Is the Galaxy a viable spawn?

[Hamma]

The Galaxy is now our mobile spawn point and with the introduction of a deployment mode and shields it's quite a powerhouse on the ground. Do you think it's viable? Does it need more tools to be functional or should the Sunderer also be made a spawn?

[EVILPIG]

The Galaxy is absolutely a viable spawn point and making the Sundy a spawn is unnecessary. So is the AMS.

One of the biggest concerns was the size of the Gal and the ability to hide it. The Galaxy is big, but the terrain is HUGE. Galaxies can be hidden and in no way need cloaking. They are tough and can be defended. If they are taken down, they can be easily and QUICKLY replaced.

[Darkphoenyx]

The Galaxy is viable and actually is remarkably effective as a spawn point, but I would still like to see a ground vehicle that can operate as a spawn point (either a Sunderer or AMS, I don't really care which). I just like to have options in my gameplay.

[Aaron]

The Galaxy is absolutely a viable spawn point and making the Sundy a spawn is unnecessary. So is the AMS.

One of the biggest concerns was the size of the Gal and the ability to hide it. The Galaxy is big, but the terrain is HUGE. Galaxies can be hidden and in no way need cloaking. They are tough and can be defended. If they are taken down, they can be easily and QUICKLY replaced.

I'd say they do work, but without cloaking they require a lot more man power.

[Saxywolf]

Frankly, I'll miss the AMS. I loved charging through enemy lines to hide it just outside of the enemy base. Plus, it was invisible.

What if the galaxy had such a shield that could be turned on when deployed, but would also deactivate the guns, (and preferably be viewable by friendlies)?

[Zebasiz]

The Galaxy works wonders as a spawn. The shielding allows her to take massive ammounts of damage. And makes it nigh on immune to most forms of damage. It takes sustained fire from a strong source, tank or Liberator, or a large group of infantry with anti-vehicle weapons to bring it down. And that is with no one defending the Galaxy.
Though I do wonder where the little shields for the spawning troops went.

[andehh]

Its is not viable at all.

The whole point of the galaxy (and AMS) was the additional spawn points closer to the action then outposts/towers. This is something the galaxy is incapable of doing due to its sheer size. The minute anyone spots one they think of the possible 12+ kills they can get in one shot and hammer it till the cows come home.

This instantly means the galaxies cannot be deployed anywhere near action...forcing you to talk a long walk to get into the battles!

Even with a cloak it is still a giant flying bathtub/missile magnet and it will NEVER be able to boost action by reducing time away from battles.

[EVILPIG]

Its is not viable at all.

The whole point of the galaxy (and AMS) was the additional spawn points closer to the action then outposts/towers. This is something the galaxy is incapable of doing due to its sheer size. The minute anyone spots one they think of the possible 12+ kills they can get in one shot and hammer it till the cows come home.

This instantly means the galaxies cannot be deployed anywhere near action...forcing you to talk a long walk to get into the battles!

Even with a cloak it is still a giant flying bathtub/missile magnet and it will NEVER be able to boost action by reducing time away from battles.


Have you even played the Beta? Everything you said is completely incorrect. You can place Galaxies near the action and behind cover. Their survivability is good, even inside enemy courtyards. Hell, you can deploy a Galaxy on top of enemy based/towers and feed infantry into the fight for some time. I have personally Deployed my Galaxy on an air pad on top of an AMP station and with infantry constantly coming out of the top doors and enemy vehicles rolling around the CY below us, I was able to keep it up for 20 MINUTES. It's tough, you can repair it and you have an unlimited source of ammo to do so with. You can even use it's guns while it is deployed.

[Crator]

GAL is definatly viable. Best use case is being able to land it on air pads at locations you are attacking. That's great!

IMO, to give the players more options and make the battlefield more dynamic, we still need a ground vehicles that has a spawn point on it. They could even make it so you have to cert into the ground vehicle to give it more capabilities such as a cloak bubble, etc. Of course, they should give many feature and counters to those features to make it even more fun!

[Canaris]

What I loved about the AMS is you could sneak it into places and set up a "rats nest" for your team to spawn at, I think one of the major problems with the Gal as a spawn you can't really sneak it anywhere. It's more of a kick in your front door spawn system.

"Can anybody see where the enemy are coming from.... never mind I can see there Gal failing to hide behind that mountain"

Also it can lead to some absurd things happening, We were attacking the crown the other night and set up a Gal on the outcropping above Zurvan, the VS then land a Gal side ways on our one and begin spawning at it.
I do love the addition of the side shields though, they were a great idea.

this beta right? I think I'd like to see the sunderer given a chance as an AMS to test out how they work for PS2.

[Kromatic]

Some of the most fun moments I've had so far in the Beta have included landing a Galaxy near a hotspot. Usually on top of a mountain and slightly out of view of the enemy base. Then using it as a spawn point and dropping down and attacking the near-by base! It's like a base away from home!

[Valcron]

Pig, you are overstating the Galaxy. It's viable to a point, but it doesn't have the flexibility of the AMS.

[EVILPIG]

The reason the AMS is not necessary in any way is because in addition to the Galaxy being so viable and just better for the role, though the map looks huge, it does not feel huge. Even running from place to place is fast compared to Planetside 1. Believe me, I always had AMS certed in 9 years of Planetside as they were the most powerful vehicle in the game, but that just isn't the case anymore. Play the Beta for a couple of months and you will see how true this is.

[Figment]

Only viable in zergs and if you're bullying far smaller teams than yours.

It's not suited to spec ops. or any other type combat. Evilpig, I would like to remind you that your outfit is numerically a zerg (not saying anything about its organization), but you basically prove that it works within large groups of players. Just like medic class works in large groups of players, but is entirely insufficient for groups smaller than 10.

[EVILPIG]

Pig, you are overstating the Galaxy. It's viable to a point, but it doesn't have the flexibility of the AMS.

If you are referring to a cloaking bubble, I completely disagree that claoking is needed on any spawn vehicle in Planetside 2. The cloaking is about survivability, which was a concern due to the time it would take to replace an AMS. If your Galaxy dies, you can spawn a new one and have it back in it's position in about 1 minute.

And to clarify, I have never believed that anyone's AMS "deserved" to live forever, as so many AMS drivers come off that way.

[Blue Sam]

Thus far, we've been using Galaxies as spawns almost exclusively. The vast majority of our attacking operations (and the majority of those that have been done against us) have been a case of landing 1-3 Galaxies on/around whatever we've been attacking and pushing from there. The only real differences have been where there's been an excess of enemy fighters stopping us from landing a galaxy (like that epic push up to the Crown yesterday; that was really interesting), or when we've had small groups roaming around in lightnings and the like quickly wiping up the minor bases. If anything, Galaxies are too viable a spawn, since actually using Galaxies for gal drops has been rare to non-existent thus far, because we can just as easily park on one of those convenient landing spots and run in, but that might just because people haven't yet worked out defending those entrances properly, or because there aren't yet the numbers in the beta at once to do that adequately along a lengthy frontier.

Only viable in zergs and if you're bullying far smaller teams than yours.

It's not suited to spec ops. or any other type combat. Evilpig, I would like to remind you that your outfit is numerically a zerg (not saying anything about its organization), but you basically prove that it works within large groups of players. Just like medic class works in large groups of players, but is entirely insufficient for groups smaller than 10.

I've been doing it in groups of 6-8 half the time, and doing it without much trouble. Most of them haven't even been organised groups, just a matter of somebody sticking a galaxy down at warpgate and a handful of people jumping in it. For example, yesterday somebody spawned a galaxy for 2-3 of his mates, had a couple of randoms jump in with them, and I tagged along in a scythe. As we arrived, we got attacked by a couple of Mosquitoes that I was able to hold off for just long enough for the Galaxy to land and deploy before I got shot down, then respawned at the Galaxy and we pushed the Mosquitoes off and then took the base in question.


(For reference, I'm VS on EU1, and I haven't seen TR significantly below a 10 point lead in terms of numbers over the other two factions at all so far, so we've been pretty badly outnumbered most of the time).

[Figment]

Also because there's only two classes of infantry that can damage a Galaxy and neither class can actually deal enough damage to kill it even if you have three people firing constantly.

Worse, HA can't hit a moving Galaxy because you're basically firing decimators with a strong gravitational arc. That leaves a MAX with dual Burster and those can't even kill Liberators on their own. Same for AA Wall Turrets.

On the other hand, if you bring a Liberator, it's piss easy to kill anything, especially infantry and stationary Galaxies.

[Haro]

I love the gal's current implementation, but I'd be open to a sunderer alternative if it's available. Gal spawns are a little on the rare side outside of big base caps, when you see them on landing pads, but I think it's a good balance. However, a less powerful, more common spawn would be cool, especially if we start seeing more emphasis on big battles away from bases.

[EVILPIG]

Also because there's only two classes of infantry that can damage a Galaxy and neither class can actually deal enough damage to kill it even if you have three people firing constantly.

Worse, HA can't hit a moving Galaxy because you're basically firing decimators with a strong gravitational arc. That leaves a MAX with dual Burster and those can't even kill Liberators on their own. Same for AA Wall Turrets.

On the other hand, if you bring a Liberator, it's piss easy to kill anything, especially infantry and stationary Galaxies.

HA has lock-on AA and AV available to it.

[Figment]

HA has lock-on AA and AV available to it.

If you can spare 7.500 for the AV and 12.500 for the AA, thus in total 20.000 Auraxium you can have both, yes.

Meaning only few will spend on that as they are upgrading their Lightnings and other units. Meaning pretty much none of the players actually do right now. In about half a year you'll see it become common, but for now you can't comment on that it's viable because you can park your Gal: you simply have not the opposition you will have in due time. In Tech Test for instance, it was far harder to keep a Galaxy alive in close because people had lock on then en mass.

And even then people will have to change class, just to combat you. I at least am not happy with either prospect, it severely lacks creative options and "JUST BRING 5 ZILLION ROCKUTZ AFTUHR EVERYUN SPECIAZ... GENERALIZED" is getting old fast. (Unlimited) certs next to temporarily unviable opposed to purchasable weapons are no recipy for prolonged balance.

[Saxywolf]

If you are referring to a cloaking bubble, I completely disagree that claoking is needed on any spawn vehicle in Planetside 2. The cloaking is about survivability, which was a concern due to the time it would take to replace an AMS. If your Galaxy dies, you can spawn a new one and have it back in it's position in about 1 minute.

And to clarify, I have never believed that anyone's AMS "deserved" to live forever, as so many AMS drivers come off that way.

I don't know what he was referring to, but...

Can you park the Galaxy on a slope? Can you get it between a couple trees for protection? Can you park it right nearby but they still have to actually find it? Can you park it between a couple buildings to limit which directions it can be attacked from? Can you hide it at a base so that only a small team can use it to attack while undefended depending on it being hidden so that the enemy must search for the spawn? Much of this depends on the map of course.

I never thought my AMS should live forever... in fact, depending on the situation, after deploying one I would spawn at a nearby base to grab another. I would simply run between them killing enemy troops and hop in and out of them so that neither would de-spawn.

[Crator]

I still don't get why folks talk against the AMS type vehicle. Also don't understand why the DEVs don't want to try it out even. Only thing I can think of is they are trying to control the Frames Per Second issues by attempting to spread out the players.

[EVILPIG]

If you can spare 7.500 for the AV and 12.500 for the AA, thus in total 20.000 Auraxium you can have both, yes.

Meaning only few will spend on that as they are upgrading their Lightnings and other units. Meaning pretty much none of the players actually do right now. In about half a year you'll see it become common, but for now you can't comment on that it's viable because you can park your Gal: you simply have not the opposition you will have in due time. In Tech Test for instance, it was far harder to keep a Galaxy alive in close because people had lock on then en mass.

And even then people will have to change class, just to combat you. I at least am not happy with either prospect, it severely lacks creative options and "JUST BRING 5 ZILLION ROCKUTZ AFTUHR EVERYUN SPECIAZ... GENERALIZED" is getting old fast. (Unlimited) certs next to temporarily unviable opposed to purchasable weapons are no recipy for prolonged balance.

You spoke as if the lock on didn't exist. I was just informing you. Also, not every infantry class should have an anti-vehicle or anti-air option. That's the point of the Heavy Assault. HA will specialize in anti-infantry and anti-vehicle and will have to choose between those two roles.

We don't know what the final pricing for unlocking weapons will be, but it won't take 6 months to see most everything on the battlefield.

I still don't get why folks talk against the AMS type vehicle. Also don't understand why the DEVs don't want to try it out even. Only thing I can think of is they are trying to control the Frames Per Second issues by attempting to spread out the players.

I believe the issue is that there would be hundreds of small, cloaked vehicles acting as spawn points all over the map. Due to the cloaking bubble, they have to have a proximity limitation or you could make entire territories invisible. Then, when you do have the proximity limitation, you get all the jerk-offs who TK AMS's just so that they can place their own. Given the size of the terrain, a cloaked spawnpoint could be too OP.

[NewSith]

So far I like the Galaxy.

