Combat Engineering

[LordReaver]

I feel it's a safe assumption that CE will make PSN, so without further ado...



Spitfires should go underground when they are not firing. This stop friendly vehicles from running over them and destroying them. It also "cloaks" them without making them lame. You can still see they are there, and can still kill them. (I have to admit, I would miss spitbombs :lol:)

Cerberus Turrets need to be removed entirely. Aircraft have enough to worry about.

Shadow Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see spitfires).

Wall Turrets should be all over the walls, not just corners and gates. They should be easily killable and easily repairable.

One Man Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see bunkers below)

Motion Sensors should hide underground when a vehicle comes near them (even enemy), or just be small enough to drive over without hurting them, again, this stops vehicles from running over and destroying them.

Boomers need to be circular. Triangles are way to easy to spot.

Mines need to be deployed in groups. It doesn't have to be large groups, three at a time would be nice. Maybe add an alternative mode that does singles.

TRAPs need to be easier to kill, but remove the terrible limit on where they can be placed. Except for on bridges, they should not be allowed on bridges.

Bunkers should become a deployable. Give them a lengthy deploy time, lots of armor, and suddenly you can make any spot a viable location to fight from. Variations would be nice.

Sand Bags (or whatever the non specific name is) are also something to be added. Make them a quick setup and perhaps even stackable. If they were somewhat like LEGOs people could make little forts of their own.

Aegis Shield Remove due to redundancy. The AMS/bunkes/sandbags cover this.

Ammo Terminal should be added to allow basic ammunition replenishment. Would have a moderate deploy time, and would go away after a minute or two.


Any improvements and/or additions?



What exactly are the rules on the f-bomb here?

[DviddLeff]

I feel it's a safe assumption that CE will make PSN, so without further ado...

Spitfires should go underground when they are not firing. This stop friendly vehicles from running over them and destroying them. It also "cloaks" them without making them lame. You can still see they are there, and can still kill them. (I have to admit, I would miss spitbombs :lol:)

Good idea.

Cerberus Turrets need to be removed entirely. Aircraft have enough to worry about.

No, infantry need an effective air defense out in the field. Cerberus turrets can only damage/destroy aircraft which are flying low anyway and by the time a Mossie or Reaver is in range they have usually got a cheap kill anyway.

Shadow Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see spitfires).

Agree.

Wall Turrets should be all over the walls, not just corners and gates. They should be easily killable and easily repairable.

Agree.

One Man Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see bunkers below)

Agree.

Motion Sensors should hide underground when a vehicle comes near them (even enemy), or just be small enough to drive over without hurting them, again, this stops vehicles from running over and destroying them.

Agree.

Boomers need to be circular. Triangles are way to easy to spot.

They need to stick to vehicles!

Mines need to be deployed in groups. It doesn't have to be large groups, three at a time would be nice. Maybe add an alternative mode that does singles.

Agree.

TRAPs need to be easier to kill, but remove the terrible limit on where they can be placed. Except for on bridges, they should not be allowed on bridges.

Disgree; if they are easily destroyable putting them on bridges wouldn't matter anyway.

Bunkers should become a deployable. Give them a lengthy deploy time, lots of armor, and suddenly you can make any spot a viable location to fight from. Variations would be nice.

Agree.

Sand Bags (or whatever the non specific name is) are also something to be added. Make them a quick setup and perhaps even stackable. If they were somewhat like LEGOs people could make little forts of their own.

Agree.

Aegis Shield Remove due to redundancy. The AMS/bunkes/sandbags cover this.

Agree.

Ammo Terminal should be added to allow basic ammunition replenishment. Would have a moderate deploy time, and would go away after a minute or two.

I have CR3's being able to deploy these, and they would have a limited supply of equipment like an AMS terminal (no MAX armour).



My comments in yellow.

[CutterJohn]

Just make friendlies pass through spits. Mowing them over with vehicles is a valid tactic.

Cerberus turrets.. Meh. Aircraft have enough to worry about? So does everything else.

Shadow turrets - Rather a silly concept all over.

Wall turrets - Should lower into the courtyard when not in use. When occupied, the operator can raise it to fire, or lower it to avoid fire. Gun tower turrets should pop up from inside.

Motion sensors are fine. I could support placing them in more positions so that they are harder to run over if well placed. Stop friendly drivers from hurting them, if that happens. I can't remember now.

boomers - I'd like to see them be able to be attached to vehicles. Oh, the lulz that could create. I would like to see boomers moved away from CE, as its a much different beast than the rest of the cert, which is concerned with field fortifications. SA might be appropriate.

