Regarding instakill via drop-pods

[avpmaster]

Seems to me as if the drop pods can become a massive annoyance if a player is apathetic about his k/d r, and constantly crashes down on enemy vehicles at the expense of his life. I just think that it's absurd that the prowess of a tank or a liberator becomes null knowing that a player can drop on it and destroy it, along with it's entire crew.

Suggestion: No damage penalty for vehicles / person in drop pod dies when collides with vehicle?

Just a thought.

[Timealude]

i imagine they arent really easy to aim and also its on a pretty long timer im also sure they can be shot out of the sky (source?)

[ruskyandrei]

I think you're going too far but I do agree.

Instead, I suggest the person in the drop pod take some damage (maybe down to 50% hp or so), and the impact target also take some damage ( a fixed amount, perhaps just enough to instantly kill infantry but only enough to do minor damage to something like an MBT or Lib/Gal).

[Rasui]

Random unavoidable death is a horrible thing to have in a game no matter how seldom it happens. I hope they take it out.

[Shinjorai]

Yeah because with the amount of people that are going to be on at any given time, even with the cooldown, it could get a little bit rediculous, i say on a direct hit let it do alot of damage but not completely destroy whatever it hits unless it was heavily damaged already.

Lets say you got two squads of griefers, thats 20 people, very possible it could happen, they all wait till their timer on the drop pods are reset and go on a griefing spree taking turns suicide bombing things, It could get a little out of hand and fast. So they definitely need to adjust the damage on it. I think its a reasonable mechanic they should keep in but not as an Insta Kill.

[Rivenshield]

I suggest the person in the drop pod take some damage (maybe down to 50% hp or so), and the impact target also take some damage ( a fixed amount, perhaps just enough to instantly kill infantry but only enough to do minor damage to something like an MBT or Lib/Gal).

That sounds about right.

OP raises a salient point, though. This is potentially one helluvan exploit. If a platoon of infantry hide their three spawn beacons in the area where, say, War Machine is operating... well... War Machine is toast. All that teamwork, all that heavy armor, all that careful preparation and coordination on their part -- as well as their fearful reputation -- is for naught, because a handful of kamikaze TR just guided their own personal Rods From God down on top of their Vannies.

As a loyal Terran, I think that's bullshit.

[Littleman]

These pods are large, fast, and extremely hot. I would imagine any aircraft basically having ANOTHER aircraft - built for atmospheric entry mind you - slamming into it would bring the bird down. The momentum alone would send even a galaxy careening into a fatal stall, never mind losing an entire wing.

Also considering these pods are designed to collide full speed into cold, hard earth, yeah... they're like giant bullets, nothing is going to take that and shrug it off.

Finally... I'm betting the insta-gibbing is more of a practical issue. What happens if a guy lands on a tank? Does he show up inside it? I'm sure the idea of landing on top of the tank has crossed SOE's minds, but they opted against it for reasons only they know.

But you know what I think? I think the solution to this problem is MUCH simpler: don't allow even the slightest amount of control over the pods decent. If you happen to cross right into that path, it really is your own fault. Extra points if actually hitting something in mid-air throws the pod off course.

BTW, that whole "hidden beacon, falling thunder" scenario is fairly contrived, and takes a good deal of teamwork in it's own right. Couple that with the fact that SOI's are likely to return - which will deny squad spawning within them, and possibly galaxy spawning as well - and really, I see sneaky people calling in a squad to bomb a forming tank column closer to an impossibility at worst, and a wasteful impracticality at best.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

I think you guys are really being ninnies about this. A drop pod killing what it lands on is perfectly fine. You can't really "AIM" the damn thing to any extent, you know. Even if you can nudge the course a little bit, unless something is stationary and DIRECTLY under you, your odds of hitting it are slim to nil.

Will it EVER happen? Yes, of course, just like people sometimes "win the lottery", but will people be able to consciously TARGET stuff with it? No, not so much... Seriously, don't worry so much.

[Helwyr]

[...] I think the solution to this problem is MUCH simpler: don't allow even the slightest amount of control over the pods decent.


That would seem reasonable, combined with with some audio and visual indicators that a pod is descending close to you I really don't think it would be an issue.

[Blackwolf]

Adding guide light from pod to target would be ideal I think. This gives plenty of warning for everyone under the pod to clear the area and also for-warns them of incoming infantry/MAX suits or whatever, making the use of squad spawning limited to non-combat situations.

Changing the fact that it insta kills stuff? Bad idea. If it lands on you, that much steel at that temperature traveling at that speed is not going to feel like a fluffy bunny.

[SFJake]

I think there is one simple solution to this:

Sound.

The pods are apprently dropping from space, right? They should be making a decent amount of noise and there should be an obvious visual. They're after all, breaking through the atmosphere and going at very high speed toward the ground. These things would be making a lot of noise.

In other words, the last thing they should be is subtle, in every way.

Not only does that make them more epic overall, but it also makes sure that anyone paying a minimum of attention to their surrounding will not get randomly squashed. It might still be dangerous on vehicles however, if they can't look up enough (can they?). I think they should be able to look as high as they want in Third Person even if the cannon doesn't follow.

[Blackwolf]

I think there is one simple solution to this:

Sound.

The pods are apprently dropping from space, right? They should be making a decent amount of noise and there should be an obvious visual. They're after all, breaking through the atmosphere and going at very high speed toward the ground. These things would be making a lot of noise.

In other words, the last thing they should be is subtle, in every way.

Not only does that make them more epic overall, but it also makes sure that anyone paying a minimum of attention to their surrounding will not get randomly squashed. It might still be dangerous on vehicles however, if they can't look up enough (can they?). I think they should be able to look as high as they want in Third Person even if the cannon doesn't follow.

Last I heard vehicles won't have 3rdPV

[noxious]

That sounds about right.

OP raises a salient point, though. This is potentially one helluvan exploit. If a platoon of infantry hide their three spawn beacons in the area where, say, War Machine is operating... well... War Machine is toast. All that teamwork, all that heavy armor, all that careful preparation and coordination on their part -- as well as their fearful reputation -- is for naught, because a handful of kamikaze TR just guided their own personal Rods From God down on top of their Vannies.

As a loyal Terran, I think that's bullshit.
Given the timer on squad spawning, it would take a non-trivial amount of coordination to orchestrate a strike like that. If the group of tanks remains mobile and aware of their surroundings (IE, have secondary gunners to watch the sky [for aircraft, not just drop pods, mind you]), then it should be possible for the vehicles to evade such a strike strike. Aircraft obviously do not have this luxury, but they also have much higher mobility-- as long as an aircraft remains mobile, only bad luck will cause death by drop pod.

[Wolftdb]

Maybe if they still have the drop but get rid of the Pod Halfway through the flight. Have the pod break into small sections which can either do damage or not. Make it similar to what is used in Section 8 Prejudice. That way there is no reason to have the Pod do so much damage and the delivery service is still the same.

[Raymac]

Adding guide light from pod to target would be ideal I think. This gives plenty of warning for everyone under the pod to clear the area and also for-warns them of incoming infantry/MAX suits or whatever, making the use of squad spawning limited to non-combat situations.

Changing the fact that it insta kills stuff? Bad idea. If it lands on you, that much steel at that temperature traveling at that speed is not going to feel like a fluffy bunny.

That's not a bad idea.

[Envenom]

It's pretty damn funny the first time. But I could see it getting really stale fast.

[Fenrys]

Don't stop moving in a vehicle and you'll be fine.

It's a counter to tanks camping building exits, but it's also a threat to deployed gals. A cloaker squad lead just needs to get close to the enemy gal, then order his squad to spawn on him.

[Stardouser]

I think you can see how silly drop pod bombing will be. Also, sphere of influence will protect defenders from being drop pod bombed by attackers but the reverse is not true(presumably). Even after the enemy has disabled your vehicle spawns you can use this to cheaply keep killing any enemy vehicles that get in among your base buildings.

[Rivenshield]

It's a counter to tanks camping building exits.

The counter is cloakers with things that go boom and lots of AV and aircraft flown in from other bases. Things that require teamwork.

This is an exploit and it's baloney.

[Blackwolf]

I think you can see how silly drop pod bombing will be. Also, sphere of influence will protect defenders from being drop pod bombed by attackers but the reverse is not true(presumably). Even after the enemy has disabled your vehicle spawns you can use this to cheaply keep killing any enemy vehicles that get in among your base buildings.

Personally I don't like the idea of sphere of influences. I'd rather see a guide light beacon similar to when an OS is called in PS1. You know it's coming and you can clear the spot and open fire on the target when he comes out. This makes the maneuver risky to balance out it's usefulness but doesn't force a restrictive rule on the battlefield that seriously dampens the feel of it being a battlefield.

[Ranik Ortega]

Drop pod insta kills are one of many issues i'm hoping the devs see the light on.

No way in hell is someone dropping in from space and being able to instant kill a vehicle in anyone fun for the people getting dropped on.

[Azarga]

I personally don't think that squad-spawning via drop-pod will be heavy exploitable even as it is now. Lots of options to limit possible exploits have already been proposed. I can throw in another.

It seems now drop-pods simply slam to the planet's surface. At full speed. Wow. That would definately destroy anything in it's pass. Perhaps even leave a crator. Put aside crators and stuff, it's still extremely hard impact. Okay, the drop-pod is not compressed into metal pancake - nanites give it strenght! But they don't, since devs said that drop-pods can be destroyed mid-air, so impact to the ground will outright destroy them. But what about squishy contents of this drop-pod? Well, it's sci-fi, so the soldier inside is protected by some nano-gel or something, which have to be removed before entering combat. Too complicated I think.

I think a little change to drop-pod's mechanic would be better.

Instead of slamming into the ground straight from the orbit, drop-pods dramaticaly decrease their speed before impact. It's sci-fi, so f*ck parachutes and sh*t. Let's use something kewl, like directional explosion or something like that.
Infantry will still have to die, if they were lucky enough to be under drop-pod, and you will think twice where to land so that you don't kill your squadmates on the ground - adds little bit more planning and depth to squad-spawning. But tanks, anything with decent armor does not need to be destroyed instantly. This 'brake-explosion' is directional, but not focused, it has little to no armor-penetration. So the tank is hit by significantly slowed personal transport device, not human-filled orbital bullet.
Aircraft cought in the way of not yet slowed drop-pod are still destroyed (mosquito, etc) or take huge amount of damage (galaxy). Serves them right, I think, aircraft floating in one place deserves to be destroyed and laughed at.

[Sledgecrushr]

I think getting insta gibbed by a drop pod is a lesser threat by far than being lit up by an os.

[Robotix]

My biggest worry about this is people using drop pods as ghetto Orbital Strikes against deployed Galaxies. Just have the Infiltrator squad leader stealth over to an enemy Galaxy and start dropping pods on it.

No thanks.

[Stardouser]

I think getting insta gibbed by a drop pod is a lesser threat by far than being lit up by an os.

Honestly, the lesser evil of all of it would be spawning on the ground next to your squad leader. That's the optimum choice; drop pods are just too exploitable and silly.

Lone wolves dying because the guy they were chasing spawned a squad member and they weren't running with a squad of their own isn't enough of a problem to outweigh it, and besides, there's just as good a chance he'll spawn with his back to you and you'll gun them both down.

As for the silliness argument, it's no sillier than endless troops running out of a galaxy and it's certainly less silly than drop pod bombing. And we'd still have SOI.

[ParisTeta]

There are many ideas to balance that, but does that help the gameplay?
Yes of course it would be realstic that getting hit by a droppod should have an effect, but hell it sucks gameplay wise, it happends so often already in the relaesed videos.

Droppod killing need to go!

Simple as that, there is no gameplay/flow reason to keep them.
Squad drop is bad enough, imagin a cloaker sneaking in, who is squad leader and then drop many troops in, instead of physicaly move them, which adds gameplay!

[Stardouser]

imagin a cloaker sneaking in, who is squad leader and then drop many troops in, instead of physicaly move them, which adds gameplay!

Haven't heard of sphere of influence? That problem has already been addressed.

[Ranik Ortega]

Haven't heard of sphere of influence? That problem has already been addressed.

Not if you are doing it out in the field.

[Stardouser]

Not if you are doing it out in the field.

Out in the field is different. Out in the field is not a cloaker sneaking into a base.

[Ranik Ortega]

Out in the field is different. Out in the field is not a cloaker sneaking into a base.

The problem is the same. One dude sitting out in the field can have people drop on him. A cloaker walking next to a tank should not give his squadmates the ability to instant kill tanks. No two ways around it.

[Stardouser]

The problem is the same. One dude sitting out in the field can have people drop on him. A cloaker walking next to a tank should not give his squadmates the ability to instant kill tanks. No two ways around it.

Then we're back to what I said. Drop pods are the problem here, and drop pod ramming/bombing is absolutely ridiculous. You should spawn on the ground next to your squad leader. That's the lesser evil.

Though, aren't cloakers supposed to get C4?

[Ranik Ortega]

Then we're back to what I said. Drop pods are the problem here, and drop pod ramming/bombing is absolutely ridiculous. You should spawn on the ground next to your squad leader. That's the lesser evil.

I'm more of a fan of two things

A) the drop pods should slow down on landing and only mildly hurt vehicles. Maybe the lightest vehicles or infantry should be killable by landing on them. If you land on a vehicle you should blow up in your drop pod and the Vehicle should take as much damage as one to two AV rounds to top armor.

B)Timers should not work the way they are currently suggested. Maybe make them last longer or maybe reset the timer everytime one person uses it out of the whole squad. Either way its something that is going to murder the gameplay once you have 2k people on a server and should be toned down beforehand.

[ParisTeta]

He`s somewhat right i forgot about the SOI, still, it`s not that much fun to die due drop pod, if you stand still, dosn`t matter where, you should be punished by real enemy fire, and not droppods.

There are many balance option, but why? What does the game (aka we) get from it? Nothing, just make them not clip or no damage. That is easy, effective and dosn`t subtrac from the gameplay.