[Kain]

I believe they are, yes (and this is in no way due to me being one of the main taxi drivers for my Outfit :P).

If you organise yourselves to have four holding the Galaxy (the pilot and three others) with the other eight forming the spearhead of the attack, it can be an invaluable point of insurance for your empire.

New players and those who do not realise the tactical importance of a well placed Galaxy spawn point would be well served by veterans highlighting that defending the Galaxy is just as important as attacking the base in question.

[ringring]

I'm for an ams.

Although I have to admit the galaxy has grown on me. I don't know how Bio labs can be won without a galaxy or two parked on the air pad.

The thing is, the devs want the galaxy as a spawn for some reason, and they've had to bend over backwards to achieve it by giving it shields and a rediculous amount of armour.

I'd still want the ams. The ams allows stealthy operations the gal doesn't. All in all, remove the Bio Lab issue and an ams is better in all scenarios.

[Figment]

I've been doing it in groups of 6-8 half the time, and doing it without much trouble. Most of them haven't even been organised groups, just a matter of somebody sticking a galaxy down at warpgate and a handful of people jumping in it. For example, yesterday somebody spawned a galaxy for 2-3 of his mates, had a couple of randoms jump in with them, and I tagged along in a scythe. As we arrived, we got attacked by a couple of Mosquitoes that I was able to hold off for just long enough for the Galaxy to land and deploy before I got shot down, then respawned at the Galaxy and we pushed the Mosquitoes off and then took the base in question.


(For reference, I'm VS on EU1, and I haven't seen TR significantly below a 10 point lead in terms of numbers over the other two factions at all so far, so we've been pretty badly outnumbered most of the time).

You mention a few mosquitos, how many players were actually present?

And no, the amount of players on the continent doesn't matter one bit. Pop indicators don't say anything about the resistance you have so saying "looky, we're VS and we're understaffed" is pointless if TR are actually off fighting the NC, which they usualy were due the west-east orientation of the Indar map (VS tended to have next to no opposition, especially on ex-VS (north) turf where next to no NC or TR were found, ever due to the map layout). And yes, I've managed to take bases with 3-6 points on my own regularly as well as long as next to nobody responds and you have a bit of a territorial edge advantage.

I can't see your group of 8 capturing a large base against 20 NC or TR. Meaning I'm under the impression you're highly exagerating the numbers you've been fighting. Landing the Gal isn't a big problem even if there's some fire. Keeping it alive if there's actually a local zerg present is.

Killing it with a relatively small group has also proven to be a problem and that occurs the moment you're more preoccupied with whack-a-mole due to the constant ticker time pressure than with taking out the Galaxy.

[Shogun]

i like the galaxy. haven´t piloted one yet, but the functionality is ok.

but a cloakable flexible ams wouldn´t hurt the game. maybe a cert variant of the sunderer. like sacrificing transport functionality to get sparntube instead and sacrifice vehicle repair module for cloakbubble.

[Figment]

Btw, for those that say the Galaxy is fine, given the amount of players in PS2 and if it's as easy and intuitive as they say it is... Why is it there is very very very very often NO Galaxy spawnpoint available on the entire continent?

And do they realise that far away positions may have no places where you can get a Galaxy on short notice at all?


Further more, what's wrong with some of you lot? You think it's AWESOME that there's "alternative customizable, personalizable play styles" because there's lots of different guns (not yet) available (that do next to nothing differently, mind, took a look at all their stats and even between empires they are almost all the same), yet if you want to do something differently from the zergGalaxies, then it's suddenly "not needed" and "get an outfit", etc.


Hypocritical much? Spec Ops don't work like zergfits. Don't make us use Galaxies when it doesn't suit our playstyle. If this game really is about playing as you want (which it isn't, at all), then ffs give us alternative options!

[typhaon]

Galaxy is perfectly viable. It's tough and can be made even tougher... has quite an impressive arsenal, especially now with the upgraded AA gun and better firing position.

Park it somewhere that it can be blasted non-stop by enemy armor or tower guns and it will fall... as it should.

Otherwise, it's absolutely fantastic.

[Visperas]

I like the galaxy but I think that another ground vehicle with less armour than a Gal should work as a spawn point aswell. And I think that's the Sunderer. It doesn't need to be cloakable. Just the way it is but with spawning options. It could even work as a global beacon so players need to drop from the sky.
PS: Dropping is cool. The cooldownd on the two different ways for dropping are too high in my opinion.

[Sleepy]

Yes, the Galaxy is a viable spawn. However, it is, to this point in Beta, not enough.

Galaxies require dedicated, or nearly so, pilots. You have to take a significant amount of time to Cert, learn to fly, and learn where to land properly around the entirety of the map. They are for organized medium-large Outfits. In this way, they will never become redundant, as you can fly over obstacles and enemies en route to your objectives, quickly. Even escorted by fighters from Outfit mates.

What about the rest of the Empire (ie, the 'zerg')?

There will be copious numbers of players in the game who just log on for brief periods (<1 hour), or just to play with a friend. Some don't like TS and have to listen to people; they just want to be immersed in the game world. An AMS projects Empire assaults - not just Outfit ones. The Devs said you aren't required to use TS and be in an Outfit to play (paraphrasing: Smed blogged that solo play is viable).

Currently, this game plays like a 400 meter dash. Sprint sprint sprint into a high TTK environment. Then sprint again. The Vehicle Dev stated he 'just can't see' a viable reason for AMS. Well, I remember the Dev Team stating a design goal being less downtime. This game has no less DT than PS1. Sure, you respawn faster, but die a lot quicker and usually spawn 400m from where you died. Most fights I've been at in the Beta do not have Gals supporting them, and if they do, they are also parked >400m from the fight, if not on the roof.

An AMS adds Organic depth to the game. That same Vehicle Dev said that 'there are plenty of spawn points' as another reason AMS is not needed. Fixed spawns offer no compelling gameplay. The Tension created around:
- getting your AMS to the target safely
- parking it as to maximize it's stealth potential
- protecting it/repairing it for soldiers
- knowing that it will eventually be found (adding to the pressure)
- Defenders having a shared goal to find and destroy it (them) to break the back of the assault

It's no wonder during that twitch Dev meeting that so many people cried out "AMS!" when Higby asked if the audience have questions.

Having said all this, PS2 is a fun game, and all of us appreciate the unprecedented Developer interaction. Hopefully, more PS1 gameplay can enrich PS2's experience - right now, as even Smed observed: "It plays like MMOBF3."

[EVILPIG]

Btw, for those that say the Galaxy is fine, given the amount of players in PS2 and if it's as easy and intuitive as they say it is... Why is it there is very very very very often NO Galaxy spawnpoint available on the entire continent?

And do they realise that far away positions may have no places where you can get a Galaxy on short notice at all?


Further more, what's wrong with some of you lot? You think it's AWESOME that there's "alternative customizable, personalizable play styles" because there's lots of different guns (not yet) available (that do next to nothing differently, mind, took a look at all their stats and even between empires they are almost all the same), yet if you want to do something differently from the zergGalaxies, then it's suddenly "not needed" and "get an outfit", etc.


Hypocritical much? Spec Ops don't work like zergfits. Don't make us use Galaxies when it doesn't suit our playstyle. If this game really is about playing as you want (which it isn't, at all), then ffs give us alternative options!

I rarely see "no galaxy spawns available". If you do, I would suggest you set one up for your empire.

The weapons that are unavailable are just placeholders. You shouldn't read into their stats too much.

You make it sound as if all Spec Ops are done by small groups, which I disagree with, but that is besides the point. Most Spec Ops are done at low or not populated enemy facilities. For this, you really don't need a mobile spawnpoint, though it helps. A good Spec Op will have the right personal to ensure that the operation can sustain it's self. You sound too reliant on the AMS as a crutch. I love the AMS and hated to see it go, but it is not necessary and you have to think about the overall effect. Having a cloaked AMS means that there will tons of them out there. It may make clearing a territory of enemy too difficult, and I say that with a grain of salt. The truth is that the distance from one facility to another is not far. It does not take long to run from base to base. You should be placing Galaxies near your next target, they certainly help until you get a hard spawn. You just have to look at the overall effect of having the AMS in the game would have. That, we do not know yet.

Lastly, why can't this be discussed without you getting angry? Is it just that others disagree with you?

[MrBloodworth]

Game play has shown that the Gal as an AMS has marginalized one of the most iconic things from Planetside.

The hot drop.

Even after the squad spawn change to a beacon. I have not seen Gal-drops with any sort of frequency. I am quite sure it is due to the Galaxy being a spawn point.

If you can put a spawn point anywhere, at any elevation, hot dropping on the top of a base becomes moot. The AMS did not cause this problem, and did not overlap with Galaxy Hot-dropping.

No more real proof needed than this.

Planetside 2 5 GALAXY***39;S ON 1 LANDING PAD! [RECORD] - YouTube

[Joe]

The Gal is a great spawn if you r organized and protect it a driven spawn unit would be great 2 however :)

[Wizkid45]

The Gal is viable, but I dont feel it fits every role. I still feel that an AMS or deployable Sundy would be beneficial for the game. Lets be honest, the Gal is a giant target for everyone on the other team to shoot at, and while it has been made stronger over the past patches, it is still super easy to kill one. I think having a Sundy/AMS would allow you to have more covert tactics by being able to more easily hide your spawn point, but at a cost of say a much higher respawn time and the inability to spawn/pull a MAX at it to keep people from flooding them. I'm sure there will be more Gals being used in release or later in beta if they continue to be tweaked, but a smaller, specialty vehicle would be nice. There just currently aren't enough around to alleviate the agonizing 5 minute run from a spawn point to a base only to be killed as soon as you get there.

[Crator]

Lastly, why can't this be discussed without you getting angry? Is it just that others disagree with you?

Nothing wrong with being passionate about an idea and showing emotion (as much as you can via text) over it.

You're one of the only ones here that I've seen talking against the need/want for an AMS.

[Bittermen]

I'd love to see a cert for the Sunderer that allows squad spawning.


I like options.

[waldizzo]

Getting a Galaxy into a highly contested area successfully takes coordination, skill and some luck. Once in place, it is an asset worth keeping around because of the difficulty involved in replacing it.

What I would like to see is a certification that is deep within the sunderer tree that allows for AMS like ability. Certifying into this should be a dedicated effort by the player and not easily obtained. The AMS was too prevelent in the original game, I'm of the opinion that having an expensive certification cost would greatly reduce the amount of these we would see on the battlefield. Most players would rather invest in themselves. Dedicated support players want to invest in the team.

[TheSaltySeagull]

The Galaxy is now our mobile spawn point and with the introduction of a deployment mode and shields it's quite a powerhouse on the ground. Do you think it's viable? Does it need more tools to be functional or should the Sunderer also be made a spawn?

watching your steam it appears you spend a good deal of time flying the gal. So I am curious what you yourself think about it and what you would do to improve it if you feel it needs to be improved at all?

[EVILPIG]

Getting a Galaxy into a highly contested area successfully takes coordination, skill and some luck. Once in place, it is an asset worth keeping around because of the difficulty involved in replacing it.

What I would like to see is a certification that is deep within the sunderer tree that allows for AMS like ability. Certifying into this should be a dedicated effort by the player and not easily obtained. The AMS was too prevelent in the original game, I'm of the opinion that having an expensive certification cost would greatly reduce the amount of these we would see on the battlefield. Most players would rather invest in themselves. Dedicated support players want to invest in the team.


The only skill is sticking the landing, and that is also easy. You spawn Galaxy at Warpgate and fly about 30 seconds to your waypoint and land. That is not hard.

[ringring]

You're quite right figgy, gal is not suitable for covert actions .... and you're also right that there is often not one available.

AMS please.

[Fenrys]

It does not work. You can't really park a galaxy any closer than the peripheral capture points, so attackers will always have a too-long jog to get to the fight.

[NewSith]

I used to drive AMS in PS1 alot and now fly Galaxy alot.

I'm from anti-AMS camp, because AMS will just be overpowered in this game. With cloaking bubble or without it. I will elaborate it in one key phrase: Size Matters. Big Galaxy cannot be parked harmlessly right next to a capture point. With equal forces it has low chance to stand there for long.

AMS, however will just keep spawning people right into the point without any real counter except for an OS. TWhich, above all, is not unlocked yet.

That being said - imagine an AMS parked in the basement of a PS1 biolab right next to a CC. That's what AMS will be like until they actually change the capture mechanics.

[Kipper]

For me, doing a 'spec ops' in a galaxy would be something like flying over a target area, hot dropping a small squad from it, who then proceed to set up a 'proper' squad/platoon/empire spawn beacon in a discreet place without drawing too much attention.

Galaxy then retreats to a safe distance to become a backup spawn point where people can pull MAX or change classes.

