VS underpowered when it comes to infantry?

[Zalmoxis]

I have thought about it, and I am starting to believe that the VS might be quite underpowered in terms of infantry combat. Why?

Well, in my opinion snipers play a very important role in infantry combat and base defense against infantry ( hate them or love them, you can't deny their battle effectiveness). And since the VS have the "bullets lose damage over time" perk, I think that the VS snipers might get raped by the enemy snipers. And same thing goes for the rest of the infantry, since the VS would lose in medium to long range battles because of their perk, they would have to get in CQ where they have no advantage over the other factions.

But hey, these are just my thoughts on the matter, and since I haven't played PS1 I don't know what to think.

So, what is your opinion on this matter?

[Sephirex]

We don't know the damage drop for VS sniper rifles yet. Also I saw a VS use a rifle that was an insta-hit laser, no drop. You might have a hard time getting the quick hand of the draw on that one.

[RodenyC]

I believe that the VS snipers are just like the other snipers in sharing bullet drop and does not have the lose damage over time like assault rifles do.

[EisenKreutzer]

I believe that the VS snipers are just like the other snipers in sharing bullet drop and does not have the lose damage over time like assault rifles do.

I seem to remember that not being the case.

[Canaris]

what you loose on the one hand you gain with the other

[Zalmoxis]

I believe that the VS snipers are just like the other snipers in sharing bullet drop and does not have the lose damage over time like assault rifles do.

I think I saw in one of the gameplay footage that the VS snipers don't have bullet drop. And their scope sucks. A lot!

And yeah, we won't know the bullet damage drop until we get to play. This is just a pre-beta speculation thread :)

[ChipMHazard]

There's no way to know until beta. :p

[breigar]

TR - speed
NC - power
VS - accuraccy i suppose :P

[Elays]

Well as a balance issue, undoubtedly it will be addressed in Beta at some point. That being said, I can see a lot of workarounds for it:

1. No bullet drop = repeat accuracy. TR/NC have to adjust for each shot, VS don't, meaning a more effective RoF. Not the RoF of the weapon mind you, just the RoF you can actually hit something with.

2. Reverse the perk. Damage drop-off for normal weapons intended for mid/short range. How about damage-pick-up for snipers? After all, I'm sure the good ol' VS can think up something sciency for that.

3. Balance with AP feature. Perhaps the damage lessens but the penetration/AV capability remains steady over distance? Melts through armor rather than punches?

4. Common Pool Guns. Not that that's necessarily a GOOD idea, but it's an idea.

Also, if you'd kindly refrain from the use of rape in a casual context, we can change the English language for the better.

[NoDachi]

Since when did snipers play a game changing part?

3. Balance with AP feature. Perhaps the damage lessens but the penetration/AV capability remains steady over distance? Melts through armor rather than punches?

Makes absolutely no sense.

The energy weapons damage degrades overtime quicker than the kinetic alternatives is because they lose more energy travelling through the same atmosphere.

A shot hitting a tank will be much cooler/weaker than when it first was fired.

[bbihah]

When your medic got shot in the face.

[Top Sgt]

i don't think snipers will have anything to do with it.

VS seem to overuse Max units from PS1

and now the mag tank and scythe flghter there is why your infantry is low

AT Zerg 100 people 95 of them max's. :) no one left to actually cap the point.

[Elays]

Since when did snipers play a game changing part?



Makes absolutely no sense.

The energy weapons damage degrades overtime quicker than the kinetic alternatives is because they lose more energy travelling through the same atmosphere.

A shot hitting a tank will be much cooler/weaker than when it first was fired.

Thus my added idea of it "melting" through the armor. It will be cooler than first fired, sure why not, but the "melting" quality could still retain greater penetration than the "punching" of a bullet, yes? This is sci-fi, after all.

[NoDachi]

But then why don't the normal rifles just carry on melting through the enemy soldiers at greater range?

[RodenyC]

I seem to remember that not being the case.

If I can find the link,I remember either Tray or Matt confirming that the VS snipers had bullet drop.That's where I got that.

[Landtank]

VS are the worst empire, so it makes sense for them to be underpowered.

