Planetside 2 - Any fears?

[Xaine]

While i'm very aware that the game is a long way off launch, and that i personally am, on the whole, very happy with what i've seen in terms of design decisions, graphics and generally the whole package...

I was wondering if any of you had any nagging fears about the direction the game is taking. Obviously we can't have anything solid yet, none of us have played it and we know next to nothing about the fundamental mechanics - but as a general sort of feeling?

My slight fear is that the game is being made too simple. Planetside 1 was good because it had a lot of depth to it, as well as great combat and very good variety in terms of weapons and vehicles. I'm worried some of that depth is disappearing to favour the wider crowd of gamers who want the whole instant gratification thing like most people these days.

The other nice thing about PS1 is that you could just zerg if you wanted to. Not think about tactics and just go where everyone else was. While this is nice if you want some brainless fun, i really don't want this to become THE game. It needs those wider tactics and versatility to keep people playing.

While the zerg still needs to be there to keep the big battles going, i still want ghost hacking, elite outfits gen holding bases to deny benefits, module stealing etc etc to be a part of the game.

Anyone else have other thoughts on the topic title generally? It might give the devs an idea as to our opinions on certain things, and we might even get some fears addressed :)

[Grognard]

My fear, if you want to call it that, is that the game, for some undisclosed reason, can not handle the size of battles that are being mentioned. 1500+ combatants, etc. I am hoping that the game, in final form can handle 1000 players per side, brigade size stuff, perhaps even better... So that is my concern, 300x300x300 would disappoint me.

Edit: Oh, big one, worried about hackers... keep these clowns out...

[SKYeXile]

err PS1 had very little depth, take bases for no apparent reason other than they're there, also have some merits. PS2 will offering the same, will have so much more depth with its resources and hex system, along with far more different playstyles because of the new class and cert system along with weapon vehicle upgrades and mods not to mention a whole lot more visual customisation.

[Xaine]

Mmmm the hacking i completely agree on. That would really fuck this game up, given that its free to play and people can just keep making accounts.

With the population size in mind. I also know how you feel. 500v500v500 would be ok with me, given that PS1 was capped at 133 a side and it felt pretty damn awesome.

I honestly think 1000 a side is unrealistic, but that's just my opinion. :)

But no, this game does need to be big. 133 a side just isn't going to cut it anymore. Hopefully we will get more than that.

[ThirdCross]

I guess my main concerns/fears are snipers being OP to the point where infantry combat outdoors is impossible and if they are able to fill the servers come release.

[Xaine]

err PS1 had very little depth, take bases for no apparent reason other than they're there, also have some merits. PS2 will offering the same, will have so much more depth with its resources and hex system, along with far more different playstyles because of the new class and cert system along with weapon vehicle upgrades and mods not to mention a whole lot more visual customisation.

I disagree.

Dropping/holding a gen at a Tech plant to deny tech to an enemy, drawing the enemy away by attacking another base, or another cont. Using cloakers to ghost hack.

They're making it harder (not saying its a bad thing) to attack an enemy hex if its deep in their territory, which makes it harder to start up another point of attack.

This resource system will certainly add some depth, i'll give you that.

Taking away free form inventories is cutting back on choice, freedom and depth.

There are less vehicles in game for launch, than there were in PS1. Quite a few less. I know they're streamlining some, which again, is not always a bad thing, but its taking away roles and wider team play.

I'm really not complaining about the game, i'm just voicing my fears as i see them.

[Zulthus]

My nitpicking fear is that the game is getting way too condensed, especially merging many vehicles into one and giving it multiple roles. The Lightning, for example, merged with the skyguard. That's one less vehicle on the field. MBT's are worse, where they can actually have AA?? I mean, tanks are meant to combat armor and infantry. Not aircraft. That's what the Skyguard, AA Maxes, and other aircraft were meant for. It even sounds like only Rexo will be the only ones able to use HA/AV, with Agile being able to use only carbines/rifles. Taking out the freeform inventory really irked me. Not even going to try expanding on this again, I've typed it out so many times.


My general fear though is that the game will be so simple and a rehash of modern shooters aside from the massive warfare, and will provide a couple months of entertainment for me. I hope to god that it isn't the case. I want this game to succeed so much.

[Xaine]

My nitpicking fear is that the game is getting way too condensed, especially merging many vehicles into one and giving it multiple roles. The Lightning, for example, merged with the skyguard. That's one less vehicle on the field. MBT's are worse, where they can actually have AA?? I mean, tanks are meant to combat armor and infantry. Not aircraft. That's what the Skyguard, AA Maxes, and other aircraft were meant for. It even sounds like only Rexo will be the only ones able to use HA/AV, with Agile being able to use only carbines/rifles. Taking out the freeform inventory really irked me. Not even going to try expanding on this again, I've typed it out so many times.


My general fear though is that the game will be so simple and a rehash of modern shooters aside from the massive warfare, and will provide a couple months of entertainment for me. I hope to god that it isn't the case. I want this game to succeed so much.

Couldn't agree more.

Thats pretty much what i was trying to say, you just worded it slightly better. :P

[Conq]

My main fear is about hacking and exploiting. MMO shooters are extremely susceptible to both and SOE never cracks down very hard.

I said I would never play another SOE game again after DCUO was killed by exploits but here I am, placing all my hopes on another.

[cellinaire]

My nitpicking fear is that the game is getting way too condensed, especially merging many vehicles into one and giving it multiple roles. The Lightning, for example, merged with the skyguard. That's one less vehicle on the field. MBT's are worse, where they can actually have AA?? I mean, tanks are meant to combat armor and infantry. Not aircraft. That's what the Skyguard, AA Maxes, and other aircraft were meant for. It even sounds like only Rexo will be the only ones able to use HA/AV, with Agile being able to use only carbines/rifles. Taking out the freeform inventory really irked me. Not even going to try expanding on this again, I've typed it out so many times.


My general fear though is that the game will be so simple and a rehash of modern shooters aside from the massive warfare, and will provide a couple months of entertainment for me. I hope to god that it isn't the case. I want this game to succeed so much.

Well, some of those might change 2~3 years from now....

But do we really have to see this kind of thread pop up almost every week?
I mean, Isn't there at least a consolidation thread in this forum?

[Chinchy]

I fear squad spawning I'm ok with squad leader spawning but squad spawning will be very unfair.

[Hmr85]

My nitpicking fear is that the game is getting way too condensed, especially merging many vehicles into one and giving it multiple roles. The Lightning, for example, merged with the skyguard. That's one less vehicle on the field. MBT's are worse, where they can actually have AA?? I mean, tanks are meant to combat armor and infantry. Not aircraft. That's what the Skyguard, AA Maxes, and other aircraft were meant for. It even sounds like only Rexo will be the only ones able to use HA/AV, with Agile being able to use only carbines/rifles. Taking out the freeform inventory really irked me. Not even going to try expanding on this again, I've typed it out so many times.


