Twitter Chat and Nanite Systems Galaxy

[Hamma]

http://www.planetside-universe.com/news-twitter-chat-and-nanite-systems-galaxy-2659.htm

[Bags]

Sounds like the new AMS.

[akiadan]

Sooo, Pretty.... and point defense beats cloaking bubble any day. I approve of the vehicles and their roles so far. Excitement is over 9000

[Zenben]

My favorite looking vehicle so far, except maybe the Scythe (duh). Also, 4 weapons systems??? Does the pilot have a gun now or something? And I see no mention of a vehicle carrying capacity, whether it be the same as PS1 with ANT and Lightning sized vehicles or some sort of modification that makes it a heavy lift vehicle. Was really hoping for a kind of "sky crane" refit that sacrificed troop carrying ability and allowed it to carry tanks under the belly.

[Radant-J]

The nicest part is the detail of the base behind it, first great screenshots of an actual facility

[Hamma]

Very cool that it is deployed similar to an AMS and is not a flying spawn point as we first expected.

[BigBossMonkey]

DEFINITELY prefer this over the old AMS.

Galaxy mini-bases? HELL YEAH

[Bags]

The nicest part is the detail of the base behind it, first great screenshots of an actual facility

There's an old name.

[OnlinePirate]

everybody in the game is going to get this certification lol

[Erendil]

My favorite looking vehicle so far, except maybe the Scythe (duh). Also, 4 weapons systems??? Does the pilot have a gun now or something?

Yeah I'm guessing the 4th weapon is a nose gun for the pilot. Either that or a top-mounted MG for defensive use when it's deployed. I hope the tailgun can shoot up now. :p

Interesting design tho. Not too fond of the bulky look.... Holds 12 now, no mention of if it can still carry a vehicle tho, nor if it has a cloaking bubble when deployed. I hope that the cloaking bubble is on the base model, or at the very least available as an unlock. We need to have a cloaked mobile spawn point available to us for stealth operations. :cool:

Even if it does cloak tho it'll still have certain limitations due to its size compared to an AMS. I wonder if the wings fold in once its deployed to reduce its footprint...

I also presume that it needs to be stationary and on the ground to deploy. I always thought the concept of ppl spawning in a flying gal to make a continuous stream of paratroopers kind of silly. :p

[Zenben]

Yeah I'm guessing the 4th weapon is a nose gun for the pilot. Either that or a top-mounted MG for defensive use when it's deployed. I hope the tailgun can shoot up now. :p

Interesting design tho. Not too fond of the bulky look.... Holds 12 now, no mention of if it can still carry a vehicle tho, nor if it has a cloaking bubble when deployed. I hope that the cloaking bubble is on the base model, or at the very least available as an unlock. We need to have a cloaked mobile spawn point available to us for stealth operations. :cool:

Even if it does cloak tho it'll still have certain limitations due to its size compared to an AMS. I wonder if the wings fold in once its deployed to reduce its footprint...

I also presume that it needs to be stationary and on the ground to deploy. I always thought the concept of ppl spawning in a flying gal to make a continuous stream of paratroopers kind of silly. :p

I love how it looks. I liked the Galaxy in PS1, but this one is so much more streamlined. I just wish we had more angles of it than head-on.

[Mastachief]

I like this... alot.

GALS as the new ams will certainly speed things up

[Zulthus]

I love the look of it. And I swear, that thing looks like it needs a runway or something to take off/land. It does NOT look like a VTOL to me :confused::confused:

[Zenben]

I love the look of it. And I swear, that thing looks like it needs a runway or something to take off/land. It does NOT look like a VTOL to me :confused::confused:

Nanites

[Vash02]

bit concerned its just going to be reaver food the moment it sets down. Would need some AA turrets to give it some teeth and be able to fend off at least 2-3 aircraft at a time I'd say.

Still think the AMS should be in, theres always room for the sneaky sneaky ground vehicle rather than the huge blimp coming in to land :p

[Surge72]

bit concerned its just going to be reaver food the moment it sets down. Would need some AA turrets to give it some teeth and be able to fend off at least 2-3 aircraft at a time I'd say.

Don't forget about the supposed huge amount of customisation available for everything. I'm guessing we'll be able to refit different weapons onto it, including AA.

[SKYeXile]

Sounds like the new AMS.

yea, I r Happy now.

fly 12 people around, drop em at low altitude, land the gal, deply it, setup a defence...roll a sunderer in...forward base.

[dsi]

Not sad about the loss of the AMS anymore. I can already see a trailer involving this, full gal flying over a column of tanks with air support flying around the whole group, gal lands in a clearing, 12 people hop out and as they walk/run away it turns into a base, tanks roll by, engineers setting up turrets...

Now how about those one man tanks...

[SKYeXile]

i would have to think this is going to be pull able at all bases now, it would defiantly make galaxies more widely used.

[BorisBlade]

ooh its not a spawn point while flying? Awesome! The deployed idea is much better! =D

It would be good to have a cloaked ams as well tho. Even with weapons it will just get picked apart from range, so while its good since it can be flown into place and has weapons, we also need another option of a weaponless cloaked ams.

Although maybe a recharging shield when landed, so that one little guy isnt gonna just whittle this sitting duck down with ease slowly, just enough that the lighter fire wont take it out and it handles the stray bullets. But if you get a tank on you, it can blow thru the shield regen rate with ease. Basically a bfr that cant move which we all know is very easy to kill. You cant launch AV at a cloaked ams, but a giant galaxy on the ground is gonna take a TON of fire and will need atleast some kind of regenerating shield. And there must be some other interesting options aside from a cloak that could be added.

[Was_Ash_Emerald]

I will rocket spam

[Vash02]

Don't forget about the supposed huge amount of customisation available for everything. I'm guessing we'll be able to refit different weapons onto it, including AA.

Another thing is where those weapons are positioned on the Gal, if its in the manner of the PS1 gal the guns are going to be useless againts air attack while landed. They wouldnt be able to track aircraft.

[SKYeXile]

I will rocket spam

play on west coast, we will make our own Outfit, anything on the ground will die in a fury of rocket spam.

[BigBossMonkey]

Dear Higby,

I can has deployed Galaxy Sammich shot?

[BorisBlade]

Another thing is where those weapons are positioned on the Gal, if its in the manner of the PS1 gal the guns are going to be useless againts air attack while landed. They wouldnt be able to track aircraft.

While aircraft will hurt it for sure, infantry and vehicles will be just as nasty. I can just launch deci's as i bob from behind a tree as infantry. If you arent moving it doesn't matter if the deci doesnt track and is slow, ill still hit you every time and you wont be able to get me most likely. Gonna take some unique mechanics to make it work if it doesnt cloak, but its doable. =)

[Vash02]

While aircraft will hurt it for sure, infantry and vehicles will be just as nasty. I can just launch deci's as i bob from behind a tree as infantry. If you arent moving it doesn't matter if the deci doesnt track and is slow, ill still hit you every time and you wont be able to get me most likely. Gonna take some unique mechanics to make it work if it doesnt cloak, but its doable. =)

At least ground threats will have to fight through the infantry coming from your gal. Aircraft can just fly over the top of them.

[texico]

I really don't know how this is going to work. If an empire is attacking a base from a spawn point, the ABSOLUTE PRIMARY target of the defending empire will be to take out the spawn point/points, because as soon as that happens the enemy are pushed back.