[Rbstr]

"NC underpowered when it comes to infantry"
Low ROF and high recoil will lead to being ineffective at short ranges.
"TR underpowered when it comes to infantry"
High rof but low damage will lead to being ineffective at long ranges

I fail to see how any of this is worth commenting on at this point. You haven't played the game at all. How do you know how the balance stacks up?

[Flaropri]

VS Snipers might to less damage against other Snipers... but they'll be more accurate. I don't see the problem.

[Cutter]

Does it really matter in the end? I mean let's face it...the VS are DOOMED no matter what. :)

[GarryPotter]

VS Snipers might to less damage against other Snipers... but they'll be more accurate. I don't see the problem.

The problem is that one can be lessened by skill, the other can not. You can be good at gauging distance and bullet drop, thus negating the accuracy issue somewhat via skill. You cannot use skill to negate damage drop over distance, unless you consider moving closer to the target to be "skill"

[Otleaz]

Snipers aren't a game changer at all. You pretty much just ignore them in ANY other shooter.

The only game I can think of where snipers are actually part of the fight and not some ignorable environmental hazard is Arma 2.

[Tatwi]

We're overpowered in all circumstances from our excess of style. I'm not concerned.

[SixShooter]

Funny, I don't feel underpowered......:huh:

[Baneblade]

Accuracy trumps all in sniping. But, I wouldn't try to snipe with a laser pointer either.

[willaguy]

I have thought about it, and I am starting to believe that the VS might be quite underpowered in terms of infantry combat. Why?

Well, in my opinion snipers play a very important role in infantry combat and base defense against infantry ( hate them or love them, you can't deny their battle effectiveness). And since the VS have the "bullets lose damage over time" perk, I think that the VS snipers might get raped by the enemy snipers. And same thing goes for the rest of the infantry, since the VS would lose in medium to long range battles because of their perk, they would have to get in CQ where they have no advantage over the other factions.

But hey, these are just my thoughts on the matter, and since I haven't played PS1 I don't know what to think.

So, what is your opinion on this matter?

I'm pretty sure that bullet-damage-drop for VS is only going to come in to play when you get to 200 yard ranges or more. The VS also have a slight AoE radius for their plasma based weapons.

[Flaropri]

The problem is that one can be lessened by skill, the other can not. You can be good at gauging distance and bullet drop, thus negating the accuracy issue somewhat via skill. You cannot use skill to negate damage drop over distance, unless you consider moving closer to the target to be "skill"

Lessened but not removed. You can get (via experience) a better sense of where bullet drop will go but it's still not going to have the accuracy that VS has.

[Forsaken One]

The problem is that one can be lessened by skill, the other can not. You can be good at gauging distance and bullet drop, thus negating the accuracy issue somewhat via skill. You cannot use skill to negate damage drop over distance, unless you consider moving closer to the target to be "skill"

This is one of the bullshit things of so called high risk high reward. The skill something takes should never, ever be a part of what makes it balanced. It should be balanced for anyone to use THEN those with the best skill can make the most use out of it.

I laugh when people one shot people with a sniper and think they have skill, its the overpowered stats and ability of the gun, they just derp around till they can use it right.

Snipers aren't a game changer at all. You pretty much just ignore them in ANY other shooter.

The only game I can think of where snipers are actually part of the fight and not some ignorable environmental hazard is Arma 2.

You haven't played many games with snipers in them have you? Snipers tend to be one of the most hated guns in fps games because its whole thing of high risk high reward just makes it one of the most bullshit guns of any game.

Hell even CS:S has the awp, combat arms snipers everywhere, in fact a lot of arena f2p fps games like combat arms which have small maps still see maybe 50%+ snipers on each team because of the bullshitness of the gun.

[SgtExo]

This is one of the bullshit things of so called high risk high reward. The skill something takes should never, ever be a part of what makes it balanced. It should be balanced for anyone to use THEN those with the best skill can make the most use out of it.

I laugh when people one shot people with a sniper and think they have skill, its the overpowered stats and ability of the gun, they just derp around till they can use it right.



You haven't played many games with snipers in them have you? Snipers tend to be one of the most hated guns in fps games because its whole thing of high risk high reward just makes it one of the most bullshit guns of any game.