[Zebasiz]

I dunno who's been parking Galaxys miles from the fight, But I've often parked my Galaxy either right on the landing pad of a tower or Bio lab, On the roof of tech plants, Or just on the other side of the wall in the Amp stations and it has stayed there just fine. Yes sometimes the enemy sends a tank or liberator or some such. But Then I just need to call attention to it or let the people already defending the galaxy know and it's gone. And I have seen no shortage of people willing to quickly spawn engineer to help repair it. And honestly if the enemy is able to pull a multi vehicle-focused attack on your galaxy I think they earned the kill. But I've rarely seen it, or see it work.

[EVILPIG]

I dunno who's been parking Galaxys miles from the fight, But I've often parked my Galaxy either right on the landing pad of a tower or Bio lab, On the roof of tech plants, Or just on the other side of the wall in the Amp stations and it has stayed there just fine. Yes sometimes the enemy sends a tank or liberator or some such. But Then I just need to call attention to it or let the people already defending the galaxy know and it's gone. And I have seen no shortage of people willing to quickly spawn engineer to help repair it. And honestly if the enemy is able to pull a multi vehicle-focused attack on your galaxy I think they earned the kill. But I've rarely seen it, or see it work.

Some of these comments make me wonder what game they are playing? I can lad a Gal anywhere. It's not hard. You can squeeze them into bases and onto outposts that you wouldn't think would have enough room. The Galaxy is TOUGH. They are hard to take out unless you bring some serious vehicle firepower and then if they can kill your gal, so be it. Go get another one. See you in one minute.

Again, I love the AMS, but it seems they would be overpowered, especially with a cloaking bubble.

[BoldarBlood]

AMS!

[Miir]

I think they need to implement different skins. So I can put a TR/NC coat a paint on my VS Galaxy when I'm flying into their territories. That might help them last a bit longer. ;)

This is mostly because of the repair bugs I think. I would like to see them transform a bit more in the deployed state. Perhaps have a dome shield and a stronger turret on the top for Anti-Air defense.

The Galaxy is a powerful tool. No need for an AMS.

Edit: and an option to deploy camo netting on the top of it on landing.

[NewSith]

Edit: and an option to deploy camo netting on the top of it on landing.

You can use your moneyz to get custom camo paint, so this particular thing is of no necessity. I really wonder if they unlock camo for everyone for a short period of beta test to see if it works properly.

[fvdham]

I think there will be more hotdrops in PlanetSide 2 if the Galaxy loses the spawn option.
And hotdrops are cool.

[Crator]

I think there will be more hotdrops in PlanetSide 2 if the Galaxy loses the spawn option.
And hotdrops are cool.

I don't think the GAL should loose the spawn option. We just need something more discrete like the AMS to provide another option. Currently with the GAL being the only option for mobile spawning people treat it as such cause providing a spawn point is more important and garners more points for the driver too.

[moosepoop]

the galaxy is NEVER safe. its always visible and open to attack. this is the main difference to the AMS.

i would really like the sunderer to have an AMS ability, at least for variety sake.

[dsi]

The Sundy needs an AMS ability, it'll never be used otherwise. (Unless AA goes insane OP ofc, which it will once the majority of people start unlocking it...)

The Gal's AMS should be a high-cost cert ability, this is reasonable because of it's ability to defend itself, and the inherent flexibility that flying provides you. (Why land and fight into the base when you can just land on top of it? OP AA will only ever be the reason...)

Give the Sundy a default AMS module that removes passenger seats, and an expensive cloaking module that removes its guns.

On a side note, flipping the Sundy (or any vehicle for that matter) shouldn't instantly result in an explosion, if you're gonna take from BF3 take the good stuff too at least, delayed flipped vehicle explosions!

[Archonzero]

Galaxy is a total viable spawn. At first I felt it was a bit OP, I got used to the idea an completely love it.

Sunderer's already have an AREA EFFECT repair system for supporting vehicles and keeping them in the field. Sunderer's with a MSP system should do so at the cost of the repair system, not as a sacrifice for troop capacity. Both the Repair and MSP should be optional modular systems that can be purchased/added to the vehicle, not standard.

[ClockworkAug]

Certainly she is a viable spawn.

Is she a good spawn? Of that i remain unconvinced.

Sure. shes fun. but doesnt she feel too.. easy?

Ive never played PS1. I dont know how it was. But i gather the galaxy was a dropship only. Doesnt that feel more exciting? Now theres barely any reason to load up your dropship. She just lands, and people pour out. How is that a troop transport?

In this game, if the galaxy blows you can spawn another and get it to the front within three minutes. Spawn points would be a great deal more hectic and important if it was more difficult. Say if the spawn point was a ground vehicle.

Perhaps it would be so bad if we had to cert to use vehicles. Then only galaxy dedicated pilots would be using them. But even so, it feels too easy. Far, far too easy.

As much as ive loved the galaxy, i would far rather keep it as a ferry. A hot drop, then a quick run to base to pick up more. Leave the mobile spawn point to some big hulking truck, which the enemy knows they have to destroyu before it reaches its base.

[Archonzero]

Certainly she is a viable spawn.

Is she a good spawn? Of that i remain unconvinced.

Sure. shes fun. but doesnt she feel too.. easy?

Ive never played PS1. I dont know how it was. But i gather the galaxy was a dropship only. Doesnt that feel more exciting? Now theres barely any reason to load up your dropship. She just lands, and people pour out. How is that a troop transport?

In this game, if the galaxy blows you can spawn another and get it to the front within three minutes. Spawn points would be a great deal more hectic and important if it was more difficult. Say if the spawn point was a ground vehicle.

Perhaps it would be so bad if we had to cert to use vehicles. Then only galaxy dedicated pilots would be using them. But even so, it feels too easy. Far, far too easy.

As much as ive loved the galaxy, i would far rather keep it as a ferry. A hot drop, then a quick run to base to pick up more. Leave the mobile spawn point to some big hulking truck, which the enemy knows they have to destroyu before it reaches its base.


True PS1, Galaxy was just a pure transport, room for a full 10 man group, 8 infantry, 2 MAX, 1 pilot and 3 gunners + 1 light vehicle (lightning, 2 (or3) man buggy, or ATV) complete with drivers/passengers. SO the PS1 Galaxy if optimized for maximum seating capacity could carry 18 personnel (19 for TR marauder buggy) personnel.

PS2 Galaxy holds a maximum of 12 personnel, 1 pilot, 4 gunners (1 optional) an the rest is seating.

Now there is obviously still time to rework how Galaxies work. I kinda think the stock galaxy should be just a pure dropship. With a certification/purchase system to add modular options like a MSP, or Vehicle carrier, or air repair/rearm systems. This way the Galaxy can be flexible to be part of a variety of roles.

I think there will be more hotdrops in PlanetSide 2 if the Galaxy loses the spawn option.
And hotdrops are cool.

Hotdrops are fun!

[Figment]

I rarely see "no galaxy spawns available". If you do, I would suggest you set one up for your empire.

Regularly do. Too often low fps stutter causes me to fly into rocks though and landing is a problem, regularly end up flying uncontrollably sideways into trees.

In contrast, an AMS takes longer to get there, but can be deployed more efficiently without crash concerns and less obvious because you always see a Galaxy coming.

The weapons that are unavailable are just placeholders. You shouldn't read into their stats too much.

You make it sound as if all Spec Ops are done by small groups, which I disagree with, but that is besides the point. Most Spec Ops are done at low or not populated enemy facilities. For this, you really don't need a mobile spawnpoint, though it helps. A good Spec Op will have the right personal to ensure that the operation can sustain it's self. You sound too reliant on the AMS as a crutch. I love the AMS and hated to see it go, but it is not necessary and you have to think about the overall effect. Having a cloaked AMS means that there will tons of them out there. It may make clearing a territory of enemy too difficult, and I say that with a grain of salt. The truth is that the distance from one facility to another is not far. It does not take long to run from base to base. You should be placing Galaxies near your next target, they certainly help until you get a hard spawn. You just have to look at the overall effect of having the AMS in the game would have. That, we do not know yet.

Given your comments, you're not a very subtle, stealthy person or outfit and as such yours does not qualify for special ops. Please don't pretend full knowledge on what we need, want or expect. That's not a personal attack, just a caution, because you're pretending to speak for others when you don't and you basically hamper our feedback reaching the devs by triviliasing our feedback over yours.

Considering small groups can't afford medics, unlike the aggressors we face with their larger numbers, we may need alterior methods of short term reinforcement. A Galaxy is too obvious and clunky for this. Medics cost too much firepower right now.

Walking distances from fixed spawnpoints are unacceptably long and also provide only predictable routes on target. This might be subjective, but I'm far from the only one that absolutely hates jogging for 3-5 minutes then dieing in one second to an often unseen threat, plus having to move in a straight line is something I abhor as a tactical attack where time is of utmost importance. So no, we need a spawnpoint.

Spawn beacons can only be used once every 5 minutes and also take time before deploying is complete. An enemy can spawn locally every 3 seconds with a MAX and appropriate counter to our units and positions. THEY are extremely flexible due to being able to respawn and revive, we are not because we're in the clutches of a rigid class system.

With this short TTK, we need reinforcements, because reaction time is less important.



I know full well what the effect of an AMS on the game will be. And I'd even be willing to make the compromise that you can't spawn MAXes at it (they are too easy to get and too capable due to being able to cap points already anyway).

Lastly, why can't this be discussed without you getting angry? Is it just that others disagree with you?

Talking to egocentric or hypocritical people (even if they don't quite realise they are simply being selfish) makes Figgy irritated. Unfortunately, these kind of debates on gaming forums are usualy filled with people who are already in some kind of personal satisfactory situation, making them incapable of placing themselves in the shoes of a person who is not satisfied. Either they have something to lose, or have nothing to gain.

I need it for my playstyle, you don't. Great. Stop blocking my access to an AMS. You name it a crutch, that says enough about your way of thinking "I got what I wanted, everyone else can go screw themselves now". I don't get why you or anyone else wants to block access to alternative options so the game is as predictable as possible and has few viable strategies and alternatives.


Tbh, sounds to me the Gal is a crutch to you. You don't need anything else anymore? No alternative strategies need to be considered? Just throw a Galaxy or more at it? No further need to evolve your strategies or be creative? No reason to allow someone else to play the game differently from you? One thing fits all? Sounds like laziness or complacency to me. Tbh Evilpig, no disrespect to you, but you don't play in tactical subversive insertion groups of five to ten. You don't play as a lone infil. You don't expect it to be viable for some reason. You expect me to give up not just MY enjoyment of PlanetSide, but all my tactical alternatives. You expect me to give up on ALL Stealth Ops, because YOU can zerg it with an outfit that can field and uphold several Galaxies.

Honestly, if this game is only catering to one type of player, it will fail. This game needs to cater to anyone who might be slightly interested in strategic, war or fps games. That includes people who prefer the subtleties of Splinter Cell over the crudeness of Duke Nukem, people who like BF3 AND people who like CoD, people who like FarCry and people who like Crysis.

Please remember that people who hate flying exist, but you FORCE them to use Galaxies by not providing and even outright DENYING other options. That I find egocentric and selfish, even if your intentions are probably to just say "well I think it suffices, so I won't bother the devs with more work and I'll even white knight for them to stop others from making them do more work". It's nothing personal Evilpig, it's more the attitude I have a problem with.




And no NewSith, it's not going to be OP. That's like saying invisible players would be OP. Yeah we saw from experience how OP they were in PS1: NOT AT ALL. Plus, it takes more time to bring an AMS over 500m (especially problematic terrain) then it does to bring a Galaxy over several miles. So if anything would be spammed, it's the Galaxy. And it isn't most the time because people don't want to fall back all the way to Sanctuary to bring a spawnpoint.

Note also that an AMS would have less hitpoints and would be more vulnerable overall. That balances out fast. However, you also deny us all the potential to get an evolved AMS, a more tactical, subversive unit. For instance one with a built in Router. One with a focus on siege or defense, command, air support (radar), etc. You name it. Advanced Mobile Station doesn't per definition need to be limited to a cloaked spawn unit. Even if that's my preference.



Once you institute an interference radius (which the current Galaxy still needs btw!) then tadaaa, only need to find one to three AMSes to clear the entire area, JUST like in PS1.

Which given our knowledge of PS1 has never, EVER been hard unless locked into a base by camp vehicles, in which case you should lose anyway because you lost control over the base (even though camping used to be too easy because of the transition zones). Being able to set it next to a control point is the whole point of an effective spawnpoint. If they can spawn every three seconds, you need to spawn fast as well in order to capture a point near those enemies. So if it can do that, that's only a good thing!

Parking it under a Bio Lab is a problem? Sounds like the base design is wrong then, because you can park a Gal there too. And yes, it's wrong, should have been built around stairs instead of teleporters and single player launchers to airpads at points A and B. Those Bio Labs are horrible in design in terms of transitional battle flow tbh.

[Tatwi]

Yes, for 2 to 6 minutes if you're lucky enough to get it somewhere before getting shot down, in my experience. However, I'd prefer to see the Lightning become a mobile spawn point than the Sundy. Trade the cannon for the spawn ability and maybe give it a chain gun. I just think it would better than the Sundy and give the Lightning some more uses.

