Soldiers is equal and balanced to a nation with 1/3 of the total soldiers.
When you rule out a extreme advantage in weapons and tactics, overall numbers is the last major advantage.

:rolleyes:

Besides iam not arguing with you, just stating the obvious.

Now that we have global population statistic it is easy to see the overall numbers.....

[Poopy_Pants]

Remember that in the instance above. The NC have also Pop Locked the Continent.

Obviously the world population will affect what continents are owned at a time. But who really cares about that.

One hard ass fight at a base or even taking a bridge on Cysoor in a heated bridge battle is more rewarding to me than just running all over a continent with no resistance.

My point is that the game is not fun unless the 2 empires that are fighting each other on said continent have the same population on that continent. Then there are rewarding heated battles. And in those instances the TR and VS have earned my respect as a fighting force (keep in mind this is on Emerald).

So you can not really argue that a bigger population makes a difference on a continent. Thats what Pop Locks are for. Get all your folks on the same continent until it is locked. It takes dedication by your empire to follow your CR5 direction. And if your CR5's are idiots then start getting command rank so you can lead your VS buddies on Werner in the same direction. Only then will you stand a chance in this game. And trust me. If you pop lock continents you will find that the game is not as imbalanced as you think.

I am not argueing with you either. Just stating the obvious.

[Red October]

Seeing the HUGE multitude of arguments, I'm going to try to break it down in my view.

Going to the original premise of this thread, it does take more TR to pilot vehicles. Its very dis-heartning when we push across a bridge, nab the tower then I run foward to scout (as an inf)...and spam back that there are 6+ vangaurds rolling out w/escort buggies vs our two prowlers and a couple of buggies. Interesting enough, I often relay back the number of vehicles we can expect in an attack rather than troop estimates. There are times when it seems (both NC and VS) that everyone and thier mother is got a vehicle. Bottom line, were not going to match vehicle vs. vehicle. Nor should we try. But we should make better use of them. Some ideas/tactics:

1) When you hear "We need a gunner", get in the damn vehicle. A prowler or raider can do some serous damage when fully manned. Your not going to win against superiour number of vehicles, but you can at least soften them up. And that helps tremendously. Plus its down right embarrasing to see a driver get out of his prowler and then mount the big guns, he becomes a sationary artillery platform or as I like to call it, reaver bait:

1a) For AV troops, a weakend vech, is a lot easier to take down.
1b) Have some faith in the grunts, were good at spam firing, and a vehicle is a large target and a weak vech can be taken down. I know, I've done so with a cycler a few times.
1c) Have some faith in the infiltraitors. Aside from killing snipers and unsuspecting troops (while I'm waiting to get closer to the tower or base), I love to follow heavily damaged enemy vech's, then see the guy jump out and start repairing...and the next thing he see's the respawn timer because he just took a full clip of amp to the back of the head.

2) Take out the blasted vehicle pad. Whenver the pad clears for a moment, I set a boomer and wipe it out. Or if your in a squad, get a damn lib and have a bomber and tail gunner plus a mossy escort helps a ton as well. Waypoint the vech pad and dont stop dropping untill your absolutely sure the term is black. Then drop a few more for good measure. Don't waste time nailing the troops with bombs, when it comes to troop vs. troop, we do well. But hit the vech's hard, your guaranteed to get some kills on troops any way as the VS and NC do use them to push through lines.

Just a few tips that I've learned...

[Onizuka-GTO]

My point is that the game is not fun unless the 2 empires that are fighting each other on said continent have the same population on that continent. Then there are rewarding heated battles. And in those instances the TR and VS have earned my respect as a fighting force (keep in mind this is on Emerald).

So you can not really argue that a bigger population makes a difference on a continent. Thats what Pop Locks are for. Get all your folks on the same continent until it is locked. It takes dedication by your empire to follow your CR5 direction. And if your CR5's are idiots then start getting command rank so you can lead your VS buddies on Werner in the same direction. Only then will you stand a chance in this game. And trust me. If you pop lock continents you will find that the game is not as imbalanced as you think.