My general fear though is that the game will be so simple and a rehash of modern shooters aside from the massive warfare, and will provide a couple months of entertainment for me. I hope to god that it isn't the case. I want this game to succeed so much.

Yep, I agree completely with everything you said. I feel the same way. The addition of "jack of all trade" vehicles really pisses me off. I really enjoyed the diversity of all the vehicles ps1 had. Sure some did not get used as much as others. But they all had their roles to play in one fashion or another. The cloaked sniper has me a tad worried. I have expressed my concerns about it over the last month or so.

Another thing that has kind of rubbed me the wrong way is the MBT. I am extremely annoyed that the driver can now gun. My father, Jamman always gunned for me in the Vanguard. Along with other outfit mates. We managed to get it down to a art. Now all this has been taken out for the sake of simplifying the game. Which is BS imo. There is more but that's a start.

[Rumblepit]

hacking.... players being able to create a account 10 secs after being banned.

[polywomple]

1. hacking

2. watering down gameplay for idiot-children players

3. the game being designed counter-intuitively. Meaning, with so many players on one battlefield with so many opportunities for teamwork and cooperation, yet the game encourages lonewolfing (one man tanks, multiple roll vehicles)

[Rivenshield]

I'm frankly worried about the smurfs winding up with all the cool weapons (again) and leaving my beloved Republic utterly outclassed and outgunned (again). They have the best close-in weapon (shotgun from hell), the best *long* range weapon (gauss rifle), and now apparently have some kind of goddam gatling-shotgun. They also have the tank withthe biggest gun AND the most armor.

In return, from what we know so far, the TR gets a tank that.... goes faster. But not as fast as a Magmower, natch. (The old Prowler had the best armor, remember?) And our guns shootz moar boolitz. Yay.

I'm sorry, Hig. I smell bullshit. Your fondness for smurfdom seems to be worming its way into actual game design.

[Coreldan]

My biggest fear by far are cheaters.

After that whether they can truly deliver a working game with the amount of people they keep talking about.

[Logri]

Jackhammer spam, Reaver spam did I mention Jackhammer spam... ah sorry, misunderstood :P
Hackers, jack of all trades, lag due to server load, free-to-play exploit (ban = new free account)

[AncientVanu]

1. Hacking
2. Me not getting an access to the Beta
3. The Beta not launching soon

[Redshift]

i'm only concerned about it turning out to be rock paper scissors gameplay

AI grunt > AV grunt > MAX > AI grunt

Which i think will get dull fast

[ringring]

I think it's fine to have concerns. It's natural and as much as I liked the mechanics of PS I recognise that PS2 is a different game and I also recognise that I don't know the reasons why Higby and the devs have done certain things and if I did know the reasons I may well agree with them.

Having said that, the reason for pulling the AMS was frankly bizarre.

So,
speeding up gameplay, um, it was quite fast already. But, I'll accept it. A hack timer going from 15 minutes to far less (30 secs is it) is a gain some lose some deal. If it means you don't have to defend a hack with 'every fiber of your being', then we lose. However, mostly it's a win.

Classes+skill trees vs Certs. I liked the cert system and before we heard about classes everyone thought that the PS cert system was one of the things that made PS great. However, this is a new game so I'll accept it.

Night fighting. Don't like it, but it depends on how sensitively it is done. If it is insensitive it will drive people away.

Tanks where driver is main gunner. This works currently on the magrider and it's great. I don't think it will work with the PS2 prowler and vanguard - because they don't have the strafe ability of the mag and so are a little harder to drive but mostly they are turreted. It's too much. My outfit used to roll tanks lots, perhaps I am wrong but I can't see that.

With all the design nods towards BF, COD etc. I hope we don't finally get the game and we end up saying "C'est magnifique, mais c'est ne pas Planetside".

On a lighter note. Lots of my outfit are in touch and are very eager for launch.

[Gortha]

@ Original Post

Overall i have faith the Devs won´t distance PS2 too much from PS1 gameplay-wise.

But a few things concerning me a bit.

- Kill-Cam
- No Vehicle - Entering -Exiting Animations
- Equip - Loadouts / Loot from Enemies

A Kill Cam will make the game less challanging - as good Outfits will use the Intel
to their favour and roll much harder than before. Which will make the game unfairer.

The Missing Vehicle Animation will make the game less realistic, breaking the immersion.
It was a important and good part of Planetside1 that a person had to move
to the one specific door. If someone wanted to be Gunner, he had to move
to the Door of the Gunnerseat.
And i really like the Idea to be able to shot someone while he is entering or
beeing shot myself while entering.
Because it´s cooler and more realisitc than just some person disappearing
(in Milliseconds) and beeing shot by this person with a MainBattleTank-Gun 1 Second later...
Well, the biggest Concern i have with this in mind, that somebody can switch
through all vehicle-seats like in Battlefield series, managing a Vehicle completely by himself - alone.
IMHO there must be a Seat-Switch-Cooldown of several Seconds, when this kind opf switching is possible.

Coming to Loadouts and the diversity of Actions i am able to perform with a given loadout.
In the old days of Planetside, with a max BR of 20 my Mainchar was a very
teamoriented all-rounder, able to keep me and my Squad alive while still
beiing deadly.
Certed Adv.-Medic + Repair i was usually running around with Lasher & Lancer,
a Armor-Repair-Kit and the Medic-Gun, wearing Rexo. I was a Rock in my Squad
beeing able to rezz and heal/repair and stay alive as long as possible.
To admit i only got one good vehicle, the Vanu Magmower, but as i mentioned
my Main was certed teamorinted for Infantry-Combat.
My fear is, that i am stuck in a role of a Medic, and not beeing able to repair armor,
or not able to defend against vehicles, because a Medic can only Equip anti Infantry Weapons...
I fear a lack of diversity my Character is able to perform. That beeing said,
i know that the Devs told us we are never stuck, we can change Roles with
a respawn, but i want to be as versatile as possible for my squad.

Regards
Gortha

[Gortha]

I fear squad spawning I'm ok with squad leader spawning but squad spawning will be very unfair.

Afaik u ll need to put some points in this squad leader ability to be a spawn-location. You have to be certified in this. It´s also not possible inside bases,
so i think it will be pretty much balanced.

But i agree, Squadleader-Spawning is okay. The Spawning on every Squadmate may be too much.

[Coreldan]

They can still make it so that you need to enter from the specific spot to enter a specific seat. There has also been talk of delay of some kind so you cant just "oh im getting shot, ima hop into the vanguard cannon and shoot him instantly" kinda thing.