[Renegadeknight]

I like the slow down someone had suggested before, but how about some auto AA guns engineers can place. Some of those should help prevent drop pods falling on your heads.

[Marinealver]

mabey there should be some sort of misshap say you land on a clif that is too steep or can crash it into something that will result in either you leaving the pod hurt or you destroy the pod with you inside it, wich prettymuch destroys the pod itself.

[Azarga]

mabey there should be some sort of misshap say you land on a clif that is too steep or can crash it into something that will result in either you leaving the pod hurt or you destroy the pod with you inside it, wich prettymuch destroys the pod itself.

I think this is how it stands now - you hit a tank or an aircraft with your drop-pod - you are both destroyed, thus you sacrifice your 3 minutes (or was it 5 minutes?) squad-spawn timer but destroy a single target. Yet many are still concerned.

I honestly see no problem here, if an infiltratos sneaks up on deployed Galaxy, then this Galaxy is as good as dead anyway and should be more cautious next time. I strongly believe it does not matter how it is destroyed then - by C4 or drop-pod-suicide-bomber.

I somehow agree with rage about instakilled tanks, but I have already proposed a solution to this (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showpost.php?p=795540&postcount=22) (clickable), and I think it is nice and balanced.

[Kezz]

There's no particular reason why a drop pod should automatically kill a tank: the impact of the pod with whatever it lands on is meant to be survivable by the occupant of the pod, so it can't be supersonic, or even terminal velocity (it could be called "terminal" for two reasons... :) ). Also, the drop pod is a one-use thing, and could be designed to largely have disintegrated before it reaches the ground. Just because it's survived re-entry doesn't necessarily mean it's really heavy and strong any more.

There's no particular reason why the drop pod should ever land on anything. For safe dropping, it should be required to land on mostly-flat, even terrain, which tanks and other vehicles decidely are not. The automatic guidance systems should make it impossible to land on things that can be avoided. Mid-air collisions, and ground units "Getting in the way" would still be possible, but they'd be accidents or by the design of the hit unit rather than the dropper.

Squad Spawn Ortillery would indeed be very amusing for the first day, then it would wear somewhat thin.

[Azarga]

The automatic guidance systems should make it impossible to land on things that can be avoided.

That would most definately be the case, if you need to deliver the soldier alive and unharmed. But on Auraxis all soldiers are basicaly immortal, so nobody seem to care much about safe landings.

[TheApoc]

from what i understand it wont be nearly as big an issue as one mite think. it will happen but i dont think it will be a real issue that can be exploited to be a problem..

[Kezz]

That would most definately be the case, if you need to deliver the soldier alive and unharmed. But on Auraxis all soldiers are basicaly immortal, so nobody seem to care much about safe landings.
A dead soldier is not sending lead/HE/plasma downrange where he was meant to be. A dead soldier who just used up his squad spawn could be out of the fight for a crucial period of time while he treks from the nearest fixed spawnpoint. Safe landings make tactical and strategic sense. Allowing the grunt to override the safety features on the off-chance that they'll occasionally be able to smash a tank is not something that military heirarchies are generally very keen on.

[Redshift]

Sounds like a good idea tbh, it's not random if you can guide it a bit, and it stops people from camping doors with tanks, looks good

[Vanath]

It's amazing the number of times this topic has come up. How many different threads are needed?

And based off the more recent reviews and videos I've seen anyone that drop-pods onto a vehicle will destroy the vehicle and kill themselves. It can be guided slightly but not enough to hit anything that isn't in the vicinity of where you will land anyway. So you'll occasionally have the option to kill yourself and waste the squad spawn to destroy a vehicle but it isn't going to happen every time you do it.

[Memeotis]

I think they still require some balancing, given that they can pretty much insta-kill any vehicle/player.

I think it's perfectly fair that a player drop pod can steer the trajectory slightly as he's dropping in, but I don't think he should be able to do so all the way down. From the little footage we've received so far, too many players/vehicles have been killed by drop pods, and although it's nowhere near as maneuverable, the drop pod is starting feel somewhat like a predator missile from CoD.

I think player's who drop in should only have a couple of seconds to adjust their trajectory, after which all you can do is cross your fingers. That way if you happen to score a kill dropping in, it's either down to luck or skill, not because you're playing some seemingly EZ-mode mini-game.

[Pyreal]

The real issue is Squad spawn. Timers or no, I don't like it.

SOI should effect squad spawn.

[Littleman]

Have been playing for a while...

While I have some suspicion he could have meant "Haven't been playing for a while," that phrase alone indicates to me he's had more than a few weeks-old 30-minute-to-one-hours sessions under his belt.

[OnexBigxHebrew]

I think they still require some balancing, given that they can pretty much insta-kill any vehicle/player.

I think it's perfectly fair that a player drop pod can steer the trajectory slightly as he's dropping in, but I don't think he should be able to do so all the way down. From the little footage we've received so far, too many players/vehicles have been killed by drop pods, and although it's nowhere near as maneuverable, the drop pod is starting feel somewhat like a predator missile from CoD.

I think player's who drop in should only have a couple of seconds to adjust their trajectory, after which all you can do is cross your fingers. That way if you happen to score a kill dropping in, it's either down to luck or skill, not because you're playing some seemingly EZ-mode mini-game.

I think this one has it's own thread already, could be wrong.

[Stardouser]

The real issue is drop pods, they should be removed in favor of just spawning on the ground, it's much more balanced:
1. You can't use it to get on rooftops
2. You can't drop pop bomb which is completely ridiculous
3. Drop pods will get sickening to use after a while
4. Unlike what people claim, spawning on the ground is not silly, certainly not as silly as drop pod bombing, and no more silly than endless people running out of a Galaxy. In fact, it's no more silly than the idea of respawning at all.
5. Chasing a squad leader and dying because an extra guy spawned is not an issue. First, there's a good chance you will simply gun them both down as the guy spawning in is unprepared, and secondly, if you were lone wolfing, that was your choice.
6. There will still be sphere of influence, so even with spawning on the ground next to your leader, you still won't be able to do it inside a base.

[Hmr85]

I am in favor of removing drop pods and Squad spawn all together. Bring back the AMS and it will take care of this problem. Otherwise put a SOI around the base with a AA gun on top that shoots down inc drop pods.

[bigcracker]

Drop pods and squad spawning gonna stay.

[Pyreal]

With Squad spawn they are talking away the whole mechanic of getting your AMS (now Galaxy) into position to support the cap.

And if you say that its a timer and therefore doesn't negate the Galaxy spawn, why have it in the first place?

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

[bigcracker]

With Squad spawn they are talking away the whole mechanic of getting your AMS (now Galaxy) into position to support the cap.

And if you say that its a timer and therefore doesn't negate the Galaxy spawn, why have it in the first place?

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Squad spawning gonna let you get back to the front line for a period of time as seen in the video its on a timer. Now the galaxy is gonna let you spawn away from the battle as a galaxy is so huge i dont think you wanna put it at the frontline. So we the drop pods you have a chance to keep the fight going which is always a good thing.

[Stardouser]

With Squad spawn they are talking away the whole mechanic of getting your AMS (now Galaxy) into position to support the cap.

And if you say that its a timer and therefore doesn't negate the Galaxy spawn, why have it in the first place?

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Not really, because squads WILL get wiped early and often and if there is no Galaxy there to respawn the leader, then it's a huge problem when you have to run all the way back from wherever you came from - perhaps even fly back from the foothold. Numerically, squad spawn might reduce the number of total spawn throughput that actually passes through deployed galaxies, but because squad leaders will die often, they are still supporting the cap because every time a squad leader respawns at the galaxy, then every squad spawn that takes place on him after that was directly facilitated by the Galaxy.

[Badjuju]

Already a thread for this. I personally think drop pods for squad spawning is a great idea personally. Just ad the SOI back in, which I believe they may be doing. Vehicles shouldn't be as condensed, shouldn't be moving slow if they are smart, and opposing forces wont be overlapping as much outside of bases. Drop pod bombing will be much more rare. Personally I don't wan't it to go away though, I think its pretty awesome and I don't foresee it being a problem.

Im not sure the SOI is necessary though, lets wait for beta before we keep making these threads.

[Hamma]

Merged threads.

[Xyntech]

With Squad spawn they are talking away the whole mechanic of getting your AMS (now Galaxy) into position to support the cap.

And if you say that its a timer and therefore doesn't negate the Galaxy spawn, why have it in the first place?

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Because squad spawning is replacing the HART. It's a way to spawn into a continent and join your squad, regardless of if there is a spawn point nearby or not, and get into the game quicker. Much quicker than the shitty HART timer, that's for sure.

The drop pods just need a few tweaks here and there to balance them. Some of those tweaks are already on their way.

[Kezz]

With Squad spawn they are talking away the whole mechanic of getting your AMS (now Galaxy) into position to support the cap.

And if you say that its a timer and therefore doesn't negate the Galaxy spawn, why have it in the first place?

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
Just because you have one additional tool doesn't make existing tools useless. It helps keep a squad together, and if you can spawn at the GAL, it's probably better to, most of the time, and save your squad spawn for "one hard push" (or if you're the last Medic to go down and the others are still en route from the hard spawnpoint; I'm sure we're capable of coming up with other tactical reasons to reserve your "once in a while" spawn-where-needed). It's a way for your squad to muster "in the field", or for a straggler to catch up when the fixed or mobile spawnpoint nearest the squad's location is unavailable to the straggler (though it looks like your selection of potential spawnpoints might be larger than the PS1 AMS/Tower/Base/Bind/Sanc choices - I'm certainly not clear on how the available respawn points will be restricted in PS2).

[Stardouser]

Because squad spawning is replacing the HART. It's a way to spawn into a continent and join your squad, regardless of if there is a spawn point nearby or not, and get into the game quicker. Much quicker than the shitty HART timer, that's for sure.

The drop pods just need a few tweaks here and there to balance them. Some of those tweaks are already on their way.

The HART could be used to spawn places directly from the sanctuary.

Can squad spawning actually be used to spawn on your squad leader from anywhere in the game world? If not, it doesn't seem to perform quite the same function.

[avpmaster]

These pods are large, fast, and extremely hot. I would imagine any aircraft basically having ANOTHER aircraft - built for atmospheric entry mind you - slamming into it would bring the bird down. The momentum alone would send even a galaxy careening into a fatal stall, never mind losing an entire wing.

Also considering these pods are designed to collide full speed into cold, hard earth, yeah... they're like giant bullets, nothing is going to take that and shrug it off.

Finally... I'm betting the insta-gibbing is more of a practical issue. What happens if a guy lands on a tank? Does he show up inside it? I'm sure the idea of landing on top of the tank has crossed SOE's minds, but they opted against it for reasons only they know.

But you know what I think? I think the solution to this problem is MUCH simpler: don't allow even the slightest amount of control over the pods decent. If you happen to cross right into that path, it really is your own fault. Extra points if actually hitting something in mid-air throws the pod off course.

BTW, that whole "hidden beacon, falling thunder" scenario is fairly contrived, and takes a good deal of teamwork in it's own right. Couple that with the fact that SOI's are likely to return - which will deny squad spawning within them, and possibly galaxy spawning as well - and really, I see sneaky people calling in a squad to bomb a forming tank column closer to an impossibility at worst, and a wasteful impracticality at best.

Sorry for going off topic, but just gotta reply to this.


What you stated above is true, it would be completely unrealistic if a drop pod, traveling at such a high velocity crashed on a vehicle, only to have it suffer no damage. However, this is a video game, not a futuristic military simulator, so I think it's fair to compromise some realism for gameplay balance.

[Novice bot]

Sorry for going off topic, but just gotta reply to this.


What you stated above is true, it would be completely unrealistic if a drop pod, traveling at such a high velocity crashed on a vehicle, only to have it suffer no damage. However, this is a video game, not a futuristic military simulator, so I think it's fair to compromise some realism for gameplay balance.

What balance? Someone sacrifices their timer just to drop down a tank that has stayed still for 2 minutes straight? A life for a life, obviously.

[Xyntech]

The HART could be used to spawn places directly from the sanctuary.

Can squad spawning actually be used to spawn on your squad leader from anywhere in the game world? If not, it doesn't seem to perform quite the same function.

The HART was used to get into the fight after logging in.

Squad spawning will be used to join up with your team after logging in.

The speed and style will be a little different, but I do believe it's meant to fill a similar role. I don't think it's an accident that they both use drop pods.

[Ranik Ortega]

What balance? Someone sacrifices their timer just to drop down a tank that has stayed still for 2 minutes straight? A life for a life, obviously.

A free squad spawners life != A Tank life. Anyone still arguing that someone respawning should be able to kamikaze a vehicle is delusional.

[Arcticus]

I think drop-pod should stay and insta-kill on both pod and vehicle should remain. Don't stay near a drop pod beacon.

I agree that a single drop pod should not be able to insta-kill a deployed gal spawner; that's too big a reward for squad spawning. This can be fixed by the gal receiving only partial damage (pod is destroyed to avoid 2 enemies occupying same space). Alternatively, a deployed gal that's spawn-capable can have a small SOI around it to avoid the d-pod mechanic.

Although I can understand if the devs tell us that, if you want to avoid your gal being destroyed by a d-pod, then don't let squad spawn-certed enemy near your gal.

[Ranik Ortega]

I think drop-pod should stay and insta-kill on both pod and vehicle should remain. Don't stay near a drop pod beacon.

I agree that a single drop pod should not be able to insta-kill a deployed gal spawner; that's too big a reward for squad spawning. This can be fixed by the gal receiving only partial damage (pod is destroyed to avoid 2 enemies occupying same space). Alternatively, a deployed gal that's spawn-capable can have a small SOI around it to avoid the d-pod mechanic.

Although I can understand if the devs tell us that, if you want to avoid your gal being destroyed by a d-pod, then don't let squad spawn-certed enemy near your gal.

ALL enemies are squad spawn certified the certifications just make it EVEN faster and easier to use. And there are NO squad spawn beacons to show incoming spawns. So wrong and wrong.

