A serious question about modern gaming and Support class's.

[Forsaken One]

The question is simple. Why can't I play as a full "Support"?

You don't play Assault and have the grenade launcher on another Assault type char.

You don't play a Sniper but have the high zoom scopes on a different char.

Why must I be a Engineer OR a Medic? Why can't I just be "The Support"?

Give the Assault the AV and let someone who wants to play a full Supporting class do so. :(

[Shade Millith]

Because SOE hates choice.

[Sirisian]

Engineer is for repairing vehicles and setting up deployables. Their inventory will be focused on that. (Possibly focusing on being the gunner class. The guy you want to jump into your tank).

With the new shield mechanic the medic's role is to heal and possibly other things. I think you're painting the classes with a very narrow brush. Basically they'll be doing so much stuff in unique parts of the battle that combining them would be like combining infiltrator and assault.

[Vancha]

How do you know the medic won't have vehicle support specializations (I'm thinking bio-tech and nanite manipulation), or that the engineer won't have medical stations and such? It doesn't seem unlikely that one of them will have the other role available in some form, though it might not be as proficient at it.

[Forsaken One]

Basically they'll be doing so much stuff in unique parts of the battle that combining them would be like combining infiltrator and assault.

so, Infiltrator and Snipers don't count when they are combined?


Honestly I could say the same thing about the other classes. A Assaults role is to Assault not camp and spam nades with his GL attachment. Why not make a tanky Assault class and a camping Grenadier class then?

A Engineer and Medic being one class would fit well. they both "fix" and deploy stuff. The Engy fixes the ride and the Medic fixes the body. (medics tend to deploy medic stations or boxes or something to heal as well.)

Why is it supports are always the one that ends up with the short end of the stick and forced to choose specializations?

[Magpie]

Don't make them recode the game lol it's gonna be fine the way it is, if your a medic your not gonna have time to do both coz there's gonna be 330 people to try and heal lol

Ps1 is self centred and ps2 is aiming to team work, plus if your eng u gonna have lots of toys to play with and u want as much as u can get in lol

[CutterJohn]

Why is it supports are always the one that ends up with the short end of the stick and forced to choose specializations?

Largely because the two roles, while similar in scope/style, do not interact much. Engineers for the most part concern themselves with vehicles, either repairing them or attacking them, or with setting up static defenses. Medics concern themselves with troops, again, repairing or attacking(and usually rezing), and stick around the troops.

Remember that there is no infantry armor to heal in PS2, so an engineer doesn't have much place within the ranks of infantryman.

Also we don't know for sure that medics/engineers can't grab a repair kit or medapp. It might be that all classes can grab those things, but medics would have extra options/efficiency at the role, or can carry more, or whatever. We know some things will be available cross class, but not what won't be, if indeed anything is.

Oh, and lastly, because you can only carry so much crap. Just because PS1 allowed you to carry around a medapp and glue gun in your pistol slots does not mean you will be able to do so in PS2. If you have medic gear and a gun, where are you going to stash the engineer gear?

[Knocky]

Because you don't need to be anymore.

Trooper armor does not get repaired anymore.

If you are healing troops it is doubtful that you will have time to repair any tanks.

If you are outside the base where that is possible then park a Sundy nearby so you can switch your roles at the terminal.

[Forsaken One]

Largely because the two roles, while similar in scope/style, do not interact much. Engineers for the most part concern themselves with vehicles, either repairing them or attacking them, or with setting up static defenses. Medics concern themselves with troops, again, repairing or attacking(and usually rezing), and stick around the troops.


Yes but stop and think about it for a second. Its still Support. In fact if they were one class that would make a true INdoor and OUTdoor support. As for deployables they can ALL take one slot.

Oh, and lastly, because you can only carry so much crap. Just because PS1 allowed you to carry around a medapp and glue gun in your pistol slots does not mean you will be able to do so in PS2. If you have medic gear and a gun, where are you going to stash the engineer gear?

ever play a game called Quake Wars?

http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2007/284/reviews/928340_20071012_embed004.jpg

You select the deployables key then scroll through the deployables and pick one.

I also think Section 8 is the same if I remember right.

I'll happily not have a pistol to carry more support stuff.

So all the deployables can fall under one key, you got maybe a medic box/throw out needle or something, repair tool, tossable shield or spitfire or something, gun, smoke nade, med thingy to res people.

thats. 7 buttons, and a scroll list under one of them. that leaves 2-3 numbers on the keyboard. the nade may not even count as it may have a grenade button, (like F or G)


Because you don't need to be anymore.