[NewSith]

And no NewSith, it's not going to be OP. That's like saying invisible players would be OP.

Bad example. Heavily armed invisible people are OP. In other words, I simply can't come up with any senseful area limitations to make it NOT OP. My point still stands - a (relatively) small spawnpoint right next to a control console is a recipe for undeniable success.

Yeah we saw from experience how OP they were in PS1: NOT AT ALL. Plus, it takes more time to bring an AMS over 500m (especially problematic terrain) then it does to bring a Galaxy over several miles. So if anything would be spammed, it's the Galaxy. And it isn't most the time because people don't want to fall back all the way to Sanctuary to bring a spawnpoint.

1. Infiltrators are able to hack teminals. Their primary ability is just locked as of now.
2. I myself will "spam" an AMS, because I can just leave it where I want and cloaking bubble will just do all the job. Galaxy doesn't have that privilege.

Either way... I will not cry about having an AMS. Nor will I start supporting having it over Galaxy.

[Figment]

Bad example. Heavily armed invisible people are OP.

Yet they're adding both shotguns and sniper rifles to (temp) cloakers. That I actually have severe issues with. The devs are thinking WAY too action oriented.

In other words, I simply can't come up with any senseful area limitations to make it NOT OP. My point still stands - a (relatively) small spawnpoint right next to a control console is a recipe for undeniable success.

Define small. Something the size of a Sunderer or slightly larger or even slightly smaller is not small.

A buggy would be small, but we're not talking buggies here. Were talking something of this size:

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/Planetside%20Vehicle%20Concepts/AMS_Mk3_01_NC.jpg (http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/Planetside%20Vehicle%20Concepts/AMS_Mk3_01_NC.jpg)

Respawn beacons (new deployable the size of a grenade for squad spawning). THOSE are small and can be obtained every spawn, anywhere. But those are okay?

I can easily define that for you. 100-150m interference radius. Can be played around with for fine tuning, but would make it completely unspammable. If you can't find AMSes in that area, you wouldn't find the Galaxy either (meaning you'd either be blind, or your keyboard/mouse is broken). Tracking down an AMS doesn't take severe skill. Just look at how easy it is for people in PS1 to track down AMS by simply flying over an area or following the dots. Hell, even hit indicators will give them away as they give attack vector information, which every time you come closer become more accurate. Liberators would make short work of any found PS2 AMS. But in the meantime, you can at least have a field fight.

1. Infiltrators are able to hack teminals. Their primary ability is just locked as of now.
2. I myself will "spam" an AMS, because I can just leave it where I want and cloaking bubble will just do all the job. Galaxy doesn't have that privilege.

Either way... I will not cry about having an AMS. Nor will I start supporting having it over Galaxy.

1. What terminals? (Unfortunately, that's an ironic comment due to lack of things to potentially hack in PS2, literally and because there are so few terms in places you can reach, what with some terms actually being inside spawns points you can't enter as non-Light Assault. Even if you're a friendly player...). I'm so going to miss vehicle jacking.
2. Great, but if there's three others in place (like in PS1), you will just have to sit back further with that AMS, thus slowly building up a frontline and a more continuous war with fall back positions. Currently fights end abruptly due to lack of interference radius and lack of nearby spawn points.

Why should you have to babysit an AMS/Galaxy? Do you enjoy continuous repair duty for the next 10 years over actually playing a FPS game? If you want to look at a rotating pixel for hours at end, I would advice PacMan.

And I'm not saying remove the Galaxy, I'm saying complement it with the AMS, it having a different playstyle.

[NewSith]

Define small. Something the size of a Sunderer or slightly larger or even slightly smaller is not small.

A buggy would be small, but we're not talking buggies here. Were talking something of this size:

Image

Sunderer is still "less hittable" than a Galaxy, if you understand what I mean.

Respawn beacons (new deployable the size of a grenade for squad spawning). THOSE are small and can be obtained every spawn, anywhere. But those are okay?

A big pillar of light makes them rather easy to spot and they have a timer for usage. Seems senseful to me.

I can easily define that for you. 100-150m interference radius. Can be played around with for fine tuning, but would make it completely unspammable. If you can't find AMSes in that area, you wouldn't find the Galaxy either (meaning you'd either be blind, or your keyboard/mouse is broken).

If the radius is too small - you can still park it next a point. If the radius is too big - you can't park Galaxies on tower airpads. I doubt devs will just go and handcraft every interference radius values.

1. What terminals? (Unfortunately, that's an ironic comment due to lack of things to potentially hack in PS2, literally and because there are so few terms in places you can reach, what with some terms actually being inside spawns points you can't enter as non-Light Assault. Even if you're a friendly player...). I'm so going to miss vehicle jacking.

Just in case that irony still included the unawareness: Vehicle terminals.

Why should you have to babysit an AMS/Galaxy? Do you enjoy continuous repair duty for the next 10 years over actually playing a FPS game? If you want to look at a rotating pixel for hours at end, I would advice PacMan.

Babysitting a Galaxy, in a proper fight is far more interesting and rewarding, than an AMS. In fact a deployed Galaxy is a small fortress, defense of which is a worthwhile activity.

[batfastard]

My opinion:

Make the galaxy more of a troop transport like it used to be. Bring back the AMS or at the very least make the sunderer the AMS. Having a galaxy as a spawn point allows too great of an advantage when it can be landed in bases or on top of towers. Also, in the original planetside galaxies were actually used to hot drop to get troops inside bases, now u just park it inside and hop out.

[Scopedog]

I think its viable and not only that but very much good as is, its not drive and forget like an ams and I like this aspect its about getting a foot hold to spawn. And its perfectly viable either go safe and far away or risky and close.

The Sunderer is perfect now being troop transport and vehicle REPAIR and RE-ARM it has its role in all ground warfare and is essential in armoured columns.

What I do feel is that its too slow, in general all air vehicles are at least 100 kph to slow thats 60mph for you others :cool: I feel air needs more speed and gravity influence would be nice.

But getting back to OP the gal is viable, dough it all needs more tweaks beta and all :groovy: but its heading in the right direction.

[Raka Maru]

I like spawning in Gals, I don't like operating one because I don't like to fly.

Very simple, very direct. Bring back the AMS or sundered variant. We're talking play styles, and so far, only flyboys get to run mobile spawn points.

[Figment]

Sunderer is still "less hittable" than a Galaxy, if you understand what I mean.
Definitely and VERY MUCH THE POINT. The Galaxy is too big. WAY TOO BIG.

If you disagree that's your perogative, but a Galaxy is simply unsuitable for just that reason: it's too easy to track down and find cover for. Smaller is better and if you can move at ground height it is harder to detect if you move through the field. Those are all EXCELLENT QUALITIES for a spawnpoint.

A big pillar of light makes them rather easy to spot and they have a timer for usage. Seems senseful to me.

You can deploy them inside you know. ;p

If the radius is too small - you can still park it next a point. If the radius is too big - you can't park Galaxies on tower airpads. I doubt devs will just go and handcraft every interference radius values.

And you should. You can only spawn at one at a time anyway, so that's not a problem either. In fact, it'll ensure some elongated fighting which there isn't now and that's a widespread complaint (length of battle being too short and too abruptly ended) you completely ignore. And that's primarily because the Galaxy does not suffice, at all.

And why the blood hell would they not attach standard interference radiusses to AMSes if they did that for Aegis Turrets, TRAPs, ALL CE, AMSes, Routers and several other things in PS1? What kind of weird logic are you on about? The terrain does not determine interference radii and it has nothing to do with that! If you make interference radii spherical, instead of cilindrical (like in PS1, which made them harder to place in Annwn), then it's no problem.

And really you're just griping here for the sake of griping. Basically you're saying we should remove AMSes from PS1. FFS NewSith, don't be such a tool.

Backup AMSes are a GOOD thing. Stop making a problem out of a non-issue! These will cost resources too and will be on timers AND will be just as hard to obtain locally as a Galaxy. If you want to place it in the middle of a Tech base, fine. It'll be found immediately since all enemies will move through that area when they go for the CC points.

If you want to leave the game where you can spam rockets with a bunch of aircav from 1.500 miles because you saw a barn parked somewhere that can't defend itself at that distance and think that "fortress" will last, then that's your perogative, but I'm not going to support such an irresponsible design choice.

The battle should be persistent and if they can bring AMSes, so can you. So stop pretending it's a huge issue.

And yes, cloakers should be able to jack to at the very least deconstruct them if not take them over, just like in PS1. Tracking down AMSes, pinpointing them for my outfit and taking them out was one of my roles as a scout infil.

But hey, let's keep stripping all subversion roles from the infils and keep making them more into LOLDAMAGE-assassins like the PS2 devs in all their wisdom have been doing.

If you never think in countermeasures then sure I can imagine why you would think they'd be OP. Come on NewSith, you know I'm not going over one night of ice when I make a statement and you know very well how accurate I am with in-game judgments, predictions and strategies.

Don't strip spec ops tools away for fear. The Zerg is far too blunt to use precision instruments without giving their positions away.

AMSes should be placed next to control points. In fact, if you want to ensure it's found rapidly, please do and don't make your enemy search long for it. :rolleyes:

Just in case that irony still included the unawareness: Vehicle terminals.

Majority of which are ATV, any others are smack down in the middle of enemy spawn terrain save the Tech Plant, which however can be fired at from all directions. It's not a problem.

Babysitting a Galaxy, in a proper fight is far more interesting and rewarding, than an AMS. In fact a deployed Galaxy is a small fortress, defense of which is a worthwhile activity.

Fine, you go babysit if you enjoy that. Let me do something else because I play this game to fight, not to hold down a button and watch a side of an aircraft for the entirety of the game.

I have no problem with doing the occasional repair and one of the only people responsible enough to rep a base after we conquered it in PS1, but I'm not that easily satisfied by a game that I can have my entire game be around guarding a spawnpoint that stops me from advancing on the very reason I brought a spawnpoint.

NewSith, I'm an infil and my outfit is about stealth holds and quick raids. I have no use for a bloody fortress that distracts from my objective! And your outfit doesn't have much use for that either actually. Ask Jolly, Korn and others if they agree with you.

[NewSith]

And why the blood hell would they not attach standard interference radiusses to AMSes if they did that for Aegis Turrets, TRAPs, ALL CE, AMSes, Routers and several other things in PS1? What kind of weird logic are you on about? The terrain does not determine interference radii and it has nothing to do with that! If you make interference radii spherical, instead of cilindrical (like in PS1, which made them harder to place in Annwn), then it's no problem.

I was mistakenly thinking that you were offering a way to limit the ability to park Gals and AMSes next to a capture point.

As for the outfit mates' points of view, - it's outfit's internal business.

[Crator]

Spot on Figment!

[Figment]

I was mistakenly thinking that you were offering a way to limit the ability to park Gals and AMSes next to a capture point.

Placement should be up to the player. If distance is an issue, then clearly the distance of the CC to the outside is wrong. And for many bases (read: virtually all) it is currently far too easy to reach CC's out of the weird fear that people might setup defensive perimeters around it... Look at the defenders and attackers distance to a CC in PS1 though; around 10 seconds distance, tops and winning is done by cutting people of from reinforcing the CC. If the issue in PS2 is they'd become undefensible and unholdable, then that just illustrates that the CCs are too easy to reach. That has nothing to do with the spawnpoint locations, but because every controlpoint has just one room or less between it and the outside.

Someone on these forums said that all bases are small inside. That is correct. The Tech Plant is tiny inside and has no defensible positions around the CC. One jump and you are at the CC. Two jumps and you are in high ground position and furthest distance you can travel inside. The teleporters and outside area don't mean anything there. You can't respawn inside since barracks are outside, it's nothing more than a glorified hangar with some sheds around it. If you can put an AMS in, like you can place Gals on top, then fine. It's going to be found and camped very soon, but at least you could spawn troops to defend that area without having to go outside. But once your enemy drops your tech shields, your AMS would die instantly due to lack of cover. It would not be as fortified as a Galaxy, so I can't see any problem.


I would imagine they would have interference radii just like the usual, to limit the amount of AMSes in an area. I don't know why they want people to park groups of Gals together now though. There is no interference radius unfortunately and it is currently possible for one outfit to bring 20+ Galaxies (and by the time they'd be all dead all would be available again, etc). I also don't get why they auto-deploy.

That is an issue to me as well. I don't mind them landing next to each other, I do mind them all being deployed next to each other. It benefits large groups too much.

I'm just thankful our zerg players aren't that imaginative. If they had been, PS1 would have been both more fun and quite hellish at times because they'd make good use of their options.

But this type of spam is why I'm mordicus opposed to "give everyone access to everything". Because once one zerg outfit realises they can spam spawnpoints and sets the example...

[Bittermen]

I think its viable and not only that but very much good as is, its not drive and forget like an ams and I like this aspect its about getting a foot hold to spawn. And its perfectly viable either go safe and far away or risky and close.

The Sunderer is perfect now being troop transport and vehicle REPAIR and RE-ARM it has its role in all ground warfare and is essential in armoured columns.