Mines hurt small vehicles enough. No need for even more of the damned things. If buggies and such were less susceptible to them, maybe.

Bunkers is a nice idea, but I see that as something that a CE does in combination with a lodestar, being able to place large battlefield fortifications.

Sandbags, sure. Stackable ofc won't happen. Also, should be a shield, instead of sandbags, so it doesn't look as weird when friendlies drive through. It might be nifty to make them very difficult to destroy, but the shield portion has relatively fewer hitpoints, and recharges.


Ammo terminal is pretty redundant with an ams or base around. If it were to exist, it shouldn't go indoors, should have a limited supply, and the construction gizmos shouldn't be able to be purchased from it.


As I went into a bit, I'd like to see players with CE and Lodestars able to deploy advanced/heavy fortifications. Dropping an AMS like bundle. The aforementioned bunker. Heavy field turrets. That sort of thing.

[LordReaver]

No, infantry need an effective air defense out in the field. Cerberus turrets can only damage/destroy aircraft which are flying low anyway and by the time a Mossie or Reaver is in range they have usually got a cheap kill anyway.

Disgree; if they are easily destroyable putting them on bridges wouldn't matter anyway.

Infantry need cover from air, more than they need a counter to it.

I didn't mean really easy to kill TRAPs, I just meant a little easier. It takes a long time to kill one of them. If the limit on how many can be placed next to each other was removed, imagine trying to break into a CY with how strong they are now. People would place them like 5 deep. That's a lot of ammo not going towards any kills. I guess if infantry could somehow dismantle them, that would be fine also.

[DviddLeff]

Yeah infantry need cover from air; they do not have it currently, so they need the Cerberus Turrets or for the Mossies nose gun COF nerfed.

If Traps could be destroyed with a single Boomer that would be quite cool.

[CutterJohn]

Or viable infantry AA. Dedicated, or alternate fires on the AV weapons that make them better vs air. Well, the striker was mostly fine. The lancer could use a flak round, and the phoenix... just needs to be rethought somehow.

[DviddLeff]

I would rather have separate AA weapons than have an alternative fire mode for the AV ones.

And the Mossies nose gun needs a nerf whatever happens; its a scout aircraft not mean to be a kill whores dream vehicle.

[Tikuto]

Actually, I'd tailor all engineer roles and equipment to make clear difference in battles instead of just putting stuff down.

"What do you mean?"

The Engineer would have their role easy. You place an deployab le item(s) it is works against all vehicles: anti-vehicular. The purpose is to greatly promote field battles away from facilities/urban territories without any vehicles (ground & air), and how many times have we not seen this? -- key information: one field deployable item works against all vehicles effectively.

It means the Engineer has the clear role of something and they do it effeciantly and effectively: anti-vehicular with little time-consuming hassle. Deploying everything for an EMP Blast to jam it all is very aggrivating. So, the Field Turret will have it's uses against anti-infantry or anti-vehicle (ground and air).


Basicly reduce time-consuming effort for more shooty-action fun.

[CutterJohn]

The purpose is to greatly promote field battles away from facilities/urban territories without any vehicles

Why would you want to promote that? This is a combined arms game. CE should help give infantry a chance vs vehicles if they dig in to a defensible position in the field. It should not banish the threat of vehicles entirely.

[ArcticPrism]

I still don't see why so many people want Cerberus Turrets(and other AA gone). It requires a group of them to do any sort of damage and even then a mere Wasp can fly through them and survive unless it has low hp or no afterburner. All aircraft have at least 2-3x more range. Other aircraft should not be the only threat to aircraft.

I think in general deployable turrets should be more useful. I haven't found much viable use for Spitfires/Shadow turrets other than making it a pain for cloakers to reach my Lodestars. They aren't very useful around bases. It is fairly discouraging/frustrating spending a lot of time and effort placing them around the base just to see all of the work gone with the press of a button from CR emp. I also think that a limit of only 15 is much too low considering they are extremely weak and have half the range of a Sweeper(lol). They even have damage degradation so if you are a Rexo standing at the edge of its range, it only does 5 armor per bullet and no health!

Field turrets(player manned) are very useless. They have poor range, accuracy and they have way too little shield. You'd be lucky if you could take 20% of a tank's hp before being destroyed by it. They should at least have enough shield to do significant damage to vehicles. If they had greater range they could be placed on hills and stuff.