No one should ever get a free kill for just showing up on the map. It's a broken mechanic and should be changed.

[Stardouser]

Although I can understand if the devs tell us that, if you want to avoid your gal being destroyed by a d-pod, then don't let squad spawn-certed enemy near your gal.

The devs telling us that doesn't make it right.

Also, there will be hit and run attacks - I died, so I don't immediately respawn, and my light assault squad leader sneaks into range then makes a run for the galaxy and uses his jump jets at the last minute. Then, when he thinks he's been seen, he tells me to spawn. So I do, and even if he dies after that, it's all over, boom, I land on the galaxy. And since they will be somewhat steerable, he doesn't have to make it all the way.

[Rhyfelwrr]

It worked well in bf2142 and although occasionally it landed on a dropship or gunship okay the player got a couple of kills but people accepted it and moved on,

I think those crying over it should just accept the fact that it will happen and you are not invincible. You will die, multiple times.

I think the only change that should be made is that spawning on your squadleader but not anyone else. Mechanic brings teamwork in sticking together and keeping SL alive.

[Sledgecrushr]

The devs telling us that doesn't make it right.

Also, there will be hit and run attacks - I died, so I don't immediately respawn, and my light assault squad leader sneaks into range then makes a run for the galaxy and uses his jump jets at the last minute. Then, when he thinks he's been seen, he tells me to spawn. So I do, and even if he dies after that, it's all over, boom, I land on the galaxy. And since they will be somewhat steerable, he doesn't have to make it all the way.

Drop pods shouldnt be steerable. I think this would fix a lot of the issues with kamikaze pod pilots.

[Arcticus]

ALL enemies are squad spawn certified the certifications just make it EVEN faster and easier to use. And there are NO squad spawn beacons to show incoming spawns. So wrong and wrong.

No one should ever get a free kill for just showing up on the map. It's a broken mechanic and should be changed.

My mistake, I thought that, even if you had the cert you would have to give up an ability slot in order for the cert to be active on the ground and, therefore, not ALL enemies would be squad spawn targets.

I also thought that there would be beacons visible to all for the squad spawn.

[Ranik Ortega]

My mistake, I thought that, even if you had the cert you would have to give up an ability slot in order for the cert to be active on the ground and, therefore, not ALL enemies would be squad spawn targets.

I also thought that there would be beacons visible to all for the squad spawn.

From what gameplay i've seen the squad leader is the one who gives squad spawning. He may not be very good at it but its a free default ability. And from the vids i couldn't notice a trail or beacon as the drop pods were heading downwards.

The real solution is thus Drop pod slamming at full speed into the ground = dead occupant.

Slow the drop pod down as it lands, make it landing on a vehicle count as 1-2 AV rounds of damage to top armor and damage the occupant of the drop pod as well by a quarter to half health.

It still makes it fun and sometimes tactical to land on enemy vehicles but this isn't a freaking meteor coming out of the sky its a pod which is supposed to LAND SAFELY

[avpmaster]

What balance? Someone sacrifices their timer just to drop down a tank that has stayed still for 2 minutes straight? A life for a life, obviously.

Yes, a life is a life, but should a lone infantryman be able to take out a liberator or a MBT, just because he is in the pod? Vehicles are supposed to give an edge over small groups of infantry, but can be quickly eliminated if a player sacrifices himself via pod. Just seems bs to me.

It's just that my main concern is if a squad agrees to sacrifice themselves, and kamikaze a horde of incoming tanks as a form of "effective" defense.

[Arcticus]

The devs telling us that doesn't make it right.

Also, there will be hit and run attacks - I died, so I don't immediately respawn, and my light assault squad leader sneaks into range then makes a run for the galaxy and uses his jump jets at the last minute. Then, when he thinks he's been seen, he tells me to spawn. So I do, and even if he dies after that, it's all over, boom, I land on the galaxy. And since they will be somewhat steerable, he doesn't have to make it all the way.

While I think my first solution (spawnable gal having a small SOI) is a perfect solution to this, I think I would like to see your "sneaky LA" squad leader in action; sounds like a regular James Bond. Lucky for him all gal pilots will be trained to land and deploy their gals for maximum vulnerability.

Again, I don't think a deployed gal should be vulnerable to d-pods... Let alone a single d-pod. But don't you think the devs will wait and see how it plays out? They are going into beta with many questions about spawn-capable gals. I personally don't think these will last on the ground for too long. Not because of d-pods, but because they are a giant bullseye.

So let me ask you this. What do you think of the spawnable gal having a small SOI to avoid d-pods?

[Ranik Ortega]

From what gameplay i've seen the squad leader is the one who gives squad spawning. He may not be very good at it but its a free default ability. And from the vids i couldn't notice a trail or beacon as the drop pods were heading downwards.

The real solution is thus Drop pod slamming at full speed into the ground = dead occupant.

Slow the drop pod down as it lands, make it landing on a vehicle count as 1-2 AV rounds of damage to top armor and damage the occupant of the drop pod as well by a quarter to half health.

It still makes it fun and sometimes tactical to land on enemy vehicles but this isn't a freaking meteor coming out of the sky its a pod which is supposed to LAND SAFELY

Quoting myself for emphasis and in the hope someone will actually read it for once.

[Sturmhardt]

Random unavoidable death is a horrible thing to have in a game no matter how seldom it happens. I hope they take it out.

Thats exactly my thought. You cant do anything about it because you wont notice it until you are dead. Thats just not fun.

[Azarga]

Yes, a life is a life, but should a lone infantryman be able to take out a liberator or a MBT, just because he is in the pod? Vehicles are supposed to give an edge over small groups of infantry, but can be quickly eliminated if a player sacrifices himself via pod. Just seems bs to me.


You say that like every drop-pod at any given time has two options: land safely or kamikaze into something for 100% kill.

Not always SL is near enemy vehicle that can be pod-bombed, it is very situational use. Yes, you can steer your drop-pod a little, but it's not really maneuverable, it doesn't lock on enemy vehicles, you will have to target your fall pretty well to actually hit something.

Don't get me wrong, I don't say that it will never happen, it certainly will, but not as often as some of us fear. Yes, we've seen people get drop-pod bombed in those videos, but it's mostly when they stay in one place, and it happened a lot. Remember how TB had to switch cam multiple times to find someone actually moving/doing something? People played PS for their first times and had no idea what to do and what to expect, especially not a drop pod coming at them from the orbit. Once people get used to enviroment a little bit they no longer will be such an easy targets.

[Ranik Ortega]

Stuff

A free instant kill is still completely unfun for the ones killed. No explanations can change that. See my post above

[Arcticus]

It's just that my main concern is if a squad agrees to sacrifice themselves, and kamikaze a horde of incoming tanks as a form of "effective" defense.

This being your main concern, I would like to attempt to address it as it may clear up some things for me about the squad spawn dynamic. Can you tell me how the suicide squad gets this done?

1)assuming the leader is able to approach the tank formation, is it that the entire squad can respawn on the kamikaze leader at the same time?

2) is the dpod so maneuverable that the dpod squad is able to stretch themselves out to match the area taken up by the incoming tank formation?

[Azarga]

A free instant kill is still completely unfun for the ones killed. No explanations can change that. See my post above

It's not more free or instant then being sniped-down. You stay still - you die. You move - you will likely survive.

[Stardouser]

While I think my first solution (spawnable gal having a small SOI) is a perfect solution to this, I think I would like to see your "sneaky LA" squad leader in action; sounds like a regular James Bond. Lucky for him all gal pilots will be trained to land and deploy their gals for maximum vulnerability.

On this point specifically, if you deploy your Galaxy so that it's behind cover to protect from long range tank shelling or base turrets from seeing it, then the same cover against being shelled by tanks provides that squad leader with cover to approach the galaxy without being seen. And even if we forget about drop pods for a moment, C4 is going to be ubiquitous now.


Again, I don't think a deployed gal should be vulnerable to d-pods... Let alone a single d-pod. But don't you think the devs will wait and see how it plays out? They are going into beta with many questions about spawn-capable gals. I personally don't think these will last on the ground for too long. Not because of d-pods, but because they are a giant bullseye.

So let me ask you this. What do you think of the spawnable gal having a small SOI to avoid d-pods?

I think that deployable galaxies having a soi is a bad idea because simply removing the drop pods is the right answer. Sure, adding a SOI might prevent drop pod bombing of galaxies, but that's only one example. What about all the other drop pod bombing? What about defenders? If your team owns the galaxy, you can defensively drop pod bomb any tanks that come up without interference from own team's SOI. Same is true for larger bases, if you own the base your own guys will be able to drop pod bomb any tanks that come in.

Drop pods have more negatives than positives and only cause even more people to be biased against squad spawning.

[Ranik Ortega]

It's not more free or instant then being sniped-down. You stay still - you die. You move - you will likely survive.

Terrible example. The sniper had to move into place and risks exposure. The sniper cannot blow up a heavily armored vehicle either. The drop pod can sacrifice his life to kill something that he has no right killing that easily. Drop the Strawman.

Pasting it AGAIN so someone might read the damn thing.

The real solution is thus Drop pod slamming at full speed into the ground = dead occupant.

Slow the drop pod down as it lands, make it landing on a vehicle count as 1-2 AV rounds of damage to top armor and damage the occupant of the drop pod as well by a quarter to half health.

It still makes it fun and sometimes tactical to land on enemy vehicles but this isn't a freaking meteor coming out of the sky its a pod which is supposed to LAND SAFELY

[Azarga]

And even if we forget about drop pods for a moment, C4 is going to be ubiquitous now.


You just want to protect careless galaxy pilots at all costs. Quote prooves it. :)

[Ranik Ortega]

You just want to protect careless galaxy pilots at all costs. Quote prooves it. :)

Once again strawman argument. The infiltrator risks failure and death trying to approach the galaxy. YOU CANNOT KILL THE DROP POD IN FLIGHT.

[Pepsi]

Here's the two step system to determine whether an anti-vehicle weapon or tactic is balanced or not:
1) It has to take a measure of skill
or
2) It has to have a chance to be evaded by the pilot.

That's it. I'm going to say pointing where you want the drop pod to go doesn't take any measure of skill, and as far as I know you can't see the drop pod coming (correct me if I'm wrong), so it fails both of these tests.

This just seems like a random, gimmicky mechanic that only serves as a first time hilarious way to die that is quickly followed up by groans of disgust the following times you are killed by it. It doesn't expand the depth of air or anti-air gameplay.

[Ranik Ortega]

Here's the two step system to determine whether an anti-vehicle weapon or tactic is balanced or not:
1) It has to take a measure of skill
or
2) It has to have a chance to be evaded by the pilot.

That's it. I'm going to say pointing where you want the drop pod to go doesn't take any measure of skill, and as far as I know you can't see the drop pod coming (correct me if I'm wrong), so it fails both of these tests.

This just seems like a random, gimmicky mechanic that only serves as a first time hilarious way to die that is quickly followed up by groans of disgust the following times you are killed by it. It doesn't expand the depth of air or anti-air gameplay.

Bingo. I couldn't put it better if I tried. "oh but its your fault for staying still" as if that changes anything considering you can't actually see it coming.

[Badjuju]

I think you guys are really being ninnies about this. A drop pod killing what it lands on is perfectly fine. You can't really "AIM" the damn thing to any extent, you know. Even if you can nudge the course a little bit, unless something is stationary and DIRECTLY under you, your odds of hitting it are slim to nil.

Will it EVER happen? Yes, of course, just like people sometimes "win the lottery", but will people be able to consciously TARGET stuff with it? No, not so much... Seriously, don't worry so much.

Exactly.. people act like you will be able to chose where the drop pod begins to descend then chase down vehicles with it. You spawn over your squad leader and have very limited mobility. How often do you really expect a galaxy or lib be sitting still over your squad leader waiting for you to drop on him. Dropping at the perfect moment to hit a moving vehicle will be even more rare.

[Azarga]

Pasting it AGAIN so someone might read the damn thing.


No use, nobody cares - I suggested almost the same thing on pages 2 and 3, and it got completely ignored.

As to right to destroy something. Kamikaze-podder has to actually hit his target with barely controlable drop-pod (takes some, if small, degree of skill) and sacrifices all other opportunities to harm his enemy he would have if he landed safely. He exclude himself from fight for time needed to get to actions by means other than squad-spawning.

YOU CANNOT KILL THE DROP POD IN FLIGHT.

That is just wrong, you can.

[Arcticus]

I think that deployable galaxies having a soi is a bad idea because simply removing the drop pods is the right answer. Sure, adding a SOI might prevent drop pod bombing of galaxies, but that's only one example. What about all the other drop pod bombing? What about defenders? If your team owns the galaxy, you can defensively drop pod bomb any tanks that come up without interference from own team's SOI. Same is true for larger bases, if you own the base your own guys will be able to drop pod bomb any tanks that come in.

Drop pods have more negatives than positives and only cause even more people to be biased against squad spawning.

I'd like to know how manueverable these dpods are. I'm certainly not advocating an SOI radius of tank shelling range. The squad leader would still have expose himself to approach the tanks, if he's wanting to use his squad spawn timer as an artillery shell.

I think the many spawning at the gal would be a bigger danger To the tanks than the possible one hit wonders dropping out of the sky on a timed basis.

[Ranik Ortega]

No use, nobody cares - I suggested almost the same thing on pages 2 and 3, and it got completely ignored.





That is just wrong, you can.

Meh it's a good change to instant kills. And as far as killing drop pods. Proof? I haven't seen that in any of the vids and even then they'd have to be frail or slow their descent to make it viable.

[Timealude]

i still think people are over reacting a little bit in this thread the reason the drop pods are steer able is so you can land safely like if you are falling and there are mines on the ground your squad will tell you so you can land away safely from this, they also dont look to be that steerable. You can move maybe a few inches to the left but thats about it. People in this thread are acting like you can turn it to 45 degree angles and aim right for a veh. If you are in a veh and get hit by one you either have bad luck or that person is really good and targeting you out. Its going to be the same thing with an OS. This is also like in the E3 demo where people were worried about pilots jumping out of aircraft shooting another with an AV weapon and hoping back in, its totally based on skill.