What I do feel is that its too slow, in general all air vehicles are at least 100 kph to slow thats 60mph for you others :cool: I feel air needs more speed and gravity influence would be nice.

But getting back to OP the gal is viable, dough it all needs more tweaks beta and all :groovy: but its heading in the right direction.

Idk I've seen some pretty awesome gal drops... and they were from the opposing side.

[Figment]

The too short point of DJEclipses point: only cater to the zerg and chase all other players out. Particularly smart, subversive, stealthy and tactically ones.

Also: EXPLOSIONS.

[Figment]

DJ, you are in the wrong thread. Try searching the PS2 forums for conquest systems. Try looking through threads I started. I'm glad you think I'm cool, but please, consider what this topic is about: the Galaxy.

Stop trolling. You are bad at it.

[MaximusRudedog]

AMS please!

[NewSith]

Figgy, just for your sole attention:

Q: Is the Galaxy a viable spawn?
A: AMS please!

I really hope you can understand what I'm saying by compilating this.

[Figment]

Figgy, just for your sole attention:

Q: Is the Galaxy a viable spawn?
A: AMS please!

I really hope you can understand what I'm saying by compilating this.

I see the problem, you got the answer wrong.
A: Gal is only suitable for zerg play, hence not always viable, hence we need a stealthier alternative.

The problem is that because you think it is viable in SOME situations it is ALWAYS viable. My answer is way too nuanciated for someone who wants yes or no. If you think yes or no answers are good, then you just try to get a biased answer to support a status quo.

So if the question is "is it viable" and based on one single or set of situations one would say yes, then the question is poorly phrased, because it fails to ask if it is always or in the majority of situations viable. To that the answer is a definite no. It fails to probe for a deeper and complete answer. So if you base your answer on a basic yes, then you are in tunnelvision.

[ExplodingSilver]

I would like to see the Sunderer as spawn, as well as the galaxy
It would be an interesting experiment in teamwork options

[Hamma]

They said they are going to try the Galaxy. The devs have also stated numerous times they don't want spawns to be hidden. :\

[Furber]

I'm ok with the gal as a spawn point, it has its pros and cons. I do look forward to the Sunderer becoming a spawn point too though (semi-confirmed). More is better.

[Rivenshield]

Everybody sees it coming.

There's no way to hide it.

Once planted on the ground you can't use it as a dropship, which is what it's *supposed* to be.

It's extraordinarily difficult to stagger them forward to make inroads into an enemy defense. I haven't seen it done so far.

I'm not super fond of it. I hate to sound like an atavistic old fart who wants the first game with a facelift, but... damn. This just doesn't work. Yes, I want the AMS back.

Any questions?

[Figment]

They said they are going to try the Galaxy. The devs have also stated numerous times they don't want spawns to be hidden. :\

Well they've tried it.

And yeah they said that. Tbh: screw that statement. They've also stated several other things that don't sit well with a large portion of the playerbase. It's a silly statement to argue "it's not fun to play hide and seek", because instead "they" want action action action action or to say "data" doesn't suggest an AMS is needed without qualifying "data". Thought they were making this game for us? Do they realise we don't all play the same way?

Though now and then I'm under the impression there's just a portion of devs who be in charge of that decision that either don't want to lose face by admitting the Gal is not sufficient enough to handle everything, or who are just not looking at different scenarios where spawnpoints are needed.

I mean look at the speed at which the 'argument' about an AMS went in the design meeting: "at this time there's no data that indicates an AMS is needed", uhm... Define "Data"? Because I'm coming across "data" continuously where people are being held back at a spawn point simply constantly repairing (ACTUAL BORING AND UN-FUN THING!) and I continuously come across fights that don't last because there's no mobile spawnpoint near a spot that needs to be defended, I continuously come across fights where I have to travel long distance, because no spawnpoint can come close without attracting so much attention it will die soon after and when I compare this to PS1, they're just not fun outdoor fights and they're over way too fast. Similarly, because of lacking spawnpoints and therefore elongated fighting, territory switches too fast and too often.

I'm not sure what "data" is being looked at, but I'm somewhat inclined to believe it's a bullcrap argument to support a previously made decision until such "data" is shared so it can be analyzed.

[CutterJohn]

Not a fan of the gal spawn. Not because its to big, or not cloaked, or anything. Its too easy. It makes the ground fight completely irrelevant. Theres no reason to set up a defensive line on the ground, because your line will be completely bypassed by the mobile spawn point in the air.

In PS1 it was hard to get spawns around a base. Often as not, your ams was blown up before you even got a chance to deploy it. You needed to set the AMSs up behind YOUR people because they would die quickly if discovered. Now you fly behind their army and set up. And the thing is such a tank that it will last quite a long time with 1 or 2 engineers healing it.

Down with the gal spawn. Trade the roles with sunderer. Nobody uses the sunderer as a transport anyway.

[Figment]

Nobody uses the sunderer as a transport anyway.

True. Too many vehicles you can play solo (never another unit you can't pull due to the cert system being akin to BR40: you have access to everything in game) and it's being used as a Lodestar right now already (sits back and repairs tanks or groups of Sundies, rather than storm ram bases).

Add the AMS role and it'll lose all combat and transport use (the Galaxy pretty much already did as well). :/

Unfortunately, this is not something people who want to add it to the Sunderer think about much. They just see vehicle size and go "that might be a decent size", role and how other roles are affected are not considered.



To me, ideally we'd have the AMS for empire spawning and the Galaxy (one per squad) as Squad Rally Point for Galdrops, which IMO should be a squad leader cert: be able to matrix your squad to a Galaxy (like you could set a base as squad home base in PS1).

[CutterJohn]

To me, ideally we'd have the AMS for empire spawning and the Galaxy (one per squad) as Squad Rally Point for Galdrops, which IMO should be a squad leader cert: be able to matrix your squad to a Galaxy (like you could set a base as squad home base in PS1).

Gal as a squad spawn only I could totally be down with.

[Timealude]

I think having an AMS would be alot harder keep alive in PS2 with spotting the way it is OS im sure will be alot easier to target an AMS even with a cloak

[Crator]

I think having an AMS would be alot harder keep alive in PS2 with spotting the way it is OS im sure will be alot easier to target an AMS even with a cloak

It's not supposed to be easy. But given the tools and know how of the driver, anything is possible.

[Sunrock]

The Galaxy is now our mobile spawn point and with the introduction of a deployment mode and shields it's quite a powerhouse on the ground. Do you think it's viable? Does it need more tools to be functional or should the Sunderer also be made a spawn?

IMO it's too mush zerging in this game as it is. Only way to spawn outside of fixed spawning points should be the squad beacon.

[Raka Maru]

Does noone care that we have to fly to be a spawn point? I for one, hate that as my number one reason.

I drove a sundie for a bit today and I can see that being a very good AMS replacement.

Come on devs, wise up and admit this Gal only thing isn't working. Give us back our ground based mobile spawn.

I don't care if Gal stays spawn point, it still works for me when one is around. I just want one with wheels.

[TerminatorUK]

I think we have a case where the Galaxy is a viable spawn however, like many things in the game at the moment, we need more options & diversity.

I would like the Sunderer to have a spawn option (say in trade for weapons or armour) and possibly a cloak bubble option to be an alternative to the Galaxy.

[Ertwin]

I wouldn't mind having the sunderer as an alternate spawn vehicle. However I don't think it needs a cloak bubble.

Galaxies may be used more often for hot drops if there's an alternate spawn option.

[Emperor Newt]

I think the Gal is a viable spawn, but it should not be the only one. Give the Sun some certifications to make it an AMS.
More options please.

[Crator]

I'm starting to change my mind. It disrupts ground based activity too much. Essentially it's too easy to use (once you get used to flight controls) which will allow players to spam spawn points anywhere on the map. Since it's a big flying boat and there's no real way to hide it they will get destroyed pretty quickly most of the time. But with certs being used it might be able to survive quicker. I guess it all depends on what organized and certed players start doing once the game has had a chance to settle.

I wouldn't mind having the sunderer as an alternate spawn vehicle. However I don't think it needs a cloak bubble.

Galaxies may be used more often for hot drops if there's an alternate spawn option.

What if the cloak ability was a really expensive cert? When you first cert the ability has a timer and a cooldown b4 next use on it but you can make that timer and cooldown longer by putting more certs into it?

[ringring]

I think the Gal is a viable spawn, but it should not be the only one. Give the Sun some certifications to make it an AMS.
More options please.

Yea, gal is viable, at least in some situations. But it's not the best one gameplay wise and as a result there are not enough of them.

Return the am witha cloaking bubble, even if it's a certed up sundy.

[Morat]

I don't really have a problem with Galaxy-as-a-spawn in itself, it's more the fact that there's no real reason to use the Galaxy as a transport now. Planetside without hotdrops just isn't planetside (imo).

Can't we have an airborne spawn on a different vehicle? And give sunderers a spawn module.

[CutterJohn]

I don't really have a problem with Galaxy-as-a-spawn in itself, it's more the fact that there's no real reason to use the Galaxy as a transport now. Planetside without hotdrops just isn't planetside (imo).

Can't we have an airborne spawn on a different vehicle? And give sunderers a spawn module.

That would just mean nobody uses the galaxy. Nobody hotdrops because hot drops are not necessary. Why drop the troops when you can land and be a spawn for them where you were dropping them?

[Hamma]

My outfit uses Hot Drops all the time as do others it's still a viable tactic to put troops quickly into one spot then land and become a spawn.

[XxAxMayxX]

I think it works you just have to park it in the right spot so you're allies don't get torn apart. then again im not in beta on acout my computer sucks so i'm onnly guessing.

[Crator]

You can't really hotdrop on a Biolab. All other locations you can though. There's also a hotdrop GAL cert so the driver can control the drops.

[Looopy]

what about a cert where it can deploy into a cloak instead of shielded mode, and when its cloaked it takes regular damage.

And possibly when you spawn from a cloaked galaxy you'd be cloaked for several seconds.

OR!! better yet you cert into something where in the back of the gal theres a compartment holding a deployable cloak bubble that drops a cloak bubble over the gal and its near surroundings however it must be used within 50 feet of the gal.

thoughts?

[Tatwi]

I decided to play with the Gal as though it were an AMS. I watched the map and gathered as much info as possible about what was going on and set a personal waypoint where it looked like I should place it. I had a lot of success doing this a few times, so it's possible to use the Gal as a moblie spawn point without requiring a garrison just to keep it alive.

The best one was when I parked it behind the main spawn room of Peris when our lands were being double teamed. When I landed we had Peris locked, but 5 minutes later the VS had zerged in (maxsplash ftw) and capped our spawn point. However, people were able to spwan at my Gal and keep the pressure on those inner points, take out the VS Gal, and win the fight. If my Gal had not been there at the time, we would have had to spawn back at the wapgate once squad spawn was blown. Amazingly, my gal lasted the whole fight even after it was discovered, due some great TR offensive pressure and smart defensive tactics.

Other times I was able to have them last 5 to 10 minutes in useful locations. I suppose it's an alright spawn point, but I would prefer more options (like the lightning or sunderer).

[Kipper]

Galaxy should be a good spawn point, it's size and visibility means that if you're taking it close to the lines (as you're free to do) then expect to draw a lot of fire and have to repair/defend.

If you park it further away, exchange a jog into battle for less need to defend your spawn.

Sunderer should be added as a spawn option too; it's more easily hidden and taken close in due to its relative size and it still packs a defensive punch.

I do not think either needs a cloak though, if you want to use the vehicles close to the action then they need to be defended IMO.

I also think that the equipment terminal should be removed, as should MAX spawning.

Maybe squad spawn beacons could become an faction router where the galaxy is the other end within a limited range and giving galaxy a reason to be used over the Sunderer in some situations.

Hot drops need to be used more but I think with as more outfits come in and start playing properly and not testing and trying things out - that will happen.

I'd like to see more options with benefits and drawbacks to increase tactical diversity and keep everything fresh.

Galaxy lodestar, spawn Sunderer would be a couple of good starts tbh.

[Salad Snake]

The Gal is fine, but I would love the Sunderer to be certed into a spawn as well.

[andehh]

Well said figment! Good posts & justifications there.

Galaxy is too big and obvious for a spawn point. The majority by far of current galaxies are so far away the outposts are just as good a spawn. They are too big, too obvious before and after deployment and without large dedicated outfits (in the MINORITY!) to camp them they fail at speeding up the action and getting people into the fun.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Bocheezu]

Some of these comments make me wonder what game they are playing? I can lad a Gal anywhere. It's not hard. You can squeeze them into bases and onto outposts that you wouldn't think would have enough room. The Galaxy is TOUGH. They are hard to take out unless you bring some serious vehicle firepower and then if they can kill your gal, so be it. Go get another one. See you in one minute.

The game they are playing is the TR/VS side of things. Let me sum this up.

NC: The gal is wonderful, I can it fly it anywhere, it never dies.