If the spawn point is large and uncloaked, everybody and their dog is going to be trying to take it out, whether that means aircav, crashing planes into it, organizing tank-crashes of 15-20 tanks to go on suicide missions just to damage it and take it out, you name it. I know if I was protecting a base I'd be using any and every suicidal means to take that thing out.

On the other hand, if an empire doing all that can't take it out, it must surely be overpowered. I'm interested to see how that's going to work.

I think there should still be smaller mobile spawn points. This sounds like a really good idea as the main, primary spawn point at the heart of an empire's forces in the field, but it should be used in conjunction with something like AMS' scattered around battles in particular locations.

[Radant-J]

Nanites
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v351/Radant/giorgio-a-tsoukalos2.jpg

[texico]

At least ground threats will have to fight through the infantry coming from your gal. Aircraft can just fly over the top of them.

I dono. I mean, it only takes well organized outfit to drive sunderers/hot drop nearby with loads of AV all firing at once.

And even if that's not the case, the mechanics are going to have to be spot on, because any slight way people can find to take them out, they'll take advantage of.

[Was_Ash_Emerald]

play on west coast, we will make our own Outfit, anything on the ground will die in a fury of rocket spam.

I'll be playing on the East Coast although it's not much different ping wise since I'm in Austin. East Coast servers are better because they hold up their populations longer later on (75% of US/Canada pop is East or Central time zone); and also Eurofags often make characters on them if they play during the day a lot their time.

[Roy Awesome]

I really don't know how this is going to work. If an empire is attacking a base from a spawn point, the ABSOLUTE PRIMARY target of the defending empire will be to take out the spawn point/points, because as soon as that happens the enemy are pushed back.

If the spawn point is large and uncloaked, everybody and their dog is going to be trying to take it out, whether that means aircav, crashing planes into it, organizing tank-crashes of 15-20 tanks to go on suicide missions just to damage it and take it out, you name it. I know if I was protecting a base I'd be using any and every suicidal means to take that thing out.

On the other hand, if an empire doing all that can't take it out, it must surely be overpowered. I'm interested to see how that's going to work.

I think there should still be smaller mobile spawn points. This sounds like a really good idea as the main, primary spawn point at the heart of an empire's forces in the field, but it should be used in conjunction with something like AMS' scattered around battles in particular locations.

Keep in mind that this thing is also a flying vehicle, meaning it can get to places that a tank simply cannot. I don't think it's too particularly overpowered in that regard (Enemy tanks can't reach it to kill it, friendly tanks can't reach it to protect it).

If anything, big and bulky means teamwork. ALOT of teamwork. You have to keep this bad boy from dying, so you station your entire push from a gal. It's now less about a sneaky spot that the enemy hasn't found yet and more about a coordinated attack into a region.

[Squeegeez]

Can't believe no one has talked about this piece of information, so I will highlight it,
The Galaxy is equipped with the innovative "Hot Drop" system which automatically encapsulates any soldier or MAX unit that bails out with a protective barrier that slows their fall. This system removes the bulkiness and complications of using parachutes.

I do like this change, parachuters are easier to hit than a near-straight moving meteor (hot droppers from PS1). They also capture a nicer visual element, like something out of a WWII sortie, where there are crashing planes and parachutes all over. Definitely a step up from an explosion and a hot-dropper.

I'm also curious what kind of "complications" they are talking about when using parachutes.

[Vash02]

Can't believe no one has talked about this piece of information, so I will highlight it,


I do like this change, parachuters are easier to hit than a near-straight moving meteor (hot droppers from PS1). They also capture a nicer visual element, like something out of a WWII sortie, where there are crashing planes and parachutes all over. Definitely a step up from an explosion and a hot-dropper.

I'm also curious what kind of "complications" they are talking about when using parachutes.

Key word is "removes" in that quote. The hot drop system is the same as in PS1 as far as I can gather.

[Oryon22]

I love it!

[EASyEightyEight]

The second an AMS was found, it's bubble was useless. They weren't very hard to find, just look for the source of the stream of foot mobiles.

I always knew Galaxies would be deployable on the ground. Never made sense to require a pilot to always be circling an area to allow spawning considering SOE's philosophy for PS2. I imagine now forward locations will need to be actually secure, instead of just ramming the mobile spawn point into position, hoping no one saw you shift into park.

On the upside, hopefully it packs a lot more armor. We also don't need to worry about that jack ass with a laser pointer of a spray can recoloring the thing because people are too stupid to take 2 seconds to check for it. I'm thinking removing the cloaking bubble is for balance reasons.

[Vash02]

At least with the AMS's there was usually a backup that was hidden nearby people would start using the moment the first was destroyed.
And as the orbital strike is in PS2 I think a cloaked AMS would have a longer lifespan than a parked galaxy will have.

[Sirisian]

I hope one of the upgrades is a cloaking bubble.

[Squeegeez]

Key word is "removes" in that quote. The hot drop system is the same as in PS1 as far as I can gather.

Hmm, you may be right; the way I read it sounded like the Galaxy was the only one with this capability this time around.

[texico]

Keep in mind that this thing is also a flying vehicle, meaning it can get to places that a tank simply cannot. I don't think it's too particularly overpowered in that regard (Enemy tanks can't reach it to kill it, friendly tanks can't reach it to protect it).

If anything, big and bulky means teamwork. ALOT of teamwork. You have to keep this bad boy from dying, so you station your entire push from a gal. It's now less about a sneaky spot that the enemy hasn't found yet and more about a coordinated attack into a region.


Oh I like that idea too. I think this will be a nice mobile "base", that will have to be right at the heart of the empire on the field at its most well-defended and difficult to get to point.

But I also think the smaller, more mobile sneaky spots would have been great together with this.








Oh, and I don't think a cloaking bubble would do much more than shield it from casual eye. It'll be pretty obviously where it is even if it's invisible, considering how big it is. Things will be entering and exiting all the time. With AMS', they were tucked in between trees and in cracks in the ground and it was difficult to necessarily spot infantry leaving the cloaking device.

[acosmo]

sounds good. this game might not suck

[Crator]

Love the look! I do have concerns about no cloak bubble to, but who's to say they don't have an engineer ability like the aegis shield generator that allows you to deploy something to cloak it?

Another engineer ability they may add is to deploy vehicle pads... Those combined with the deployed GAL, yeehaw...

[Zulthus]

The second an AMS was found, it's bubble was useless. They weren't very hard to find, just look for the source of the stream of foot mobiles.




And then there are the people who seem to know exactly where your AMS is even when everyone is already inside the base...

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/50501_400341510461_3491840_n.jpg

[Sirisian]

And then there are the people who seem to know exactly where your AMS is even when everyone is already inside the base...
detect enemies -> OS. Tried and true method.
Or as I always did it: Cloaker -> find AMS -> Suicide -> Liberator perfectly over waypoint -> Kills

[Zulthus]

I did say when everyone is already inside the base. AMSes don't pop up on reveal

[wormywyrm]

I like it taking the place of an AMS. I would especially like to see flying battlestations in the future though, ones that are semi-rare and can be walked around on (could be small or big either way).

The new galaxies look reminds me of firefly (serenity). Or a pretty girl with a little too much junk in the trunk.