[Badjuju]

Bingo. I couldn't put it better if I tried. "oh but its your fault for staying still" as if that changes anything considering you can't actually see it coming.

There is this thing called tactics.. Staying still in a huge target is not tactical. It looks like it will be very hard to hit a moving target with a drop pod, and you will have to be incredibly lucky with the timing of your spawn and their path. If some one is hovering still over the other team with a giant vehicle and get hits with a drop pod, then yes it is their fault for not recognizing that they put themselves in a dangerous situation; and not just because a drop pod could drop on them.

[Stardouser]

There is this thing called tactics.. Staying still in a huge target is not tactical. It looks like it will be very hard to hit a moving target with a drop pod, and you will have to be incredibly lucky with the timing of your spawn and their path. If some one is hovering still over the other team with a giant vehicle and get hits with a drop pod, then yes it is their fault for not recognizing that they put themselves in a dangerous situation; and not just because a drop pod could drop on them.

But SOE leaving ridiculous kill methods in the game isn't a valid response to enemy tactics, poor or otherwise.

Camping, or shall we say, any stationary positioning, because defending from fixed positions isn't camping(if it were, setting up 5 MAXes behind a tower door with engineers behind them would be the ultimate camp) is a valid tactic. Blind hate for stationary tactics doesn't make ridiculous kill methods right or fun.

[Ranik Ortega]

There is this thing called tactics.. Staying still in a huge target is not tactical. It looks like it will be very hard to hit a moving target with a drop pod, and you will have to be incredibly lucky with the timing of your spawn and their path. If some one is hovering still over the other team with a giant vehicle and get hits with a drop pod, then yes it is their fault for not recognizing that they put themselves in a dangerous situation; and not just because a drop pod could drop on them.

Tactics sometimes = STANDING STILL SO YOU CAN GET A CLEAR SHOT. So yeah your theory is out of the window :D

[Azarga]

And as far as killing drop pods. Proof? I haven't seen that in any of the vids...

If I recall correctly this was in dev's comments in one of those pre-e3 videos. Since then I personally haven't seen devs stating the opposite, so I guess it's still correct.
Yes, we haven't yet seen drop-pods to be shot mid-air. But it can be explained - either people just not used to fire at drop-pods, drop-pods are barely seen / heard (if so, that is the problem, I agree, drop-pod should be a bright loud target I believe), or something of potential is not yet implemented as mission system and other stuff.

As to slowing down, I have already wrote it and I will repeat myself - drop-pods should decrease their speed before hitting the ground thus being unable to instantly destroy armored targets.

Tactics sometimes = STANDING STILL SO YOU CAN GET A CLEAR SHOT. So yeah your theory is out of the window :D

This tactic has an obvious disadvantage - becoming significantly more vulnerable. Seems like legit trade-off. :)

[Ranik Ortega]

If I recall correctly this was in dev's comments in one of those pre-e3 videos. Since then I personally haven't seen devs stating the opposite, so I guess it's still correct.
Yes, we haven't yet seen drop-pods to be shot mid-air. But it can be explained - either people just not used to fire at drop-pods, drop-pods are barely seen / heard (if so, that is the problem, I agree, drop-pod should be a bright loud target I believe), or something of potential is not yet implemented as mission system and other stuff.

As to slowing down, I have already wrote it and I will repeat myself - drop-pods should decrease their speed before hitting the ground thus being unable to instantly destroy armored targets.

On that we are agreed. if they slow down on descent it makes them easier to shoot as well. So 100% behind this.

This tactic has an obvious disadvantage - becoming significantly more vulnerable. Seems like legit rade-off. More vulnerable to other players. Not instant kill drop pods :D

[Stardouser]

I suspect you can kill drop pods, but tanks can't fire straight up. And if they were that easy to kill by people around the battlefield, then squad spawning would be a non-viable method of getting to the fight.


More vulnerable to other players. Not instant kill drop pods :D

This. There is SO much hate for ANY stationary tactic, that if you could just look at players or vehicles that aren't moving and make them explode, people would say it's fine because you can avoid it by moving.

[Badjuju]

Tactics sometimes = STANDING STILL SO YOU CAN GET A CLEAR SHOT. So yeah your theory is out of the window :D

You stand still to get a shot and you put your self at risk, this is what we call a trade off and risk/reward. Theory still stands.

[Arcticus]

Tactics sometimes = STANDING STILL SO YOU CAN GET A CLEAR SHOT. So yeah your theory is out of the window :D

It's not just about standing still. It's about standing still where the enemy is or has been in the last few seconds.

[Ranik Ortega]

You stand still to get a shot and you put your self at risk, this is what we call a trade off and risk/reward. Theory still stands.

i like how you cannot comprehend that a drop pod is not the same as someone actually risking exposure to kill you. but i guess some people just want to ignore core points.

It's not just about standing still. It's about standing still where the enemy is or has been in the last few seconds.

It's a good thing tanks can see infiltrators just fine. oh wait.

[Azarga]

i like how you cannot comprehend that a drop pod is not the same as someone actually risking exposure to kill you. but i guess some people just want to ignore core points.



It's a good thing tanks can see infiltrators just fine. oh wait.

Drop-pod is not risking exposure - if it hits the target, drop-pods content are not exposed, they are dead.

Problem with not seeing something resolves through teamplay and cooperation.
Drop-pod bombing pre-requires these two things.

[Ranik Ortega]

Drop-pod is not risking exposure - if it hits the target, drop-pods content are not exposed, they are dead.

Problem with not seeing something resolves through teamplay and cooperation.
Drop-pod bombing pre-requires these two things.

And the value of a single grunt DOES NOT EQUAL THE VALUE OF A VEHICLE.

Teamplay = Infiltrator sneaking up and lazing a target for drop pod drop. Risking exposure by sight of the laser and sound

Solo = Infiltrator just standing around completely hidden. and someone can freely spawn in to kill a vehicle.

Solution = No squad spawning unless the squad leader lazes an area?

[Stardouser]

Drop-pod is not risking exposure - if it hits the target, drop-pods content are not exposed, they are dead.

Problem with not seeing something resolves through teamplay and cooperation.
Drop-pod bombing pre-requires these two things.

Drop pod bombing is just a instant kill at the expense of a death. You aren't required to put any time into approaching the target and risking dying without getting any kills, you just need to hit.

Also, you could have 20 guys around you, they aren't likely to be looking up, either. And in a larger battle, the people who are far enough away from you to see it coming down, won't know exactly who it's going to hit and thus won't be able to warn anyone specific. And if drop pods are easy to shoot down by people who are far enough away from you to see them without looking up, then drop pods are a non-viable spawn method.

[Badjuju]

Drop pods bouncing off air crafts would just be silly for one. More importantly a drop pod dropping on a vehicle dosn't appear to be a common or easy thing to do. It will happen rarely due to blind luck. If it becomes problematic I am sure the devs will change it. It is no different then some one firing a tank shell into the distance and randomly getting a kill. The people who will be effected by this the most are drivers who over extend and sit still among the enemy. Say what you want but that makes you a huge target. There are ways of getting a "clear shot" tactically. Hovering over some one is almost never going to be the right choice. It is a mechanic that is in the game simply for fun. It dosn't appear that it will be common at all and thus shouldn't be game breaking. If it is, again I am sure the devs will make adjustments, maybe tune the damage down. Land mines pose no risk to the person laying them as long as they put them down when not under fire. Maybe we should take them out too.

[Azarga]

And the value of a single grunt DOES NOT EQUAL THE VALUE OF A VEHICLE.

Teamplay = Infiltrator sneaking up and lazing a target for drop pod drop. Risking exposure by sight of the laser and sound

Solo = Infiltrator just standing around completely hidden. and someone can freely spawn in to kill a vehicle.

Solution = No squad spawning unless the squad leader lazes an area?

First. Marking the area for landing pod is fine solution.

Second. Infiltrator can be detected if galaxy is defended by someone certed to detect infiltrators. Exactly to prevent different kinds of diversions. Teamplay. If gal's unguarded - well, too bad for gal.

And if drop pods are easy to shoot down by people who are far enough away from you to see them without looking up, then drop pods are a non-viable spawn method.

The fact that it is counterable and not very easy to perform doesn't make it non-viable. I'm all for adding some difficulty to drop-pod deployment, I stated that numerous times.

[Ranik Ortega]

First. Marking the area for landing pod is fine solution.

Second. Infiltrator can be detected if galaxy is defended by someone certed to detect infiltrators. Exactly to prevent different kinds of diversions. Teamplay. If gal's unguarded - well, too bad for gal.

First i have no idea how the hell darklight works now. Second does it even exist? Third Dark light does not cover the range necessary to spot a infiltrator with a laser so the laser must be visible to be counter-able. Highly visible.

[Azarga]

First i have no idea how the hell darklight works now. Second does it even exist? Third Dark light does not cover the range necessary to spot a infiltrator with a laser so the laser must be visible to be counter-able. Highly visible.

Devs stated that infs can be detected by someone certed into it. How this will work - well, here my guess is as good as yours.

If drop-pod guiding laser has some decent range it will only make pod-bombing easier. I'd rather go with redeployable guiding beacon, which can be destroyed by enemy. bf2142 had it and it worked fine.

[Stardouser]

The fact that it is counterable and not very easy to perform doesn't make it non-viable. I'm all for adding some difficulty to drop-pod deployment, I stated that numerous times.

Spawning into the game isn't something that should be counterable. It shouldn't be a choice between a long run or a high chance to not even make it to the ground.

[Ranik Ortega]

If drop-pod guiding laser has some decent range it will only make pod-bombing easier. I'd rather go with redeployable guiding beacon, which can be destroyed by enemy.

That is probably the best option. Squad spawning? Drop the beacon. and risk them blowing it up or exposing that you are cloaked nearby.

Good idea. But maybe make it have a 5 second start up/set up timer.

[Azarga]

Spawning into the game isn't something that should be counterable. It shouldn't be a choice between a long run or a high chance to not even make it to the ground.

Just one word: WHY?

[Stardouser]

Just one word: WHY?

Long runs aren't fun, and being killed before you even enter the game isn't fun. This isn't a realism sim where realism takes precedence over fun.

[Azarga]

Long runs aren't fun, and being killed before you even enter the game isn't fun. This isn't a realism sim where realism takes precedence over fun.

You and I have very different definitions of what is fun. I cannot argue with you here.

[moosepoop]

i think the squad leader should place a beacon on the ground for squad spawning.

[Ranik Ortega]

i think the squad leader should place a beacon on the ground for squad spawning.

It's looking like the best option. It lets the people on the ground notice that it's up and keeps infiltrators from freely dropping pods while invisible.

[Stardouser]

You and I have very different definitions of what is fun. I cannot argue with you here.
I don't think that a game design where you can be killed before you even actually enter the game can be considered anything but the minority opinion. The fact that you can somewhat control the drop pod clouds the issue of whether you have actually entered the game(it's hard to argue that you haven't re-entered the game if you can control movement), but since being able to act as a guided drop pod bomb shouldn't be possible, it should be removed, and then, since you wouldn't be able to control the pod, you really can't be said to have entered the game world until you land.

Look at all the people whining about spawn camping. But at least with spawn camping, you die once, and you know the spawn room is occupied by enemies and you need to spawn elsewhere. IF drop pods are that easy to kill, then this is much worse than that, because you might never make it to the ground. Of course, I suspect that drop pods are NOT that easy to kill, in which case, your arguments about teamwork saving the tank from being drop pod bombed are null and void.

[Kezz]

Maybe drop pods should be ballistic and aim at a spot determined at the point of launch by the spawner (who cannot see any units on the ground or in the air column between them and the ground). There should be a CEP somewhere within which the pod will land, determined randomly, and that circle should be much larger than any vehicle. Any hits on targets will be entirely random at that point, and rare as hens' teeth. Air collisions would be fatal to both parties. Hits on squishies would be fatal to the squishy hit, and not damage the lander at all. Hits on vehicles would do "a chunk" of damage to both parties. If the vehicle was very light, it might be destroyed, but MBTs wouldn't be unless they were already mostly doily.

[Xyntech]

Maybe drop pods could have a beam come down like a Planetside 1 orbital strike has, and a recognizable sound preceding them.

[Hamma]

Honestly guys the drop pod implementation is really fun, its a great experience to drop in on the ground and steer your pod into a position. It gets the adrenaline going as you come into an inevitable fight.

There are only a few things that need to be done to make them less powerful.

SOIs need to be put on bases so you cannot constantly drop on bases and change the course of a fight.
It needs to be a rare ability that is not on a short cooldown. Seeing a drop pod should be a unique sight not a constant one.


Higby has already mentioned the possibility of squad spawn beacons so I think we will see those as well.

Let's not forget the Galaxy mobile spawn location as well. That should be a more viable alternative to drop pods.

[Ranik Ortega]

Honestly guys the drop pod implementation is really fun, its a great experience to drop in on the ground and steer your pod into a position. It gets the adrenaline going as you come into an inevitable fight.

There are only a few things that need to be done to make them less powerful.

SOIs need to be put on bases so you cannot constantly drop on bases and change the course of a fight.
It needs to be a rare ability that is not on a short cooldown. Seeing a drop pod should be a unique sight not a constant one.


Higby has already mentioned the possibility of squad spawn beacons so I think we will see those as well.

Let's not forget the Galaxy mobile spawn location as well. That should be a more viable alternative to drop pods.

Hamma we are a considerable bit more worried about the instant kill nature of drop podding onto a tank. It is not at all fun to be a tank and die to some nooblet just podding in.

[Stardouser]

Hamma we are a considerable bit more worried about the instant kill nature of drop podding onto a tank. It is not at all fun to be a tank and die to some nooblet just podding in.

SOE thinks everyone is going to just see it as fun to guide down, consequences be damned. They're wrong.