Players should be able to place more mines or EMP mines should have a separate limit from High Explosive mines. Currently no one uses EMP mines because they are vastly inferior to HE mines.

Aegis shield can be useful for hiding vehicles, but I would also like other types of shields. Maybe ones that can be used as cover for infantry or small vehicles. Players that also have hacking stuff should be able to deploy things that enhance radar instead of only on a charged Aegis.

[Hamma]

We need spider clamp turrets. :brow:

[Bags]

I feel it's a safe assumption that CE will make PSN, so without further ado...



Spitfires should go underground when they are not firing. This stop friendly vehicles from running over them and destroying them. It also "cloaks" them without making them lame. You can still see they are there, and can still kill them. (I have to admit, I would miss spitbombs :lol:)

Agree


Cerberus Turrets need to be removed entirely. Aircraft have enough to worry about.

Agree


Shadow Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see spitfires).

Agree


Wall Turrets should be all over the walls, not just corners and gates. They should be easily killable and easily repairable.
Not sure, I'd have to see this in game


One Man Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see bunkers below)


Not sure


Motion Sensors should hide underground when a vehicle comes near them (even enemy), or just be small enough to drive over without hurting them, again, this stops vehicles from running over and destroying them.

Agree


Boomers need to be circular. Triangles are way to easy to spot.

Not sure how this actually would affect gameplay


Mines need to be deployed in groups. It doesn't have to be large groups, three at a time would be nice. Maybe add an alternative mode that does singles.

I think the status quo is fine


TRAPs need to be easier to kill, but remove the terrible limit on where they can be placed. Except for on bridges, they should not be allowed on bridges.

I honestly think they should be removed


Bunkers should become a deployable. Give them a lengthy deploy time, lots of armor, and suddenly you can make any spot a viable location to fight from. Variations would be nice.

Not sure, would have to see in game


Sand Bags (or whatever the non specific name is) are also something to be added. Make them a quick setup and perhaps even stackable. If they were somewhat like LEGOs people could make little forts of their own.

Agree


Aegis Shield Remove due to redundancy. The AMS/bunkes/sandbags cover this.

Agree


Ammo Terminal should be added to allow basic ammunition replenishment. Would have a moderate deploy time, and would go away after a minute or two.

Ammo is abundant enough as is, don't think this is necessary.


Any improvements and/or additions?



What exactly are the rules on the f-bomb here?

Red.

[wildcat140679]

Wall Turrets should be all over the walls, not just corners and gates. They should be easily killable and easily repairable.



With wall turrets I assume your referring to the base/tower turrets.
I don't agree with the easy to be destroyed part. Base turrets have never really been very strong, nor are the much of a threath when unmanned and steered by AI.

Weapons that fire in an arc like lightning cannon, can take out the turret with out getting shot at and even outside the fire range of the turret and there are more weapons that can harm a base turret while staying outside it's shooting range. The have all the time in the world to kill it. Turrets are and will always be sitting ducks!

The base/tower turrets should have no range restriction or be equal to the max weapon range of what ever weapon system. But that's an other topic.

Base turrets should not be easier to destroy, they are going no where and are easy targets.

[Traak]

No way on Auraxis can you remove the Shadows. We don't NEED more advantages for droppers. What do you want next, People to be able to fly their airplanes while in an entire Interlink Base of armor, so when the plane gets low on armor, they jump out, clothed in Voltan, replete with capitol dome?

Not everything in Planetside needs to be something that droppers can easily see from afar and destroy from way beyond rifle range.

No Shadows? Hah! No way! I love the Shadows.

How about no droppers? Then you wouldn't have the people whining so much about shadows, because droppers are the primary source for Shadow gripes. OMG! I can't drop and OMGZ0WNZ0RZ everyone in the tower! What a disaster for Planetside!

Nah. Planetside needs Shadows until it no longer has droppers.

[Bags]

I mainly foot zerg and I absolutely hate shadow spits. At least let me lock onto them with my striker.

[ArcticPrism]

I mainly foot zerg and I absolutely hate shadow spits. At least let me lock onto them with my striker.

Just EMP blast. Spitfire field? Let me just press the button. Shadows popping up? Press the button! Too many mines at an entrance? Press the button! It's the answer to pretty much all CE and works almost instantly.

[Bags]

Just EMP blast. Spitfire field? Let me just press the button. Shadows popping up? Press the button! Too many mines at an entrance? Press the button! It's the answer to pretty much all CE and works almost instantly.