Trooper armor does not get repaired anymore.

If you are healing troops it is doubtful that you will have time to repair any tanks.


but whats the harm in someone being able to fully cert a Support class? Why FORCE the choice of which to be at any given time. The ones that want to heal can, but they can repair their or their friends ride as well. Why not let them be the full and true support guy that anyone can call when they need some type of support?

[CutterJohn]

Yes but stop and think about it for a second. Its still Support. In fact if they were one class that would make a true INdoor and OUTdoor support. As for deployables they can ALL take one slot.

Sure they are both support. A sniper rifle and HA fulfill fundamentally different roles too, even though they are both technically AI.

Whats the difference between two classes and one? You're not limited. Grab the other class when you go outside. You'd have had to change gear anyway.



ever play a game called Quake Wars?

[Image Removed]

You select the deployables key then scroll through the deployables and pick one.

I also think Section 8 is the same if I remember right.

Why would they let you have access to 8 different deployables at once?

I'll happily not have a pistol to carry more support stuff.

Assumes the support stuff can fit in a pistol slot. The engineer repair gizmo may just be the rifle sized thing, since there is no infantry armor anymore.

So all the deployables can fall under one key, you got maybe a medic box/throw out needle or something, repair tool, tossable shield or spitfire or something, gun, smoke nade, med thingy to res people.

thats. 7 buttons, and a scroll list under one of them. that leaves 2-3 numbers on the keyboard. the nade may not even count as it may have a grenade button, (like F or G)

Obviously you can fit everything in a game. In fact you could program the game to let players carry everything, including vehicles, if you wanted to.

But thats disregarding their objectives for balance and class diversity. They don't want one man armies. Presumably that means they don't want one man support armies as well.

but whats the harm in someone being able to fully cert a Support class? Why FORCE the choice of which to be at any given time. The ones that want to heal can, but they can repair their or their friends ride as well. Why not let them be the full and true support guy that anyone can call when they need some type of support?

Nobody is forcing you not to cert both medic and engy. If you want to be The Support Guy, then by all means, cert both engy and medic.

[Forsaken One]

Sure they are both support. A sniper rifle and HA fulfill fundamentally different roles too, even though they are both technically AI.


you are making the wrong combo. Why can't a support actually fully support BUT a "Sniper rifle and cloak" which should be on "fundamentally different roles too" be allowed?


Whats the difference between two classes and one? You're not limited. Grab the other class when you go outside. You'd have had to change gear anyway.


Yeah whats the difference? You're not limited. Grab a melee knife user if you want cloak. Grab the other class (sniper) if you want range. You'd have had to change gear anyway.


Obviously you can fit everything in a game. In fact you could program the game to let players carry everything, including vehicles, if you wanted to.

But thats disregarding their objectives for balance and class diversity. They don't want one man armies. Presumably that means they don't want one man support armies as well.


A full support is such a one man army. I mean that HA and deci he carrys just takes a dump all over everyone... oh wait...he has weak weapons and needs to rely on the fighters to protect him.


Nobody is forcing you not to cert both medic and engy. If you want to be The Support Guy, then by all means, cert both engy and medic.

Nobody is forcing you not to cert both Sniper and Cloaker. If you want to be The Rambo Killwhore, then by all means, cert both Sniper and cloaker.

[Coreldan]

I can sorta relate to the idea. I like being support, but in no game you ever really get to do all of the support stuff without the need to change class. I have no idea why did they bunch up assault and medic together to begin with in BF3.

"Full support" vs. Medic & engi is sort of a thing that I think both make sense, but some things in both also don't make sense.

From someone who enjoys supporting, I would even like to see this happen, but I think it would require quite a bit of an overhaul to their class system at this point.

The "full support" would probably lose stuff like rocket launchers and other directly AV weaponry. Mines I could still understand as I would other deployables such as turrets. As for their weaponry, I'd give the "carbine" stuff, as in pretty much similar to MA, but they are classified as different weapons so that they can be balanced without hurting fe. those playing the assault classes.

That said, I do understand why not to make a full support class. It pretty much goes with the same reasoning why they changed tanks having drivers that can gun. They want everyone to enjoy and not one person having the dull stuff while other gets to blow shit up. While this would probably please the ppl who really wanna play as support, it might actually push away people who "need" to do the support, but dont really want to. This way they would be quite poor at anything but just the supporting, while with seperated engi and medic you can give both some cool, decent and unique combat niches (such as engi having AV launchers, perhaps)

[SKYeXile]

i still dont think that the engineer will get an AV weapon, i doubt they're going to follow battlefield class for class.