Yes. Continent pop lock with equal ratio of soldiers are a good thing. But this is only a small part of whole picture.

With a larger population you can pop lock a large number of continents at the same time when those empires with lesser populations can only spare the resources to fight on one continent,
then that becomes a problem. As it drags on, the rest of continents that cannot put up a resistance with enought soldiers will be conquered and then those continents that are pop lock will open up as some players will log off for the night, which is much more dangerous blow to the ones with a smaller population....
It set a whole reaction off. Which is why we have Global Empire incentive, population is the key to everything. Even the Dev recognise this, and is actively trying to redress the balance, though i think the way the Incentive is done isn't helping at all.

Granted, Werner is much more balanced due to the fact that there seems to be a equal ratio between the Empires.
I say seem because i'am sure one of the empires have a slightly more advantage in numbers, but i know for certain it isn't the TR's, i say it is split between the NC and VS though i only seem to come online when the majority of NC players are on. :rolleyes:

[SandTrout]

Yes, it takes more for the TR to field fully manned vehicles in a battle, however, only the marauder suffers signifigantly from this(and this should be addressed).

The prowler suffers more from people not certifying the vehicle because (I believe) there is so much whineing about it, people assume it must be crap. In truth, the Prowler is an absolutely vicious tank, and can be effectively used without a third machine gunner. however, because so few people cert in armored assault in the TR(apparently) they still lack the numbers to stand up to magrider and vangaurd formations.

Oh yeah, and before I forget. In reference to the thread title, there is nothing simple about balance in planetside.

[Onizuka-GTO]

Prowlers are Infantry Tanks, slow speed, fast firing, infantry suppressing firepower with moderate armour.

You should not even attempt to take on opposing tanks, unless you have the numerical superiority of 2:1

IRL you shouldn't put a 1 to 1 encounter with a Medium Tank (Vanguard) or a Tank Destroyer (Magrider).

Though for some reason TR equipment always seems to be based on the assumption that the TR have a vast population resource therefore can spare the extra gunners/drivers to operate and make the vehicle more efficient...... which isn't really good for any Empire.... :rolleyes:

[Rbstr]

no its not based on more population but that they get much more damage output with one vech wit the extra gunners than on vech with the normal amount

[Lartnev]

Fortunately, Planetside isn't real life ;)

[Onizuka-GTO]

that is fortunate indeed, lets leave all the carnage and killing for the game please.

*stabs Lartnev* :p

[Lartnev]

Need Reconstruction!

[Onizuka-GTO]

:lol:

Anyway, i wish we had more crew served vehicles, make them have a steep learning curve, but are powerful in the experienced team would be one of my dreams.
A bit like Flashpoint, but futuristic, but not as realistic as that, nor as simple as Battlefield 1942 vehicle system.

mmm...maybe i'm asking too much? perhaps i should move to a different game....

[TheN00b]

mmm...maybe i'm asking too much? perhaps i should move to a different game....

Gah, no, the Black Widows need you to stay! Without you to flirt with, Firefly would get all pissy :eek: !




;)

[Onizuka-GTO]

:rolleyes:

talking about firefly, i haven't seen him around here lately,
no wonder i've been feeling kind of peaceful and relaxed.... :lol: ;) :p

[Sputty]

This of course of omitting the 178,906 TR grunts running around in any good zerg all equiped with Strikers.

Also of minor note is that the MCG is the best HA against low flying enemy aircraft. I've downed several reavers with a MCG, but never with a Lasher or Jack...

Having played all 3 empires to BR20 I can tell you that the TR are the hardest to fly against. VS and NC grunts caught in the open are helpless Reaver bait. Not so for groups of TR troops... they break out the Strikers and kill or chase off the enemy aircraft.

Let's break this AA capability down a little...