[wormywyrm]

detect enemies -> OS. Tried and true method.
Or as I always did it: Cloaker -> find AMS -> Suicide -> Liberator perfectly over waypoint -> Kills

But we know it was more than just this... Alt accounts, friends on other empires, and hacks all contributed to AMS' short lifespan. When the game first came out an AMS set up was a big deal, hard to take down, and considered a capture point in many ways onto itself. That disappeared as the community aged, but I would like to see galaxies being a 'bigger deal' in PS2, like the AMS' were when PS1 first launched.

Meaning, if the enemy found out where the galaxy is, that doesnt mean its going to be destroyed within 30 seconds... An ensuing interesting battle where the galaxy may escape would be preferred.

[CutterJohn]

I do like this change, parachuters are easier to hit than a near-straight moving meteor (hot droppers from PS1). They also capture a nicer visual element, like something out of a WWII sortie, where there are crashing planes and parachutes all over. Definitely a step up from an explosion and a hot-dropper.

I'm also curious what kind of "complications" they are talking about when using parachutes.

Sounds very much to me like other aircav will have to use parachutes.

[Baron]

Now...

Take the Galaxy as we now know ...

1) Keep gunner positions
2) Remove additional squad capacity; Replace with undercarriage for suspending a vehicle
3) Remove spawn tubes / equipment terms; Replace with vehicle repair / rearm station

Now you have a wicked GAL variant (maybe real high in the GAL skill tree?) that can replace the Loadstar.
:D

[texico]

Or, they could make the Loadstar. Why not?

[Hmr85]

Interesting, I was really worried about how they where going to do spawning with the AMS being out of the game. But after reading this I feel a lot better about it. I'm really happy they limited spawning on the galaxy to only while its deployed and on the ground. My only fear is that this thing is gonna be Reaver bait unless they give it some sort of a cloaking field like the AMS had. I can't wait to check it out in the beta.

[SKYeXile]

Interesting, I was really worried about how they where going to do spawning with the AMS being out of the game. But after reading this I feel a lot better about it. I'm really happy they limited spawning on the galaxy to only while its deployed and on the ground. My only fear is that this thing is gonna be Reaver bait unless they give it some sort of a cloaking field like the AMS had. I can't wait to check it out in the beta.

I think if it had a top mounted AA gun, equivalent to a max it would offer some deterant, since i guess you cant spawn maxes from it....if you can well then no AA gun. considering the amount of it has it would be hard to take down.

also there is the possibility of a engineer to lay cloak bubbles still.

[nomotog]

Also sense its a spawn spot, you can have people spawning in with rockets and repair packs. That could keep it going for awhile depending on how strong it's armor is.

[Talek Krell]

I think dropping the ability to spawn troops on the move is a shame. I was looking forward to having hot dropping be a primary spawn method. Would have been an interesting sight, to say the least. Maybe it'll show up in a highly specialized variant. . .

Sounds very much to me like other aircav will have to use parachutes.I had not considered that interpretation, but I see what you mean. Probably a good question to bother them with on twitter.

[SKYeXile]

I think dropping the ability to spawn troops on the move is a shame. I was looking forward to having hot dropping be a primary spawn method. Would have been an interesting sight, to say the least. Maybe it'll show up in a highly specialized variant. . .

I had not considered that interpretation, but I see what you mean. Probably a good question to bother them with on twitter.

yea i was thinking for a time been there we would see galaxies flying in circles droppings troops constantly, but i think having the deployable spawn point is better anyway since it creates clear battles lines on the map.

[BorisBlade]

I think if it had a top mounted AA gun, equivalent to a max it would offer some deterant, since i guess you cant spawn maxes from it....if you can well then no AA gun. considering the amount of it has it would be hard to take down.

also there is the possibility of a engineer to lay cloak bubbles still.

I think he means even with aa you can get in and atleast get one spam off before you get chased off so a few hit and runs and you destroy it. You have to understand this thing is not moving at all, it takes no skill to hit it, no leading at all. And its the size of a house so you barely have to aim either. You could sit a mile away and hit the target since its not moving and AA would be at a big disadvantage since you can easily escape at that range. Without some regenerating shields at very least it would die very fast and easy. Now if it had some cloaking of some sort or some other cool mechanics we dont know about yet, then it could change.

I'm very interested to see what they do to make the vehicle work if its not a simple cloak. Personally, i think it would be cool if it didnt cloak but had other interesting and unique methods to survive and that the sunderer had some loadout that would give it the AMS functionality too plus cloaking, but maybe with a longer spawn timer and less features, aka no flight, no weapons, no rearm, far less armor, or whatever. Lots of choice, where everything is useful with ups and downs to each, thats what would make the game work the best.

[sylphaen]

They could do the same thing in PS1 but we had engineers and I do not see people complaining about the AMS.

Unless in PS2 vehicles have paper and engineers repair is OP, it could end up being ok.

It's hard to tell right now.

[BigBossMonkey]

Instead of giving the Galaxy itself a cloaking field, why not have one for engineers as a deployable?

[Magpie]

everybody in the game is going to get this certification lol

Haha not me but you can be my taxi if u wish

It looks like a great ideal no need for a lodster, this wil mak the game faster past and not overpowered

[xSquirtle]

Kind of hate the fact that they took out the AMS. I liked the idea of making a fix location a spawning point.

Whats to stop 100 people flying these in, with unlimited amounts of spawning abilities? I fear the defenders will always be the losers in a fight, due to non-stop spawning action at random locations.

[Lonehunter]

So for Planetside 2 the mobile spawn point has..

lost a cloak bubble (assumption)
gained "static defense" while deployed
gained more maneuverability
gained more armor

It's really just a better support vehicle over all. Someone mentioned it can get to places ground vehicles can't, that's huge. Not only can it change locations a lot quicker then an AMS, it can bring 12 people to deploy instantly on arrival, or at another location on the way. It gives something the Gal pilot and gunners something to do after dropping a squad off. There's a lot more tactical scenarios that could come up.

What I really want to know, is what those two little sensor-like objects are under the nose. I've suspected the Galaxy would have support options wile flying, like radar, jamming, some command options, I'd love for them to repair air vehicles in flight. Maybe one of those is a camera for a gunner, all he does is laze targets and fires a missile.

[sylphaen]

A thought about gameplay we may see in PS2:

Excluding base fights, let's imagine a fight to take a control point in the field somewhere remote, the 2 empires would move in with their gals and flying escort.

They start setting up while AA is happening all over. Troopers start fighting over the objective. Ground vehicles arrive last for the grand finale.


Of course, this assumes a high TTK for galaxies from:
1. indecently high armor on gals
2. or broken-high repair speed for engies
3. or very-capable ground-to-air defense with low-TTK on reavers

Also, attackers would also always be able to set-up first before defenders move-in. So setting-up first should not provide an insta-win either.

While it sounds potentially great to fight in, such a scenario has many many things that can go wrong balance-wise.

I'd really like PS2 to succeed but I'm worried we will get "PlanetField" or "BattlePlanet". (i.e. boring and plain bad vehicle side because of low-TTKs)

[CplVars]

I think the Galaxy will work in this new capacity.

I don't know about the need to cloak spawn points anymore. I know that it was extremely useful because it was difficult for CAS to find the AMS but the presence of Buggies and Delis was what usually ended up finding the cloaked AMS' other than of course Infantry.