Also, I hope there wont be seat switching, but to switch the role you get out and enter from the other spot

[Captain1nsaneo]

I'm worried that after launch the team will be bogged down in chasing bugs and split off to work on other things that all of the post launch content will never come.

[Hamma]

err PS1 had very little depth, take bases for no apparent reason other than they're there, also have some merits. PS2 will offering the same, will have so much more depth with its resources and hex system, along with far more different playstyles because of the new class and cert system along with weapon vehicle upgrades and mods not to mention a whole lot more visual customisation.

Going to have to echo others and disagree here. It may not have had depth in terms of game systems but it had depth in terms of what Xaine explained. You had many tactical choices to starve the enemy of equipment, spawn, vehicles etc.

My nitpicking fear is that the game is getting way too condensed, especially merging many vehicles into one and giving it multiple roles. The Lightning, for example, merged with the skyguard. That's one less vehicle on the field. MBT's are worse, where they can actually have AA?? I mean, tanks are meant to combat armor and infantry. Not aircraft. That's what the Skyguard, AA Maxes, and other aircraft were meant for. It even sounds like only Rexo will be the only ones able to use HA/AV, with Agile being able to use only carbines/rifles. Taking out the freeform inventory really irked me. Not even going to try expanding on this again, I've typed it out so many times.


My general fear though is that the game will be so simple and a rehash of modern shooters aside from the massive warfare, and will provide a couple months of entertainment for me. I hope to god that it isn't the case. I want this game to succeed so much.
Well said and agreed.

[Coreldan]

I wouldnt underestimate PS1s depth even in gamesystems. I know I havnt played much, but still several months worth and theres still a crapload of stuff I don't know/understand about how some things work.

At least in 2003 terms, I'd say many things in PS1 mechanics was fairly deep.

[DOUBLEXBAUGH]

Battlefield: Auraxis

[NewSith]

My main fear is that most of PS2's equipment will be whinerfed straight away.

Also cheaters.
Let me elaborate this one: My main concern is not cheaters themselves, but the easy access to the game for cheaters. This tends to create serious misbeliefs inside the playerbase. People just rant all the time about cheaters and every time they die it happens because of the said cheaters. It's getting into people's minds very quickly and though there're no real cheaters among most of the accused, the game is getting abandoned, because "there're too many cheaters in the game". That's especially true for F2P games, where mental age average is far lower then in p2p and even b2p games.

TL;DR:
Cheater rants. They hurt the game more than the actual cheaters.

[Death2All]

I fear the game will be way too simplified that there might possibly be very little depth or a very apparent skill gap. Marginalizing the skill gap and trying to make your game more accommodating to casual players is a bad thing. A good player should be rewarded and not handicapped because some people aren't as good.

Speaking of accommodating, I fear that the game is trying to accommodate to way too many genres at the moment. It's trying to appease the FPS, MMO, RPG and RTS crowd currently. While the game has something for every genre, it may fall flat in those areas and no aspect will truly shine. Their main focus should be making an amazing FPS game that's incredibly unique and will stand out, then focus on the other aspects and how they can blend them all together.


I just think they have A LOT on their plate right now and it may be very difficult to make it all work fluently....and not suck complete ass.

[Goku]

At first I was rather concerned about the games direction, but I've calmed down quite a bit. There is nothing I am fearing now, but only disappointed in the direction SOE is handling how vehicles will be done.

[Warborn]

I don't have any real fears so far. I think that magrider was the ugliest thing I've ever seen with its awful cam job, and the prowler is goofy, but that's just minor cosmetic stuff. The cutting off vehicles that were redundant is an excellent choice; Planetside 1 had too many vehicles which were mostly useless, so this will keep things streamlined. The decision to remove liberator bombs and redo orbital strike is also incredibly reassuring. Honestly, I think Planetside finally got the development team that can do it justice.

[AshOck]

While i'm very aware that the game is a long way off launch, and that i personally am, on the whole, very happy with what i've seen in terms of design decisions, graphics and generally the whole package...

I was wondering if any of you had any nagging fears about the direction the game is taking. Obviously we can't have anything solid yet, none of us have played it and we know next to nothing about the fundamental mechanics - but as a general sort of feeling?

My slight fear is that the game is being made too simple. Planetside 1 was good because it had a lot of depth to it, as well as great combat and very good variety in terms of weapons and vehicles. I'm worried some of that depth is disappearing to favour the wider crowd of gamers who want the whole instant gratification thing like most people these days.

The other nice thing about PS1 is that you could just zerg if you wanted to. Not think about tactics and just go where everyone else was. While this is nice if you want some brainless fun, i really don't want this to become THE game. It needs those wider tactics and versatility to keep people playing.

While the zerg still needs to be there to keep the big battles going, i still want ghost hacking, elite outfits gen holding bases to deny benefits, module stealing etc etc to be a part of the game.

Anyone else have other thoughts on the topic title generally? It might give the devs an idea as to our opinions on certain things, and we might even get some fears addressed :)

Yes, definitely. Not fear though, its disappointment that I feel.
Nothing ever stays the same though and I can't really blame them for wanting to make more money.

[Tikuto]

Performance - Performance or GTFO. Everyone's computers must have the same equal performance of playing PlanetSide 2 as every other player.

Stat-based variations - While stat-based PvP can be inherently unfair, it can still be within fair-play. This is not about 'buying power'. I am refering to typical MMORPGs where loots and levels changes the player's power over another player, and so

Controlled fairness - Where Balance is a common topic, game-wide Control of some extraordinary 'super-powers' as I keep mentioning on the forum must also be considered. Like an Orbital Strike, It's poor game design and game play to see multiple Orbital Strikes at once, in my personal opinion.

[Goku]

Performance - Performance or GTFO. Everyone's computers must have the same equal performance of playing PlanetSide 2 as every other player.


That is only possible on consoles I am afraid. There is too many possible configurations on computers for that to be possible. You will likely have performance issues if you do not have a computer that was built in the past 3 years or so I bet. Even on low settings just due to the sheer amount of action going on in the game. If you do not well that is your own problem, gaming on a computer can be a expensive hobby.

[Vancha]

I'm sorry, Hig. I smell bullshit. Your fondness for smurfdom seems to be worming its way into actual game design.
That has to be the most premature silliness I've seen yet.

[Graywolves]

Not enough vehicles

[Gortha]

That has to be the most premature silliness I've seen yet.