[Forsaken One]

Well said core. I myself honestly don't understand the whole thing of Engys being the ones to carry around the main AV guns. That is like the sniper carrying around the medic bags.

I wouldn't miss the Rocket launcher, the assault class can have it. that's their job, they blow enemies up, the Engy should be blowing walls, bridges, etc up. maybe laying demo traps, mines, and c4 as deployables but its stupid when the same guy who fix's vehicles is the same guy to jump out of them and be a mobile vehicle AV cannon in his own right.

As for your edit core. No one should "need" to do support. (in the choice sense.) You should have it set up so that the ones who WANT to support can fully support, and the ones who want to blow shit up, can zerg all they want.(if they want to zerg.) they already did this with the sniper and made it a rambo 1 shot kill cannon.

[Coreldan]

Somehow I can still swallow the engi carrying AV guns. Even before BF3, it does feel halfway natural to me.

I raised the concern about randoms not wanting to pick up support role at all if it was full support, as it would mean non-existant combat capabilities. I was thinking that if it would be possible through the cert system, they could perhaps give the support class a weapon specialization that has cool stuff, similar to other classes, but if you take that, you can only cert into one of the support roles.

As in you could take:

Engineering + Medicing as main "certs"

or perhaps

Engineering + weapon spec

or

medic + weapon spec

This way those who want to go full support, can, and they willingly give away the cool combat niches. Those who arnt into the full support idea, could mix & match and choose the support-role they want and the "cool weapons".

But I guess that gets a tad complicated and I dont think the cert system currently works anything like that :D

If we just go with the "PS-style" engineer, if they won't get the AV weapons, I'm not quite sure what they would get? If we think about a healthy balance between combat abilities and support abilities, I think giving AV weaponry would sorta provide that. That said, it's sorta retarded in BF3 how if you are not an engineer, you can't scratch a tank. So I dont want engineers only to be able to hurt armor, but I wouldnt mind them being the best at doing so.

And just as a disclaimer, these are random assortment of thoughts, not trying to really argument much.

[Forsaken One]

I raised the concern about randoms not wanting to pick up support role at all if it was full support, as it would mean non-existant combat capabilities.

Well, sure there will be more randoms as the killwhore or assault classes then supports. but, you forgot about the support's support combat role. deployables! Mines, C4, smoke, maybe gas and emp style throwables/traps, buildable walls, turrets, medic stations/equipment terms.

He will suck in direct combat and run and gun. He will be weak and easily killable face to face. but he will make up for it by you making a mistake in falling into traps and such. in delaying the enemy, and causing them trouble just by being alive.

[Coreldan]

But that's just what I mean, it's all "indirect combat", pretty much. I mean, if we compare dropping mines/putting up deployables, it's whole lotta less direct than shooting someone with a rocket launcher :D

That said, I don't mind that, but I was just trying to think of ways to make it a bit more attractive for the general killwhore :D Cos the thing is, we're gonna need these support players all the time and it doesnt help if the class isnt attractive to more than 0,1% of the playerbase who want to play full support :D

I play a lot as engi in PS, but I do feel very useless especially on offense cos the CE/FDU stuff can't do that much in most offensive situations. As I started playing so late and have played fairly little, I can't have CE and FDU as well as any decent combat related certs, so that's what I'm sorta after, a way to somehow make engineers more attractive and also easier to use on the offense.

[SKYeXile]

the engineer will get a turret that they can deploy and operate, seems like direct combat too me, i presume it would be capable of AI av or AA...seems everything willbe.

[Coreldan]

Yes, but last time around you could not deploy it into enemy SOI, meaning you were still mostly useless on offense :D There was like one fight where I managed to fight a place like 1m out of enemy SOI where I could still be somewhat useful with the Osprey, but only really cos the enemy was pushing out quite hard as well, I had no chance to hit/see anything inside the actual base.

Now, I know I havnt played much at all compared to most of you, but in my time, I've only once seen the enemy use the deployable manned turrets. And it was in a bridge fight.

I don't think it would've been at least said that SOI would return as an identical mechanic? And then again, fights will now happen elsewhere too (for resources) than around bases and towers, so perhaps now the manned turrets might actually be worth more. I do hope they make a return and have some fancy customization options.

[Knocky]

Indeed....deployables will only be worth it if they can be deployed in a enemy SOI.