[FIREk]

We'll see how it works during beta. Cloaking instead of weapons could become an option for the Galaxy, or the Sunderer could be equipped with spawn tubes and cloak bubbles.

It just occurred to me that, if the Galaxies won't cloak when deployed, there will probably be no limit as to how many can be deployed in a single area. Either that, or they will be able to deploy closer to each other.
That would mean we might be able to deploy freaking walls out of Galaxies, making their defense all the more viable. I may be wrong, though.
If there will be alternative cloakable spawn vehicles, they could have more stringent deployment restrictions, though. It would be pretty cool if this were possible - you could deploy one cloaked Gal/Sundy, and another, uncloaked+armed Gal someplace else, acting as a diversion. :)

[Grimster]

I would be very surprised if the Galaxy is not VTOL.

Because if it is not then it will seriously limit where it will be able to deploy if the pilot wants to be able to take off again. :)

Otherwise I like it that it will be deployable on the ground and not able to respawn troops in the air.

[Coreldan]

It's still a big target though when deployed. Prepare to have an aircav your way :D

[Redshift]

Thats sounds like parachutes are now from the galaxy rather than the armour, i.e dropping from reaver will mean death

[Coreldan]

Thats sounds like parachutes are now from the galaxy rather than the armour, i.e dropping from reaver will mean death

Thought about this same. While I never approved the mossie dropping to towers and all that crapm but I'd still like to see a way to emergency exit and aircraft, even the small ones. Perhaps it just needs to make you more of a sitting duck or something :D

[SKYeXile]

Thought about this same. While I never approved the mossie dropping to towers and all that crapm but I'd still like to see a way to emergency exit and aircraft, even the small ones. Perhaps it just needs to make you more of a sitting duck or something :D

you will be punished for your hate crimes.

[Lazza]

Has it been confirmed that the Gal is VTOL?... its gonna suck if we need a runway or flat area to land on before you can get a mobile spawn going.

[SKYeXile]

Has it been confirmed that the Gal is VTOL?... its gonna suck if we need a runway or flat area to land on before you can get a mobile spawn going.

given that its a a mobile deployable spawn point.
it needs to be pulled from a terminal
it needs to be able to land in a courtyard
its a brick
its a troop transport that you need to load.

i think its safe to assume its votl, given that every other aircraft in PS2 is VTOL.

[Lazza]

given that its a a mobile deployable spawn point.
it needs to be pulled from a terminal
it needs to be able to land in a courtyard
its a brick
its a troop transport that you need to load.

i think its safe to assume its votl, given that every other aircraft in PS2 is VTOL.

Good!:D

[Zulthus]

I wonder what the wheels are for then. There's no point in having wheels instead of regular landing struts like every other VTOL has. To be honest, if you really look at those engines, it doesn't look like there's any room for motion. I don't know, I guess we'll see when they confirm how it works.

[CutterJohn]

I wonder what the wheels are for then. There's no point in having wheels instead of regular landing struts like every other VTOL has. To be honest, if you really look at those engines, it doesn't look like there's any room for motion. I don't know, I guess we'll see when they confirm how it works.

From a strict RP perspective, you would want wheels for ground handling, even for a VTOL craft. See the many helicopters with wheels instead of skids.

Pretty sure its just for looks.

[SKYeXile]

From a strict RP perspective, you would want wheels for ground handling, even for a VTOL craft. See the many helicopters with wheels instead of skids.

Pretty sure its just for looks.

was about to say that...
also it would seem most military craft have wheels.

[ringring]

Just because it doesn't have a bubble doesn't necessarily mean that 2 gals can be deployed next to each other.What the deployment restrictions are are unknown at present.

Can this galaxy be deployed in a CY. - It's a big thing and it seems there are going to be quite a lot of outbuildings in the CY, is there enough space? A spawn point within courtyards is to me essential; so either there must be space for Gal(s) to be deployed or perhaps there are capturable spawn facilities that attacking forces can take and use prior to the comlete base capture.

As yet I am not convinced - Need more info imho.


*editted for clarity

[Sabrak]

Thank God Higby for deployable Galaxies!

I don't think we need to worry about the defensive abilities of a deployed Gal.

I mean, yes, a lone Gal will be an easy target, but let's not forget a Gal can transport engineers who will have deployable defense turrets (probably some as AA and AV), maybe deployable cloak bubbles, mines, sensors, and probably some other things we didn't even think of.

I hope there's an animation of the Galaxy deploying itself, and that it looks a bit (no, a lot!) different from the normal flying one!

[Frisby]

I don't think we need to worry about the defensive abilities of a deployed Gal.

I mean, yes, a lone Gal will be an easy target, but let's not forget a Gal can transport engineers who will have deployable defense turrets (probably some as AA and AV), maybe deployable cloak bubbles, mines, sensors, and probably some other things we didn't even think of.

Sorry, but the only thing I really want to know is if it can defend itself against Orbital Strikes, just imagine with "thousands of players" on a continent how many OS that probably are after a year or two of PS2 running.

[Sabrak]

Sorry, but the only thing I really want to know is if it can defend itself against Orbital Strikes, just imagine with "thousands of players" on a continent how many OS that probably are after a year or two of PS2 running.

Who says OS are as "easy" to get/use as it was in PS1?

OS might not be as effective/accurate, or it might cost so many ressources to fire that you won't see much of them.

And what if it's placed in a commader/squad/outfit skill tree after very long hours of certifications?

It might not be that simple to cert.

[Tikuto]

awesome

[psychosiszz]

wow thats pretty cool :) and forward bases! ah thats going to be hella fun. Though why is this game flying so low under the radar? it needs more media attention!

[Hmr85]

I would love to see Engineers have the ability to erect walls. My reason being a really good strategy could be having 2 or 3 galaxy's land right next to each other assuming there isn't a limit on how close they can be. Set them up in a triangle style. Wall them bad boys off and you would have a pretty formidable defense especially if the Galaxy's came with a AA turret to fend off Reavers. That FOB would be a really tough nut to crack.

Also if they do include the ability for Engy's to erect walls, give us a platform we can stand on to look over them.

Shameful MS paint pic to show what I mean.
http://i363.photobucket.com/albums/oo77/Hmr85/GalStrat.png

~Hmr85

[Coreldan]

I would love to see Engineers have the ability to erect walls.

http://images.wikia.com/teamfortress/images/6/61/TF2Engineer.jpg

I have the ability to erect, and I'm not afraid to use it.

On a more serious note, I would love some more "concrete" deployables, but I'm not sure if it will happen. They have however talked about some player-built structures, so I guess it's not ruled out.

I played a lot as CE/FDU engi in PS, mainly cos from europe to NA the ping was bad enough coupled with ADAD warping to feel like actually taking much part in the gunfights.

[wildcat140679]

What I really want to know, is what those two little sensor-like objects are under the nose. I've suspected the Galaxy would have support options wile flying, like radar, jamming, some command options, I'd love for them to repair air vehicles in flight. Maybe one of those is a camera for a gunner, all he does is laze targets and fires a missile.

I asked my self pretty much the exact same question, whats that thing mounted underneath the nose, my first thoughts was it's a camera and the similar but bigger version behind it could be the gun mounting point.