And don´t forget, T-Ray is Vanu :D
Most Coders are Vanu too :D :D

Here a what concerns me about the Free Form Inventory:

I was able to loot and trade:

http://666kb.com/i/c106rvuwjmduuxojy.jpg

Here some guys i learned to know via chat and we met to trade HA-Guns:
(was the time of the ÜBER-Lasher, but a MCG or Jackhammer handled well, were always en par with the others. Lasher was bestter indoors, other elsewhere,... etc.)

http://666kb.com/i/c106sjy7mvoshu74e.jpg

http://666kb.com/i/c106ssioi27iancem.jpg

Next is stealing/hacking Vehicles, it was just mega cool, creating havoc behind or right between enemies! Managing to get out of there and survie, still having the MBT as trophy! :D

http://666kb.com/i/c106u16f2nzq9bery.jpg

http://666kb.com/i/c106u8tkvptri56z2.jpg

[Tamas]

My biggest fear is F2P. I can't see why they don't go GW2 style and charge for the box and a number of expansions (or is this the case?). I hate MT shops and games tend to go pay to win. I'd be fine if they would ask to pay for a premium account where you get 1.5X rate for resources and skill learning ala WoT.

[BlazingSun]

My biggest "fears" are,
a) that my PC won't run the game properly
b) that the game doesn't turn out to be the way I'm hoping, in which case I can forget about point a.

They also have the tank withthe biggest gun AND the most armor.

In return, from what we know so far, the TR gets a tank that.... goes faster. But not as fast as a Magmower, natch. (The old Prowler had the best armor, remember?) And our guns shootz moar boolitz. Yay.

I'm sorry, Hig. I smell bullshit. Your fondness for smurfdom seems to be worming its way into actual game design.

You have to get your facts straight:

Planetside 1: Vanguard always had the most armor and the damage per shot was the highest, indeed. The Prowler however had more damage output over time. A good crew with a vanguard would always lose to a good crew with a Prowler ... not by much, but still.

Also we don't know what the NC's heavy assault weapon will be .. JH was not confirmed and no one knows what that one weapon T-Ray posted is supposed to be. The Gaussrifle was probably the best MA gun in the first game, but that doesn't automatically mean, that it will be again.

Besides ... so far I like the TR infantry a lot more than anything I have seen from the NCs .. but since we haven't seen that much from the NC, that's not saying much. We just know to little to make a judgement yet.

[VioletZero]

In general, my biggest fear is that they will turn Planetside 2 into Battlefield the MMO.

That they won't go for any outlandish ideas like Sandbox content or Airships.

Oh, and I fear that they won't give any air vehicles proper wings.

[Tehroth]

My fear is the hacking which might be rampant because it is a f2p game and the game being very shallow and just a larger scale Cod/Bf Fps game.

I know many things are different, but with the way mmorpgs(fps/tps) have been these days there is a little concern.

[SKYeXile]

Biggest fear is SOE listening to armchair developers on the forums.

[Sighpolice]

Yeah, a lot of the people I used to play with have seen the pics and stuff of PS 2 and just said "Meh"

It's looking way too much like Battlefield: Auraxis, Modern Flail than PlanetSide atm.. Good job it's free to play cause after the 1/2 months it takes for it to get boring I wouldn't have spent anything

Kill Cam, Iron Sights (implemented correctly perhaps) and lack of diverse vehicles and gunners to gun them.

[Xaine]

Biggest fear is SOE listening to armchair developers on the forums.

Subtle.

[Graywolves]

I really hope they implement more vehicles and more field roles to avoid the game becoming a big infantry war.

Or a big sunderer war.

[Xaine]

I really hope they implement more vehicles and more field roles to avoid the game becoming a big infantry war.

Or a big sunderer war.

I don't think there is much chance of that really, i think the general combat balance should be great.

I'm just terrified the game will be dumbed down too much for the great unwashed masses.

[Saintlycow]

hackers


I also don't like the exemption of hacking. it was a good mechanic

[Shade Millith]

My biggest fear, is this game is trying to be BF2 or 3 with 2000 players.

I played Bf1942 and the mod Desert Combat for several years. Loved the game to pieces. Played competitively in one of the top Australian clans.

Then BF2 came around. Magic instant rezing, magical squad spawning, no massive air dominate maps, no massive tank dominate maps, too much emphasis on infantry, magical all-seeing eye, easy as piss to use artillery, heli's easy to use and about as agile as a brick, heli's with guided missiles, surface to air weapons weak and useless, jets both anti-air and anti-ground, iron sights, big thing made about KDR with stat tracking, weapons half as accurate than they were in Desert Combat, a single support class member could provide unlimited ammo.

And I hated it with a passion.

I'm worried that there is going to be TOO much emphasis on infantry now. PS1 had it pretty good. Natural terrain features with good AV weapons meant that infantry was still relevant, even outdoors, but tanks and aircraft held the upper hand.

I'm worried that there is going to be less teamwork involved. PS1 MBT setup I liked. Driver and gunner had to work together to be really effective. Is it going to be too simplified now?

I'm worried that PS2 is going to have too many BF3 leanings. PS1 had it good. Rezing took time to do, so was impractical to attempt during combat. Ammunition was something to be conserved, and not wasted willy nilly. Is it going to be too easy now?

I'm worried that classes are going to be stale and boring. I had many options as a cloaker in PS1. I could run around laying CE under peoples feet and blowing them up, or I could be a stealth medic, or an assassin with a NC pistol. Is it going to be too stale now?

I'm worried that they're intending to really speed up battles. I loved the hour long sieges of bases, or the epic fights over that one bridge that both sides would strain to take. Is it going to feel like a COD match now?

I'm worried that individual diversity will become a problem. I loved to death that everyone used the same weapon. My cycler was the exact same as his cycler. No +1's to damage, +5%'s to ROF. Is this going to be "lvl 40 character being curbstomped by a lvl 50" game?

I'm worried it's going to become the PS2 to my PS1, as BF2/3 was to my BF1942/DC.

[Zulthus]

My biggest fear, is this game is trying to be BF2 or 3 with 2000 players.

I played Bf1942 and the mod Desert Combat for several years. Loved the game to pieces. Played competitively in one of the top Australian clans.

Then BF2 came around. Magic instant rezing, magical squad spawning, no massive air dominate maps, no massive tank dominate maps, too much emphasis on infantry, magical all-seeing eye, easy as piss to use artillery, heli's easy to use and about as agile as a brick, heli's with guided missiles, surface to air weapons weak and useless, jets both anti-air and anti-ground, iron sights, big thing made about KDR with stat tracking, weapons half as accurate than they were in Desert Combat, a single support class member could provide unlimited ammo.

And I hated it with a passion.

I'm worried that there is going to be TOO much emphasis on infantry now. PS1 had it pretty good. Natural terrain features with good AV weapons meant that infantry was still relevant, even outdoors, but tanks and aircraft held the upper hand.

I'm worried that there is going to be less teamwork involved. PS1 MBT setup I liked. Driver and gunner had to work together to be really effective. Is it going to be too simplified now?