Hell even CS:S has the awp, combat arms snipers everywhere, in fact a lot of arena f2p fps games like combat arms which have small maps still see maybe 50%+ snipers on each team because of the bullshitness of the gun.

Thats why snipers should be almost impossible to use in close range, snipers should just be viable at medium to long range.

[bbihah]

i don't think snipers will have anything to do with it.

VS seem to overuse Max units from PS1

and now the mag tank and scythe flghter there is why your infantry is low

AT Zerg 100 people 95 of them max's. :) no one left to actually cap the point.

Well simple answers to that. Did VS have any lock on/indirect AA except max?

How about AV?

Had far better chance doing good damage against ground vehicles( and not getting raped) if you had lock on/indirect(phoenix) weapons from afar than using the lancer.
better to use AV max to increase your survivability for that by being in a max suit.

[rTekku]

Snipers aren't a game changer at all. You pretty much just ignore them in ANY other shooter.

The only game I can think of where snipers are actually part of the fight and not some ignorable environmental hazard is Arma 2.

You must be new to FPS games.

"Quick scoping" is a term used for aggressive play with a Sniper Rifle in close quarters. This play style is extremely popular due to it being a potential one shot, one kill at close range.

[Knightwyvern]

You must be new to FPS games.

"Quick scoping" is a term used for aggressive play with a Sniper Rifle in close quarters. This play style is extremely popular due to it being a potential one shot, one kill at close range.

That's not "sniping."

[Sephirex]

You must be new to FPS games.

"Quick scoping" is a term used for aggressive play with a Sniper Rifle in close quarters. This play style is extremely popular due to it being a potential one shot, one kill at close range.

That tends to be used in games where the action of pulling up the scope isn't properly balanced. You don't tend to see quick-scoping in most FPS's.

[rTekku]

That's not "sniping."

I know that isn't sniping. The weapons themselves are a game changer. They are still Sniper Rifles regardless of which distance you're using them.

Actual "snipers"? Forget them.

[Mr DeCastellac]

Logically, the sniper rifles wouldn't lose damage over distance, since any sniper rifle's appeal is shooting from a long range.

I think people are really exaggerating the damage drop-off. It's just something they put in to make up for the fact that they fire straight.

As with anything, it'll get balanced and tweaked in the beta. We'll see.

[Knightwyvern]

I know that isn't sniping. The weapons themselves are a game changer. They are still Sniper Rifles regardless of which distance you're using them.

Actual "snipers"? Forget them.

Only if there actually is "quickscoping," and only if you immediately gain pinpoint accuracy when you look through your scope. If you can't raise your scope fast enough, or there is still a (movement based?) CoF when you use your scope, then this won't be a very viable tactic. Also, I believe that high powered rifles in PS2 won't be OSOK unless you get a headshot; they may be OSOK on an enemy infiltrator as well, I don't know. But this means that you will be hard pressed to one shot a very large percent of the player population, would need to get headshots every time, and have a very fast scope with no cone of fire. Seems unlikely to me.

Did you play the original PS? Several competent enemy snipers could wreak havoc on your defending base, stoping infantry from using their AV on tanks, AA on aircraft, nab them before they grabbed vehicles from the terminal.

[GarryPotter]

Lessened but not removed. You can get (via experience) a better sense of where bullet drop will go but it's still not going to have the accuracy that VS has.

Yes, and this could be a problem, but in the opposite direction you are going with it. The guns are balance such that one is accurate but does less damage, the others do more damage but are harder to hit with. That's all fine and dandy, but if you can be good enough with the NC/TR sniper to lessen their accuracy penalty, it could throw the balance off since their is no way to increase the damage of the VS sniper using skill/experience with the gun.

However, this is all theorycrafting right now. We have no idea how these weapons will feel and perform in relation to each other at the moment, and won't be able to realistically judge the balance until we get our hands on beta.

[Sephirex]

Only if there actually is "quickscoping," and only if you immediately gain pinpoint accuracy when you look through your scope. If you can't raise your scope fast enough, or there is still a (movement based?) CoF when you use your scope, then this won't be a very viable tactic. Also, I believe that high powered rifles in PS2 won't be OSOK unless you get a headshot; they may be OSOK on an enemy infiltrator as well, I don't know. But this means that you will be hard pressed to one shot a very large percent of the player population, would need to get headshots every time, and have a very fast scope with no cone of fire. Seems unlikely to me.