The Apache (http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4008/4481572991_2a223f1998_z.jpg) helicopter has a similar camera and gun.


The galaxy might not be a spawning point in flight, but a galaxy pilot could have a pretty busy day by flying over a designated target dropping it's payload worth of infantry and find a save landing zone deploy in AMS mode gather troops and repeat.

I'm really looking forward on piloting one of those flying ships.

[Etrigan252]

I used to love being the Galaxy driver, after offloading the troops at a tower, I would circle around and crash into the incomming defenders front lines (and eject just before I hit)!

This new Galaxy with the FOB deployment sounds and looks awesome. I would like to customize my Galaxy, like you can customize empire vehicles.

[Hmr85]

You know, the funny thing is I hear everybody on here saying "Oh I'm gonna be a Galaxy Pilot, this is so cool". When In reality why do I have this feeling its gonna be just like PS1 where it was almost impossible to get people to pull AMS's. At least with the AMS you didn't have to really worry about bad drivers. :lol:

[Shogun]

i drove ams in ps1 all the time!
but i didn´t have enough certpoints to also get a galaxy. having both vehicles in one unit now will help. i guess all the former gal pilots will still be gal pilots in ps2 and now they will stop to abandon and crash their gals after hotdrop because landing safely will produce a spawnpoint!

the devs took care of several problems at once! good move!
i hope we will get customisation info on the twitterchat.

sacrifice the weapons for a cloak bubble would be cool.
but the next thing we need to know is, what kind of deployments the engineers will be able to do to help establishing and maintaining a forward base.

[EVILoHOMER]

It needs to become invisible when deployed or it will be useless. Aircraft have a hard time sneaking up and deploying as they can be seen much easier than land vehicles. So it needs to become invisible like the AMS when deployed or it'll just become so useless, especially with the horrible spawn on squad features which is so dumb.

[Coreldan]

It needs to become invisible when deployed or it will be useless. Aircraft have a hard time sneaking up and deploying as they can be seen much easier than land vehicles. So it needs to become invisible like the AMS when deployed or it'll just become so useless, especially with the horrible spawn on squad features which is so dumb.

I'm not too concerned as they mentioned the weaponry on galaxy to defend itself somewhat, however the OS question is very much valid. They were confirmed to be back, even if probably not in the same scale as in PS, but still.

[EVILoHOMER]

I'm not too concerned as they mentioned the weaponry on galaxy to defend itself somewhat, however the OS question is very much valid. They were confirmed to be back, even if probably not in the same scale as in PS, but still.

Thing is it's a static target and by design it'll probably only be two guns on each side so there will be lots of blind spots and limited fire power. In reality I just seem them dying so fast and we'll have that situation of AV hiding behind walls in a base and spamming AV. We'll also have tanks doing the same, OS if they're in and air vehicles like Reavers just owning it from the sky.

This is OK if it was in a smaller smaller scale game but when you have hundreds of people about you'll have more than enough fire power to make these things useless. They need to make it so the guns defend the aircraft in the sky and the invisibility cloak defends it on the ground. Don't forget once you find the location of the AMS it is very easy to kill one so it isn't over powered. With it being a slow moving aircraft and deployed, it wont be getting away very fast or easily. I really doubt that the guns on this ship will be powerful enough to take down a tank before the tank takes out it, making it useless straight away. If they make it so they can take things down fast then it becomes OP...


Take out Squad spawning unless you're on your own territory and give The Galaxy the Unique ability to let you spawn into enemy territory if it is cloaked and deployed.

Sorted.

[Shogun]

they took out so many things i loved :-(
but the one thing i hate the most about ps1 will stay... OS

i´ll wait and see how OS will be implemented before i start the ranting, though.
if they limit the OS in a way that prevents a situation like it is now in ps1, it may be ok. but if it´s just a matter of time until the deathrain starts pouring again, i would rather request to stick OS where spitfires and the ams went to.

[EVILoHOMER]

they took out so many things i loved :-(
but the one thing i hate the most about ps1 will stay... OS

i´ll wait and see how OS will be implemented before i start the ranting, though.
if they limit the OS in a way that prevents a situation like it is now in ps1, it may be ok. but if it´s just a matter of time until the deathrain starts pouring again, i would rather request to stick OS where spitfires and the ams went to.

Just make them so they're strafing runs by some canned animation ability. It wont be instant kill like the OS but it'll be enough to push back the enemy to heal for a bit.

[Xennith]

Whilst it would be nice to have a cloaking bubble, its not the only solution to the "owned almost instantly by reavers" problem. An alternative could be a shield bubble, damage inflicted from outside the shield is reduced by a percentage which could scale based on the number of people inside the shield.

Essentially that means that a lone galaxy can be taken out by a lone reaver, but as people start spawning in to defend the galaxy, you either need moar firepower, or a strike team to pass through the shield bubble and blow the galaxy up after taking out the defenders.

Could make for some good gameplay.

[Vash02]

I'm thinking you can have an option of the nearest Gal or your squads/platoons gals

[SurgeonX]

The only thing that I've been a bit gutted about so far is the lack of an AMS.
I was thinking that having a Gal as a mobile spawn point is all well and good, but an AMS really concentrated the battle lines in a particular place. And I loved that.
So I was a bit disappointed to hear that it was no longer included.

And then this:

"The Galaxy can also be deployed into a forward base when landed. When deployed, respawn tubes and equipment terminals become active, creating a forward staging and fall back point for infantry."

Amazing.
Looks like my new role is Galaxy pilot then.

[Coreldan]

However that makes it sound like air-spawning wont happen.

[Raymac]

As an avid AMS hunter, I can tell you that the stealth bubble did very little in protecting an AMS. Anti-Air combined with engineers repairing the AMS was the only way to really protect it. If they had that set, then the ONLY way to take out an AMS was with an OS.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing a stealth ability be an unlockable skill for a deployed Galaxy, but there are far better ways to protect a mobile spawn point.

[Figment]

I'm presuming they don't give it a cloaking bubble for two reasons:

1. Too big. A big cloakfield is pretty easy to detect.
2. What's the point of having defensive weaponry if you can't look out your cloak field?


That said, half the guns will not be useful during a defense, due to people positioning it behind a rock to avoid it getting shot at and taking damage in the first place. So, backmounted gun (under tail as before?), top mounted gun (if it is there, would be most used)... side guns probably useless (too low, too limited).

Deployed means it's literally stuck to the ground, which means you can't make it lift off fast without undeploying first. That's going to be some precious (un)deploying seconds there.

Huge object = huge target

Huge flying object = huge obvious target

Don't expect these to be able to move in unnoticed.


Being a ground base that actually has to defend itself as it cannot conceal itself (and can't reach a destination undetected), means it'll be a constant target need a lot of hitpoints. This could mean some people would use it as a camping vehicle in relatively low pop situations. I guess we will have to test just how effective it is at that in Beta. Anyway, how many people will have to keep their glue guns out to keep this alive?



If it gets AA guns - which can be fired while airborne - I might for once be going to feel sorry for airchavs. So I wonder how that'd work against a group of airchavs if you get four people in two Galaxies covering eachother with AA: gal bait + AA trap?


If NC get Phoenixes again (though I think we're probably getting more Striker like rocket design). Poor TR and VS in non-flatlands: constant pounding.