I'm worried that PS2 is going to have too many BF3 leanings. PS1 had it good. Rezing took time to do, so was impractical to attempt during combat. Ammunition was something to be conserved, and not wasted willy nilly. Is it going to be too easy now?

I'm worried that classes are going to be stale and boring. I had many options as a cloaker in PS1. I could run around laying CE under peoples feet and blowing them up, or I could be a stealth medic, or an assassin with a NC pistol. Is it going to be too stale now?

I'm worried that they're intending to really speed up battles. I loved the hour long sieges of bases, or the epic fights over that one bridge that both sides would strain to take. Is it going to feel like a COD match now?

I'm worried that individual diversity will become a problem. I loved to death that everyone used the same weapon. My cycler was the exact same as his cycler. No +1's to damage, +5%'s to ROF. Is this going to be "lvl 40 character being curbstomped by a lvl 50" game?

I'm worried it's going to become the PS2 to my PS1, as BF2/3 was to my BF1942/DC.

I completely agree with all of these points. However the devs are trying to make money and cookie cutter games are what sell these days. I want PS2 to succeed but I don't want it to play like every other fuckin' game out there.

Off topic, I have never played 1942. I've played 2 and up, however. Is it any good? Do people still play?

[Graywolves]

Oh I hope they don't give engineer's an ammo box that gives everyone unlimited ammo...

I'm gonna miss those times in a gen hold when we had to pass around ammo between waves.

[Xaine]

Oh I hope they don't give engineer's an ammo box that gives everyone unlimited ammo...

I'm gonna miss those times in a gen hold when we had to pass around ammo between waves.

I think its been confirmed that this is in.

This is pretty much what i'm talking about.

Those gen holds were amazing. You knew you were going to die, or run out of ammo at some point. You just had to take as many with you as you could.

[cellinaire]

So, most of these basically boil down to :

1) Cheaters and hackers

2) F2P (sneaky, gameplay-affecting SC items. Catering only to mainstream crowd)

3) Game is getting too much simplified (possible lack of depth and diversity, immersion > holstered weapons, new AMS concept, free-form inventory, fewer vehicles.. etc )

4) The spirit of teamwork will be threatened

5) Possible conflicts of interest between Devs and players (communication/development direction)

6) Optimization/framerate side

[Shade Millith]

I completely agree with all of these points. However the devs are trying to make money and cookie cutter games are what sell these days. I want PS2 to succeed but I don't want it to play like every other fuckin' game out there.

Off topic, I have never played 1942. I've played 2 and up, however. Is it any good? Do people still play?

It was a much different game. AA was powerful, so aircraft always had to be very careful with what they did (None of this aircraft dominating crap), but they were effective at doing it.
There was no rezing, or giving ammo outside of APC's. No squad spawning, so dying meant something.
Artillery was done similar to how Planetside had theirs, as a vehicle you entered and aimed/fired manually, usually at a spot marked by another player.
Big air maps like Battle of Britain and Coral Sea were almost air only. BoB in particular could have a dozen or more fighters dogfighting around 3-4 giant B-21 bombers with 3 gunners/1 pilot each trying to prevent/defend them from blowing up radar sites and a factory. Or tank maps with over a dozen MBT's and Light tanks trying to capture small villa's that could hide infantry inside.

Good vid of Battle Of Britian here. Enemy team is playing badly, a flak gunner near the factory would have had a field day.

Let's Play Battlefield 1942 - Episode 36 - Britain 1/2 - YouTube

People do still play a little bit, but numbers are quite low.

Those gen holds were amazing. You knew you were going to die, or run out of ammo at some point. You just had to take as many with you as you could.

Thirding this. They were some of the best parts in PS1. It was a desperate fight for survival, sharing ammunition to make sure everyone had just enough to keep firing. You had no way out other than in a body bag, and you knew that when the ammo ran out, you were finished.

[VioletZero]

Biggest fear is SOE listening to armchair developers on the forums.

Oh god forbid we communicate what kind of things we want to see in the game to the developers so that they actually know what their audience wants.

[SKYeXile]

Oh god forbid we communicate what kind of things we want to see in the game to the developers so that they actually know what their audience wants.

BFR = voted for by players.

You want to stick with that statement?

[Shade Millith]

BFR = voted for by players.

You want to stick with that statement?

Which was then voted to be struck from the game, and ignored.

[SKYeXile]

Which was then voted to be struck from the game, and ignored.

I have never seen that official SOE poll for its removal.

[Shade Millith]

I have never seen that official SOE poll for its removal.

As the most commonly cited problem of the game, I'd be VERY surprised SOE hadn't picked up on it.

[TheBladeRoden]

I am a little worried about this general "Everyone must always be shooting at all times!" theme.

Time that is spent entering vehicles is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent driving is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent cloaking your spawn vehicle is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent walking to the equipment terminal is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent customizing inventory is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent in your sanc is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent looking at what guns people have on their back is not time that is shooting!
Time that is not spent shooting is time that is dumb!

I'm actually surprised they're putting killcams in because

Time that is spent watching killcam is not time that is shooting!

Everyone but CoD devs know that good pacing isn't just maximum intensity for 6 hours, it needs its highs as well as the low-key moments.

[Neksar]

Hacking was probably my favorite thing to do in PS1. That said, my biggest fear for the second has to do with latency and movement prediction. I hated warping in PS1, and with more people in PS2, I hope connectivity isn't a huge problem.

[Sirisian]

Was going to overlook this thread, but there are a lot of good points raised. Zulthus's point about the lack of vehicles echos my own fear that they won't bring in any new vehicles other than buggies. I hope they show us their 3 year plan and timetables in that regard. Would love to see this game after a few years with like 50 vehicles and tons of choices, but at the rate we're seeing vehicles and the amount of customization they want to put into each one I'm fearing well see only a few new ones.

Lack of continuous updates is also my fear. It would kind of be lame if they only released a new item every month and expected everyone to buy it. What would be sweet is just continuous content streaming into the game from the artists and designers so that everytime you login there's new choices. (weapons, vehicles, implants etc). Thinking of the game going static like PS1 did for months at a time is what made me jump in and out of playing.

Lack of player choices in combat is my last big fear. I'd prefer in an MMOFPS to have more than just shooting, running, or throwing a grenade as options during combat. Hopefully the implant system opens up some choices for individuals and groups.

//edit: Oh last fear and probably the biggest. Under utilizing the whole idea that this is a science fiction game is a big fear of mine. That they stick to only realistic decisions instead of just doing what makes sense from a gameplay perspective. If they have an idea that's fun they should put it in and explain it away with sci-fi talk and nanites. The last thing I'd want to see is them to go "oh that's not something we see in the real world". (For instance, bringing back crystals, caves, zip lines, teleporter pads like in the caves, among other things).