And Hamma is ignoring that SOI won't affect the defenders.

And worst of all, squad spawning is a legitimate way to return to combat, and shackling it to the drop pod function is just going to poison people into wanting higher cooldowns. And even with a long cooldown, it's going to get repetitive both to use, and to see constant meteor showers.

[MrMorton]

Seems to me as if the drop pods can become a massive annoyance if a player is apathetic about his k/d r, and constantly crashes down on enemy vehicles at the expense of his life. I just think that it's absurd that the prowess of a tank or a liberator becomes null knowing that a player can drop on it and destroy it, along with it's entire crew.

Suggestion: No damage penalty for vehicles / person in drop pod dies when collides with vehicle?

Just a thought.

you can't control them, its just a lucky chance when it happens

[Hamma]

Hamma we are a considerable bit more worried about the instant kill nature of drop podding onto a tank. It is not at all fun to be a tank and die to some nooblet just podding in.

The things I stated as far as reducing them still stand as a solution to the issue.

Defense, offense it doesn't matter.

[Ranik Ortega]

The things I stated as far as reducing them still stand as a solution to the issue.

Defense, offense it doesn't matter.

Your first point only matter in base fights. Any field fights are still unprotected.

Your second point may work but you would need a significantly longer timer.

And even then Hamma a unearned free vehicle kill is still not at all fun for the receiving end.

As several people have said,Make the drop pod only do a chunk of damage to both parties and require a drop pod beacon. Then we can call it balanced.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

You are making too big a deal out of this. Yes, random collisions will happen, they expect that, thus making them DAMAGING.

However, people will not be able to realistically PLAN mass drop waves that do a whole hell of a lot of anything. Seriously. Even if FORTY pods drop right into the middle of a MASSIVE clusterfuck battle... Maybe two or three of them will actually manage to hit something. Who gives a shit? If you got smashed by a pod, get over it.

It's not that I particularly support or oppose the concept. But seriously, not EVERY damn thing requires opposition. This is a non-issue in every way. It DOESN'T MATTER, because it cannot ACTUALLY be used the way you are worried about.

Don't believe me? Get a couple dozen of your buddies together during beta and TRY to do it. After you've done it a half-dozen times, and only managed to smash two or three people, you'll see what I mean.

And IF the guidance is sufficient that it can be aimed effectively, then it just needs to be tweaked a little to make it less accurate (like removing steering, or reducing it). If THAT. If somebody can effectively use drop pods as weapons... Good for them! That's pretty creative and requires a lot of co-ordination. If your "armored column" can't cope with somebody's frickin' DROP PODS, you deserve to die to the man!

[Hamma]

I don't like to be on the receiving end of any sort of death I guess we should just make all our guns shoot feathers. :lol:

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Your first point only matter in base fights. Any field fights are still unprotected.

Your second point may work but you would need a significantly longer timer.

And even then Hamma a unearned free vehicle kill is still not at all fun for the receiving end.

As several people have said,Make the drop pod only do a chunk of damage to both parties and require a drop pod beacon. Then we can call it balanced.

Having to steer the damn thing onto somebody who's totally oblivious, or tracking a moving target, is no different then taking a rifle shot and capping somebody.

You call it balance... I call it stupid.

I don't like to be on the receiving end of any sort of death I guess we should just make all our guns shoot feathers. :lol:

Really! That would solve EVERYTHING :) :)

[Ranik Ortega]

I don't like to be on the receiving end of any sort of death I guess we should just make all our guns shoot feathers. :lol:

Nice strawman Hamma. As you are who you are I must say i'm disappointed by you acting like this.

[Hamma]

I just think you guys are putting far to much stock into this. There are not and will not be 90 drop pods falling from the sky at any given time causing havok to everyone driving a vehicle. It's going to be a rarity and it's NOT EASY to steer your drop pod into a moving vehicle.. take it from someone who has tried.

I don't think it needs to be removed or nerfed at all, I am not opposed to them being instakill but for the frequency it actually happens I don't think they are as big of a deal as you guys are making them out to be.

Base SOIs solve the problem quite a bit because the chance of landing on a vehicle in open field battles or outposts are even less.

[lolroflroflcake]

Well don't stop moving, since the pods only seem to have a limited steering capability as long as your moving abit you should be able to dodge all but the most persistent drop-podding-suicide-bombers.

That combined with SOIs around bases and long timers should make landing on someone with a drop pod an offensive option only reserved for the most annoying of vehicle pilots.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Nice strawman Hamma. As you are who you are I must say i'm disappointed by you acting like this.


He's a forum admin. What's that got to do with his thinking this argument is silly? Just because he doesn't agree with some of the views here?

And his point is valid. People getting killed by stuff in this game is a given. There will be a variety of ways to die. Many times, you will never even see the death coming. What is the value of complaining about "I died via method A instead of Method B. I only think Method B is ok!"

[Ranik Ortega]

The more people on a server the more this is going to happen. It may not be constant but it will be happen and it will feel cheap. Hamma what do you have against my suggestion of both parties taking some damage but not both dieing? Do you have any actual argument against it?

He's a forum admin. What's that got to do with his thinking this argument is silly? Just because he doesn't agree with some of the views here?

He made a crappy strawman argument about people not wanting to die in a video game. When thats obviously not the case. It was a poor argument and I am simply disappointed in him.

Well don't stop moving, since the pods only seem to have a limited steering capability as long as your moving abit you should be able to dodge all but the most persistent drop-podding-suicide-bombers.

Sometimes you have to sit still and if you guys would have actually read the thread we have issue with the fact that YOU HAVE NO PRIOR WARNING AT THE MOMENT TO INSTANT DEATH DROP PODS.

[Stardouser]

Base SOIs solve the problem quite a bit because the chance of landing on a vehicle in open field battles or outposts are even less.
I think you're looking at this through a tunnel. Are you saying defenders can't squad spawn into their own sphere of influence? If they can, then all you have to do is get a squad leader outside long enough to spawn his members and it's bombs away. Defenders don't need to use squad spawn just to get back into the fight because they can spawn at their own base spawn points, so, in order to avoid having a squad spawn cooldown at a critical moment, they only squad spawn while on defense when they are going drop pod bomb. As long as you avoid using squad spawn while on defense when you don't have to use it, you'll not be subject to a cooldown when you do need it. Unless you're subject to a squad spawn cooldown after any kind of respawning, which I'm not aware of.

He's a forum admin. What's that got to do with his thinking this argument is silly? Just because he doesn't agree with some of the views here?

And his point is valid. People getting killed by stuff in this game is a given. There will be a variety of ways to die. Many times, you will never even see the death coming. What is the value of complaining about "I died via method A instead of Method B. I only think Method B is ok!"

Then arguments against flails are invalid. And arguments for pain fields in spawn tube rooms, arguments in favor of low flight ceilings to keep aircraft in range of AA, and similar issues.

[Pepsi]

You are making too big a deal out of this. Yes, random collisions will happen, they expect that, thus making them DAMAGING.

However, people will not be able to realistically PLAN mass drop waves that do a whole hell of a lot of anything.So you're saying there's no skill depth to using the drop pods to get random, lucky kills? Well I think you wrote my argument for me!

[Stardouser]

I have an idea. Squad leaders, when they spawn, carry ONE Portable Nanite Cloning Device. You place it on the ground like a spawn beacon, and players are cloned right on it. Once it's deployed, it's there until you either place another one, or it's destroyed. The squad leader only gets a new one by dying, so if it's destroyed, that's it - no more squad spawns until the leader dies and respawns.

So, this would be just like a spawn beacon, and could be found and destroyed, but removes drop pod bombing.

[Geist]

Drop Pod killing is the one of the coolest things about PS2, just because some people like to sit fucking still doesn't mean it should be nerfed in any way. It looked like it was incredible hard to steer and the tiniest movement by the target would mean that the drop pod would miss and you'd be killed by whatever you landed next to.

It takes a lot of luck and skill and I don't think that it should be nerfed or removed because some people are too lazy to move themselves.

[Ranik Ortega]

Drop Pod killing is the one of the coolest things about PS2, just because some people like to sit fucking still doesn't mean it should be nerfed in any way. It looked like it was incredible hard to steer and the tiniest movement by the target would mean that the drop pod would miss and you'd be killed by whatever you landed next to.

It takes a lot of luck and skill and I don't think that it should be nerfed or removed because some people are too lazy to move themselves.

Same old crap. Actually try and read the thread before you pull the "just move". I mean god damn people have freaking ADHD when it comes to reading these days. :rofl:

[Stardouser]

Same old crap. Actually try and read the thread before you pull the "just move". I mean god damn people have freaking ADHD when it comes to reading these days. :rofl:

Some people call it camping if you don't move and think that branding something as camping justifies anything. Sometimes tactics call for you to sit in one spot. It's not camping just because you aren't moving. If you have guys going into a capture point room, then you as a tank might sit outside and support them. If someone C4s you or gets a firing position on you with a MAX or HA, that's fine. But the fact that a tank has you pinned down where you can't do those things doesn't make this OK.

[TheDAWinz]

I think you're looking at this through a tunnel. Are you saying defenders can't squad spawn into their own sphere of influence? If they can, then all you have to do is get a squad leader outside long enough to spawn his members and it's bombs away. Defenders don't need to use squad spawn just to get back into the fight because they can spawn at their own base spawn points, so, in order to avoid having a squad spawn cooldown at a critical moment, they only squad spawn while on defense when they are going drop pod bomb. As long as you avoid using squad spawn while on defense when you don't have to use it, you'll not be subject to a cooldown when you do need it. Unless you're subject to a squad spawn cooldown after any kind of respawning, which I'm not aware of.



Then arguments against flails are invalid. And arguments for pain fields in spawn tube rooms, arguments in favor of low flight ceilings to keep aircraft in range of AA, and similar issues.

Enjoy your ban.

[Azarga]

Same old crap. Actually try and read the thread before you pull the "just move". I mean god damn people have freaking ADHD when it comes to reading these days. :rofl:

If it were one or two pages, people would read. At least, some of them. This thread is 9, no it's already 10 pages long, everyone and their mom will simply click 'Last page'. We should be grateful if they even read that last page and not jump to last three posts. Nothing new here.

Well, fine by me, squad-spawning looks good for me as it is, and I will do perfectly fine without those small changes I proposed. :)

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Sometimes you have to sit still and if you guys would have actually read the thread we have issue with the fact that YOU HAVE NO PRIOR WARNING AT THE MOMENT TO INSTANT DEATH DROP PODS.

It's still a one in a million event! What difference does it make? If I stand on the other side of a hill and lob grenades over it randomly, there's no skill to that either, and you have virtually no warning unless you happen to look straight up.


My point is not that ALL arguments about game features are pointless, or that all features are ok. My point is that THIS one feature, you guys are talking about it like it's a doomsday and it simply is not. It does not matter. It will not happen except on rare occasions, even if someone is TRYING.

Random stuff happens. You can walk on the sidewalk and brick falls off and kills you. Life isn't sterile, and I don't see why the game should be either. Fluke things happen. And the complaint about it is "I don't want to get killed like THIS". It's not that big a deal. If somebody gets smashed by a drop pod and rage quits because it was not "fair" good, good bye to them!

It makes SENSE for the world to have fluke stuff happen. It would be nice if you could get struck by lightning and electrocuted if you stand on top of a top building during a lightning storm. It would be nice if a mud slide during torrential rain could kill everyone in a valley. It would be cool if all the weird, random stuff that happens in real life happened in the game.

If you're the person it happens TO, yeah, that kinda sucks. Unlike real life, however, you just click respawn, and for the people watching, they have a "that was COOL!" moment. The victim would, too, except most people are apparently too busy complaining about getting killed in this here video game...

[Disillusioned]

Won't be as flukey when hundreds of people are dropping in the same area. Get it outta here.

[Ranik Ortega]

It's still a one in a million event! What difference does it make? If I stand on the other side of a hill and lob grenades over it randomly, there's no skill to that either, and you have virtually no warning unless you happen to look straight up.


My point is not that ALL arguments about game features are pointless, or that all features are ok. My point is that THIS one feature, you guys are talking about it like it's a doomsday and it simply is not. It does not matter. It will not happen except on rare occasions, even if someone is TRYING.

Random stuff happens. You can walk on the sidewalk and brick falls off and kills you. Life isn't sterile, and I don't see why the game should be either. Fluke things happen. And the complaint about it is "I don't want to get killed like THIS". It's not that big a deal. If somebody gets smashed by a drop pod and rage quits because it was not "fair" good, good bye to them!

It makes SENSE for the world to have fluke stuff happen. It would be nice if you could get struck by lightning and electrocuted if you stand on top of a top building during a lightning storm. It would be nice if a mud slide during torrential rain could kill everyone in a valley. It would be cool if all the weird, random stuff that happens in real life happened in the game.

If you're the person it happens TO, yeah, that kinda sucks. Unlike real life, however, you just click respawn, and for the people watching, they have a "that was COOL!" moment. The victim would, too, except most people are apparently too busy complaining about getting killed in this here video game...

see...

Won't be as flukey when hundreds of people are dropping in the same area. Get it outta here.

What he said

[Pepsi]

Random stuff happens.Except this is a video game, where people enjoy consistent, reliable mechanics. Would you play a game where a gun can jam randomly or grenades be a dud?

Saying "It won't happen often" isn't a defense for it, and neither is saying it is randomly effective (in fact that hurts your argument even more) and can't be mastered. If these are the only two arguments left, then you have basically agreed with us.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Yes, I would play a game that had guns that jam and rare dud rounds. Such an event would be pretty rare, just like it is in rl (in RL, it is dependent on your upkeeping the weapon, in a game you could assume everyone takes care of their weapons).

I said you guys are worrying too much. And I stand by that. Some of the folks around here are just stressing about not getting to play yet, and are happy to complain about everything :)

Except this is a video game, where people enjoy consistent, reliable mechanics. Would you play a game where a gun can jam randomly or grenades be a dud?

Saying "It won't happen often" isn't a defense for it, and neither is saying it is randomly effective (in fact that hurts your argument even more) and can't be mastered. If these are the only two arguments left, then you have basically agreed with us.

No, sorry. You're wrong.

[Landtank]

Just move!

Hah jk, but seriously, move! I wouldn't worry about it.

@Pepsi, Yes, infact I love games like that, case and point: FarCry. That was one of the best mechanics in that game, unjamming your gun or fixing a broken vehicle.

The fact that some people think that *moving* isn't the solution to the problem is pretty funny.

[Pepsi]

@Pepsi, Yes, infact I love games like that, case and point: FarCry. That was one of the best mechanics in that game, unjamming your gun or fixing a broken vehicle.Then the consequence of that is the game can't be considered competitive or skillful if guns jam randomly or grenades fizz out. Not only that, but you end up needlessly frustrating every gamer, from the ultra competitive to the casual. Why needlessly frustrate people, Landtank?

The fact that some people think that *moving* isn't the solution to the problem is pretty funny. Except when I'm flying a full Galaxy at max speed and a player gets a lucky drop pod spawn and smashes right into me, getting 12 kills.

No, sorry. You're wrong.I'm convinced.

[Landtank]

Then the consequence of that is the game can't be considered competitive or skillful if guns jam randomly or grenades fizz out. Not only that, but you end up needlessly frustrating every gamer, from the ultra competitive to the casual. Why needlessly frustrate people, Landtank?

Except when I'm flying a full Galaxy at max speed and a player gets a lucky drop pod spawn and smashes right into me, getting 12 kills.

Sucks for you then, should have moved the other way!

It's not needlessly frustrating, at all. Your weapon only jammed in that game if you didn't take care of it, so it was more of a gameplay mechanic I'd say.

[Stardouser]

The fact that some people think that *moving* isn't the solution to the problem is pretty funny.

Yes, no one is permitted to stand still. Because we might get hit by a cheap drop pod, we should be constantly moving, making poor use of cover and coming within range of AV that couldn't have hit us if we'd stayed where we were, and abandoning teammates that needed us to stay with them.

All because people call it camping if you don't move for more than 5 seconds and think that this justifies any bad gameplay mechanic that can possibly be connected with not running and gunning.

[Pepsi]

Sucks for you then, should have moved the other way!

It's not needlessly frustrating, at all. Your weapon only jammed in that game if you didn't take care of it, so it was more of a gameplay mechanic I'd say.Which means it's not a random game mechanic...

I think you're missing my entire argument. I mean, is it honestly my fault if I rolled the dice and didn't roll a 3? I can't control randomness, I can't predict nor consistently evade drop pods.

[Landtank]

Which means it's not a random game mechanic...

I think you're missing my entire argument. I mean, is it honestly my fault if I rolled the dice and didn't roll a 3? I can't control randomness, I can't predict nor consistently evade drop pods.

You brought up a random-event game mechanic. Not my fault. The weapon would break at random times if it wasn't maintained. No telling when.

I don't know what to tell you, other than when you kill someone with a drop pod you won't complain about them.

@Stardouser: In order for a drop pod to come close to a vehicle a SL has to be close, if you let him get close enough for one of his SM to spawn on him, then that's a tactic that isn't really random.

[Blackwolf]

It's amazing the number of times this topic has come up. How many different threads are needed?

And based off the more recent reviews and videos I've seen anyone that drop-pods onto a vehicle will destroy the vehicle and kill themselves. It can be guided slightly but not enough to hit anything that isn't in the vicinity of where you will land anyway. So you'll occasionally have the option to kill yourself and waste the squad spawn to destroy a vehicle but it isn't going to happen every time you do it.

Tactically speaking it is ideal. Because if you actively avoid that tank and land near that tank, that tank is going to kill you and you won't have the chance to kill that tank.

Again I don't believe Sphere of Influence is the right answer. In fact it's a terrible idea because it gives the advantage solely to defenders which is the 3rdPoV mess all over again. A guide light directed strait down at the original point of impact will alert anyone under it that a pod is dropping down and has the potential to smash into you if you don't clear the area. The light can form the moment the player clicks deploy and even max altitude aircraft will have some warning before the pod hits.

This forces players to consider communication and planning, and encourages the team to move to a safer location before calling for reinforcements. Naturally only a very secured CY will be a viable location to "hot drop" in since that beam of light warns everyone that someone is dropping down there and that's where you should focus fire.

[Rasui]

It's still a one in a million event! Yeah, no it's not. We've already seen it happen a half dozen times in only a few hours of footage during what will be considered a small engagement on a full server.

What difference does it make? If I stand on the other side of a hill and lob grenades over it randomly, there's no skill to that either, and you have virtually no warning unless you happen to look straight up. You're comparing throwing a random grenade (something you'll likely never do) and killing an infantryman to instantly destroying a tank/gal/lib that costs resources and has a respawn timer? Seriously? As for what difference does it make? A pretty damn big one if you're the guy who just got his squad wiped out by something totally out of his control. That's the definition of a bad game mechanic.


My point is not that ALL arguments about game features are pointless, or that all features are ok. My point is that THIS one feature, you guys are talking about it like it's a doomsday and it simply is not. It does not matter. It will not happen except on rare occasions, even if someone is TRYING. It's not doomsday, it's just such an obviously terrible idea from a game design standpoint, so it gets talked about a lot. The whole thing smacks of something the devs thought was cute/funny so they left it in. Now we're approaching beta and it needs to go.

Random stuff happens. You can walk on the sidewalk and brick falls off and kills you. Life isn't sterile, and I don't see why the game should be either. Fluke things happen. And the complaint about it is "I don't want to get killed like THIS". It's not that big a deal. If somebody gets smashed by a drop pod and rage quits because it was not "fair" good, good bye to them! I don't even know where to begin with this section. It's becoming increasingly apparent that you either don't understand what makes a game and its' mechanics good or you just don't care. So I'll make it simple, RANDOM DEATH IS BAD! ALWAYS!

It makes SENSE for the world to have fluke stuff happen. It would be nice if you could get struck by lightning and electrocuted if you stand on top of a top building during a lightning storm. It would be nice if a mud slide during torrential rain could kill everyone in a valley. It would be cool if all the weird, random stuff that happens in real life happened in the game. No, it doesn't. This is a computer game not real life, there are no flukes, there is no such thing as random, it's all programmed in. The same is true for real life, there is no such thing as random. Just events beyond our current ability to comprehend. That feeling of powerlessness is one of the worst things about real life, especially if you're a soldier, and now you want to bring it into a world where we actually do have complete control?

If you're the person it happens TO, yeah, that kinda sucks. Unlike real life, however, you just click respawn, and for the people watching, they have a "that was COOL!" moment. The victim would, too, except most people are apparently too busy complaining about getting killed in this here video game... The only difference is that you can click respawn, so you're still around to realize exactly how much that sucked.

[Littleman]

This thread is still full of hysterical imaginings. The way some of the members fearful of drop pods talk, you'd think they were capable of loop-de-loops and on a 10 second cool-down. The uninformed are being stupid, angry and panicked as usual...

There's not enough control over the pod to make this a real concern. There are methods to help diminish the already small number of potential drop pod kills, such as removing the slight control afforded to players, a guiding light, and even increasing the minimum cool down limit. But seriously, if your galaxy is moving full speed and a pod smashes into you, that wasn't some tactical event between the squad lead and his team mate, that's simply you being horribly unlucky. The likelihood of that happening shouldn't be a concern for anyone.

But removing the feature outright? Man the **** up. Might as well be complaining about being sniped or a tank rolling around the corner and one-shotting you.

This is definitely a "wait for beta" issue, as it's a potential balance issue with respawn convenience more so than people actually going through the trouble of organizing a drop on a tank column. I sincerely doubt SOE will remove the insta-gibbing feature of the pods.

[darkfiretwofive]

This thread is still full of hysterical imaginings. The way some of the members fearful of drop pods talk, you'd think they were capable of loop-de-loops and on a 10 second cool-down. The uninformed are being stupid, angry and panicked as usual...

There's not enough control over the pod to make this a real concern. There are methods to help diminish the already small number of potential drop pod kills, such as removing the slight control afforded to players, a guiding light, and even increasing the minimum cool down limit. But seriously, if your galaxy is moving full speed and a pod smashes into you, that wasn't some tactical event between the squad lead and his team mate, that's simply you being horribly unlucky. The likelihood of that happening shouldn't be a concern for anyone.

But removing the feature outright? Man the **** up. Might as well be complaining about being sniped or a tank rolling around the corner and one-shotting you.

This is definitely a "wait for beta" issue, as it's a potential balance issue with respawn convenience more so than people actually going through the trouble of organizing a drop on a tank column. I sincerely doubt SOE will remove the insta-gibbing feature of the pods.
agreed, this is why there is a beta, it may happen very rarely, or it might happen all the time and it will get incredibly annoying. We need to wait until we all play the game, then give our opinions.

But... I personally would like to see something like, the pod deflecting off on an angle going off course, and the aircraft or whatever being hit badly damaged, so its bad for both but survivable. That is what I personally would like, just a suggestion.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

@Rasui

RAWR! You better be quiet, boy, I'm gonna aim my drop pod at u!

[Landtank]

I don't even know where to begin with this section. It's becoming increasingly apparent that you either don't understand what makes a game and its' mechanics good or you just don't care. So I'll make it simple, RANDOM DEATH IS BAD! ALWAYS!


There is nothing random about a drop pod. Seriously, NOTHING.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

@Rasui

It's not that I don't understand what the "market" considers a good game, or that I don't care. It's that I have a different concept of what's "good". You know... Opinion. And my opinion is the more like "real life" it is, the better. I hate seeing things in games, knowing I COULD do (whatever) in RL, but can't in-game for the single specific reason that some jackass considers it to be "not fun" or "unbalancing", etc, etc.

I'm all for making our virtual worlds mimic the real world. That's the whole concept behind graphical improvement, enhanced physics, etc. To make the "pretend" more "real". I disagree at drawing these artificial lines of demarcation. That doesn't make me ignorant or stupid just because you disagree. I am not calling YOU ignorant or stupid for wanting them.

I am saying that you make a far bigger deal out of this than is necessary. And why would you seem surprised that the devs would specifically go out of their way to show "amusing/interesting" footage like pods smashing people? Out of hundreds of hours of footage of that NOT happening, it's more entertaining the show the handful of times that it DID happen.

If it is a problem, it can easily be tweaked. I seriously doubt it will require much if any tweaking. And I would bet money it will not be removed or altered in a major sense.

[Stardouser]

There is nothing random about a drop pod. Seriously, NOTHING.

The people who are complaining about randomness are wrong, it's the overpoweredness that matters. And to the extent that it being random would justify it, not really, because if everyone who thinks it is going to happen only rarely is wrong, it means you are forced to spend every moment driving in circles or backing up/moving forward because someone got rewarded for dying by being given an opportunity to suicide bomb you. Not good.

And as far as letting squad leaders get close to you, that shouldn't be too much of a challenge for infiltrators and perhaps not even light assaults. Especially when you finally get into an enemy base, the defenders just have to say "hold your spawn dude wait til I call you then bomb this tank", and then make a mad dash out into the courtyard(or what passes for a courtyard) and then say "go!!!". Even if you kill them 2 seconds later, it's too late.

And my opinion is the more like "real life" it is, the better. I hate seeing things in games, knowing I COULD do (whatever) in RL, but can't in-game for the single specific reason that some jackass considers it to be "not fun" or "unbalancing", etc, etc.


Like prone? Granted I have no idea where you stand on prone but after what you just said, I really don't see how you can say anything against it. I'm NOT trying to make this a prone thread, just testing your consistency.

As for the rest of your argument, which basically boils down to "it will be too rare", only live gameplay can show that to be true or false. So, we will see. Though I would say if it happens to you at least once per hour, that's not rare.

[Pepsi]

"Predator missile inbound." ;)

[Blackwolf]

The people who are complaining about randomness are wrong, it's the overpoweredness that matters. And to the extent that it being random would justify it, not really, because if everyone who thinks it is going to happen only rarely is wrong, it means you are forced to spend every moment driving in circles or backing up/moving forward because someone got rewarded for dying by being given an opportunity to suicide bomb you. Not good.

And as far as letting squad leaders get close to you, that shouldn't be too much of a challenge for infiltrators and perhaps not even light assaults. Especially when you finally get into an enemy base, the defenders just have to say "hold your spawn dude wait til I call you then bomb this tank", and then make a mad dash out into the courtyard(or what passes for a courtyard) and then say "go!!!". Even if you kill them 2 seconds later, it's too late.



Like prone? Granted I have no idea where you stand on prone but after what you just said, I really don't see how you can say anything against it. I'm NOT trying to make this a prone thread, just testing your consistency.

As for the rest of your argument, which basically boils down to "it will be too rare", only live gameplay can show that to be true or false. So, we will see. Though I would say if it happens to you at least once per hour, that's not rare.

I'm an advocate of realistic features and absolutely against Prone. Go for it Star, raise that dead horse one more time, I know you want to.

And once per hour is rare, given the average session time will likely be 2 hours or so? I'm inclined to believe it will happen more then that given the population values and the rate of deaths. And that the number will steadily increase as more and more leaders pick up the ability. Despite this, I don't think it will be a tremendously huge issue. No where near as tactically viable as the doomsday theorists are claiming. Have you seen cloakers in the game? I have, a lot, and they are no where NEAR as invisible as PS1 cloakers were. "Sneaking one up on an armor column" just won't be possible.

But I think all that is needed is a guide light. Every other aspect of the mechanic looks just fine to me and the only thing that could possibly change my opinion is beta. A guide light would solve the problem strategically rather then using invisible lines, and it would not be hard to implement.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Like prone? Granted I have no idea where you stand on prone but after what you just said, I really don't see how you can say anything against it. I'm NOT trying to make this a prone thread, just testing your consistency.

As for the rest of your argument, which basically boils down to "it will be too rare", only live gameplay can show that to be true or false. So, we will see. Though I would say if it happens to you at least once per hour, that's not rare.

No, I understand what you all mean. I'm not necessarily outright shooting down your complaints. And if it happens ALL the time, then yes, something would need to be done, I agree. I just don't expect it to be the game breaking issue some seem to expect it to be.

On first part, yeah I would endorse prone. People have legitimate reasons to lay down, anyway. I know you'd see lots of idiots crawling/laying in the way all the time, which is irritating, but no more than all the OTHER stupid crap you can see people doing... The offset is that you can't move around a whole lot while your prone, and in particular, your situational awareness is greatly reduced by not being able to see over anything around you.

I'm not saying all aspects of real life are "grand and glorious", some aspects are kind of shitty, like a gun jamming. But since it happens in real life, to have that in there just makes it "more real", which is what I personally like. For example, I think the frequency with which weather changes in a lot of games is a bit bogus.

I like when it starts raining in PS1, but I dislike that it may only rain for a few minutes before "clearing up" again. Generally speaking, when going for "realism" I think it should mimic the way it is in real life. If the "chance-o-meter" decides it is going to rain today, then a storm should roll in gradually across the continent and linger for hours, or perhaps all day. Not fifteen minutes. There's no point if it's only going to last a few minutes, really, imo. And yes, I endorse violent weather. With the provision that it is like real life. I live in tornado alley, but the odds of my house getting hit by a tornado at any given moment are virtually nil, however they are AROUND, and the possibility exists. I don't think a storm should spawn randomly every hour or two, and that every storm, or every other storm should have a tornado, though. Know what I mean?


-edit

A nice fix for the prone issue, like some dumbass laying down in the doorway while everyone is trying to rush through (thinking he's safe but really just causing a traffic jam) is to introduce some nice TRAMPLE mechanics :) That'll cure that problem really fast :)

[Littleman]

The people who are complaining about randomness are wrong, it's the overpoweredness that matters. And to the extent that it being random would justify it, not really, because if everyone who thinks it is going to happen only rarely is wrong, it means you are forced to spend every moment driving in circles or backing up/moving forward because someone got rewarded for dying by being given an opportunity to suicide bomb you. Not good.

And as far as letting squad leaders get close to you, that shouldn't be too much of a challenge for infiltrators and perhaps not even light assaults. Especially when you finally get into an enemy base, the defenders just have to say "hold your spawn dude wait til I call you then bomb this tank", and then make a mad dash out into the courtyard(or what passes for a courtyard) and then say "go!!!". Even if you kill them 2 seconds later, it's too late.



Like prone? Granted I have no idea where you stand on prone but after what you just said, I really don't see how you can say anything against it. I'm NOT trying to make this a prone thread, just testing your consistency.

As for the rest of your argument, which basically boils down to "it will be too rare", only live gameplay can show that to be true or false. So, we will see. Though I would say if it happens to you at least once per hour, that's not rare.

Between:

-Someone needing to cert it, with the first level cert possibly having a 30 minute cooldown if not longer...
-There being a limited number of people per span of time...
-The destination squad member needing to be nearly on top of you anyway...
-And someone freaking dead and on that level of coordination with their squad mates...

Yeah, it's going to be pretty rare and if they aren't, they'll be made that way. SOE definitely doesn't want this to be the primary spawn method. I wish people would stop fear mongering like it is.

Pods are more likely to land on someone because a podder saw an opportune target directly below them than being some organized strike like people fear. That's a lot of freaking trouble, not to mention a waste of a cooldown that could turn a FUBARed operation into a successful operation. The cloaker would be so close to the tank he may as well toss some C4 its way and clear the path for his incoming friend(s.)

Will the cooldown be made longer? I wouldn't be surprised if the minimum timer is at least 15 minutes with only 3 available drops per squad (not just squad lead to prevent rotation) when the cert is fully trained. Removing the killing functionality? Not likely to happen.

One will be killed dozens to hundreds of times through other methods for every pod that actually successfully drops on them. Watching the videos, most pod drops I saw didn't hit anything. Stop focusing on the seldom few instances where a pod successfully hits something and thinking that will be a common occurrence.

"Predator missile inbound." ;)

Also, remember mention of an app with something like this, probably also connected through certs? You think DROP PODS are bad?

[vVRedOctoberVv]

I'm an advocate of realistic features and absolutely against Prone.

This statement is contradictory and unreasonable.

[Blackwolf]

This statement is contradictory and unreasonable.

I've already explained my stance a hundred times on it. Bulky armor + laying down = stuck on ground + combat situation = better off crouching. Then there is the developer time to code in the stance, the balance tweaks of whether or not it improves accuracy over crouch, remaking the environment to accept prone in certain situations... It's a giant mess of developer time and given the game play style that PS2 displays, I'd say it would be a waste of time that no one in their right mind would ever use.

[Stardouser]

This statement is contradictory and unreasonable.

Well, as you're consistent and not self contradicting;, I guess you win the debate; and we just have to wait and see what happens.

It just seems like we're seeing proof of selective arguments here. One thing that's realistic is judged bad because it's perceived as leading to static tactics, another thing is accepted for its realism because it's perceived as a counter to static tactics.

Basically I get the impression that anything which is perceived as facilitating static tactics would be rejected regardless of realism or consequences; and anything seen as a counter to static tactics will be embraced regardless of realism or consequences.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

I've already explained my stance a hundred times on it. Bulky armor + laying down = stuck on ground + combat situation = better off crouching. Then there is the developer time to code in the stance, the balance tweaks of whether or not it improves accuracy over crouch, remaking the environment to accept prone in certain situations... It's a giant mess of developer time and given the game play style that PS2 displays, I'd say it would be a waste of time that no one in their right mind would ever use.

Not to argue you with you, prone doesn't exist, and they aren't going to add it in at this time = argument moot.


That said, even the HA infantry don't look like they're wearing THAT much armor. There's certainly no reason why you couldn't flop down on your belly in it, even if it was cumbersome, you just wouldn't be able to roll around a lot, and might take a little longer to get up. Accuracy would only need to improve a few percent. I hardly see it as game changing. It's biggest advantage is reducing your silhouette. If you expect to move anytime soon, no, laying down would probably be unwise.

Regarding the time required to institute it, I cannot oppose that part. You're 100% correct that it would take time away from other things. As for terrain, it would probably be simplest just to have it check if there was a relatively unobstructed area sufficient for the character to lay in. If yes, he goes prone, if not, he crouches. While it would require code to check surroundings when a player goes "prone", it wouldn't require any other alterations.

I do disagree "no one in their right mind would use". There are situations where it would be stupid, yes. But to say it would not EVER be useful? That's not true. And while it would lend itself to more of a from a distance trading pot shots style of firefight (much like real life, people don't just charge haphazardly charge into a fight... Usually) that doesn't in itself matter. You and yours could still charge to point blank if you really wanted to. Terrain and your personal planning permitting, as well as what the other guys are doing, shock tactics like that would still be effective.

As said, it's irrelevant because it's not and will not be in. But there's really no reason to oppose, aside from the time consumption factor. Even idiots in the way can be overcome by making a trample mechanic.

Well, as you're consistent and not self contradicting;, I guess you win the debate; and we just have to wait and see what happens.

It just seems like we're seeing proof of selective arguments here. One thing that's realistic is judged bad because it's perceived as leading to static tactics, another thing is accepted for its realism because it's perceived as a counter to static tactics.

Basically I get the impression that anything which is perceived as facilitating static tactics would be rejected regardless of realism or consequences; and anything seen as a counter to static tactics will be embraced regardless of realism or consequences.


I wasn't trying to "win an argument", sir. Just stating my thoughts, too. That's what all of us are doing. We're just talking.

And yes, people tend to use selective arguments a lot :) It's human nature, I think. I try to consciously avoid that tendency, and be consistent, but I'm sure there are times I am not :)

edit

And I always tend to play static in shooters. People who charge and run around are just targets, imo. I do very well at gunning them down. The balance is in a smart sniper (which doesn't require a sniper rifle) is not to sit in one place TOO long, because they'll eventually compensate and come calling. In a world as large as PS, I can continually move at all times. And with the reduced TTK, I will cause a lot of casualties in short order while everyone else is busy meat-grinding. High TTK is counter productive to this, because it requires you to fire long streams of fire that make yourself visible, and require you to sit in one place too long. A short burst and then move on favors my gameplay style, fortunately.

[Blackwolf]

Not to argue you with you, prone doesn't exist, and they aren't going to add it in at this time = argument moot.


That said, even the HA infantry don't look like they're wearing THAT much armor. There's certainly no reason why you couldn't flop down on your belly in it, even if it was cumbersome, you just wouldn't be able to roll around a lot, and might take a little longer to get up. Accuracy would only need to improve a few percent. I hardly see it as game changing. It's biggest advantage is reducing your silhouette. If you expect to move anytime soon, no, laying down would probably be unwise.

Regarding the time required to institute it, I cannot oppose that part. You're 100% correct that it would take time away from other things. As for terrain, it would probably be simplest just to have it check if there was a relatively unobstructed area sufficient for the character to lay in. If yes, he goes prone, if not, he crouches. While it would require code to check surroundings when a player goes "prone", it wouldn't require any other alterations.

I do disagree "no one in their right mind would use". There are situations where it would be stupid, yes. But to say it would not EVER be useful? That's not true. And while it would lend itself to more of a from a distance trading pot shots style of firefight (much like real life, people don't just charge haphazardly charge into a fight... Usually) that doesn't in itself matter. You and yours could still charge to point blank if you really wanted to. Terrain and your personal planning permitting, as well as what the other guys are doing, shock tactics like that would still be effective.

As said, it's irrelevant because it's not and will not be in. But there's really no reason to oppose, aside from the time consumption factor. Even idiots in the way can be overcome by making a trample mechanic.


As I've said, I'm opposed to it for a number of reasons. It's a long list but this isn't the thread for it and I don't feel like hijacking a pointless discussion for yet another pointless discussion.

But, and this is for Star, I'm not opposed to it just because it is "static game play". The fact that you, Star, keep raising this dead horse shows a serious lack of maturity and a tendency to troll. Stop raising the point, especially in threads it doesn't belong in.

[Hamma]

Enjoy your ban.

You're kidding right? I don't ban people because they disagree with me. This would be a boring place if I did that ;)

[Ninjacalypse]

Someone brought up a good point, mentioning certs. You should be able to cert up DropPod skills so it gives your droppod like AOE damage, incendiary damage, EMP damage, fit more than one guy inside it, etc, etc...

Think of the possibilities!

^_^

[vVRedOctoberVv]

As I've said, I'm opposed to it for a number of reasons. It's a long list but this isn't the thread for it and I don't feel like hijacking a pointless discussion for yet another pointless discussion.

But, and this is for Star, I'm not opposed to it just because it is "static game play". The fact that you, Star, keep raising this dead horse shows a serious lack of maturity and a tendency to troll. Stop raising the point, especially in threads it doesn't belong in.

He didn't "raise the horse". He asked me a simple to the point question, that was maybe one or two sentences long. I answered him with one or two sentences. We then discussed the rest of each others points.

YOU are the one that made it a little lengthier, and then I replied to you. In fact, I dare to say if you had not entered the conversation and jumped on Star, the prone part would have ended with those 3 or 4 sentences. So shove off, mate. You are being rude, unnecessarily, to someone who was having a conversation with NOT YOU.

[Stardouser]

As I've said, I'm opposed to it for a number of reasons. It's a long list but this isn't the thread for it and I don't feel like hijacking a pointless discussion for yet another pointless discussion.

But, and this is for Star, I'm not opposed to it just because it is "static game play". The fact that you, Star, keep raising this dead horse shows a serious lack of maturity and a tendency to troll. Stop raising the point, especially in threads it doesn't belong in.

Right, this isn't a prone thread, but it IS a valid point to make that some of the people who are in favor of drop pods for a certain reason are against prone for the same reason. Your arguments, as it happens, aren't related to the comparison. And, on that point, I wasn't even referring to you. There were other people much earlier in the thread who were claiming that it's OK because it's a counter to tanks sitting still.

He didn't "raise the horse". He asked me a simple to the point question, that was maybe one or two sentences long. I answered him with one or two sentences. We then discussed the rest of each others points.

YOU are the one that made it a little lengthier, and then I replied to you. In fact, I dare to say if you had not entered the conversation and jumped on Star, the prone part would have ended with those 3 or 4 sentences. So shove off, mate. You are being rude, unnecessarily, to someone who was having a conversation with NOT YOU.

Thank you. It was only an example as you seem to comprehend.

[typhaon]

You know... I thought it was pretty cool that if a drop pod happened to fall on someone or something, it would do damage/kill. That seems like a nice touch... added bit of realism - something you might not expect.

Intentionally steering pods to crash into things seems kind of cheesy and not a lot of fun.

[Blackwolf]

He didn't "raise the horse". He asked me a simple to the point question, that was maybe one or two sentences long. I answered him with one or two sentences. We then discussed the rest of each others points.

YOU are the one that made it a little lengthier, and then I replied to you. In fact, I dare to say if you had not entered the conversation and jumped on Star, the prone part would have ended with those 3 or 4 sentences. So shove off, mate. You are being rude, unnecessarily, to someone who was having a conversation with NOT YOU.

Being rude isn't the intention, and I'm sorry if I came off that way. But I took a very firm stance in that thread based on realism and other factors and this is not the first time I've seen star bring up that topic in other threads.

So, despite the fact that it was directed at you, I took it as a personal reference. Right or wrong, hindsight is 20/20 and I don't much care.

I will, by the way, say this now. The idea of drop pods being a counter to tanks and aircraft hovering is absurd. That's no more a good argument for it then the "people can exploit it by doing X" is against it. Both are based on hypothesis with nothing related to data backing it up.

[Ranik Ortega]

Being rude isn't the intention, and I'm sorry if I came off that way. But I took a very firm stance in that thread based on realism and other factors and this is not the first time I've seen star bring up that topic in other threads.

So, despite the fact that it was directed at you, I took it as a personal reference. Right or wrong, hindsight is 20/20 and I don't much care.

I will, by the way, say this now. The idea of drop pods being a counter to tanks and aircraft hovering is absurd. That's no more a good argument for it then the "people can exploit it by doing X" is against it. Both are based on hypothesis with nothing related to data backing it up.

But to be fair saying "it's not all that likely to happen" is not exactly comforting when its a game built around lots and lots of people. It's something that can very quickly get out of hand due to the sheer numbers of players.

[Kezz]

...I can't predict nor consistently evade drop pods.
I suspect that you'll be able to consistently evade them whether or not you can predict them. Especially in flying vehicles, but the frequency of actual "Drop Pod Ortillery" getting hits is going to be very small indeed, so you will consistently not be getting hit by drop pods.

And if an entire outfit decides to send their squad leaders into a CZ to provide signal for the rest of the outfit to hot drop onto, well, we'll see the consequences in beta, and there any necessary adjustments will be made. I can imagine plenty of people trying to squash MBTs with pods, and if they succeed more than once in a blue moon, something will be changed. It's one of the things that might be broken, so I wouldn't be surprised if Higby et al arranged for some mass drops and "suitable" targets, just to see what happens.

Ooo. One way to limit "carpet pod bombardment" would be to have collisions between descending pods destroy both pods, so any tank that's successfully targeted by 2 or more simultaneous pods (which would happen, since there's no real way to assign specific targets) would actually be safe, except from small falling fragments.

[TheStigma]

I have an idea that I don't see has been mentioned (I haven't read through the WHOLE thread mind you):

How about if drop-pods remain largely as they work right now - but they simply add some form of "targeting lasers" to the underside that show a circle (several thin laser-like beams in a circle pattern) on the ground around where you are currently heading. In my head I envision this circle being large and then contracting more and more the closer you get to the ground. For lore purposes its easy to say that they are ground-scanning lasers or something that is required for the pod to direct its flight-path.

This would allow anyone underneath the drop-pod to (a) be notified of an imminent drop so they can prepare if it is going to land very close to them and (b) allow people a reasonable chance to avoid any kamikaze pods. A tank for example should probably be able to dodge a kamikaze pod as long as they have the space to do so. This would allow for the occasional situational kamikaze-pod but without it being something you can not reasonably defend against. It would also cut down on drop-pods being used to surprise-buttsex people by dropping down 5 meters behind them. I think a little more incentive to find a relatively safe landing zone is a good thing. If you decide to drop right on top of enemies you shouldn't except to get a surprise attack on them. The drop-pods are there primarily as a means to get to the front-lines with your squad quickly after all, and I don't think it should be designed to be a reliable tool to grant you extra added surprise and insta-kill bonuses - but its fun if we can balance it out so its still possible that it happens occasionally rather than just removing the whole mechanic.

Finally add to this some basic balancing on the maneuverability of the drop-pods. If they prove too hard to dodge even with some warning then gradually add more momentum to the turning speed so that you can still have good control but not be able to track targets while landing easily. This is just tweaking a numerical value and should be simple stuff to balance in testing.

Although this does not address potential problems that might still remain where kamikaze-pods get used against mostly stationary targets like landed galaxies, I think it goes a long way as at least a partial solution, and it has the benefit of being easily combined with other solutions. I also don't think it would take a lot of time to implement the change.

-Stigma

[OnexBigxHebrew]

I think the effectiveness as a tactic and rate of occurance of drop pods is being vastly overstated here.

:rolleyes:

[vVRedOctoberVv]

I will, by the way, say this now. The idea of drop pods being a counter to tanks and aircraft hovering is absurd. That's no more a good argument for it then the "people can exploit it by doing X" is against it. Both are based on hypothesis with nothing related to data backing it up.

I will agree this :) Relying on something that should be a "fluke" as a "counter"? That's messed up. If it's so great that you can actually do THAT, then yes, I whole heartedly support a change.

I would imagine, more than anything else, that if something needs to be done, it's simply taking steering away from the pilot. That is somewhat of an odd thing to give to them, anyway. Clicking on a mini-map, it's going to be a lot harder to "aim" the damn thing, reducing it down to the "fluke" level again. Theoretically, if several hundred pods dropped into the same area all at once, you probably WOULD see an increase in hits, also mid air collisions with pods, but the likely-hood of entire outfits, or multiple outfits, co-ordinating their drops in this manner, is slim.

Even if they did, it'd be an occasional thing, not something they'd do everytime they entered battle. Even if they did, the cool down would pretty much guarantee only the first initial wave would be of substantial size enough to have any effect. After that, it would be too broke up and sporadic, unless they wanted to wait a half an hour for everybody to die off and then do it again, in which case the enemy have already moved WELL past the original location and probably already taken whatever base they were after.

Anyway, this is something that can be solved during beta. Worrying about it over much right now is pointless (not aimed at anyone, just in general). As others have mentioned, speculation at this point is just that. Speculation. No one has any facts or numbers or personal observation to back any of this up, so it's pointless. We'll see in a week or so.

[GrayWave]

... if a player is apathetic about his k/d r ...

... Then he has his priorities straight. The only situation where KDR would ever semi-accurately determine your worth as a player is a simple team deathmatch with no objectives other than "shoot dudes."

I play games to have fun, not to watch my own numbers go up.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

@GrayWave


KDR debate thread is ---> this way


:) I'm just being a smart ass. Ignore me.

[Reizod]

It's a valid point and should not be easily dismissed. Once everyone starts getting into beta we shall see how bad this could be. However, once the SOI gets implemented it all may be a moot point.

[Hamma]

I think the effectiveness as a tactic and rate of occurance of drop pods is being vastly overstated here.

This is really my thing - I know that once we get into a larger scale beta if it doesn't work as they had hoped they will change it. Maybe SOI's will fix it? Maybe not - maybe they will make the damage changes also suggested in the thread. I'm not against making them non-instakill if that's what we find works best for the game.

I don't mean to sound like I am all 100% for it regardless. ;)

[Forsaken One]

Map awareness+ there is most likely a drop sound effect. If you get hit by something like that when you should have been aware of your surroundings and moved/flown away you should get insta-killed.

[Pepsi]

I suspect that you'll be able to consistently evade them whether or not you can predict them.Well that has sort of been the point I was trying to make this entire time. Sometimes I'll evade them, sometimes I'll get hit, but this fact alone isn't what concerns me. What concerns me is that there is no way I can control the outcome to any reasonable degree. Considering I'm ferrying the virtual lives of a dozen people, the Galaxy's fate should not be what is essentially a roll of the dice.

Also I keep seeing the argument of "it doesn't happen often so it's k" from other posters. I hope people realize that logic can be applied if there was a bug that made vehicles randomly explode every .01% of the time. Citing the rarity of the feature isn't a defense at all.

[Kitsune]

TotalBiscuit did say in one of his recent planetside videos that at first, drop pods falling on vehicles was cute and fun, but it gets really annoying after it happens to you multiple times.

Imagine flying a galaxy and then BOOM you and your cache of people are killed cuz a guy respawned on you... That's right, a guy who was already killed fell from the sky and destroyed about 8 people and a highly expensive vehicle. Say you respawn and fly a Liberator, boom, you dead cuz another guy fell on you.

I will argue that if you are constantly moving, it won't happen as much, or at least it shouldn't, but as a flyer, especially when outfitted as a gunship, you often more or less hover in place as you gun down infantry.

is it realistic? Yes. Would would that happen in real life? Yes. Do you think it's fair for the pilot? Not really.

I will hold most judgement until release however. I doubt 80% of my deaths will be cuz of drop pods, especially when you need to spec into that ability.

[maddoggg]

Insta killing tanks and even liberators(at full health)is pretty rediculos.
The should do it like section 8 did.
There you can insta kill soldiers and small vehicles(like bikes)by droping on them,but for bigger targets like tanks(or even a 3 man bomber with a lot of armor)you would only do a decent amount of damage,but you wouldnt one shot them if they are at full health.

If you are able to snipe full crew galaxies,sunderurs,heavy tanks and even liberators,all at full health,i guarantee you this will be a very abusable thing from day 1.

[Xyntech]

The should do it like section 8 did.
There you can insta kill soldiers and small vehicles(like bikes)by droping on them,but for bigger targets like tanks(or even a 3 man bomber with a lot of armor)you would only do a decent amount of damage,but you wouldnt one shot them if they are at full health.

This would probably be best.

Just give drop pods a certain number of hitpoints. If you land on any soldier, you survive and they die. If you land on an ATV (or any other vehicle if it is sufficiently damaged), then both the drop pod and the target die. If you land on anything with more hitpoints than an ATV, then the drop pod dies and the target takes x amount of damage.

For one thing, it's going to be harder to hit an infantryman or an ATV than it will be to hit a tank or Galaxy. For another, even if drop pod bombing still happened just as much as it does today, I don't think nearly as many people would rage at dying as an infantryman or taking survivable damage in a larger vehicle.

I will absolutely be supporting this solution once I get into beta and the beta forums.

[Littleman]

I'm a supporter of increasing timers and removing flight control before making pods weaker or prone to exploding should they hit something hard enough. The facility and earth are tougher than a tank, yet hitting the tank will kill the dropper? That makes sense... (not really.)

Good news is all the fears relayed on this board are based purely on speculation and conjecture. The bad news? People will be walking into the tests with these thoughts and ideas already pre-loaded, making them even MORE biased about what should and shouldn't be, instead of taking what actually is at face value and evaluating it from there.

[OnexBigxHebrew]

Good news is all the fears relayed on this board are based purely on speculation and conjecture. The bad news? People will be walking into the tests with these thoughts and ideas already pre-loaded, making them even MORE biased about what should and shouldn't be, instead of taking what actually is at face value and evaluating it from there.


I agree.

[Quovatis]

I was killed by a drop pod in PS1 while in a field turret once. It got stuck on top of the turret and eventually blew it up. But yeah, at least kill the drop pod too if it's going to destroy a vehicle in PS2.

[Morphic]

Well if a drop pod did hit a tank Im sure someone inside would be messed up a little bit. I hope this doesnT kill friendlies as well. Would be dangerous if a bunch of people were dropping in one spot.

[vVRedOctoberVv]

Forget the drop pods, dudes! It's trees we should be lobbying against! Trees are OP and annoying! I demand we remove them all!

@Littleman

Don't worry :) I'll play no matter what they settle on for the many features :) I just am going to state my opinions along the way, on the off chance anybody gives a damn what I think :D

[Hamma]

Trees are definitely OP. :p

[Tseralith]

Not sure if I remember correctly, but aren't you able to destroy enemy drop pods before they hit the ground? If that's the case then couldn't you just dedicate a few people to hunt them before they hit? If all it takes is a "little" automatic fire to destroy them, then drop pod bombing should be easily counterable, especially if you try it against a tank convoy with turrets.

[Fenrod]

Reviving the thread, just to point out the fact that you should never, ever underestimate the power of the drop pods.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjdloVQZ56M&feature=plcp#t=23m38

[Rhasta]

Changing the fact that it insta kills stuff? Bad idea. If it lands on you, that much steel at that temperature traveling at that speed is not going to feel like a fluffy bunny.
You seem to imply they will hit the ground at terminal velocity, which doesn't make sense. It's not a missile. Those 3 rockets you see on PS1 pods are there to slow the speed of descent and when the pod touches the ground, the speed is close to zero.

At worst, if it lands on infantry it should just give a headache, nothing more.

[Gugabalog]

Drop pods can be killed and can be avoided. Drop pod bombing requires teamwork. This trumps the death of a tanker or aircraft as the bombing requires more coordination than the usage of the craft or tank. This arguement demonstrates its balance.

Regardless of the impact of the pud the jets used to decelerate the pod would still apply significant force to the surface landed on, and if the pod were to decelerate in the fashion described it would destroy the object on the ground while leaving the podder alive, this solution in fact exacerbates the perceived problem.

[opticalshadow]

You seem to imply they will hit the ground at terminal velocity, which doesn't make sense. It's not a missile. Those 3 rockets you see on PS1 pods are there to slow the speed of descent and when the pod touches the ground, the speed is close to zero.

At worst, if it lands on infantry it should just give a headache, nothing more.

not really true. maybe with a tank that holds up, but it doesnt matter if sevral hundred to 1k pounds is moving 100 mph, or 1 mph, the weight would still crush a infantry, likely a max, and quad. a tank may suffer minor dmg, but airborned planes would be detroyed since they are still going quite fast in the air.

[Gugabalog]

Once again strawman argument. The infiltrator risks failure and death trying to approach the galaxy. YOU CANNOT KILL THE DROP POD IN FLIGHT.

Here's the two step system to determine whether an anti-vehicle weapon or tactic is balanced or not:
1) It has to take a measure of skill
or
2) It has to have a chance to be evaded by the pilot.

That's it. I'm going to say pointing where you want the drop pod to go doesn't take any measure of skill, and as far as I know you can't see the drop pod coming (correct me if I'm wrong), so it fails both of these tests.

This just seems like a random, gimmicky mechanic that only serves as a first time hilarious way to die that is quickly followed up by groans of disgust the following times you are killed by it. It doesn't expand the depth of air or anti-air gameplay.

Drop pods can be killed and can be avoided. Drop pod bombing requires teamwork. This trumps the death of a tanker or aircraft as the bombing requires more coordination than the usage of the craft or tank. This arguement demonstrates its balance.

Regardless of the impact of the pod the jets used to decelerate the pod would still apply significant force to the surface landed on, and if the pod were to decelerate in the fashion described it would destroy the object on the ground while leaving the podder alive, this solution in fact exacerbates the perceived problem.

Reposting. Apparently some missed this.

[Galron]

In the totalbiscuit stream that gal was going very slow and looked like it was making a perfect circle around the base (flying bot?). If going at a moderate flying speed and on a random flight path makes you avoid this 95-99% of the time im fine with drop pods 1 shotting any air vehicle thats dumb enough to be slow and predictable.