As for Field turrets....you don't see many Ospreys around due to Lancer fire finishing it off about 2 seconds after you finish the boarding animation.

[texico]

Every game is going to be self-centered? Generally the only reason people support is because they receive Support-Experience Points (in PS1). Either that, or one or two might be doing something very particular just to help the empire win (laying traps). But ultimately if they weren't earning XP while they were if they were shooting, you wouldn't see many people supporting.

It's rare in any game that people will genuinely be doing teamwork unless they're getting some kind of benefit for doing it. PlanetSide 2 probably won't be much more based around teamwork than PlanetSide 1. PlanetSide 1 had a diversity of classes everywhere you looked. You go out on to any battle field and there'll be a hill of people Sniping, another hill full of people firing AV, a group of MAX's getting ready for a crash (back in the day), if you zoomed in to the enemy, you could see friendly name tags (cloakers) wandering all over the place. If you ran to a loadstar or AMS, there'd be people there repairing vehicles or healing soldiers.

It's simply not true to say that PlanetSide 1 had no teamwork and everyone organized themselves as a one-man army. Sure, most of the INFANTRY were becoming one-man army's but that was a problem with the balance and weight of certs.

Making everyone in the support roles separate in to classes isn't going to stimulate more teamwork than PlanetSide 1 had. People did that in PS1 naturally without nametags or restrictions on equipment. Some had a fairly even distribution of Medical and Engineer certs, some had them more heavily favoured towards Engineering so they could lay Aegis' and TRAPS. You'd have medics who would stay near the AMS' or Loadstar just spewing out health, or you'd have ones in the heart of the action in cloaker suits healing friendlies from behind the enemy empire's back.


I think somebody said earlier "they won't need to." But that's taking an assumption about the way people are likely to play and then forcing them into playing like that, and therefore you cut out the more uniquely-adapted classes that people would be creating in response to the actual battlefield, which is to be applauded because it means they were using their head and geared their role towards what the battle demanded in order to gain an advantage.

It's hardly a far stretch to see Engineering and Medical being combined. If people want to set up "support" stations for example, repairing all the vehicles and equipment while the person goes around healing the injured vehicle drivers or nearby troops.

Obviously we don't know to what extent these two roles will be combined, and maybe the engineer can lay terminals that can heal for example. But even then, the decision is still being made for you - what if you want nothing to do with engineering and be a Medic-Cloaker, or a cloaking engineer?


Still think at the very least players should be able to select multiple (but not ALL) classes and be able to select abilities/equipment from all of them while in the field, IF classes are staying.

[SteinB]

I am a dedicated support player myself and I don't have any issues with the separation of the Engineer and Medic into distinct classes. Just like the combat classes have to choose a role to be at any given time so will the support people. And even within those class distinctions we will have choices to make; will you carry the pistol repair gun and a heavier weapon or the heavier repair gun and a pistol weapon? Will you loadout as a repair guy or a deployables guy? I LOL'd when I read someone say SOE doesn't like choices when this thread is about having to make a choice, the only choice being denied to players is the choice to do everything at once. Picking a role within a group and relying on others to do their chosen roles is a big part in making the game social.

[Lonehunter]

I still can't figure out the OP's main point, so many different things are being discussed lol.

Do you want to be able to go full support or do you want assault to be able to use some support?

I've always thought PS2 wants to get rid of the One Man Armies. Assault being able to heal/repair needs to be tossed. Putting those support roles in their own classes allows us to specialize in them much further and require more teamwork. Keep in mind the amount of medic/engi toys we had in PS1 should be dwarfed in PS2.

Edit: I think I understand more now. The reason you can't be "Full Support" as Medic and Engi is because that would be like going "Full Assault". There are so many different combat roles they are split up into different weapons and classes, Heavy, Light, MAX. Being Full Support might be just as overpowering

[Knocky]

I am a dedicated support player myself and I don't have any issues with the separation of the Engineer and Medic into distinct classes. Just like the combat classes have to choose a role to be at any given time so will the support people. And even within those class distinctions we will have choices to make; will you carry the pistol repair gun and a heavier weapon or the heavier repair gun and a pistol weapon? Will you loadout as a repair guy or a deployables guy? I LOL'd when I read someone say SOE doesn't like choices when this thread is about having to make a choice, the only choice being denied to players is the choice to do everything at once. Picking a role within a group and relying on others to do their chosen roles is a big part in making the game social.

Even with my free rexo....still can't shove everything I want into it.