[VioletZero]

BFR = voted for by players.

You want to stick with that statement?

Yes, I will. Especially since your argument against it is so fallacious I'm a little dumbfounded.

1. The problem with BFRs was their implementation, not the concept itself. The concept is fine, just look at how BF2142 did something similar. The problem is how they decided to put it in the game. It just backfired on the balancing end, that's all.

2. That doesn't even address the potential problem of not knowing what the audience wants. Sure, they're not designers and you don't take what they say to the letter. But they DO know what they want. They just don't know how they want it implemented.

[nomotog]

My only fear is that my computer won't play it.

[KALU]

My fear is that we might loose the epic-ness as we had with the original by using the new hex system and have the lines spread to thin.

Although I do trust the development team and just have my fingers crossed we still experience MASSIVE fights as we did in the beloved planetside original.

[HitbackTR]

Yes, I will. Especially since your argument against it is so fallacious I'm a little dumbfounded.

1. The problem with BFRs was their implementation, not the concept itself. The concept is fine, just look at how BF2142 did something similar. The problem is how they decided to put it in the game. It just backfired on the balancing end, that's all.

2. That doesn't even address the potential problem of not knowing what the audience wants. Sure, they're not designers and you don't take what they say to the letter. But they DO know what they want. They just don't know how they want it implemented.

The problem with BFR's was not just their implementation, it was also the concept of it to begin with. People in the pro-BFR camp, (such as yourself) just can't seem to grasp that solo-piloted kill-whoring machines, (i.e., the original BFRs) detracted from the team -orientated spirit of Planetside where teamwork was essential to achieve any type of objective. SOE devs f**ked up on both accounts in PS1 so stop acting like it will be any different/better if they tried to do it the second time round, (which they said they wouldn't). BFR's and Planetside do not/can not fit in concept or implementation because they are attempting to fill a role which for all intents and purposes has already been filled by other vehicles. And essentially that non-existent role has been dumbed down to attract more subscribers in the form of playing the aforementioned no skill required not exactly as advertised one-man-kill-whoring-machine.

[Gortha]

I completely agree with all of these points. However the devs are trying to make money and cookie cutter games are what sell these days. I want PS2 to succeed but I don't want it to play like every other fuckin' game out there.

Off topic, I have never played 1942. I've played 2 and up, however. Is it any good? Do people still play?

Battlefield 2 with Reality Mini Mod or Forgotten Hope 2 was as good as a Battlefield 1942 with DC Mod.

BF3 is worst. BF2 with Mods and BF1942 with Mods were really cool.
EA killed the Series aiming for Console Gamers. Noobgameplay.

I really hope SOE is keeping PS2 more serious. More challenging.
Else peeps get bored to fast and will leave.

@ Sales-Model
I really hope they Sell a BOX first or Sell Game via Download. After that Free2Play! Free Download of the game and free play with a item shop.... OMFG nnnoooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOO :mad:

[Shade Millith]

The problem with BFR's was not just their implementation, it was also the concept of it to begin with. People in the pro-BFR camp, (such as yourself) just can't seem to grasp that solo-piloted kill-whoring machines, (i.e., the original BFRs) detracted from the team -orientated spirit of Planetside where teamwork was essential to achieve any type of objective. SOE devs f**ked up on both accounts in PS1 so stop acting like it will be any different/better if they tried to do it the second time round, (which they said they wouldn't). BFR's and Planetside do not/can not fit in concept or implementation because they are attempting to fill a role which for all intents and purposes has already been filled by other vehicles. And essentially that non-existent role has been dumbed down to attract more subscribers in the form of playing the aforementioned no skill required not exactly as advertised one-man-kill-whoring-machine.

The 'One-man-kill-whoring-machine' part IS implementation.

Again, this comes down to people thinking like there's either it's a PS1 BFR, or nothing.

Making a mech unit that has -

Slightly better anti-armor power.
Much worse anti-infantry power. (As in really bad)

And properly balancing it can make it a fun addition to the game. Some things they got right. A shield that infantry can get under and fire AV weapons directly into the mech, and most normal non-AV infantry weapons simply bypass the shield, and jammer nades that almost incapacitate the thing.

If something in PS1 didn't work, instead of scrapping the ENTIRE VEHICLE TYPE (In this case, mechs), look at what was WRONG, and fix it into a working vehicle.

EDIT: Also thirding/fourthing this
I am a little worried about this general "Everyone must always be shooting at all times!" theme.

[Gandhi]

I am a little worried about this general "Everyone must always be shooting at all times!" theme.

Oh yeah, this. It really comes back to my only fear for PS2, Call of Battlefield: MMO edition. Which would probably be a lot of fun, for about 2 months.

[Gortha]

I am a little worried about this general "Everyone must always be shooting at all times!" theme.

Time that is spent entering vehicles is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent driving is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent cloaking your spawn vehicle is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent walking to the equipment terminal is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent customizing inventory is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent in your sanc is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent looking at what guns people have on their back is not time that is shooting!
Time that is not spent shooting is time that is dumb!

I'm actually surprised they're putting killcams in because

Time that is spent watching killcam is not time that is shooting!

Everyone but CoD devs know that good pacing isn't just maximum intensity for 6 hours, it needs its highs as well as the low-key moments.

OMFG LoooooooooL i really had a good laugh. :bouncy::rofl::rofl::rofl:

You are so damn right... and it´s sad that you are right.... :(

Just a bit this all sounds like the game is made ONLY for premature, unpatient, Attention-Deficit-Disorder, stupid, Deathmatch-type noob Kiddos.

Well, we´ll see, i have faith it won´t get this bad... but a bit may be... :(

[skoimich]

a) Wount be out this year
B) Pc issues, high spec may drive alot of ppl away

[Gimpylung]

My greatest fear for the game is the new revenue model.

I fear in the future that, despite Higbys reassurances, he gets overruled by the SOE finance department and over time Pay to Win elements start to appear. 6 months in, finance guy tells Matt that more money needs to be wrung out of the existing playerbase.

A secondary aspect of the new revenue model is that I find F2P games to have generally more griefers and chat assholes, nevermind hackers.

With at least 1 months sub invested, players generally try and get their value from the game and attempt to fit in. F2P games tend to draw in far more penniless 13 year olds and the like, they have nothing invested in the game and therefore don't care much about it or the community coz they'll be playing the next F2P game the following week. After all it's so much more fun to block the vehicle spawn with a sunderer and feed of all the hate in the chat window.

I'm hoping there will be a continual heavy GM presence(unlike PS) to moderate what is likely to be an generally unfriendlier, younger and more cynical playerbase. This obviously doesn't apply to anyone reading this as you care about the game already, but we're gonna be so outnumbered.