QFT
COD has a very unique set of game rules that make quickscoping even possible as a strategy. They tried to fix it in Black Ops, but it was already such a strong part of the game culture, it was re-implemented for MW3. In most FPS's it's not a viable strategy, and PS2 seems like it's going to be the same.

[Zalmoxis]

Well actually in pretty much all FPS using a sniper rifle at close range is a viable strategy, because of the TTK basically.


And I did also think about the fact that the other factions can compensate bullet drop via skill, and thus getting a bonus over the VS faction. I also thought about the fact that VS will basically have the best accuracy ingame at medium to long range, and in a way it's becoming a bit more balanced.

Well, for one, no player can compensate bulletdrop for each shot, unless he's an actual sniper/soldier and there's a rangefinder for every gun. And even though he will have the upper hand in terms of damage, the accuracy might make the DPM even for all factions. I guess there is no real way to know this until we get ingame and see for ourselves.

[Knightwyvern]

Well actually in pretty much all FPS using a sniper rifle at close range is a viable strategy, because of the TTK basically.


And I did also think about the fact that the other factions can compensate bullet drop via skill, and thus getting a bonus over the VS faction. I also thought about the fact that VS will basically have the best accuracy ingame at medium to long range, and in a way it's becoming a bit more balanced.

Well, for one, no player can compensate bulletdrop for each shot, unless he's an actual sniper/soldier and there's a rangefinder for every gun. And even though he will have the upper hand in terms of damage, the accuracy might make the DPM even for all factions. I guess there is no real way to know this until we get ingame and see for ourselves.

Good post. It's true that high powered rifles can be used at close range somewhat effectively, but it's almost always extreme close range due to the hipfire CoF they should have. I used to use my bolt driver in PS as my "ghetto shotgun" in very close range tower/hallway fights, and did quite well. On the other hand, I could have been even more effective with a sweeper, and MUCH more so with an HA weapon. Seems to me that as long as our sidearms are decent in PS2, they will still be the go-to close range weapons for infils. Those machine pistols in the E3 footage were beastly. On top of that we have nice standard semi autos and even scattershot pistols. I'll take hand sized shotgun any day! :D

[Ratstomper]

Well actually in pretty much all FPS using a sniper rifle at close range is a viable strategy, because of the TTK basically.

I used to bring my bolt driver into tower fights. not because it was super effective, but just because it was all I had besides AV. I rarely killed anyone with it (no 1-shot kills), but would give one person a bad day.

Well, for one, no player can compensate bulletdrop for each shot, unless he's an actual sniper/soldier and there's a rangefinder for every gun. And even though he will have the upper hand in terms of damage, the accuracy might make the DPM even for all factions. I guess there is no real way to know this until we get ingame and see for ourselves.

Yep. Pretty much.

[Zalmoxis]

Well if they do the sidearms as good as BF3 did, it should be perfect. Good enough to be used as an alternative, but not as good as the main weapon.

And yeah, when facing multiple opponents a shotgun is the go to gun in close battles, but it takes more skill with the laser cannon to do well in that situation. That's the fun in it: the challange ( and luck :D )

I don't know how it was in PS1 with sniper rifles, but in BF3 they did a good thing, making a shot to the chest or head with a bolt action a ohk in close battle. I think this would be the best approach to it in PS2.

[Ratstomper]

I don't know how it was in PS1 with sniper rifles, but in BF3 they did a good thing, making a shot to the chest or head with a bolt action a ohk in close battle. I think this would be the best approach to it in PS2.

There were no hit boxes in PS1, so a shot from a sniper rifle was never a ohk from full health and armor. It made sniping a pain in the ass, because 90% of the people you shot walked away and healed.

Quick-scoping isn't an issue if they implement sniping mechanics correctly. That means taking some time to actually bring up the scope and line up a shot making rifles fairly innaccurate when firing from the hip (that's fair AND realistic). Chest and head shot ohk is fine, so long as its difficult to hit them when you're within 15 ft of the guy you're shooting. Snipers would be able to get some lucky hip shots, but will bite the dust in very close quarters 90% of the time.