Empire Deliverer variants:
TR vs Air = excellent
NC and VS vs Air = Bwahahahaha

Empire AV Weapons:
TR vs Air = excellent
NC and VS = Bwahahahahaha

Empire Assault Buggies:
TR vs Air = Ok
NC and VS = Bwahahahahaha

Empire AA MAX Units:
TR vs Air = excellent (no warning, just instagib)
NC and VS = good (instagib, but with a warning that allows escape for the wise pilot)

*This is just my opinion based on my reaver piloting experience. Anytime I get killed by a NC or VS MAX is because I ignored the warnings and tried to finish my attack run... a fatal mistake on my part. The Burster MAX however kills you without any warning so it's more of a matter of who sees who first and the reaver in the open sky is easier to spot than a MAX somewhere down below...)

Empire Tanks:
TR vs Air = crap (unless the crew is smart and jumps out with Strikers...)
NC vs Air = Ok
VS vs Air = excellent

So the TR troops dominate in AA capability in all aspects except for their main battle tanks... Smart TR formations have crews with Strikers and a few SkyGuards in the ranks to easily make up for this. See REDX's Prowler Column Guide.

Add to this the best all around HA weapon and implant combo (MCG + PS) and you have one tough force to deal with.
Is "Bwahahah" your scientific opinion?
It doesn't makeit true jsut because you say so. The Striker is slow, gives a warning and is easy to evade from the air. The Burster can't hit high altitude aircraft and at long ranges are nearly impossible to hit aircraft with. If you think a Thunderer is bad AA you're on crack, a decent gunner can take down a reaver easily while the Reaver is trying to kill the deli.
That being said, this is the main idea I got about you from your post:
http://www.bohicagaming.com/images/owned/Retardinrain.jpg

[Onizuka-GTO]

You just wanted an excuse to post that again, didn't you Sputty?

:rolleyes:

[TheN00b]

:rolleyes:

talking about firefly, i haven't seen him around here lately,
no wonder i've been feeling kind of peaceful and relaxed.... :lol: ;) :p

Lol :lol:

[Black]

i see so much anger from sputty :)

[ChewyLSB]

In my opinion, the TR balancing perspective would work better if the TR had a higher "population lock".

Why? I believe the Dev's original intentions was to make it so that a TR could just swamr the enemy with so many troops, they would eventually get destroyed. However, this doesn't work, as all empires have the same population lock limit. In my opinion, the Dev's should rethink the TR vehicles mainly. Just make it so that two fully manned prowlers can take on three fully manned vanguards, and two fully manned raiders can take on three manned thunderers.

[TheN00b]

i see so much anger from sputty :)

Indeed, his lessened Planetside playing has greatly affected his normally kitten-like temperament :)

[MajorTom]

In my opinion, the TR balancing perspective would work better if the TR had a higher "population lock".

Why? I believe the Dev's original intentions was to make it so that a TR could just swamr the enemy with so many troops, they would eventually get destroyed. However, this doesn't work, as all empires have the same population lock limit. In my opinion, the Dev's should rethink the TR vehicles mainly. Just make it so that two fully manned prowlers can take on three fully manned vanguards, and two fully manned raiders can take on three manned thunderers.
The problem with 2 fully manned prowlers being able to take out 3 vanguards is that the only thing the extra gunner gives you is a chain gun, used mainly for infantry and aircraft suppression. Therefore, 1 fully manned prowler shoudn't be better at armor suppression or infantry suppression then the van, just better in the way that it can do both at once. Hey, sounds like TR is horning in on the VS theme of versatility...

[BadAsh]

Is "Bwahahah" your scientific opinion?
It doesn't makeit true jsut because you say so. The Striker is slow, gives a warning and is easy to evade from the air. The Burster can't hit high altitude aircraft and at long ranges are nearly impossible to hit aircraft with. If you think a Thunderer is bad AA you're on crack, a decent gunner can take down a reaver easily while the Reaver is trying to kill the deli.
That being said, this is the main idea I got about you from your post:
http://www.bohicagaming.com/images/owned/Retardinrain.jpg

Cute image, but let me explain a few basics to you... and let's show this in provable reproducible in-game examples:

Let�s pit 3 AV infantry against a skilled Reaver Pilot. And let�s say the 3 infantry are spaced out a bit so only one can get rocket spammed at a time�

3 AV with NC Phoenix = 3 dead infantry
3 AV with VS Lancer = 3 dead infantry
3 AV with TS Striker = 1 Dead Reaver (He might kill one of the Infantry, but either way he�s dead)

Making sense yet why I said the TR AV is the best against aircraft? Typically with a Rexo and a Striker I can kill a Reaver 1v1. So I know 3 v 1 would be a slaughter.