(Jeez I sound like an old man, but that's a possible reality as I see it, all you gotta do is see how many bad minded idiots are griefing in existing FPS's and F2P games.)

[Graywolves]

I am a little worried about this general "Everyone must always be shooting at all times!" theme.

Time that is spent entering vehicles is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent driving is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent cloaking your spawn vehicle is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent walking to the equipment terminal is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent customizing inventory is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent in your sanc is not time that is shooting!
Time that is spent looking at what guns people have on their back is not time that is shooting!
Time that is not spent shooting is time that is dumb!

I'm actually surprised they're putting killcams in because

Time that is spent watching killcam is not time that is shooting!

Everyone but CoD devs know that good pacing isn't just maximum intensity for 6 hours, it needs its highs as well as the low-key moments.

Yeah. This gets me worried. I fear we might lose the actual logistics in fights because it's time not spent shooting. No AMS, No Loadstar, spawning wherever.

If the game is too much of a straight up killfest then it will lose novelty quickly.

[Hmr85]

Yeah. This gets me worried. I fear we might lose the actual logistics in fights because it's time not spent shooting. No AMS, No Loadstar, spawning wherever.

If the game is too much of a straight up killfest then it will lose novelty quickly.

I agree completely with you and TheBladeRoden. I personally enjoyed those nice long flights/rides to the next fight. It gave you a chance to joke around with your outfit mates and help co-ordinate your next move according to the flow of the battle.It also gave you some time to just enjoy the scenery. I guess will find out soon enough.

[SniperSteve]

2. watering down gameplay for idiot-children players

or console players. >.<


Also, if you do the math to find out how many different vehicles there are when you consider modifications, there will be quite a few.

[wasdie]

My fear is that we might loose the epic-ness as we had with the original by using the new hex system and have the lines spread to thin.

Although I do trust the development team and just have my fingers crossed we still experience MASSIVE fights as we did in the beloved planetside original.

The hex based grids will allow for large battles over a larger area. This will require coordination and map control over a large area, not just pushing everything into a small choke point. This will allow for far more tactical gameplay and much more real-world military tactics.

[EZShot]

I agree completely with you and TheBladeRoden. I personally enjoyed those nice long flights/rides to the next fight. It gave you a chance to joke around with your outfit mates and help co-ordinate your next move according to the flow of the battle.It also gave you some time to just enjoy the scenery. I guess will find out soon enough.

This is what made PS1 special.

In the same way downtime is important in the production of film, book and even music. Without downtime the intense battles would become exhausting, unfocused and I hate to say it but..dull. Just like the way you need to have sadness in your life to truly understand what happiness is.

The reason games like BF3, COD and Unreal Tournament don't haul back the pace of the game occasionally is because of the nature of 10 minute death matches. You have an "end" where everybody is chucked back into a loading screen and you can take a few minutes to collect and refocus.

My biggest fear is that the developers don't take time to understand why this is important, this isn't really a deathmatch game no matter how much like COD it handles. It doesn't have loading screens or timers for when everyone can put down their mouses and have a breather.

So what if it takes 10 minutes to drive from a backwater base with the vehicle you need?

It also adds another aspect to the battlefield where you hope the backup arrives before you all get pwned by the armour rolling up the valley. The tense flights where you know you can't get there any quicker and your faction needs you...NOW!

Bring sanctuaries back! :p

[Grognard]

Yes, I will. Especially since your argument against it is so fallacious I'm a little dumbfounded.


Although I will not agree here... as I have played with SKY in PS1, and he isnt unreasonable, we just disagree on a lot of stuff, primarily artillery/mechs, I respect his opinion. Similarly, I seem to agree with VZ on most things, but almost never the implementation LOL...

That said however...


1. The problem with BFRs was their implementation, not the concept itself. The concept is fine, just look at how BF2142 did something similar. The problem is how they decided to put it in the game. It just backfired on the balancing end, that's all.


This... I do agree with, 100%.

...add to that, how terrible the vanu BFR was, and the animations / physics such as standing awkwardly on the side of a hill. Most of all... the feel of piloting one was just clunky as all hell. But Mech-type vehicles are really not unreasonable, given this is a futuristic sci-fi / shooting game with "other than real world" techs... they just need to make it fit, seemlessly. The precedent already exists, "BFR's" are part of Auraxis history now.

[Vancha]

In the same way downtime is important in the production of film, book and even music. Without downtime the intense battles would become exhausting, unfocused and I hate to say it but..dull. Just like the way you need to have sadness in your life to truly understand what happiness is.

The reason games like BF3, COD and Unreal Tournament don't haul back the pace of the game occasionally is because of the nature of 10 minute death matches. You have an "end" where everybody is chucked back into a loading screen and you can take a few minutes to collect and refocus.

My biggest fear is that the developers don't take time to understand why this is important, this isn't really a deathmatch game no matter how much like COD it handles. It doesn't have loading screens or timers for when everyone can put down their mouses and have a breather.
Agreed. This is important. It doesn't really qualify as a fear for me since this is something I'd expect them to be more than aware of, but striking the right balance between action and downtime for a game like this is probably a bigger challenge than some might appreciate.

[Hmr85]

The precedent already exists, "BFR's" are part of Auraxis history now.

You mean they are part of PS1's History. PS2 Is a re imagining of the game. They have absolutely no history in this new game.

As for Violet "I am assuming your a girl due to your avatar, sorry if I am wrong"?? Last I heard she has not played PS1 and is just copying what has already been said in previous threads and what she really needs to go out and play it and form her own opinions about them. For those of you who where not there the day they came onto the scene in PS1. You'll never really know why people hated them so much. BFR's where an absolute disgrace to the game and we can only be so lucky that they never make a return.

[Graywolves]

As for Violet "I am assuming your a girl due to your avatar, sorry if I am wrong"??

All are men on the internet until proven otherwise! (or requested to be another gender...)


In the same way downtime is important in the production of film, book and even music. Without downtime the intense battles would become exhausting, unfocused and I hate to say it but..dull. Just like the way you need to have sadness in your life to truly understand what happiness is.


I can't agree more with this. The reason for no downtime in other FPS games is because the match abruptly ends when it decides one side is victorious. This isn't the case in PS2, a victory condition can't be forced in the grand scheme of things. There probably will be downtime no matter what happens. People will see where the Zerg is going and decide what loadouts they need etc.

But I just hope that they keep enough logistics in rather than going "ok battle moved, just click there on the map and fast travel." Which I almost feel will happen with the mission system.

[Tasorin]

1) Hacking - Exploiting

2) SOE Definition of "Free to Play"

3) Impact of the "Cash Store" on game play and balance

4) Balancing the 3 factions and taking the "Insert Faction" lovers fanboism out of the equation

5) SOE/Smed's track record for utter epic failure on any AAA title that was worth a damn

6) Server Locations - Population Density - Client Performance

[Atuday]

Missing my daughter's (insert event here) for planetside 2.