At what point do jammers allow me to lock onto them? I don't see why they're unlockable while shooting at me.

[Kirotan]

Faster CE deployment.

The new ACE is a ball, and when you select which mode you want, your crosshair changes and you shoot a spot on a ground within 50m. The ACE automatically rolls itself and self deploys at the spot you chose.

There, I just saved you 5-10 minutes of running around putting up mines so you can get back into the fight faster.

[Tool]

Faster CE deployment.

The new ACE is a ball, and when you select which mode you want, your crosshair changes and you shoot a spot on a ground within 50m. The ACE automatically rolls itself and self deploys at the spot you chose.

There, I just saved you 5-10 minutes of running around putting up mines so you can get back into the fight faster.

I can't remember where I read the idea but it was good with regards to engineers and placing mines.

Something about an AMS variant solely for engineers able to drop groups of mines and resupply ACEs in the field along with basic equipment.

[CutterJohn]

I think there were quite enough mines. No need for more, or mechanics that allow them to be laid down faster.

[Kirotan]

I think there were quite enough mines. No need for more, or mechanics that allow them to be laid down faster.

Mines would still be removed faster than they can be put up. The abilities to negate CE would still outweigh the convenience of placing them.

[CutterJohn]

But more convenient placement would mean even more people put them up, because its easier.

[Nuevo Jones]

Having used CE greatly, I would enjoy certain CE items only requiring 1 square in the inventory slot. Additionally, self-triggered boomers would be great, like a 2 part boomer. one part explosive, one part infra red trigger. BOOM.

[LesserShade]

We need spider clamp turrets. :brow:

I like this idea, especially if new base designs are more open. While we're wishing, how about a renegades style laser turret variant for adv engineers?? :>

[Valverde]

I dont think shadow turrets or even cerberus turrets are that bad, but I do think they should have 1 General turret and you should be able to modify it to be a special type. Kinda like upgrades, but if you want a shadow turret you should be able to add a cloaking module to it's chipset and have a menu you drop the chiptypes in.

[Jonny]

Spidermines? :D

[LordReaver]

Not only are flakfires annoying and not needed when infantry have proper cover, they are also somewhat redundant with the spit. With the current spit, all it would need is more damage vs air, and better tracking. The current spit is unbelievably easy to trick. I can get within spitting distance of one before it will start hitting me. So I assume they will be better next time.

Bunkers in general should cover the need for OMTs, because you are protected, and you can fire whatever you want out of it. However, if they were upgradable with little open seat turrets on them, that'd might be nice.

I should have mentioned the AMS before. It's not really CE, but it kind of overlaps it in my eyes (which is a good thing). I feel that it should basically be a light mobile fort. The only real defense an AMS has right now is not being found. So it could use things like a bubble that soaks up some of the damage from small arms fire, a limited detection ability, or something that would help defenders actually defend it. It shouldn't have any direct defense abilities like a gun or something though. I'm still thinking on this one, but that's where my thoughts are at the moment.

How I'd have the ammo terminal, is it can't do anything other than give out ammo. If you want to switch weapons, you should have to seek out an AMS or other non portable terminal. A user needs to engage the term, and after a few seconds, it will refill what ammo you are in need of (Like John said, it's construction tool can't be purchased from it, to prevent an endless cycle), or you can grab the ammo manually if you want to change it up. It should not be allowed indoors however, and it would expire after 5 or so minutes. Its role is to fill gaps where an AMS can't, and again help encourage going off the beaten path. This is not really an essential thing though.

The Aegis shield is really just a crappy AMS, that is usually used to hide things that shouldn't be hidden. For example Lodestars are commonly put in them and completely defeat the purpose of the Lodey being so massive.

The reason boomers should be circular rather than triangle, is because triangles area really not a common thing to see. Just look around the room you are in, how many triangles do you see (not counting squares :p). Circles blend in much better, and would allow for more crafty placement, like on a terminal or a stair. It's only a model change, so it wouldn't change their power. It would only mean you have to pay more attention for booby traps. Which I think is a fair thing. I like the idea of attacking them to vehicles. Would be fun to see someone attack one to an enemy tank, then wait for that tank to drive into a group of their own, and blow the thing. Also, if you can run up and slap a tank, then you deserve to do extra damage to it.