TR/VS: I have to park it way off in the middle of nowhere so it doesn't get spotted by the omnipresent Reavers, which blow it up in 3-4 rocket salvos. Despite spending 16k Auraxium on Dual Burster, 12.5k on HA AA, and 10k on Walker turrets for the Gal, none of them are good enough to prevent Reavers from blowing it up. See you in another 20 minutes when I get 400 alloy to spawn another.

[andehh]

Once again 4 hours of playing today and not _once_ was a galaxy within a decent range (ie few 100m).

They work on towers when you drop them on the landing pads, but for 80% of the other bases they are just fat targets too jicy for anyone to pass up on.

THEY DON'T WORK at speeding up the gameplay & keeping the action fluid.

[EVILPIG]

As I have said before, it's all about balance. A cloaking mobile spawn point would simply be too powerful. The Galaxy is very good for it's intended uses, not over or under powered. Planetside 2 is a completely different game (that those who have not played cannot grasp) from Planetside 1. The terrain is different. The way bases function is different. The speed of travel is different. You have so many options in Planetside 2. You have the ability to capture a hard spawn at enemy facilities, medics, spawn beacons and instant action (even with a 30 minute timer, you rarely need to use it that often, but it is there). The Galaxy is durable, can be placed in hard to kill locations and can be defended. If it gets killed, so what? Grab another and fly the 30-40 seconds it takes to get back to the target. Just as I have always said with the AMS, just because you placed it there, doesn't mean it deserves to live for hours.

[Raka Maru]

Why am I forced to FLY if I want to play a support role?

[Tatwi]

Why am I forced to FLY if I want to play a support role?

Because SOE/Blizzard/etc know best, it's "their game", and if you/me/we don't like, we can "Fuck off and go play something else!", because they don't need us.

[Raka Maru]

Because SOE/Blizzard/etc know best, it's "their game", and if you/me/we don't like, we can "Fuck off and go play something else!", because they don't need us.

Of course this means STFU

[Figment]

As I have said before, it's all about balance. A cloaking mobile spawn point would simply be too powerful. The Galaxy is very good for it's intended uses, not over or under powered. Planetside 2 is a completely different game (that those who have not played cannot grasp) from Planetside 1. The terrain is different. The way bases function is different. The speed of travel is different. You have so many options in Planetside 2. You have the ability to capture a hard spawn at enemy facilities, medics, spawn beacons and instant action (even with a 30 minute timer, you rarely need to use it that often, but it is there). The Galaxy is durable, can be placed in hard to kill locations and can be defended. If it gets killed, so what? Grab another and fly the 30-40 seconds it takes to get back to the target. Just as I have always said with the AMS, just because you placed it there, doesn't mean it deserves to live for hours.

Piggy, I love you really, but please get out of zerg mentality once.

If you answer the question NewSith posed based solely on the thread title, and your answer is yes, then I'll ask you another question:

"Are Migs a viable way to win a Command & Conquer Red Alert mission or random skirmish?"

You may only answer with "yes" or "no".

If your answer is yes, then you clearly don't need ANY other offensive units in C&C. In fact, it might be OP if you'd have access to heavy tanks and would use these en mass? Ehr... Doesn't that actually make it fun for some people? Maybe they don't like playing with Migs? On the other hand, you would not have considered those missions where there's massive AA defense and you have gigantic fog of war and have to deal with just the Spy Plane to scout. Basically, you ignore the diversity of scenarios by repeating the few scenarios where you can play your way. And given your outfit is huge, I'm sorry to say that you have lost all sense of small outfit and sneak perspective.

If your answer is no, then you haven't considered the scenarios where it is possible to simply spam Migs using your construction yard and completely overwhelm enemy AA defenses. Clearly you should play that way because it's possible, even if it's not very efficient? Maybe you should just play the game as intended: with Migs and aerial bombardment only, or is it really that selfish to want to play the way you want to if what you get isn't what you perceive as fun or too limited?




Do you catch my drift? You are in tunnelvision and only think from your own needs to design the proper design perspective. You haven't made any argument why AMSes would be OP, you just stated they are. Please, give me one example where AMS use would be so different from PS1 that it'd become incomparable.

Simply numbers doesn't matter as those can be balanced with ease through restricting availability if they'd prove an issue. In fact, you yourself indicate that it'd take more time to place an AMS because you can "get a new Galaxy within seconds". That would suggest the Galaxy is OP, not the AMS. The trade-off is simply different.

[andehh]

I honestly fail to see why a cloaked AMS/Sunderer would be over powered.

You still have to drive them to a point prior to deployment, they are slow, poor at manoeuvring and it isn't rocket science to work out logical places where an enemy would out their.

You can also triangulate where enemies are coming from/follow the bread crumps.

It also adds an extra layer of team player or role for an infiltrator go try and track them down prior to warning the team.

That being said due to the cloak, they can still be parked closer to the action to allow better battles and less time running across the map.

An AMS/sunderer spawn can only improve the game. If only because troops will spend more time in battles and bases, and less time hiking across the map!


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Majik]

In PS I was a GAL pilot and an AMS driver for my outfit. In PS2 I can't fly the GAL, when I do keep it in the air long enough to get it near a fight it either gets wasted by the first enemy air that sees it, or I crash it trying to find a level spot to land. Add to that you have to go all the way back to the warp to get one and it is on a forever and a day timer, I hate the gal spawn.

I want my ground based spawn point back.

[Tatwi]

Of course this means STFU

Just clarify, I am speaking of the AMS issue specifically, because in a lot of other things SOE does listen these days. It just makes me really upset that so many people in the community have asked for an AMS-like vehicle, yet SOE refuses to even try it in the beta test to see how it plays out. That's what a beta is for and if they really put the community ahead of their own egos, they would at least try it.

AMS, she's not a pink bunny.

[EVILPIG]

Piggy, I love you really, but please get out of zerg mentality once.



I fail to see how my response is "zerg mentality". I was a dedicated AMS supplier in PS1, as it was the most powerful vehicle in the game and key to victory. My opinion is based on having played PS2 extensively, but please, don't focus too much on my opinion, as I am just one of many.

Sorry, but I do not play C&C games, so I do not understand your comparison.

Just clarify, I am speaking of the AMS issue specifically, because in a lot of other things SOE does listen these days. It just makes me really upset that so many people in the community have asked for an AMS-like vehicle, yet SOE refuses to even try it in the beta test to see how it plays out. That's what a beta is for and if they really put the community ahead of their own egos, they would at least try it.

AMS, she's not a pink bunny.


Keep in mind that while you want to test what the Beta environment would be like with the AMS, SOE probably wants to extensively see what the Beta environment is like with just the Galaxy. Give it time, they have greatly shown that they look at feedback. Focus on the feedback that they need right now.

[Figment]

I fail to see how my response is "zerg mentality". I was a dedicated AMS supplier in PS1, as it was the most powerful vehicle in the game and key to victory. My opinion is based on having played PS2 extensively, but please, don't focus too much on my opinion, as I am just one of many.

You play in a really big outfit, correct?

Can you relate to outfits with 5-12 people online? Can you relate to stealth ops players? Do you play stealth ops constantly? No, you don't. Don't speak for me and my kind of players. You don't and can't know what we need, because you can rely on numbers to protect your gal, to get new ones, to do all those things you talk about based in having large group experience.

But that is all you have. :/

Did you do three men AMS missions in PS1 to setup router/AMS away from the zerg? I doubt it. You keep saying an AMS is not needed based on your experiences while denying our own experiences to mean anything. You after all, were able to do what you wanted. You were, great. But that is like a designer who is four feet tall making a seat he can sit in, then saying "if I can sit in it, everyone else can, even if they are six feet tall or longer". That is simply not good design.

In Ergonomics, one talks in Gaussian curves. In your case you may say that the Gal covers P25 to P90 of situations. But what about P1-P25 and P90-P99? (populace percentiles). You think since a large chunk is covered, the rest can be ignored, since you never get in that situation. You don't get to experience you need the AMS, because you don't get out of the Gal's comfort zone and don't mind. We do get way out of the Gal's comfort zone and it is hurting our fun because people like you block us from getting what we need by trivialisering our input by only focussing on what the Gal CAN, instead of finding out what it can't and which players it cannot support.

Sorry, but I do not play C&C games, so I do not understand your comparison.

Do you play any RTS games? Do you expect that you don't have any alternatives? In the case above, if it is possible to do air strikes and complete the mission, do you think everyone should play that way and only that way if the game is supposed to let you decide how you want to play and how you best your opponent. Meaning you scrap tanks, because you don't need them personally or you don't think they are fun personally? meaning you dictate others to play your way or forget about it?

That is what is happening here, we are stripped from strategic alternatives because someone else who doesn't know anything about us decided we don't think it's fun and we don't need it. Based on that argument we don't get it.

[Bittermen]

Yay pseudoscience!

[EVILPIG]

You play in a really big outfit, correct?



I am finding less and less validity in your opinion with each presumptuous reply. My PS and PS2 experiences are not limited to my outfit. I play a wide variety of alts across empires and servers. I lone wolf and play in various types of other outfits. I am well versed in spec ops play as well. My opinion about the potential impact of the AMS as a cloaked spawn point goes beyond your needs as a spec ops player. Though articulate, you are beginning to sound narrow minded in demanding that something is added just to suit you. It's also pretty lame for you to claim that you know everything I have done or know about the games. Basically, you're just saying that you know better and that is the final word. I have stated my opinion about the issue and you can state yours. I'm not going to simply say, I know everything about you and your motivations and you are simply wrong! So, I ask that you refrain from doing the same.

I'll summarize.
1. A cloaked spawn point would be too powerful in this environment.
2. There are many options to support spec ops activities, including:
A. Bringing a Galaxy (which is not be cloaked, but is a spawn point).
B. Have support classes. Medics and engies. just because you may be small, does not mean you shouldn't be using them.
C. Take a hard spawn if available at your target.
D. Use Spawn Beacons to back up your spawn options if you get wiped.

I predict that you will go back to your spec ops argument when it sounds more like you mean "covert ops". Is a Galaxy as covert as a cloaked AMS? No. Does that mean that a cloaked AMS should be introduced to the game? I don't believe so. Is the Spawn Beacon very covert? Not really, it can be easily seen. Does that mean that the enemy will always spot it or be able to get to it to destroy it? No, but it certainly helps for recovering once you begin to take casualties.

Feel free to add your opinion. I'd also like to know what kind of special operations you are interested in doing? And please, keep it civil.

I'll also add that again, I love the AMS and if the devs find a balanced way to bring it back, so be it.

[Kipper]

I don't think it would need to be cloaked. It has turrets for defence (Sundy AMS)

Less cloaky, more fighty. If you want to bring a spawn closer to the action, bring people to defend it.

[Crator]

When people talk against the AMS I see they mostly talk against a cloak ability. So let's try it without a cloak then? Do those who don't want an AMS leave-and-forget cloak like in PS1 would you compromise with a certed cloak ability that can't be turn on indefinitely but uses energy that can deplete but automatically refill over time, like the current special abilities that classes do?

[Salad Snake]

I think we have a case where the Galaxy is a viable spawn however, like many things in the game at the moment, we need more options & diversity.

I would like the Sunderer to have a spawn option (say in trade for weapons or armour) and possibly a cloak bubble option to be an alternative to the Galaxy.

Sunderer would be great as it doesn't really have much use now, but there'd have to be something to make it an inferior spawn point since it's cheaper...

The game they are playing is the TR/VS side of things. Let me sum this up.

NC: The gal is wonderful, I can it fly it anywhere, it never dies.

TR/VS: I have to park it way off in the middle of nowhere so it doesn't get spotted by the omnipresent Reavers, which blow it up in 3-4 rocket salvos. Despite spending 16k Auraxium on Dual Burster, 12.5k on HA AA, and 10k on Walker turrets for the Gal, none of them are good enough to prevent Reavers from blowing it up. See you in another 20 minutes when I get 400 alloy to spawn another.
This, it's tough to make suggestions when the balance is so murky atm. I'd love for them to take a portion of the team and do a balance pass one week.

[Figment]

I am finding less and less validity in your opinion with each presumptuous reply. My PS and PS2 experiences are not limited to my outfit. I play a wide variety of alts across empires and servers. I lone wolf and play in various types of other outfits. I am well versed in spec ops play as well. My opinion about the potential impact of the AMS as a cloaked spawn point goes beyond your needs as a spec ops player.

Fair enough. Apologies if it sounded insulting to you, as that was never the intention. You never make an argument based on spec / covert ops though. It's always "me and my buddies bring a Gal and then another and another), which doesn't sound anywhere close to what's possible for a small outfit.

Though articulate, you are beginning to sound narrow minded in demanding that something is added just to suit you. It's also pretty lame for you to claim that you know everything I have done or know about the games. Basically, you're just saying that you know better and that is the final word. I have stated my opinion about the issue and you can state yours. I'm not going to simply say, I know everything about you and your motivations and you are simply wrong! So, I ask that you refrain from doing the same.