Also I fear my power for doing really crazy stupid and yet highly effective stuff like tank hunting on an atv will be limited by my team mates.

[Hmr85]

[Graywolves;632635]All are men on the internet until proven otherwise! (or requested to be another gender...)

Not Disagreeing, I just thought I remember seeing it stated somewhere else... As to VZ. I apologize if I'm wrong. :love:

[Grognard]

You mean they are part of PS1's History. PS2 Is a re imagining of the game. They have absolutely no history in this new game.


Interesting, I hadnt considered that, I stand corrected. Thanks, Ill be more careful about my assumptions.


As for Violet "I am assuming your a girl due to your avatar, sorry if I am wrong"?? Last I heard she has not played PS1 and is just copying what has already been said in previous threads and what she really needs to go out and play it and form her own opinions about them. For those of you who where not there the day they came onto the scene in PS1. You'll never really know why people hated them so much. BFR's where an absolute disgrace to the game and we can only be so lucky that they never make a return.


If this is true, I agree, s/he would need a frame of reference to have an informed opinion about some specifics to the PS1 experience as it carries over to PS2, though s/he might fairly draw on other first hand experiences. I myself, was there from beta and years of PS1 play from all sides, but mostly Vanu, and liked all factions.

So, from my own experiance, I still maintain that BFRs as they existed were, as you say (implied?), a failure, and I dislike the vanu BFR. The way they functioned was very "clunky", but I am admittedly spoiled from Mechwarrior games. As far as the power vs other vehicles, I simply give the nod to others cause I didnt care in that regard.

That said, I still think they could, could... have a solid place in the landscape of the PS2, if implemented seemlessly, with a reason to be there, though simple variety is a good reason, for me.

[Draep]

My biggest fear for PS2? That someone will *** up the game boards with shitposts about how an actual human being can fear a video game or the development of said game. In short: my worst fear has come true.

[Hmr85]

My biggest fear for PS2? That someone will *** up the game boards with shitposts about how an actual human being can fear a video game or the development of said game. In short: my worst fear has come true.

What a great contribution to the topic at hand. Man your really on fire tonight. :rolleyes:

[Neksar]

And now my worst cultural fear has come true - '***' has become a verb.

[Graywolves]

And now my worst cultural fear has come true - '***' has become a verb.

That's a dream come true for me.

[Shade Millith]

For those of you who where not there the day they came onto the scene in PS1. You'll never really know why people hated them so much. BFR's where an absolute disgrace to the game and we can only be so lucky that they never make a return.

I wasn't around for their first showing. So no, I don't know how bad they were I do understand though it was bad.

The problem with this argument is, however, that you're saying it CANNOT be rebalanced. At all. Ever. Impossible.

When I did play, a single clip from a lancer could take nearly 1/3rd of it's shields off. A lone BFR would be horribly crippled (or even destroyed) by a single AGILE(!) infantry bailed from a mossie. They were balanced and brought into line. Might not have been quite far enough, but they were no longer game breaking.

Hell! As a lone infantry, I'd rather tangle with a BFR than a normal MBT any day of the week!

This could be it's role. Against a MBT it has a good advantage, against infantry it's fucked something solid.

But saying "It was too powerful at one point in time, therefor it will forever-more be too powerful" just doesn't make a good argument.

[Hmr85]

I wasn't around for their first showing. So no, I don't know how bad they were I do understand though it was bad.

The problem with this argument is, however, that you're saying it CANNOT be rebalanced. At all. Ever. Impossible.

When I did play, a single clip from a lancer could take nearly 1/3rd of it's shields off. A lone BFR would be horribly crippled (or even destroyed) by a single AGILE(!) infantry bailed from a mossie. They were balanced and brought into line. Might not have been quite far enough, but they were no longer game breaking.

Hell! As a lone infantry, I'd rather tangle with a BFR than a normal MBT any day of the week!

This could be it's role. Against a MBT it has a good advantage, against infantry it's fucked something solid.

But saying "It was too powerful at one point in time, therefor it will forever-more be too powerful" just doesn't make a good argument.

Thats not my main argument against BFR's. I went into good detail about it in that 20+ page thread we had on them a week or 2 ago. You can find out my thoughts there on them. BFR's Serve no purpose in PS2. They Have no role to fill that isn't already filled by other vehicles. Same goes for PS1.

When I did play, a single clip from a lancer could take nearly 1/3rd of it's shields off.

BTW, a Lone lancer will not clip of 1/3rd of the shield on a 2 seater BFR deployed. Just not gonna happen. Your not gonna survive long enough against a competent crew. They where crap then when they came out and they are still crap now. I myself would rather run up against a MBT. You stand a better chance.

Edit: Because I want to be accurate on that statement. I'll check the lancer 1/3rd. Last I checked it couldn't. Just me thinking about it while sitting in bed. I'll look at it tomorrow when I get back from work.

[Saintlycow]

Biggest fear... SOE ideal is $$$$$ > good gamplay. It's what happened to battlefield.

They see COD and bf3 rake in the cash, so they dumb the game down a bit. Then the game is less exiting and you will play it less.

[Shade Millith]

Thats not my main argument against BFR's. I went into good detail about it in that 20+ page thread we had on them a week or 2 ago. You can find out my thoughts there on them. BFR's Serve no purpose in PS2. They Have no role to fill that isn't already filled by other vehicles. Same goes for PS1.



BTW, a Lone lancer will not clip of 1/3rd of the shield on a 2 seater BFR deployed. Just not gonna happen. Your not gonna survive long enough against a competent crew. They where crap then when they came out and they are still crap now. I myself would rather run up against a MBT. You stand a better chance.

Edit: I check the lancer 1/3rd. Last I checked it couldn't. Just me thinking about it while sitting in bed.

I didn't really mean to argue about if it did or didn't have a place/role. I guess I'm just really sick of people saying "BFR's in PS1 were badly balanced! So we can never have a mech!" or "Flails were badly balanced! Thus we can never have artillery!". Whether or not they have a role is different.

And we will have to disagree on what we'd rather face as infantry.
BFR's were things I hunted down with devastators, jammer nades and an assault rifle, while flying a mossie.
Drop down on top of it, jammer it on the way down, get just behind it's backside and fill it's arse with rockets. Swap to the rifle if the gunner jumps out. Even if you die, by the time of your death, the thing is pretty badly hurt.

With the scout rifle I'd sit on the walls putting shots into it's systems (Once had a one hit kill on a BFR's gunner's weapon). Shots went straight through the shield. Hit it from behind and you could easily disrupt it's all important shield emitter.

Flying BFR's were complete bullshit though.