The problem lies in CoF vs recoil, though. I MUCH prefer recoil on automatic weapons, as it feels better. Sniper rifles would almost have to use CoF disturbances to encourage smooth leading of targets and inability to have pinpoint accuracy from the hip while moving, though.

[WorldOfForms]

I'm sure it wouldn't be annoying at all to have infiltrators turning invisible to hide in corners inside bases and then one-shotting people with sniper rifles at close range.

[Zalmoxis]

Well if it is easy to quickscope the guy 15 feet away then he's a complete noob and it's not really the game's fault :)

[Haro]

Still way too early to judge these things. Hypothetically, anything could be imbalanced at this point, since we have no numbers. However, I think there are plenty of advantages that could balance out the Vanu weapons. Lack of bullet drop, and I would guess a faster travel time, if not instant, VS weapons could be pretty precise at ranges, and often that can just be as good as a powerful rifle.

These discussions can wait for the next few weeks until most people get into beta, and we can actually get data to base our assumptions on. Everything before that is pure speculation, and not really helpful.

[Zalmoxis]

Well I did say in the op that this is just a speculation thread. What else can we do while we patiently wait for the beta? :)

[Ratstomper]

I'm sure it wouldn't be annoying at all to have infiltrators turning invisible to hide in corners inside bases and then one-shotting people with sniper rifles at close range.

Well, we've seen that cloaking isn't a permanent option like it was in PS1. You can only cloak for a certain amount of time before it has to recharge (think the spy in TF2). That means you likely won't see many guys camping in a stairwell or something with a sniper rifle. There MAY be a cloak pack that allows you to stand still and not drain energy, but I think the tradeoff is you can't have a sniper rifle with it.

I never enjoyed close range fighting with a sniper rifle anyway. It was always MUCH more satisfying to "pip the ace at 900 yards", so to speak. Learning to adjust, adapt and control to make incredibly long distance hits is what sniping is all about for me, but that may be because I grew up shooting.

I tried to find that clip from The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, but couldn't. :(

[Haro]

I understand, we're all bored and waiting for beta, but there is only so far a thread on speculation like this can go.

[Bruttal]

we have damage degradation over distance but high accuracy if am not mistaken. nothing like being at max pulsar distance noticing your hitting your target but only taking off like 0.01% health each shot and of course your shooting is slowed due to the extreme distance aiming. those were just wasted shots.

[Haro]

we have damage degradation over distance but high accuracy if am not mistaken. nothing like being at max pulsar distance noticing your hitting your target but only taking off like 0.01% health each shot and of course your shooting is slowed due to the extreme distance aiming. those were just wasted shots.

In all likelihood, weapons will most likely have a cut off for minimum damage after degradation, à la Call of Duty, until some ultimate range is reached where damage just doesn't work anymore.

For sniper rifles, this degredation will probably not stop for several hundred yards, which seems to be a soft cap on sniper rifle ease-of-use for all classes from videos I've seen. This is the point bullets will be dropping and deviating from original course that it will require either significant skill, luck, or some combination of both to hit. Also, VS rifles are likely to be a mid point between TR and NC rifles in terms of ROF and damage, so you will likely be able to put several rounds on targets at long range. This is pure guess work, and it depends on whether damage degradation will also influence other empire rifles (I don't think so, but maybe) and I would doubt that the VS would drop much below TR damage, since it wouldn't have the advantages of a high rate of fire and large magazine, and so it would be generally worse than TR weapons. This is all speculation, but it's how I see it turning out.

[Blackwolf]

Since when did snipers play a game changing part?



Every base assault launched from a tower or AMS? Every bridge battle? Most cave fights? Everywhere infantry fight in large open areas?

Ignorance is irritating, not bliss.

I don't think the DEVs would stick a sniper rifle in that was under par. It might be a continues laser that chews through the target in a second or two rather then a single bullet. Or it could be a high powered laser that will drop a target in one or two shots at "max range" but might not deal as much damage as an NC or TR rifle. As long as it serves it's primary function at the same level as the other two empires, I don't think the VS will be underpowered because of it.

I am worried about weaker weapons and armor compensating for higher maneuverability when it comes to VS vehicles though. The Scythe is particularly concerning to me because I REALLY want it to function exactly as described, but I know that if it does, it would be tremendously over powered compared to the others.