It's not narrowminded at all. I go beyond what you can do with a Galaxy. Saying that the Galaxy is sufficient is narrowminded from my pov. Yes, I AM asking for a tool that fits me, but it also fits everyone else. I'm not being selfish. I find it selfish and narrowminded when someone says "hey, see what I can do with it, you therefore can too even if you don't want it".

I'll summarize.
1. A cloaked spawn point would be too powerful in this environment.

You've said that before, but you have never stated why you think that. Just repeating that you think it is OP doesn't make it so.

Considering the terrain is pretty much like that in PlanetSide, only the size of terrain has been scaled up, there's no reason I see why it wouldn't work exactly the same. People would still pop as bread crumbs walking from their AMS. An AMS would have less health than a Galaxy and the whole point of a spawnpoint is longetivity. The Gal does that fighting style, the AMS hiding style. No big deal. An AMS is logistically harder to bring to the site in question due to the terrain, but once there could sustain fights better, which last way too short right now despite of the Galaxy (which utterly sucks for sustaining fights, tbh, especially in the field or creating intermediate fights).

Fights should not last a few minutes as they do now.

This seems absolutely fair to me and if you're going to say it's OP, explain why and which AMS deployment rules you expect there to be. If you base your opinion on lack of deployment rules, I could see you complain about spamming of points, but if that'd actually be an issue, that'd be easy to fix with a basic interference radius between AMSes.

Furthermore, once PS2 actually gets more properly defensible bases (which I still presume it will), then an AMS has a much harder time getting passed the walls. Meaning a Galaxy is far more OP right now because it can ignore them completely, especially if you bring several, there's a very good chance you can just deploy one somewhere in an enemy CY. In contrast, an AMS has no defenses aside from invisibility, meaning if it is spotted trying to get into CY, it'll die much faster than a Galaxy. Again, not OP.

Also, name me one situation in PS1 where AMSes were actually OP, rather than the populace lazy in recalling and regrouping to take them out. I can't recall a single situation where people couldn't have recalled, grabbed a few libs and smashed the AMSes to bits. I can recall many more times where people don't leave their fights however even if they have the chance to.

2. There are many options to support spec ops activities, including:
A. Bringing a Galaxy (which is not be cloaked, but is a spawn point).

That does not support spec ops. A defenseless Galaxy I cannot consider a spawnpoint since it'll be dead before you can use it. If it's placed further away it's not a spawnpoint you can use either. Meaning point A is absolutely false.

Further more, you can't use neither a Galaxy nor a fixed spawnpoint for a group of saboteur infiltrators. If you don't see why, then you don't play our type of game after all. Stealth and leaving it alone is an absolute must. Without it, it's pointless and a waste of time to work from the zerg side of a fight. Might as well quit then.

AMSes are also the only thing you can use to set up an ambush. A Galaxy would not be able to allow you to prepare terrain for an ambush as the enemy would immediately be warned of your presence, plus would remove you almost instantly.

An AMS in the field means you have to get close to search and take it out. This stimulates battle. A Galaxy in the field would be spammed from long distance till it is dead. This does not support field fights that a lot of players like, ends battles abruptly and generally means ping-ponging between bases like we do now in PS2.

A Galaxy as only type of spawn will also mean that there will be no spawnpoints in the entire area left once a base is attempted to be held (when a battle moves inside, quite often any Gal around a base gets blown up by enemy air). That means there are no fall back positions and you are thrown back multiple hexes - if the enemy didn't already take those areas already as you were locked in. Outposts without AMSes will see their secondary spawnpoints (Galaxy) removed before the hold of the control console even begins as Galaxies are cleared before the outpost or base is attacked. With an AMS, there's a chance you can spawn nearby and actually try an active defense or reclaiming your position. It'll probably expose your AMS soon after, so I don't see how this OP, rather than fun because you can actually fight over it rather than wait or spawn frustrated 500m along with no means of getting back in time to even try to hack back.

That might be what you intend for it, or think it fine, it's not what other players want and you're still telling them they can't have that and now also calling them selfish. That's insulting too, you know.

B. Have support classes. Medics and engies. just because you may be small, does not mean you shouldn't be using them.

Unfortunately, if we're talking small group, we can't bring all at once or more of one class. And if we bring a number of them, we'll still be severely disadvantaged because we're so diversified, we're completely dependent on individual team members. That's not proper teamwork, that's overdependency on individuals. Next to that forcing people to play "Class X" is great for RPGs (not), but horrible for FPS and sandbox games.

Yes we can bring medics, but with the current TTK, they'll be dead before they can heal as they're the first to be targeted by a smart enemy. Meaning bringing them is rather pointless in many situations unless you bring more, but in that case, you have the problem that you lose firepower. So it's a tradeoff between bad and worse case scenario.

C. Take a hard spawn if available at your target.

The problem with hard spawns is that you can't relocate them. And everyone knows where they are so they home in on it immediately. For that reason, we hardly used towers in PS1 aside from stalling the enemy.

That means they are completely and utterly predictable paths people have to take in order to reach another position fast. They are also very unsuited as a fall back point, not to mention far too far away from any positions you may wish to take (in general, between 150 and 500m away from other points and taken over within seconds by the enemy when you're not there - which in many cases you can't be because the base demands you move around).

If you have a small group and have to defend a far away point from a fixed point, you might as well just leave. The point in question can't be left alone for a few seconds meaning you have to instantly try to get back (which is already impossible), but since you didn't all die or spawn at the same time, there'll be gaps. If you have a big team, you can have a more constant stream of players. A small team is more easily picked off one by one.

D. Use Spawn Beacons to back up your spawn options if you get wiped.

Spawn beacons don't last long and can't be used several times in a row. I don't consider these more than a single use an therefore not really a suitable type of thing. I've also found they're highly unreliable at the moment.

I predict that you will go back to your spec ops argument when it sounds more like you mean "covert ops". Is a Galaxy as covert as a cloaked AMS? No. Does that mean that a cloaked AMS should be introduced to the game? I don't believe so.

Subjective. I do. And yes, covert ops are included with spec ops. Spec ops are more varied types of missions though.

Is the Spawn Beacon very covert? Not really, it can be easily seen. Does that mean that the enemy will always spot it or be able to get to it to destroy it? No, but it certainly helps for recovering once you begin to take casualties.

For one life, which doesn't help much if they can respawn every four seconds.

Feel free to add your opinion. I'd also like to know what kind of special operations you are interested in doing? And please, keep it civil.

I'll also add that again, I love the AMS and if the devs find a balanced way to bring it back, so be it.

Holds for sabotage (say generator and spawn control unit rooms), defense, flank attacks and sniping harassment, capture, precision strikes, raids, resecures, ambushes (incl. setting up minefields), general subterfuge and distraction missions (and if it ever comes back: draining). Typical behind enemy lines and relatively quiet border area stuff, usualy against bigger numbers than our own. Beyond that, I like to place AMSes such that an attack vector can be changed and a battle progress.

Being able to spawn without immediately attracting attention and thus having time to prepare is incredibly important. If you get attacked constantly due to being spotted constantly, then you can't execute your plans because you're too preoccupied defending your spawnpoint. Due to that same reason, Galaxies can't be placed just anywhere in a base and thus are usualy way too far from a target.

Beyond that, in larger groups not having to repair and guard your spawnpoint constantly is an excellent attribute because it allows you to do something more useful and fun with your time and for the team. Repairing a unit constantly might be useful, but it's not a fun job. For larger groups and more blatant assaults, it's particularly useful for sieges, defense and making the frontline creep forward, back up points, etc. It's very important that you can inch a spawn point closer, so the spawntimes become less influential and in favour of the attackers. Again, a Galaxy skips entire stages of the attack. Do you honestly think anyon will want to down Dahaka west gate shields if you can just ignore that area due to the Galaxy?

We don't expect to have enough players to guard any spawnpoint given the size of PS2 bases and outposts in relation to our own size and expected enemy numbers.

[Shotokanguy]

I have an open mind about things but...

Man, it still just feels wrong to have a spawn point that isn't the AMS.

Just something about spawning inside that bubble alongside your fellow soldiers, gearing up for another run at the back door...it feels like something is missing without it, even if we don't really need it!

[andehh]

Figment...your a hero for us all!

I repeat...the galaxy is too big, too slow, and too obvious to EVERY pilot, tank and infantry in a base who watches it like a hawk. Never will galaxies be a viable spawn point because never will they be put near bases allowing people to spawn right into the action!

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Morat]

That would just mean nobody uses the galaxy. Nobody hotdrops because hot drops are not necessary. Why drop the troops when you can land and be a spawn for them where you were dropping them?

Well if that is true, we need to look much harder at the whole concept behind spawning vs transport. Hotdropping from multiple galaxies with air support was not just spectacular to watch, it was exciting to do. Spawning direct onto the enemy base just isn't as much fun. Also, defending a base makes much more sense when you're beating off waves of enemy transports because you can see them coming, prepare and then get a sense of achievement if you repel them.
Fighting a constant stream of the soldiers with the same names is kinda ridiculous, especially when you see them popping out of a vehicle parked on your front yard.

[Figment]

It's true alright.


Btw, note that I'm talking about taking on higher pops. In tiny vs tiny pops, the Galaxy, being balanced for big zergs, is really unbalanced as well.

The Galaxy in really small fights works like this: if you bring three guys and a Galaxy and face 1 or 2 guys at an outpost, those two guys can go pack their bags because they've already lost.

They'll never be able to kill the Gal, not even if they pull AA MAXes (note that the spawnees at the Gal could pull HA and AV MAXes to compensate). The consequence of engaging them is that if they try to concentrate fire on the Gal, they'll be killed or lose their control point in the meantime. Unless they are somehow great at both killing the Gal and killing troops. If they just focus on the control point, they may hold out for a while, but will eventually be overrun since they can't take out that spawnpoint, while it's relatively easy to cap an outpost right now.

Adding a longer cap timer would help, but would also make these outposts more boring if there's nobody there. Outpost/Gal design is a bit of a lose lose situation. :/

[Jonny]

I've not played the beta enough (terrible fps) to comment properly on this yet, but i'll say afew things:

It would be nice to see specialised galaxies for hot dropping, that have characteristics that encourage that. Maybe they lose the shield and spawn when deploying, but have heavy under armour for resisting ground to air fire.

I would also like to see the devs experiment with having an AMS version of the sundy.

The current galaxy can be awesome, but it's got some problems with how it affects the overall gameplay.

Ill post more when my new computer arrives and I can properly experience big battles at more than 2 fps! (literally)

[ringring]

I believe an augmented version of the galaxy with improved hot-dropping is mooted, or muted as my friend used to say.

The devs also say that a sundy upgrade will be available to be the ams.

I don't think we have heard as yet whether the sundy/ams will have a spawn ability. In my opinion it must do otherwise it will be very hard for it to survive, harder than a galaxy - and that's pretty difficult even with 3-4 AA maxes defending, as we've seen. (pre-AA buff)

If we're going to have defendable bases we need to get spawn points in close. Galaxy can only do that if they're parked on the roof and AA isn't a threat - but, in Zurvan for instance shields prevent access to the main building.

However, taking a BOI lab with Sundy/amses and no galaxy spawning would be a problem.

I think SOE should look at Jim Rosignol's latest article for Rock Paper Shotgun and have a think about restoring the Galaxy's proper role and mobile spawns.

[Maarvy]

Its is not viable at all.

The whole point of the galaxy (and AMS) was the additional spawn points closer to the action then outposts/towers. This is something the galaxy is incapable of doing due to its sheer size. The minute anyone spots one they think of the possible 12+ kills they can get in one shot and hammer it till the cows come home.

This instantly means the galaxies cannot be deployed anywhere near action...forcing you to talk a long walk to get into the battles!

Even with a cloak it is still a giant flying bathtub/missile magnet and it will NEVER be able to boost action by reducing time away from battles.

What a total pile of crap .

You can ram a galaxy right down a enemy's throat , You can land and them in some very tight spaces considering there size . And with a active defence they are very hard to kill . Not to mention with active capable gunners they eat through any aircraft that dares stray too close in flight .

I say no to Sunderer or any other smaller vehicle being a spawn location because they are just too easy to hide , and parking them within the shields of say zurvan will make a already difficult base to cap all but impossible .

Galaxys fill this roll perfectly because they are easy to spot due to there size . They create hotspots around them and require teamwork to deploy effectivley on the front line . Unlike the AMS which could be deployed by any solo ass hat with the cert , deployed and forgotten fairly safe in the fact that even around the largest battle it would remain hidden for at least a while .

[Blue Sam]

Once again 4 hours of playing today and not _once_ was a galaxy within a decent range (ie few 100m).

They work on towers when you drop them on the landing pads, but for 80% of the other bases they are just fat targets too jicy for anyone to pass up on.

THEY DON'T WORK at speeding up the gameplay & keeping the action fluid.

Your faction is doing it wrong. A galaxy can quite easily defend itself - just need four people to take the gunner spots, a bunch of engineers to repair it and some HA/max to defend against infantry. Add some competent air support in there and it's basically immortal.


Sunderer would be great as it doesn't really have much use now, but there'd have to be something to make it an inferior spawn point since it's cheaper...