[Coreldan]

Phoenix was said to be in, but laser guided or something instead of the old system.

[FIREk]

As an avid AMS hunter, I can tell you that the stealth bubble did very little in protecting an AMS. Anti-Air combined with engineers repairing the AMS was the only way to really protect it. If they had that set, then the ONLY way to take out an AMS was with an OS.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing a stealth ability be an unlockable skill for a deployed Galaxy, but there are far better ways to protect a mobile spawn point.

True to an extent, but all this happens only after the AMS has been found. As far as we know, Galaxies will be huge targets and spam-magnets.

I'm really hoping for deployable, cloakable Sunderers instead of cloakable Galaxies. It would make tons of sense - the Galaxies swoop in first, set up the first spawn points. Then, once the fighting over the Galaxies starts, Sunderers (which are extremely vulnerable, obvious targets if caught in an open field with no diversions to keep the enemy's eyes away) roll in and set up more permanent, easier to sustain, invisible forward bases.

[super pretendo]

So, do we know if the 12 passengers figure includes driver and gunner? And can it hold vehicles?

[Raymac]

True to an extent, but all this happens only after the AMS has been found. As far as we know, Galaxies will be huge targets and spam-magnets.

I hear ya, but my point was actually finding the AMS in the first place wasn't difficult, especially in larger battles. All you have to do is look in the general direction enemy troops are coming from and you locate it quickly.

So really the cloak just delayed the discovery for a short time. The only time it was more effective was on special ops with smaller troop numbers and there were fewer people spawning. That's actually why I wouldn't mind seeing a cloak ability unlockable in the skill tree for those spec ops teams.

[polywomple]

So, do we know if the 12 passengers figure includes driver and gunner? And can it hold vehicles?

I think it does

12 passengers. 4 gunners + 2 MAX + 6 troops? sounds close to the origional

Also

"The Galaxy can also be deployed into a forward base when landed. When deployed, respawn tubes and equipment terminals become active, creating a forward staging and fall back point for infantry. Additionally, the four weapon systems on the Galaxy can still be operated while deployed, giving it some static defenses."


It sounds like, assuming the Gal won't have a bubble shield, that troops are encouraged to man the guns while deployed to defend the gal? I think it kinda confirms the gal to have no bubble shield, because the guns would be pretty useless in terms of defending.

[Lunarchild]

My home connection will be undergoing maintenance tomorrow, as such I may not be able to monitor things, but my devchat tracker will be up, running automagically :)

http://devchat.sg01.net/PSUView.aspx?qa=7

[Hmr85]

IMO give the Galaxy a AA gun on top of it when its deployed similar to what the Skyguard had in PS1. I would imagine that would work fairly well in fending off Reavers. Not to mention we have yet to see what the Engineers will get as deployable's to help out. Walls/Turrets manned or AI/shields??? who knows. It makes me all the more excited for the beta so we can find out.

[Biscuit]

was anything said about Spawn radius'

i remember that with AMS'es you can only be at a certain distance before you can deploy outside a previously deployed AMS'es SOI.

whats to say some group ends up making a Vehicle bunker of Galaxies and a couple of Sundy's all of them filled with AA guns to the brim?

[Hmr85]

you mean this?

http://i363.photobucket.com/albums/oo77/Hmr85/GalStrat.png

similar to what I put back on page 6. I said that would be a great strategy. Especially if they gave engineers deployable walls.

[Khellendros]

Did you all see that Radar dish in the near background of the second image? Do yas think that is going to be destructible?

[Hmr85]

No Destructible Environments at launch from what I hear. As for the radar dish, maybe down the road.

[Aaron]

They just made one of the most prominent symbols of Planetside even better!

[WNxClerve]

So there's a big deal about wanting a cloaking bubble and adequate defenses for a newly deployed Galaxy. How about something fairly simple. Let it put out a reasonably sized Sensor Shield? Couple that with where it's deployed ( a forest clearing, a crevice that's just big enough to fly into) would certainly be an option.

Placement is going to be important along with a flight crew that couples as ground defense of the Gal. Base defenders, protect your CC, Spawns and Generators. Attackers must defend their Galaxies at the same time. Sounds like a real tactical battle. Do you think there will be only one of these at a base fight?


Another thought is maybe a camo net that could be erected as a visual deterrent along with a sensor dampner would give some fairly adequate passive defenses. And if this thing were tough enough it could be almost as strong as say a tower? A BFR still requires adequate damage to be inflicted before it fails, or maybe once it's deployed it gets a fortification boost to its armor.

Keep in mind too that no bind or spawn restriction options have been mentioned as of yet (vehicle menu -> spawn -> outfit only/squad only/ available to all)


My main point is right now, this isn't going to be PS1, stop thinking PS1 restrictions. Gaming technology and programming have come a fair ways since then. A number of the tactical dynamics have already changed and we've yet to have a REAL experience of how the game will play. SOE does keep mentioning territory, every square inch being important. Think I'd be wanting these while surveying or scouting out new territory for the VS. Time to think outside the PS1 box folks.

[nomotog]

I am kind of confused here. We have a vehicle with 4 guns and the ability to summon a almost unlimited stream of defenders and healers. Seems like it would be fairly easy to keep alive. Yet it looks to be a rather common idea that this thing needs cloaking or it will be destroyed like a ice swan in a smelting plant. Now I know why this is. You have all played PS1 and are aware of some secret PS1 info that I'm not, so what was so underpowered about the AMU that steams of healers and defenders couldn't keep alive?

[Sirisian]

You have all played PS1 and are aware of some secret PS1 info that I'm not, so what was so underpowered about the AMU that steams of healers and defenders couldn't keep alive?
The big one was the orbital strike to instantly destroy an AMS or other stationary target. Another was just simplying flying and shooting them to death from afar. I used to kill AMS using my liberator nose gun. If hovering is disadvantageous now it might no be a problem, but with the power of those rockets they showed I imagine landing a whole set of rockets on a target that large won't be hard especially from afar away assuming the rockets don't detonate after 300 meters or something.

Basically if I'm just flying into the battle and I see a spawn point I'm going to try to kill it. If it's cloaked I might pass right by it. Huge advantage.

[Ale]

The galaxy would drop troops on target and then retreat to a safe distance, land and deploy, but it won't need to be a base, hence "Forward staging and fall back point". Upon death, the people it dropped off would spawn back into it, reequip and get back in the air for another drop. This eliminates the headaches large Gal outfits had with co-ordination, binds at bases, Dropship center availability, etc.

I don't think they are intended to be parked at back doors and used as siege engines...

[Shade Millith]

So long as Spawning is restricted to large, deployed things like the Galaxy or AMS (No magically spawning on squad mates ala Battlefield), I'm happy.

Doesn't matter what the vech is, so long as it has to be deployed.

[SKYeXile]

So long as Spawning is restricted to large, deployed things like the Galaxy (No magically spawning on squad mates ala Battlefield) or AMS, I'm happy.

Doesn't matter what the vech is, so long as it has to be deployed.

you can spawn on squad mates or a squad leader in PS2(they need to be speced for it), but only outside, there is also a timer involved somehow, you drop from a HART/orbit pod onto the squad leader.

[Shade Millith]

you can spawn on squad mates or a squad leader in PS2(they need to be speced for it), but only outside, there is also a timer involved somehow, you drop from a HART/orbit pod onto the squad leader.