Wall turrets should be easier to kill, because it actually takes a lot of fire power to take one out. The only reason they aren't overpowered is because they are stationary. With more wall turrets, it would make them even harder to combat them. Making them easier to kill helps. In return for being easier to kill, they should be easier to bring back online also. This should help emphasize taking the walls more for both sides. Get on the walls so they can't get the turrets back online, and get on the walls because the turrets aren't hard to get back online. The way it is now, people hardly ever try to get the turrets back online once down, except when the enemy can't take the walls anyways. On a side note, maybe the backside should be weaker than the front, haven't decided if that would actually be meaningful yet.

It doesn't matter what the sandbags look like, just that there is some deployable to block damage.

Traak, the issue you talk about with droppers, maybe isn't a CE problem but a problem with dropping, no? Not that I agree with it being such a problem to begin with. Honestly, how is CE supposed to differentiate between a dropper and someone who just ran up normally?

The shadow turret is redundant in every way except that it cloaks. Now add on top that my idea of spits that go underground when they aren't shooting and you have a semi hard to see automated turret, that isn't completely lame by being 100% invisible without darklight. You have to ask yourself what the reason is for wanting cloaking, and change the source, not add in a new feature to correct the problem. Not going for the source is why so many lame changes/additions happened in the past.

[Jonny]

Spidermines? :)

[Manitou]

I was considering what combat engineers do and one thing we haven't considered is the importance of bridge building. We have all experienced the bridge battles (one of my personal favorite types of battles). What would happen if the bridges could be destroyed or damaged beyond use and it required the combat engis to repair it or even deploy temporary pontoon bridges until the regular bridge is repaired?

Is this feasible? :cool:

[ArcticPrism]

Not only are flakfires annoying and not needed when infantry have proper cover, they are also somewhat redundant with the spit. With the current spit, all it would need is more damage vs air, and better tracking. The current spit is unbelievably easy to trick. I can get within spitting distance of one before it will start hitting me. So I assume they will be better next time.

Cerberus Turrets aren't redundant. Spitfires have pathetic range. Only the Dragon and knives have less range than them. AI can't lead shots so it helps to have the proximity. Cerberus Turrets in their current form even have short range. Mosquitos and Reavers especially can easily outrange them. Their damage isn't really that high and cannot barely destroy a mere Wasp and that's only if it sits in the field of them or has low hp.



The Aegis shield is really just a crappy AMS, that is usually used to hide things that shouldn't be hidden. For example Lodestars are commonly put in them and completely defeat the purpose of the Lodey being so massive.

Lodestars are massive because they are designed to be able to transport any vehicle. If it didn't have to carry vehicles it would very likely be much smaller and having a cloaking field similar to that of an AMS. Not that a cloaking field will stop anyone from seeing it on the radar, and everyone has reveal enemies these days anyways. Just reveal and OS or go destroy it or hack it.



Wall turrets should be easier to kill, because it actually takes a lot of fire power to take one out. The only reason they aren't overpowered is because they are stationary.

Current wall turrets are garbage and mostly worthless except for the AA variant. It is the only version of the upgrade that is useful. A wall turret will easily lose to any MBT. The chaingun is extremely inaccurate, suffers from heavy damage degradation, has bullet drop and does little more damage than a Mosquito at optimal range. The cannon does decent damage but it has an arc and travels too slow to hit anything that is moving. Orbital strikes are so common that people will just OS them. The turrets are very exposed and impossible to repair once destroyed if there are any vehicles around. Turrets are stationary and can easily be evaded because they are fat which makes it easy to shoot them from where they can't shoot you.

The shadow turret is redundant in every way except that it cloaks. Now add on top that my idea of spits that go underground when they aren't shooting and you have a semi hard to see automated turret, that isn't completely lame by being 100% invisible without darklight.

Shadow Turrets are the only turrets that aren't useless when fighting NC and their uncounterable Phoenix(assuming they haven't been spotted already).


Cyan stuff.

[Firefly]

We have all experienced the bridge battles (one of my personal favorite types of battles). What would happen if the bridges could be destroyed or damaged beyond use and it required the combat engis to repair it
Kinda like in C&C Tiberium Sun, where you can blow a bridge and then pop an engineer into the bridgehead and fix it. This is definitely something I'd like to see. It gives artillery and bombers something to do - it should be incredibly difficult to do, however. Denying the enemy a route of advance because the bridge is down? Hell yeah.