And to your comment about the Thunderer �easily� taking out aircraft� That�s the biggest load of crap posted in this whole thread. Unless of course you are talking about the n00b Reaver pilot types that hover to get kills� but these guys die to decimators, MCGs, SA, and MA fire as well� so just about any ground vehicle with a gun would own him�

However, in my example I was referring to a skilled pilot and in that case only the original Deliverer or the TR Raider variant is still effective in fighting back.

[BadAsh]

One thing that�s been annoying me in these �balance� posts is the �NC = n00b because it�s the easiest empire to play with the lowest learning curve on its weapons�. I love this type of invalid unsubstantiated argument.

Let�s apply that same moronic logic to all 3 empires and see what we get�

NC = n00bs because their HA weapon fires slower, but does more damage so they kill with fewer hits

TR = n00bs because their HA weapon fires faster, but does less damage so you just spray without aiming to get kills

VS = n00bs because their HA weapon �lashes� so you don�t even have to hit to get kills

So by this argument premise all 3 empires are noobish by nature/design? No, it�s the idiots that make that kind of base generalized assumption that are the n00bs.

And another thing while I�m on my soap box� all you �elite� and �righteous� players who only play 1 empire �because that�s how the game was meant to be played� need to STFU when talking about balance issues. Until you have played characters in other empires to high BR level you do not know what you are talking about when you make claims of how easy they have it.

I�m tired of vaginas whining about the Jackhammer who have never played NC and realized that it�s the ONLY HA that�s next to useless outdoors and at any range past point blank. With the death of Surge the JH is pretty much the �n00b spanker� for all you idiots that mindlessly rush towards every enemy you see. Thanks for running up nice and close helping me reach lethal distance. The smart VS and TR backpedal or side strafe to keep their distance and consistently win the ranged gun fights. But these are by far the few.

[Sputty]

3 AV with NC Phoenix = 3 dead infantry
3 AV with VS Lancer = 3 dead infantry
3 AV with TS Striker = 1 Dead Reaver (He might kill one of the Infantry, but either way he�s dead)

Making sense yet why I said the TR AV is the best against aircraft? Typically with a Rexo and a Striker I can kill a Reaver 1v1. So I know 3 v 1 would be a slaughter.

And to your comment about the Thunderer �easily� taking out aircraft� That�s the biggest load of crap posted in this whole thread. Unless of course you are talking about the n00b Reaver pilot types that hover to get kills� but these guys die to decimators, MCGs, SA, and MA fire as well� so just about any ground vehicle with a gun would own him�

However, in my example I was referring to a skilled pilot and in that case only the original Deliverer or the TR Raider variant is still effective in fighting back.
4 phoenixes kill a reaver, considering you can out range the Reaver, and it takes more than one second for a reaver to kill 3 infantry you're wrong there. the Lancer shoots faster and does more damage per magazine(and about the same per shot) than the Striker, has longer range, is extremely fast and is accurate up to about sniper range. 3 infantry with any AV weapons = dead reaver

On the other hadn the Striker is not as good against tanks, having trouble locking onto to level targets, being relatively weak and require a long time to fire and reach the target. The Lancer can deal more damage than the striker in about half the time. Phoenixes allow for long range hidden fire against tanks that do a lot of damage per shot. AV is fine, and your statistics are full of lies. "Typically with a Rexo and a Striker I can kill a Reaver 1v1." Bullshit
Maybe so pre Striker nerf bt now it takes way to long to shoot the missiles necessary to kill a Reaver or even a Mosquito. 1 on 1 a reaver or mossie will almost always beat the infantry with the striker.