If it works kinda like the old HART system, dropping back on your friends from sanc and can't be within a certain range of a bases SOI, that's fine. (Hopefully with a few minute or timer at least).

[Figment]

If it works kinda like the old HART system, dropping back on your friends from sanc and can't be within a certain range of a bases SOI, that's fine. (Hopefully with a few minute or timer at least).

That's more or less what was described. Removed a few of the major concerns about it for me.

But yeah, Galaxy is going to be one fragile spawnpoint.


As someone said, the intend could be you deploy respawn and go back in, but that is not going to sustain a siege (indeed, it is not a very suitable siege engine). But that said, I wouldn't want the game to revolve around constantly trying to shoot down 40 Galaxies at once either. I don't mind spawns on the deployed Gal itself for use as a staging point, but it is not enough for me to guarantee varied play. Nor is it enough to create situations where you can get close enough to a fully occupied enemy base to setup a nearby spawn point in order to cut down on the ever so important travel time from spawn point to control sites (not to mention to cut down on dangerous farming zone routes through the open field).



Do realise that a symmetrical distribution of Galaxy guns means you can only use half to 3/4ths of the guns. And that deployment orientation with respect to terrain is therefore going to be absolutely crucial. I hope there's going to be enough options, because with a volume four to five times that of an AMS, you can't use the tiniest slope in the terrain to protect it from taking constant damage (which you can with a low profile unit like the AMS).

[Knocky]

I am kind of confused here. We have a vehicle with 4 guns and the ability to summon a almost unlimited stream of defenders and healers. Seems like it would be fairly easy to keep alive. Yet it looks to be a rather common idea that this thing needs cloaking or it will be destroyed like a ice swan in a smelting plant. Now I know why this is. You have all played PS1 and are aware of some secret PS1 info that I'm not, so what was so underpowered about the AMU that steams of healers and defenders couldn't keep alive?


Number one....good luck getting people to actually SIT in the parked Gal while their friends advance the front line.

Number two....OS's

Number three....Looking at the weapon placement in the pix released, there is not one that will fire ABOVE the Gal ( parked Gal = AirCav bait )

Number four....Tanks will own a parked Gal BECAUSE, if a Gal was equipped with AV that was worth a damn, then it would be a GG and the Lib would have no role.


All that being said....I will probably be flying mores Gals then driving Vannies.

[Figment]

Speaking of gun layout, I think there is a bottom mounted front gun option (empty socket) in that image, but didn't see any others.

If that is one of the gun emplacements and not say... a targeting laser or whatever, who would man a bottom mounted front gun once a Gal has actually landed and deployed?

And yeah, I presume as well that the other guns are located where they are for the PS1 Galaxy, considering the plating cues on the earlier image we got of the new Galaxy:

http://www.planetside-universe.com/media/main/psnext/Galaxy_30.jpg
http://www.planetside-universe.com/media/viewer.php?img_id=1611

[Knocky]

If they would just take a look at the B-17 from decades ago then this would not be an issue.

The self defense weapon placements are great on the Flying Fortress.





http://northstargallery.com/aircraft/P1010986web.jpg

[Figment]

Think in design cues it has more incommon with the AVRO bombers, like this Lancaster. :P

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_t9gZwNaeGyU/TFGUA6cjrwI/AAAAAAAAAEg/UixZbSXM4Vk/s1600/CanadianLancasterBanking.jpg

But yes. >.> That'd make more sense, but they didn't put it on the original Galaxy to give it a weakside if I recall correctly.

[Knocky]

Think it has more incommon with the AVRO bombers, like this Lancaster. :P


American or British....both bombers still have a turret on the roof.

[Figment]

American or British....both bombers still have a turret on the roof.

Hmhm. The original Liberator was clearly inspired as a small version of these WWII bombers. The new one seems to be a bit more AC-130 inspired.

EDIT: you reckon both those turnable turrets underneath the front end are gun emplacements, or just one of 'm with the other being a camera for the pilot (would be handy for landing, dropping and deploying)?

http://www.planetside-universe.com/media/main/psnext/screenshots/20111204_4edb923f140b5.jpg

This does make me wonder where the guns are placed exactly. There don't seem to be back end cues for a gun underneath, so perhaps there's one on the point of the back?

[Shade Millith]

Number one....good luck getting people to actually SIT in the parked Gal while their friends advance the front line.

Number two....OS's

Number three....Looking at the weapon placement in the pix released, there is not one that will fire ABOVE the Gal ( parked Gal = AirCav bait )

Number four....Tanks will own a parked Gal BECAUSE, if a Gal was equipped with AV that was worth a damn, then it would be a GG and the Lib would have no role.


All that being said....I will probably be flying mores Gals then driving Vannies.

Two and Four were problems with the old AMS, and 1 and 3 are problems only because it has weapons attached. This is just going to be like a much heavier armored AMS with point defences, sans cloak. (It wasn't that difficult to find a cloaked AMS).

As for point 3, perhaps when it deploys the guns move to a more useful location?

[Knocky]

Remember.....the point of the PS2 Gal is to drop troops AND land and DEPLOY...the PS1 Gal was supposed to fly at the cealing to drop troops here, there and everywhere.

Seems to me that it would be imperative that the Gal have a roof-mounted turret even if it is only chaingun and not some AA weapon system.

There is even a convenient flat spot on the roof that a domed turret can be added without changing the body.

[Figment]

One thing I keep asking myself is, how are people going to handle and use them in large numbers? Not one, but three, four, ten Galaxies flying over the base. That all depends on their angles.

If that is indeed a bottom, front mounted gun, then you can fire down with it. Which may mean it's going to be a pretty decent camping unit in low pop fights.

If you give them all top turrets too, they'll be pretty tough cookies to take out with the amount of cover fire and hitpoints that can generate in multi-gal fights. I'm starting to wonder how much AA you need to take one out (not so much in a "here they come" fashion, but more of a "damned campers, we want to push out" fashion).

Luckily there's going to be a lot of buildings in the CY to use as cover and bases are larger meaning they probably need more to camp all doors. I wonder how intricate the connections between buildings are (how many entry points to main base etc).

[vswake]

Galaxy deploying could mean changing shape, presumeably with space for spawning and the guns redeploying for a more defensive position

[Figment]

Galaxy deploying could mean changing shape, presumeably with space for spawning and the guns redeploying for a more defensive position

As I don't see external usecues for that in the vehicle exterior, I kinda doubt that, but who knows.

Perhaps the door in the back just opens up to reveal a spawnroom and terms.

Though since you already spawn in your class, rather than pyjamas and as there may be more people spawning at one Galaxy, I'd say there's even a chance equipment consoles are not even physically present anymore. In which case re-equiping could simply be proximity based like the Lodestar/Repair Silo from PS1. I mean, exit animations are gone as well for similar purposes apparently.

This to avoid the issues of crowding we had with the first AMS design for PS1 (two tubes, one console, instead of two consoles, one tube like we have now), in order to speed up a player getting to the action.

In terms of emersiveness that'd be a shame. If that'd be the case, I wonder if shield (like armour in PS1) is affected if you change class. Could potentially be mildly exploitable to recharge shield in fights I suppose by switching between character setups that have either a higher fully charged shield or a faster recharge, depending on the implementaiton of switching gear.

