Weekly Dev Activities

[Hamma]

http://www.planetside-universe.com/index.php?newsid=1083

[Incompetent]

We will be changing the way bailing works from damaged aircraft. When a player attempts to bail from a heavily damaged air vehicle, there will be a chance that the bail malfunctions. THe chance of malfunction will not activate until a certain threshold of damage is reached. As the craft takes more damage, there will be a greater chance of malfunction.

Looking at ways to allow bailing from vehicles at higher rates of speed.
I have been waiting for both of these for a very, very long time.

[Warborn]

Some excellent changes. Minor, but very much needed.

[martyr]

oh, that secondary-explosion grief fix is AWESOME.

[GeneralRazor]

The nanodispenser, BANK, and medical applicator changes should have happened a LOOOOOONNNNNGGGG time ago. Long time ago.

Bailing? LOOOOOONNNGGG time ago the changes should have been made.

Exploding grief, that's cool.

It seems that PS is backtracking.

I wonder if any thinkers agree, and see the cycle that is happening.

I personally don't like it. Too much to late, IMO.

Sorry for the negativity, but it does seem that SOE rules out solid gaming benefits for "attraction" everytime.

I'm dismayed. :confused:

[Warborn]

The nanodispenser, BANK, and medical applicator changes should have happened a LOOOOOONNNNNGGGG time ago. Long time ago.

Bailing? LOOOOOONNNGGG time ago the changes should have been made.

Exploding grief, that's cool.

It seems that PS is backtracking.

I wonder if any thinkers agree, and see the cycle that is happening.

I personally don't like it. Too much to late, IMO.

Sorry for the negativity, but it does seem that SOE rules out solid gaming benefits for "attraction" everytime.

I'm dismayed. :confused:

Are you aware that Planetside recently got a new lead designer/producer, which is why a lot of this very simple yet important stuff is happening now instead of "a long time ago"? This isn't too late, because Samhayne, the new lead designer/producer, is new. And as you'll probably agree, he's off to a great start.

[GeneralRazor]

Very aware. My basic point is that they seem to be backtracking.

Are they?

[Baneblade]

We should have gotten the Heavy Tanks we wanted, not these BaRFs.

[GeneralRazor]

We should have gotten the Heavy Tanks we wanted, not these BaRFs.

Fully agree Sobekeus.

[GeneralRazor]

And if "BattleFrameRobots" are "simple" and "important", I would really like to know what comes next on the list. I already know. Merits and the like, more "enticing" gameplay, anything that puts cash in SOE's pockets (as if their not doing well).

How about me, who cares about the foundation? I do not cater. I wish for loyalty and propherous upbringing.

I have seen less and less of that lately.

Shoot 'em up!

Still dismayed. :doh:

[Lartnev]

The devs are paid to improve the game. If that means resolving long standing issues then that's what they should do :)

And heavy tanks would have been boring :P~

[Warborn]

We should have gotten the Heavy Tanks we wanted, not these BaRFs.

I actually don't agree. Planetside is suppose to be a futuristic game of warfare, and yet the tech being used is basically the exact same as what they were using in the 1940s. Bunch of tanks, infantry, and airplanes. Although I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a heavier tank, or a tank variant that fits the role, I think overall the BFRs were a good idea, as they look cool and make the game seem like it really is futuristic.

Very aware. My basic point is that they seem to be backtracking.

Are they?

I don't see how this is backtracking. They are adding to the game and fixing problems with the game. So no, of course they're not backtracking.

[GeneralRazor]

I don't mind them fixing longstanding issues. I think that is great. But adding fixes like the bailing fix is a bit much. Not only do aircraft have particular counters against it (and more added i.e. double AA BFR's, which are also used effectivly as AI), but now they aren't able to bail? What gives? Don't get me wrong, I think this is a change that needed to be made, just before they made the many counters against it. Also, I am not a "reaver whore" in the sense that some people have made the term to be. If I know there is a spot where vehicles and/or troops are roaming, I will hop in my aircraft and head that way to help supress them. I don't use it to kill any and every troop I see.

Without going through all the details, why doesn't the BFR (the strongest one man vehicle to date I might add) have particular counters against it? It can fly, not exactly like the reaver, but it can fly none the less. It has AI AV AA, can fly, can emp, go through water, and has shields to boot. Jammers you say? Any other vehicle cannot shoot at all when jammed. The BFR, no way! These are the uber killing machines that any killwhore has been waiting for! In my tests, even when being very risky, I have never got less than 20 kills per death in my BFR. And that's being generous, it's probably more like 40-50 on average.

Now, it's easy to see what they are trying to do with this change. Intense ground battles. That's perfect in my book, almost. Who wins? (stat wise) The one who can do everything, the BFR. Of course! Why not grab a team and field at least 2 AA AI AV BFR's with a few extra troops/vehicles? If that team is coordinated, it would be very hard to stop.

Now with BFR's, it's either kill the BFR (on foot) or zerg. Oh, and shoot endlessy in the direction of the opposing BFR force.

While writing this and thinking, it may just help the tactical side of PS. That's all I wish, that tactics were truely born again.

[Warborn]

I don't mind them fixing longstanding issues. I think that is great. But adding fixes like the bailing fix is a bit much. Not only do aircraft have particular counters against it (and more added i.e. double AA BFR's, which are also used effectivly as AI), but now they aren't able to bail? What gives? Don't get me wrong, I think this is a change that needed to be made, just before they made the many counters against it.

This has nothing to do with the effectiveness of AA against aircraft. If you're bailing out, the aircraft vs anti-aircraft encounter has already been decided. All this does is give the possibility for players to actually get a kill for aircraft they shoot down. Pilots who get shotdown shouldn't be able to bail out virtually every time. Your vehicle was taken out, that means you should be almost certainly dead, and your killer should get some experience.

Without going through all the details, why doesn't the BFR (the strongest one man vehicle to date I might add) have particular counters against it? It can fly, not exactly like the reaver, but it can fly none the less. It has AI AV AA, can fly, can emp, go through water, and has shields to boot. Jammers you say? Any other vehicle cannot shoot at all when jammed. The BFR, no way! These are the uber killing machines that any killwhore has been waiting for! In my tests, even when being very risky, I have never got less than 20 kills per death in my BFR. And that's being generous, it's probably more like 40-50 on average.

They're still being worked on, and the effects of a jammer on a BFR are far worse than the effect on other vehicles. Being not able to shoot for five seconds sucks, but it's nothing compared to having your speed reduced by half and your turning rate drastically reduced. Being jammed in a BFR means you may very likely be killed within the next 30 seconds. Being jammed in a tank just means you can't kill so well for the next, what, 5 seconds or so, but you can at least still drive away.

As for the rest, they're still being balanced, try them with the new patch. They got nerfed pretty hard this time.

[Baneblade]

I don't see the point in making TR and NC use tracked vehicles. Or at least ones so limited as the ones we have.

And the bouncing turrets is the bain of PS.