[Bags]

Kinda like in C&C Tiberium Sun, where you can blow a bridge and then pop an engineer into the bridgehead and fix it. This is definitely something I'd like to see. It gives artillery and bombers something to do - it should be incredibly difficult to do, however. Denying the enemy a route of advance because the bridge is down? Hell yeah.

One of my favorite activities in planetside is pulling out my gluegun and holding fire for a minute.

[Firefly]

One of my favorite activities in planetside is pulling out my gluegun and holding fire for a minute.
Just make it like a generator repair. Multiple people would need to repair it to get it done quickly, since it's a bridge and would need a lot of NTUs.

[Manitou]

One of my favorite activities in planetside is pulling out my gluegun and holding fire for a minute.
So how about pulling out your weapon and covering those who will do this... :rolleyes:

[ArcticPrism]

Kinda like in C&C Tiberium Sun, where you can blow a bridge and then pop an engineer into the bridgehead and fix it. This is definitely something I'd like to see. It gives artillery and bombers something to do - it should be incredibly difficult to do, however. Denying the enemy a route of advance because the bridge is down? Hell yeah.

All that does is encourage the use of air. Why bother fighting over a bridge when you can just fly over it?

[Knightwyvern]

All that does is encourage the use of air. Why bother fighting over a bridge when you can just fly over it?

The point of destroying bridges isn't so much denying infantry, but heavy vehicles (tanks.) Destroying a bridge would severely hinder enemy tank columns from advancing quickly. It is a very viable tactic and I would love to see it in PS:N.

[Firefly]

All that does is encourage the use of air. Why bother fighting over a bridge when you can just fly over it?
Because there are these things called vehicles. A lot of people don't fly because they're not good at it, so they drive. That's to say nothing of outfits that enjoy rolling large tank formations. There's also this type of soldier known as the foot-zerger. Both of these types of non-flying gamers use bridges.

[Baneblade]

Infantry AA needs to be reviewed. It should be short range relatively, but not significantly overpowered in single combat. I see the Lancer as the ideal AA weapon. Lock on weapons make AA far to easy.

But I also feel farming infantry should take more effort than simply flying a 12mm that doesn't trigger base turrets and finds infils. If aircraft were more purpose built in general (ie Wasp, Liberator) and less universally useful (Skeeter, Reaver) that would go a long way to solving the air chav problem.

The Skeeter needs no weapons to fulfill its role (scout, fast response).

The Reaver should be less spammy and more tactical, all the ideas I've ever had for Reavers made them 2 person (pilot/20mm funner and RIO/Empire specific heavy AV gunner... think ESAV replacing rocket spam on Reavers).

Liberators are ugly, but are technically fine generally.

The GG needs to be removed or more specialized in a particular combat capacity. Flying Battleship is not acceptable for a vehicle that small.

[Sirisian]

My CE idea to see around walls and to track enemies in a base. (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showpost.php?p=560581&postcount=46)
A combat engineering camera! You get the ability to place a camera on a wall and you get a small fuzzy camera screen pop up. Could be used with a boomer too. So a player like an NC would run up to a wall slam it on the wall then run back to hide and see a small screen pop up on their screen where they could keep track of a hallway.

Either that or some kind of laser motion sensor. Like you slam it on a wall and it makes an invisible line and anything that trips it pings your map.
Would make it easier to track enemies if a base gets more complicated. (It was originally the reason to get rid of third person for infantry).

[Hamma]

Destroyable bridges is an awesome idea I would love to see that and it seems totally feasible. Destroyable terrain and bases I think would go waaay to far but bridges I think would be a pretty easy fit. It would have to be balanced well, for example I don't think a solo squad should be able to run out there with some decimators and blow that shit up. :lol:

[LordReaver]

Cyan stuff.

AI can't lead shots simply because it was lazy coding. All it does is adjust its aim to where you will be based on your speed and direction of travel. That's why all you have to do to trick it is not travel in a straight line. Their damage vs aircraft is easily changed. Why assume that they will be just as shitty as before?

How about making jammer nades explode in proximity to aircraft. That should pretty much take care of infantry vs air troubles. We also don't know how aircraft handle, so making assumptions on how easy it will be to farm is rather pointless really.

The Lodey is much bigger than any ground vehicle. That is so it's easy to take down. When it carries vehicles it basically adds armor and mobility at almost no cost. Then when it gets to where it wants, it turns into a repair/rearm station. That's why it is big.

You clearly didn't read anything I said on wall turrets.

Spitfires can have have an armor plate on their top, so that when they are underground they are hard to kill.



The blowing up bridge thing is an interesting idea. My explosives expert idea would be well fitted for the position of blowing them up. There does need to be some way to counter blowing up bridges though. Who gets to choose what bridge and when? What happens when people take out bridges to grief everybody? How do you effectively repair the bridge?

On the other hand, it does provide benefit. It emphasizes amphibious combat and alternative routes. It would be awesome! I would love to see a group of armor crossing a bridge when a bridge starts coming down.

I would like to know what kind of bridges are going to be in. The old ones are boring and ugly. If some had a hump or were curved, or that would help support infantry crossing the bridge. If they are all the same, I hope they are truss. It would help against air.

[Sirisian]

How about making jammer nades explode in proximity to aircraft.
I remember people wanted them to just turn off the engine on an aircraft. That would be epic. Jump out of a plane onto a galaxy and hit it with a Jammer.

[Traak]

Riight, what we don't need is a game where the Vanu go around blowing every bridge in existence because they can hover OVER the water.

It's already hard enough to keep a generator running six minutes after any enemy steps into an SOI.

If all the empires have hovertanks, it would be less unbalanced. However, if only the Vanu do, well... We would be seeing many, many blown bridges.

[Bruttal]

Well not to rip off CoD:BO to much but Id like to see deployable cameras

[Bags]

Is stealing from thieves stealing?

Dunno, depends on how they're implemented. Not a huge need as we currently have radar. Could be useful or useless.

[Timantium]

Who would be able to look through the cameras?

If I placed 10 cameras around a base, would I have to link them to a security room or would I have to open mini-boxes on my action screen to monitor them?

Isn't this what the motion alarm sensors are supposed to do?

[Sirisian]

Combat Engineering Thread (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showpost.php?p=560863&postcount=39)

[Miir]

I could see one good use for this.

Film making :)

[Bruttal]

You only alowed 1 camera and you can toggle your mini map to camera mode.

You could either install it as a Friendly Camera that is installed via base term predesigned spots where you can place it and you can toggle though the spots till you find the location you want it in.

Wireless works up to 1 SOI's distance however big that is with deployable Wireless bosters (max 10) that lets you increase the range of your wireless devices. Your choice on new posabile wireless devices =)

[wildcat140679]

I'm sorry if i'm derailing this topic...

If PS:N would take the path of throwing out the 3rd person view for infantry and limited them to first person view only, Than this deployable camera will surly take it's place.

Corner ambushing paired with Heavy Assault really screwed up game balance
And as much as I may like a deployable camera, I don't like the idea of any kind of alternative form of 3rd person corner ambushing to return.


If a camera or 3rd person through the use of an implant makes it's way back in to PS:N, I really hope there will be a clear tell sign of a corner ambush.

In case of the camera, it needs to be big enough to be noticeable, yet small enough, one might overlook it. Maybe even a fain't red LED that blinks indicating it's in use and your being watched ;)

Adding a handicap to the camera, like a poor camera video feed thats to pixelated, that it's unable to spot cloakers for instance are worthy trade off's



As for 3rd person camera implant of some kind (don't like to see one, but still), it needs to make noise, like regeneration implant, what can be clearly heard.
Any maybe even some video disortion, different vision/color spectrum that isn't able to detect cloakers.


Tradition ambushes need to return, train you rifle at the corner/door/entrance and shoot at the first enemy who shows it's face, not this cheap 3rd person SURPRISE! And present your foe with a jackhammer greeting back to the spawn tubes.


If camera's (or 3rd person view) makes its way back in to PS:N it needs to have a serious handicap.

[DviddLeff]

Deployable cameras should be relatively noticeable; if someone is using one to corner hump people in a stairwell then the camera should be obvious to spot...

In the upgrade project I also have commanders able to view their squads HUDs to help them coordinate their troops.

[Hamma]

I've merged the camera thread with the CE thread.

I could see one good use for this.

Film making :)

Win! :lol:

Interesting idea for sure - I'm not sure if it would add a whole lot to the game and as mentioned it could be exploited.

[Traak]

To those who are concerned with 3rd person corner humpers: Use SA. Problem solved.

Cameras. I think they would have to be small enough to be fairly innocuous, but not so small as to be undetectable. Perhaps the size of mines, but with much longer viewable distance than you can see mines?

[Vancha]

Am I the only one who'd like to see CE downsized? I loved setting up the original CE, but the only part of the advanced CE that ever felt like a proper addition was the phalanx wall turret upgrades.

Shadow turrets, TRAPs, Aegis', OMTs, Disruptors...they felt like scrap ideas that didn't really belong. The cerberus turret sort of felt like it belonged, but it was so underpowered.

CE is good at deployables. Light pieces of equipment that can be a non-issue or an absolute bitch depending on how well it's been set up. Sending them in the direction of building structures like bunkers, OMTs, ammo dispensers or lego sandbags seems overly clunky to me. Keep it light and keep it minimal imo.

[Bruttal]

I'm sorry if i'm derailing this topic...

If PS:N would take the path of throwing out the 3rd person view for infantry and limited them to first person view only, Than this deployable camera will surly take it's place.

Corner ambushing paired with Heavy Assault really screwed up game balance
And as much as I may like a deployable camera, I don't like the idea of any kind of alternative form of 3rd person corner ambushing to return.


If a camera or 3rd person through the use of an implant makes it's way back in to PS:N, I really hope there will be a clear tell sign of a corner ambush.

In case of the camera, it needs to be big enough to be noticeable, yet small enough, one might overlook it. Maybe even a fain't red LED that blinks indicating it's in use and your being watched ;)

Adding a handicap to the camera, like a poor camera video feed thats to pixelated, that it's unable to spot cloakers for instance are worthy trade off's



As for 3rd person camera implant of some kind (don't like to see one, but still), it needs to make noise, like regeneration implant, what can be clearly heard.
Any maybe even some video disortion, different vision/color spectrum that isn't able to detect cloakers.


Tradition ambushes need to return, train you rifle at the corner/door/entrance and shoot at the first enemy who shows it's face, not this cheap 3rd person SURPRISE! And present your foe with a jackhammer greeting back to the spawn tubes.


If camera's (or 3rd person view) makes its way back in to PS:N it needs to have a serious handicap.

Well I think for Wall humppers if you think someone is down there toss a jammer down there and the camera will be disabled the camera should ONLY be used for Watching over a base while your defending another position in the base or close enough to the base via wireless amps

[wildcat140679]

To those who are concerned with 3rd person corner humpers: Use SA. Problem solved.


Well I think for Wall humppers if you think someone is down there toss a jammer down there and the camera will be disabled the camera should ONLY be used for Watching over a base while your defending another position in the base or close enough to the base via wireless amps

SA or throwing a grenade is not the solution to 3rd person corner humpers, just because one might be lurking around the next corner. But thats for another discussion.

[Traak]

SA or throwing a grenade is not the solution to 3rd person corner humpers, just because one might be lurking around the next corner. But thats for another discussion.

So the cure for an enemy hugging a corner is not to kill him? Then what is it? Eliminate corners? SA is the Anti-Corner.

I need 3rd person, and I'm the guy who is usually victimized by it. But I use it often enough, even just driving that I realized it would be hard for me to justify removing it.

How much more the killers, not the support guys.

[wildcat140679]

So the cure for an enemy hugging a corner is not to kill him? Then what is it? Eliminate corners? SA is the Anti-Corner.


Do you have some kind of 6th sense or other unnatural ability that tells you what is lurking around the next corner?

or do you go about shooting at each and every corner, just because an enemy might be lurking around the next corner? I seriously doubt it.

Grenades and SA are good weapons to deal with enemies in cover or behind a corner, but you still need to know that they are there.

[Traak]

Do you have some kind of 6th sense or other unnatural ability that tells you what is lurking around the next corner?

or do you go about shooting at each and every corner, just because an enemy might be lurking around the next corner? I seriously doubt it.

Grenades and SA are good weapons to deal with enemies in cover or behind a corner, but you still need to know that they are there.

I see your point, but, why not just toss a grenade as SOP and see if there is a yellow reticle flash? That'll tell you if you have enemies there. Even if it is just a jammer, it will blow up any boomers in range, kill his Invincibility Implants, AND show you a reticle flash, even if there is no boomer to blow, that someone or something (such as a now-non-functioning MAS) is there.

I just don't see 3rd person being eliminated, it is too useful to too many people. As I said earlier, even me, the cloaker/CE guy who gets owned by corner dudes a lot still wants it in the game. The ability to toggle out to be able to take a wider overview of what I'm surrounded with is just too valuable and kinda unique to PS, and adds to the fun.

[Hamma]

Please stay on topic.

There is an entire thread and poll dedicated to the discussion of 3rd person:

http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35610