Hmm... Could prevent such exploit by the shield health status not being affected by switching suits and recharging from last health status or even zero to simulate standard suit after spawning.

[klu]

did they ever give a time for the twitter q&a?

[Johari]

did they ever give a time for the twitter q&a?
Came here to ask the same thing.

I'm glad we got some more news and pictures of the Gal. Great times will be had.

[Knocky]

did they ever give a time for the twitter q&a?

This is the answer I got from em..... :(

I doubt he was serious since the Q&A is supposed to be in the afternoon and not midnight.

When does the narwhal bacon?

[Johari]

Also, does anyone else see any visible forms of propulsion? On the original Gal you could see the thrusters/engines on the end of the wings but I don't see any on this one. Maybe they're just on the rear? Cause I don't think theres a picture showing the back of the Gal.

[Knocky]

Also, does anyone else see any visible forms of propulsion? On the original Gal you could see the thrusters/engines on the end of the wings but I don't see any on this one. Maybe they're just on the rear? Cause I don't think theres a picture showing the back of the Gal.

Scroll up to the pix of the Gal on this page.

See that blackish stub on the back of the engine nacelle? That is the thrust port.

What I don't see is a separate section that can swivel to vector thrust down for takeoff/landing.

Unless the entire nacelle swivels.

[Figment]

Scroll up to the pix of the Gal on this page.

See that blackish stub on the back of the engine nacelle? That is the thrust port.

What I don't see is a separate section that can swivel to vector thrust down for takeoff/landing.

Unless the entire nacelle swivels.

If you look at the sideview close up a page back, there's a pixelated line around the wingbase near the hull.

Could be that indicates a separate section that can rotate? (Then again, there are more pixelated lines) Either way, black bits on the nacelles at the end look like air intakes.

[LordReaver]

Very cool that it is deployed similar to an AMS and is not a flying spawn point as we first expected.

Honestly, it's so absurd, that it's shocking anybody thought that to be the case.

[SKYeXile]

Honestly, it's so absurd, that it's shocking anybody thought that to be the case.

I think everybody always automatically assumes the worst of any situation when something new is announced. well not everybody...but most.

[Figment]

I wouldn't say first expected, rather than first feared. To me at least it was more of a "these are all the options (ground/inflight spawning), that seems to be the least attractive option and <arguments> is why". >.>

As long as you don't know for sure, you can only consider scenarios and try to find the implications of one.



I'm mostly interested that there's going to be a gun on top after all. Makes me wonder what functionality the bottom turret structures will have. The gun layout is indeed going to be symmetrical: tail, wings and top. Which means you can only fire three guns at a target at most.

Another thing is that they said that SOME guns would be possible to adapt for AA purposes. That is going to have a very significant impact I'd say on the survivability, both flying and on the ground. First bet is at least the topside gun can be AA. Wonder how suitable for engaging ground targets (like the Gal Gunship) the other alternate weapons will be.

[Shamrock]

I welcome the concept, though I will still miss my AMS.

Pros:

Less lead time getting to the deployment site means less chance of being picked off by random patrolling aircav/armour. It also means your up and ready quicker giving the defenders less time to base prep. Point defence may keep light attacks from lone reavers /lightnings off your back while you set up initially.

Cons:
Good spots to land behind ridges where you will actually fit will be more challenging. We haven't mentioned trees, concealing an AMS in forest areas (eg Hossin swamps) was straightforward, but flying a Galaxy into a tree line would be problematical.
Having a cloak and good placement combined with a router made for an excellent back up when back hacking with a small squad or opening up a new continent. With a deployed galaxy, first responders in aircav are going to see it almost immediately.

[Shogun]

i hope we will be able to persuate the devs to add a cloak bubble sidegrade for the galaxy. maybe sacrifice all weapons for it or even the equipment terminal, so for a cloaked forward base we would need a cloaker gal and a sunderer as equipment terminal plus additional defence if it´s discovered.

so it would not be overpowered. but i guess the cloak bubbles are out not because they are op, but they are hard to implement cheater-safe. there were always some issues and bugs with the cbubbles in ps1.

so maybe giving the galaxy a similar cloaking mechanism as the cloaker class would help? it would only cloak the galaxy and not the spawning masses, but at least there would not be that big tower of an aircraft visible from miles away.

and if only the gal is cloaked, give it a capacitor for 10-20 seconds to be able to cloak airborne. but not longer. so it could only be used to cloak during the landing sequence so there is a chance to land unseen if timed right. or at least give it a semicloak for this, not really complete cloak but a good decrease of visibility, combined with radar stealth.

[Knocky]

I will not miss driving the AMS.

I will not miss the cloak shield flickering for every AirCav that comes within render range.

I look forward to having a spawn point that can defend itself....assuming we can get gunners to sit in it.

I doubt though, that parking a Sundy next to a Gal will repair a DEPLOYED Gal.

[Tikuto]

Cloaking? Nah.

Camoflage ftw.

[Hyncharas]

I do like the rather clean, almost NASA-inspired look of the new Galaxy. Making it a forward base for the air is also a nice touch.

[EASyEightyEight]

Honestly, the number of times I've seen reavers hammer an AMS is so low because of the number of infantry that surround the damn thing. Now I know everyone and their mom can't wield a rocket launcher this time around, but even in PS1, standard bullets did a number on Max units and lighter aircraft (including the Reaver) most people just locked it into their minds they had to use heavy ordinance against non-infantry or it was a waste of ammo.

Pro-tip, 3 magazines of standard ammo from a cycler will tear down a reaver, 2 for a MAX. If there are lower TTK's in PS2, the smalls arms haven't been rendered nigh useless against non-infantry, and maybe there are weak points on aircraft/MAXes, a few riflemen could probably bring down enemy aircraft and MAX armors with some focus fire.

Though I know most people are too stupid to even bother. They'd rather run screaming thinking it's some immortal god until they find their striker.

[Mastachief]

I need my AA gauss merit, People stand there and stare if they don't have AV. 5 gauss users rape aircraft but so few realise that.

[Tybs]

Why is everybody thinking you can deploy it like the AMS?

Lets assume:
- It takes 10 minutes to deploy the base, for that time you have to defend it
- You can not bind at a base
- Alle features that can be added to the gallaxy take time and ground-resourses (cloak, AA GUN, AV GUN, Bind point, Shield)

[Figment]

Why is everybody thinking you can deploy it like the AMS?

Because that is what has been said in the Twitter chat and because they want everything to be quick quick quick fast paced action.

[Tybs]

Because that is what has been said in the Twitter chat and because they want everything to be quick quick quick fast paced action.

O.. that makes it less tactical.. :rolleyes:

[polywomple]

where can I view the twitter chat?

[Raymac]

where can I view the twitter chat?

Here, scroll towards the bottom to check out the Q&A. They did a good job of organizing the questions and answers together.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/p-developer-tweet-tracker-97.htm

[EASyEightyEight]

Playing tactical has nothing to do with speed, just with playing smart. So get ready to think faster and better than the bad guys.

[Akemo]

Here, scroll towards the bottom to check out the Q&A. They did a good job of organizing the questions and answers together.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/p-developer-tweet-tracker-97.htm



Thanks Raymac! I had the same question :)