[BadAsh]

4 phoenixes kill a reaver, considering you can out range the Reaver, and it takes more than one second for a reaver to kill 3 infantry you're wrong there. the Lancer shoots faster and does more damage per magazine(and about the same per shot) than the Striker, has longer range, is extremely fast and is accurate up to about sniper range. 3 infantry with any AV weapons = dead reaver

On the other hadn the Striker is not as good against tanks, having trouble locking onto to level targets, being relatively weak and require a long time to fire and reach the target. The Lancer can deal more damage than the striker in about half the time. Phoenixes allow for long range hidden fire against tanks that do a lot of damage per shot.

Then let's have a friendly duel... you and any 2 buddies you want armed with phoenixes or lancers vs me in a Reaver. I'll get 3 EASY ASS kills every time. Why am I so confident? Beause I do this kind of thing on a daily basis. The key here is experience, something your n00b ass obviously does not have.

Then when I'm done spanking you and friends, you can try and kill me with you in a Reaver and me armed with a Striker. You will either die or spend your time running to a air tower for repairs. Time for some more n00b skooling.

[BadAsh]

Well Sputty,

It�s been 48 hours and no acceptance to my challenge? I don�t mean to be a jerk about it, but if you are going to accuse someone of �lying�, being a �retard�, and calling my posts �bullshit� then one would assume a certain conviction on your part to your opinion. So I thought some �backing up� of your claims was in order. Apparently you disagree.

What you don�t seem to know is that�

The NC Phoenix is ONLY good at shooting Reavers that are not moving. Additionally if you are guiding the rocket you are completely motionless and won�t survive a Reaver rocket spam attack� which BTW the Reaver can rocket spam in a fast strafing run and thus avoid the phoenix rocket while delivering the coup de gras... any veteran Phoenix user can tell you this...

The VS Lancer is also pretty much ineffective against a good Reaver pilot. Again we have another AV weapon only good at hitting stationary/hovering enemy aircraft. Swooping rocket spam runs will make short work of lancer users... any veteran Lancer user can tell you this...

The TR Striker is a whole other ball game. You can very accurately (lock on missiles) hit your target while moving and dodging incoming fire. If you can get partial coverage you have very good odds of chasing off an enemy Reaver or taking it down if the pilot is not careful. Add a few more striker users and the Reaver might get spanked before he has a chance to flee.

Nifty Striker �Trick�: If you can position yourself on a mountain or hill peek that is steep enough to provide partial coverage, but not so steep that you can�t walk on all sides of the peek you can pretty much have 100% protection from Reaver rocket attacks. You just move to the opposite side of the peek from the Reaver with only the top portion of your body exposed. Any rockets that hit the mountain won�t damage you on the other side and any shots that miss fly harmlessly past you. Meanwhile the Reaver will take full hits with the Striker rockets until either he dies or runs off.

Using this tactic I�ve actually killed Reavers with a gauss rifle (2 kills), a MCG (7 or so kills), and a Lasher (1 kill). Of course these were the �hover for the kill� less experienced pilots, but that coverage position is highly annoying and a huge temptation for a pilot to try and stay long enough to �just get this one kill��

[FatalLight]

the vs were supposed to be versatile but that meant having a weapon universally used against both armor and infantry *cough*lasher 2.0*cough* which ends up as "unbalanced" when you only need to field one weapon to counter any situation you may encounter
Said a long time ago. the reason it can take armor and infantry is because ther is no armor piercing bullets like the other two empires.

[KIAsan]

Simple fact, if you catch a striker on open ground, then the strker is dead. If you catch a striker in cover, then he will kill you if you hover. It all depends on the circumstances. The striker is not the end-all-be-all AA killing machine. It is very good in numbers, but alone is not going to do much against experienced pilots. I have many striker kills vs enemy air. Very very few times have I beaten an experienced pilot (then only when they make a mistake).

As to the pheonix and lancer, they are both very good at what they do. It all depends on the circumstances. It's been said before and I'll just repeat it again: Rock-paper-scissors.

TR are fine as they are now. Yeah, they need some stuff tweaked, but for the most part, they do pretty good for themselves.