Depending on what we get to create a mobile repair station....this class system may be the greatest thing ever. If they do it right of course.

And BTW....I am stealing your Avatar Stein! ;)

Buh bye Stitch!

[nomotog]

Where did we hear that medic and engineer are different classes?

Lets assume they are. It makes sense both thematically and from gameplay. Thematically it makes sense, you don't fix a tank with a medkit and you don't fix a bullet with a wrench. They are two different disciplines. Gameplay wise the two roles operate in different places. The engineer plays the defensive roll building turrets, laying mines, painting the walls at the base. On the other hand, the medic is a much more offensive role. Right up at the helping people push through defensive lines.

[texico]

I LOL'd when I read someone say SOE doesn't like choices when this thread is about having to make a choice, the only choice being denied to players is the choice to do everything at once. Picking a role within a group and relying on others to do their chosen roles is a big part in making the game social.

That's not true, the choice being denied is being able to do multiple things at once, which was never a problem. It wasn't a problem that a cloaker could carry a medical app, or a Soldier could carry a rifle AND a rocket launcher, it was a problem that he could carry a Rifle, Rocket Launcher, Grenade Launcher, Medical App and Repair App and do all of these things at once. Yes, doing everything at once was a problem.



Where did we hear that medic and engineer are different classes?

Lets assume they are. It makes sense both thematically and from gameplay. Thematically it makes sense, you don't fix a tank with a medkit and you don't fix a bullet with a wrench. They are two different disciplines. Gameplay wise the two roles operate in different places. The engineer plays the defensive roll building turrets, laying mines, painting the walls at the base. On the other hand, the medic is a much more offensive role. Right up at the helping people push through defensive lines.

But we're going back to this belief that X class must do Y thing, and therefore the game is going to make you do that. Why can't an engineer choose to play an offensive role if the battlefield demands for it and the player is suited to do it? Running around blowing up people with Boomers and laying Spits secretly near enemies? If he IS doing this then he's also not that different from an offensive medic.

And therefore that potential role is killed. What if he wants to play offensive, front-line support, maybe sacrificing depth in each class in order to have skills in both (but not ALL) classes. That's a player-created role right there in response to what the battlefield demands. That's what PlanetSide 1 would let you do. PS2, assuming the classes stick to their classes, won't let you do that.

[nomotog]

But we're going back to this belief that X class must do Y thing, and therefore the game is going to make you do that. Why can't an engineer choose to play an offensive role if the battlefield demands for it and the player is suited to do it? Running around blowing up people with Boomers and laying Spits secretly near enemies? If he IS doing this then he's also not that different from an offensive medic.

And therefore that potential role is killed. What if he wants to play offensive, front-line support, maybe sacrificing depth in each class in order to have skills in both (but not ALL) classes. That's a player-created role right there in response to what the battlefield demands. That's what PlanetSide 1 would let you do. PS2, assuming the classes stick to their classes, won't let you do that.

The engineer can't play a offensive role because there abilities are inherently defensive. Turrets don't move or they would be called tanks. Mines don't move or they would be called grenades. (An offensive engineer is the heavy assault class.) You could play them close to the enemy, but they would still be defensive in nature. no where close as offensive at the medic. A medic's powers don't even work unless you are getting shot at. The two roles are inherently different.

[Raymac]

We still have zero details on the abilities of the medics and engineers, so lets wait until we learn at least a little information before we start ripping each others heads off.

[IceyCold]

How dare they force me to work with other people! HMPH I SAY!

Seriously though, that is exactly what they are doing here. Making each class very distinct means that to have all the counters one might need requires more people to cover each one of those roles. And quite frankly I am all for that.

As someone who has always played a support role in games, I am fully for this separation. I like the idea of a game encouraging team play and not 1 man armies.

[Graywolves]

One of the really cool things in PS1 was that you could go full blown support. Just heal and repair.

I hope that in the "medic" or "engineer class" you can eventually learn to repair vehicles and heal soldiers in the same loadout.

[SKYeXile]

We still have zero details on the abilities of the medics and engineers, so lets wait until we learn at least a little information before we start ripping each others heads off.

well higby has said somewhere that the support characters can verymuch be an in your face combat class or they can trade some of that and be very supportive.

[Bittermen]

This is the kind of thing you whine about after playing the game. Not before.

But I can understand your just "shooting the shit". It's gonna be awhile before we get to play.

[Knocky]

well higby has said somewhere that the support characters can verymuch be an in your face combat class or they can trade some of that and be very supportive.

That sounds like marriage..... :doh: