Question

[Gugabalog]

(On second thought this might belong in the New Player section but I'll ask anyways)

When people talk about carrying AV and AI and AA weapons to counter different things how important is it to do so?

Are maxes really that impervious to anti-infantry weapons?

Are aircraft that hard to take down with AV weapons?

Is it a balance thing or is there a rationalization for this?

[Beem]

Apparently maxes aren't so bad that you can't fight em with rifles, but I imagine any kind of non locking AV weapon would be a pain to use against a flier.

[Crator]

Speaking from PS1 experiences below:

Are maxes really that impervious to anti-infantry weapons?

AI weapons all have a primary fire which is normal bullets. There are two flavors of those types of bullets. One is the light bullet which works best against infantry. The other type is heavy bullet that works best against maxes/vehicles. No way the bullets do close to as much damage as the AV weapons do though.

The VS were an exception to the normal/heavy bullet rule when it comes to their ES specific light/medium assault weapons. Their ES specific light/medium assault were energy weapons. They didn't have to carry around two type of bullets because the energy weapons had a secondary fire that did more damage to maxes/vehicles.

Are aircraft that hard to take down with AV weapons?

Depends on the aircraft. Each type had different armor. Also depends on how many people you have shooting at it at the same time.

Also depends on what type of AV weapon is being used. In PS1 each faction had an empire specific AV weapon and each worked a little differently. You would use the ES AV weapons to take out aircraft. But there was also the Decimator which was common pool and more effective in certain situations (mostly inside at tower or base against maxes*) over the ES specific AV weapons.

*I say Decimator mostly against MAXes because it's not so easy to hit a target that is moving or far away. It's more effective if you actually hit your target because it does much more damage then the ES AV weapons.


Is it a balance thing or is there a rationalization for this?

Balance/Gameplay thing really.

[Bruttal]

In the orignal TTK was alot slower but to take out a max it only took what 2 decimator hits out of the 3 you get per tube?. prob 3 of any faction AV weapon. (not sure did boomers kill in 1 shot?)

also there was armor piercing bullets for stranded weapons. (TR NC TYPE weapons) but there was an armor piercing mode for Vanu just right click and begin firing. what AP would do is take a sliver of there health along with some armor per hit.

for air craft i felt like they added way to many ways to kill air craft in ps1, not only did we have NC's/VS's Lock on fire's we had lil bitty flack fire from these turrets placed by advanced engineers. Wall Turrets that can be converted to Flack Cannons, TR AA max that shot Flack out, Battle Field Robots that could be equipped with AA cannons (same as there max counter parts), The Skyguard witch ate the hell out of AA pretty quick, The Wasp witch had 2 lock on rocket pods per reload, And if anyone didn't know about the special assault rifle that fires rockets, you can load it with grenade shells and it acts as fleck too wasn't that good but if you had a couple mossys camping a tower and no AV AA, pull that sucker out and it will teach them pretty quick.

so there was more then enough ways to kill air craft and i didn't get into the AP modes for those.

[LazyBonez]

(not sure did boomers kill in 1 shot?)

It took 2 boomers to kill a max in PS1

[Shinjorai]

Apparently maxes aren't so bad that you can't fight em with rifles, but I imagine any kind of non locking AV weapon would be a pain to use against a flier.

I remember playing bad company 2 there was no lock on in that game either other than a dart you had to shoot at the choppers, it was very close to impossible to hit a decent pilot in that game. So I really hope they keep the lockon weapons. I use dumbfire and the lock on depending on the sittuation for tanks but fliers yeah you definitely need some sort of lock on or it just gets slightly rediculous to hit anything.

[Crator]

I preferred the Phoenix (http://wiki.planetside-universe.com/ps/Phoenix) (guided missile) NC ES AV weapon over the Striker (http://wiki.planetside-universe.com/ps/Striker) (lock on missile) TR ES AV weapons... Both were equally effective. Just a personal preference on my end... I'd also take the Lancer (http://wiki.planetside-universe.com/ps/Lancer) (fast hitting) VS ES AV weapon over the TR one I think....

I think for me the thing that the Phoenix has that the other two don't is you can't scout ahead with it. Hmmm, don't know what's over that hill... Let me shoot a missile and see what is there 1st! You can also use it to see mines/spits on the ground before entering an area. Also, the Phoenix doesn't require line of site. The VS/TR ES AV do.

[RadarX]

You will certainly be able to engage a MAX with infantry weaponry and it will have an effect but I would not expect to stare one down and kill it. You may have a rifle but he could have a flamethrower.

[feuerdog]

Do we know if flame damage is a DoT too, or just a direct damage effect?

[Fenrod]

Just drop your drop pod on a MAX's face. :D

[feuerdog]

When people talk about carrying AV and AI and AA weapons to counter different things how important is it to do so?


Every platform must be played to its potential to be effective, and for every platform there is a counter that must also be played effectively.

Without a counter you have fewer options to defeat what might otherwise be a superior platform.

Having these specialized weapons allows another option for equalizing a fight where one aspect of advantage(mobility, speed, firepower, armor, or other specialization) may be limited.

How important is it? It's all about options, and weighing the trade-off of not having that particular option for something else.

[Bruttal]

It took 2 boomers to kill a max in PS1

Thanks bonez

[opticalshadow]

from ps1 exp, it was. it was. you needed atleast deci's to deal with maxes, as they would chew you up. any form of vehicle all but ignored rifle fire (unless it was in high volume against a low armor vehicle)

now as far as ps2, ive seen gameplay videos from higby and TB over teh last few weeks during diffrent patches. in one of them maxes were pretty strong, in the other, they were hardly more armored it seemed then a soldier, so i have no idea.

[Gugabalog]

What I am most interested in is whether or not AV weapons are effective against infantry.

[Crator]

@Gugabalog Well, in PS1, that wasn't much the case. You could kill an infantry with a deci shot if he's already damaged though. You usually have to use more precise faster firing weapons to kill infantry....

[Eyeklops]

In regards to killing Maxes with Decimators (AV) it comes down to "exposure time." To attack a MAX head on with a Heavy Assault weapon means allot of time exposed to your target, and your target has a much more bad-ass gun. With a decimator, the tactic is to "pop-out" from behind cover, aim, fire, and return to cover as quickly as possible therefore reducing "exposure time."

[opticalshadow]

as far as av weapons against infantry, it generally didnt do much. the deci at diffrent points in the patch cycle could really hurt, but it was a pretty bad use of resources even then.

[Masterr]

In regards to killing Maxes with Decimators (AV) it comes down to "exposure time." To attack a MAX head on with a Heavy Assault weapon means allot of time exposed to your target, and your target has a much more bad-ass gun. With a decimator, the tactic is to "pop-out" from behind cover, aim, fire, and return to cover as quickly as possible therefore reducing "exposure time."

what this dude said. dont just stand there and strafe the dude, give ur shields time to regen and engage.

[Gugabalog]

That's common sense (unlike CoDsense). But I was wondering about the effectiveness of various weapon designs against unintended targets. I.E. launchers vs infantry or AA against the same.

Seems like AA would shred inf, but do far less to armor than it does aircraft since air is so lightly armored.

[Eyeklops]

That's common sense (unlike CoDsense). But I was wondering about the effectiveness of various weapon designs against unintended targets. I.E. launchers vs infantry or AA against the same.

Seems like AA would shred inf, but do far less to armor than it does aircraft since air is so lightly armored.

This would make sense, and this is where PS1 didn't make sense. I don't have a reference, but I think higby said "Infantry won't be able to take an rpg to the face and live like they did in PS1"...or something like that.

[PeterJoshua]

How effective is having two flamethrowers on a MAX?