[Ratstomper]

Every base assault launched from a tower or AMS? Every bridge battle? Most cave fights? Everywhere infantry fight in large open areas?

Ignorance is irritating, not bliss.

Unless you're the ignorant. :D

[noxious]

What is with all these utterly pointless and speculative balance threads lately? There's no way for any of us to know which weapons/factions/classes/vehicles/items/etc are underpowered or overpowered until we've actually had a chance to play the game.

Simple adjustments to the numbers behind the scenes can completely alter the balance of power, so theorycrafting that Y must be underpowered because of Z is absurd, as the dev team can use unknown factors A-X to balance things out.

[Sephirex]

What is with all these utterly pointless and speculative balance threads lately? There's no way for any of us to know which weapons/factions/classes/vehicles/items/etc are underpowered or overpowered until we've actually had a chance to play the game.

Simple adjustments to the numbers behind the scenes can completely alter the balance of power, so theorycrafting that Y must be underpowered because of Z is absurd, as the dev team can use unknown factors A-X to balance things out.

If you take away all the pointless balance threads, the only posts left on these forums would be "I want Beta now!"

[Flaropri]

If you take away all the pointless balance threads, the only posts left on these forums would be "I want Beta now!"

Now now, there's also the occasional clever video or photo-shop... asking for beta...

[Ratstomper]

Now now, there's also the occasional clever video or photo-shop... asking for beta...

Or the ones complaining that the unfinished NC music sucks...

[BlueSkies]

Since when did snipers play a game changing part?


Never played PS1 did you?

Snipers, particularly in PS1, can function extremely well in the role of area denial. For instance, defending a base that had high ground on more than one side meant you weren't going outside if the attackers brought half-way decent snipers (disclaimer: most snipers in PS1 were/are terrible).

I can understand many people having a dim view of snipers after playing certain FPS titles. However in PS1, and hopefully PS2, it is a different situation.

On the other hand, I encourage you fine soldiers in the TR and VS to ignore the impact of snipers on the battlefield. It makes it easier :D

[Ratstomper]

Regular FPS maps aren't usually big enough to warrant any real sniping. Which is what led to quick-scoping becoming some kind of made up ub3rl33t skill. PS1 and PS2 should be different.

On the other hand, I encourage you fine soldiers in the TR and VS to ignore the impact of snipers on the battlefield. It makes it easier :D

I dunno. I like it when they try to run and hide. :evil:

[SGOniell]

Thus my added idea of it "melting" through the armor. It will be cooler than first fired, sure why not, but the "melting" quality could still retain greater penetration than the "punching" of a bullet, yes? This is sci-fi, after all.

That just doesn't work...Materials take such an amount of energy to alter them, in the case of these weapons its coming from the heat. Plus depending on the temperature all you could end up doing is altering the structure of the material causing it to transform from one to another. Like when you heat up steel you could end up with Cementite, Austenite, or Ferrite rather than what you started with. This would simply bring out other properties. Depending on how its done you could make it tougher and then you'd be screwed.

[Necronile]

That just doesn't work...Materials take such an amount of energy to alter them, in the case of these weapons its coming from the heat. Plus depending on the temperature all you could end up doing is altering the structure of the material causing it to transform from one to another. Like when you heat up steel you could end up with Cementite, Austenite, or Ferrite rather than what you started with. This would simply bring out other properties. Depending on how its done you could make it tougher and then you'd be screwed.
Why necro a thread?

[SGOniell]

OCD I guess, my new meds cause that. I see certain things and have to act on it. In this case explain basic material science cause it screams "wrong" to me.

[Saintlycow]

Why necro a thread?

With your user name, I'd expect you to do the thread necro-ing :lol:

[WSNeo]

That just doesn't work...Materials take such an amount of energy to alter them, in the case of these weapons its coming from the heat. Plus depending on the temperature all you could end up doing is altering the structure of the material causing it to transform from one to another. Like when you heat up steel you could end up with Cementite, Austenite, or Ferrite rather than what you started with. This would simply bring out other properties. Depending on how its done you could make it tougher and then you'd be screwed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfIMy-ebZRk