Costs are something that is remarkably easy to change. It's one number.
Costs

[Maarvy]

You play in a really big outfit, correct?

Can you relate to outfits with 5-12 people online? Can you relate to stealth ops players? Do you play stealth ops constantly? No, you don't. Don't speak for me and my kind of players. You don't and can't know what we need, because you can rely on numbers to protect your gal, to get new ones, to do all those things you talk about based in having large group experience.

But that is all you have. :/

Did you do three men AMS missions in PS1 to setup router/AMS away from the zerg? I doubt it. You keep saying an AMS is not needed based on your experiences while denying our own experiences to mean anything. You after all, were able to do what you wanted. You were, great. But that is like a designer who is four feet tall making a seat he can sit in, then saying "if I can sit in it, everyone else can, even if they are six feet tall or longer". That is simply not good design.

In Ergonomics, one talks in Gaussian curves. In your case you may say that the Gal covers P25 to P90 of situations. But what about P1-P25 and P90-P99? (populace percentiles). You think since a large chunk is covered, the rest can be ignored, since you never get in that situation. You don't get to experience you need the AMS, because you don't get out of the Gal's comfort zone and don't mind. We do get way out of the Gal's comfort zone and it is hurting our fun because people like you block us from getting what we need by trivialisering our input by only focussing on what the Gal CAN, instead of finding out what it can't and which players it cannot support.



Do you play any RTS games? Do you expect that you don't have any alternatives? In the case above, if it is possible to do air strikes and complete the mission, do you think everyone should play that way and only that way if the game is supposed to let you decide how you want to play and how you best your opponent. Meaning you scrap tanks, because you don't need them personally or you don't think they are fun personally? meaning you dictate others to play your way or forget about it?

That is what is happening here, we are stripped from strategic alternatives because someone else who doesn't know anything about us decided we don't think it's fun and we don't need it. Based on that argument we don't get it.

If you have any experiance in ps2 beta you would see having ams or sunderer deployed inside zurvan shields , or underneath the a bio dome in the shield's makes those bases waay easier to defend and defeats to purpose of taking down the spawn control .

Small squads can still get to wherever the hell they want and deploy a spawn beacon which you can drop pod on every few min's . The only real downside of this from a ams while being used for small scale ops that you mention is that the spawn becon can be seen .... your 3 man spawn isnt so hard to find anymore , and thats not a bad thing imo

Take a look outside of the PS1 shoebox , play some beta and its pretty clear having the old AMS back would be a terrible idea .

Lets see some 5-10 man outfit try and do anything against a biodome that has a large outfit sunderer parked under the shields rolling out armour constantly . show us the spec ops team than can take down the spwan control and then make there way through the 1 and only camped to pieces teleport down to destroy the sundy/ams spawn point ....

[Figment]

If you have any experiance in ps2 beta you would see having ams or sunderer deployed inside zurvan shields , or underneath the a bio dome in the shield's makes those bases waay easier to defend and defeats to purpose of taking down the spawn control.

Bull, you'd have to use the teleporter which is easy to defend with a firing squad as we've seen in tech test already, besides, you'd need control over both ends of the teleporter in the future design to make use of it at all. So no, that's not true at all. It would however, make those bases a lot better defense wise and that's actually very much needed because there's no gradual fight between surrounding bases and middle.

And you're saying you can't get a Galaxy anywhere EVEN CLOSER like on the landing pads there? Please. That's reaching for straws.

Bio lab design is pretty poor anyway, it needs a gradual progression up where you fight your way along a route, possibly an extra garrisson half way from top to bottom.


And uhm... maybe there's people that think it's actually a good thing that you can defend that position? Besides, if it's there, it's a very obvious spawnpoint, plus it's probably in the way of any vehicle pad they have. And if you're REALLY, REALLY, REALLY desperate to prevent people from using a good position as a spawn point (which is a problem since when?)... Have you ever noticed that if you place something in PS1 too close to a vpad or door or on top of a building... it is deconstructed? EGADS NO YOU DID NOT THINK OF THAT.

Small squads can still get to wherever the hell they want and deploy a spawn beacon which you can drop pod on every few min's .

Great. You just die every two seconds within a second... So rather pointless you can use it ONCE, with a very obvious drop pod, if they can continuously respawn, isn't it?

Bad argument and already been dismissed before. Keep up with the debate. You clearly are incapable of placing yourself in the position of a small group facing a larger group. We've tried what you suggested the moment the beacon was available. We were more than a little underwhelmed about the results.

But hey, here's a thought, you go and try a 10 minute hold with one respawn and see if it works for yourself.

The only real downside of this from a ams while being used for small scale ops that you mention is that the spawn becon can be seen .... your 3 man spawn isnt so hard to find anymore , and thats not a bad thing imo

If you don't want to work for your kills and only want to move on and on and on from base to base after one kill, then no, it isn't. If you want to have a fight, then yes, it is.

Take a look outside of the PS1 shoebox , play some beta and its pretty clear having the old AMS back would be a terrible idea .

Played since Tech Test, try again. My opinion is different from yours, that doesn't mean I played less, I just play different.

Lets see some 5-10 man outfit try and do anything against a biodome that has a large outfit sunderer parked under the shields rolling out armour constantly . show us the spec ops team than can take down the spwan control and then make there way through the 1 and only camped to pieces teleport down to destroy the sundy/ams spawn point ....

How about you would use a couple jetpacks with AV. Oh wait, arbitrary class limitation. How about a group of jetpacks with C4 then? Needs to get in close, but is possible in theory. How about we make vehicle jacking possible and cloakers able to move through teleports cloaked instead of in plain sight with no armour or health to protect them? Maybe the REK should make a return after all because it actually was a good idea for variation in strategies?


Hmm there's a thought: the game is underdeveloped in those aspects and didn't take into account to allow for various strategies and diverse use scenarios.

The AMS is not the problem, the base layout and class system is. How about no base should ever have had extremely campable spawntube teleports as a main way of entry? Hmm? Oh wait, maybe you should have played Beta to understand that. No. As a designer you should have realised that the moment it would have been mentioned in a dev meeting. But just like you, they didn't draft too many scenarios and weren't awfully creative nor had an awful lot of foresight regarding these things.

In fact, a Galaxy can land underneath the Bio Lab as well, and in contrast to a Sunderer, is much harder to kill under the same circumstances by a small group since it has a LOT more armour. An AMS that's invisible doesn't have any benefit once you know where it is since it would not have a ton of armour.



But wait, no no no. Let's presume PS2 is perfect in beta and anyone critiqueing it is a noob who hasn't played it for months already.

[Maarvy]

But this isnt ps 1 and there are class limitations ....

The gap to get in over the bio lab shields is vary small and trying to get in with c4 would be almost impossible .

Stealthers get rendered by the teleporter just like anyone else ... dead .

A gal may be able to fit underneath but it has to be there already it cant be spawned underneath the biodome by the last man alive to create a instant spawn point , and respawned one after another if need be . A gal coming in to a active biodome fight has to fly in and then poistion itself to get under the dome without getting shot to fuck.

And you dont need so much to defend both sides of the teleporter when you can simply roll out one tank after another and decimate any enemy gal on the landing pads ... at which point you render any attacking ground based spawn almost useless .

AMS were great in ps1 they worked , with either of the 2 base capture mechanics we have now they wont work they will stack the odds in favour of the defenders . and since bases like Zurvan can last all day and never change hands already .... thats not a good thing .As you said the base mechanics and other things still leave a lot to be desired but as things stand now .... no ams/sundy spawns please . At least any vehicle with spawn abilitys should be limited to spawning from the warpgate before they are introduced with the current mechanics .

On top of that I just dont think every 2 man outfit should have acess to a invisible spawn point ...

[Scopedog]

My cents

I think it would be fine if the sundy had a cert for spawn, but absolutely no cloaking on vehicles whatsoever a such important thing as a spawn point should be visible. So you need to defend it. If the galaxies have spawn as default then it would be alright for sundy drivers to cert in to it but it needs to be expensive so you have to dedicate to it not so every one spamms it and naturally at tradeoffs to functionality.

But cloaking of either is just catering to people that are lazy and just attack with no sense of teamwork. And this game is about teamwork not solo zerging.

Oh and can we stop talking about AMS please? its an option on the sundy or not at all, an dedicated spawn is not the way to go in ps2 vehicles with more options are much more interesting than one trick ponys.

[ringring]

I accept an ams won't work in attacking a bio dome. The bio dome is the ps2 meatgrinder and even as it is it needs some attention. Big stairs going up rather than teleports would help. Even so I don't see how it can be capped unless there are attacking gals landed on the air pads. Other than that? Attackers should cap the surrounding points and influence, leave the centre alone and win the ticket race - but of course the cap method is being changed.

Regardless of the ams question bio labs need looking at. (imagine a multi-continent world and Surva is the last base you have on the continent and a CR5 globals 'hey lads interfarm at Surva!'.

In all other circumstances an ams would be better.

[Figment]

But this isnt ps 1 and there are class limitations ....

No it's not. This is beta where we can tell them what we think of all the various class limitations and class limitations in general.

Duh.


"All can change", right? (If not, should have listened to us when it was in alpha when people said "wait for beta", it's blisters of those that made that statement then we're sitting on, not mine).


The gap to get in over the bio lab shields is vary small and trying to get in with c4 would be almost impossible .

Hypothetically getting an infil into a gap of a Delta Triad defense is almost impossible.

Or is it. :P

Stealthers get rendered by the teleporter just like anyone else ... dead .

As said, you have to go in visible and it's a stupid system in the first place which I hope won't make it to the live game. That said, if you just had an AMS... maybe that cloaker would have come from somewhere other than the top floor? Oh... Yeah, no AMS, so any Gal in the area would be dead and any base in the area capped.

Thanks to people like you, of course, we don't have that option. So yeah, please keep cutting away the options, you're doing a hell of a job indicating what isn't possible now. Thank you Capt. Zerg.

A gal may be able to fit underneath but it has to be there already it cant be spawned underneath the biodome by the last man alive to create a instant spawn point , and respawned one after another if need be . A gal coming in to a active biodome fight has to fly in and then poistion itself to get under the dome without getting shot to fuck.

So a Gal, with its much denser armour, would get "shot to fuck", but an AMS where the last guy is alive and surrounded by enemies that control the direct area around him (because they killed everyone), would be able to get an AMS out.

You're scenario drafting is getting more awesome by the minute. And again you ignore the option that you would not be allowed to place one in a vehicle spawn area if it turns out to be an issue.

Or you could say "Well played good sir, well played" to the guy who had the brain to get an AMS out. Ah wait, no, that would be rewarding tactical thinking...


Oh and uhm. Do you know that bit where the SHIELD GENERATOR CAN BE TAKEN OUT FROM OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING? >.>

Aaah yes. You did forget about that one too... Sigh. If you're going to built hypothetical arguments, at least be thorough.

And you dont need so much to defend both sides of the teleporter when you can simply roll out one tank after another and decimate any enemy gal on the landing pads ... at which point you render any attacking ground based spawn almost useless .

lolwut? Resources and timers don't mean anything to you? You do realise that you can cut enemies from resource replenishment by taking all the terrain around a base and cutting them of from their foothold, right? Ask Higgles about their intentions on logistics.

AMS were great in ps1 they worked , with either of the 2 base capture mechanics we have now they wont work they will stack the odds in favour of the defenders .

Because attackers can't use them, right? What a load of bull.

and since bases like Zurvan can last all day and never change hands already .... thats not a good thing .

You know why they don't change hands already? Perpetual threeway, lack of spawn points and up to recently there was this very defender supportive ticker system where if a base gets defended everything in the region turns and gets locked, which given that an attack takes over half an hour and a defense around 10 minutes, while the outposts surrounding the base can't be controlled easily yet provide massive impact on capture and defense times right now, isn't really down to the spawning system, but the capture mechanics.

In fact, if you weren't dependent on Galaxies, you would be harder to clean out and you would be able to exert more control over the base as an attacker by having more harder to find, practical and unpredictable spawnpoints in the area.

As you said the base mechanics and other things still leave a lot to be desired but as things stand now .... no ams/sundy spawns please . At least any vehicle with spawn abilitys should be limited to spawning from the warpgate before they are introduced with the current mechanics .

Why? If the Galaxy, like Evilpig suggests, can be brought in within half a minute anyway, who cares about driving distance? How about you simply make it costly and put a timer on it? OoooOooooOoh, you mean like limit their accessibility?


Even better, how about you don't hand everyone the certification to all vehicles and classes, but make them make a choice so they personalize their characters? Hmm.

On top of that I just dont think every 2 man outfit should have acess to a invisible spawn point ...

No, they should have a huge whale of a spawn point instead with massive amounts of hit points that they can land just about anywhere without having to take the terrain into account instead... :rolleyes: I much rather see an invisible spawnpoint you can easily track and take down with two people (if you can't, you simply suck at scouting and probably PS1, no other option), then one that has so many hitpoints two people (enemies from the Gal) can't do anything about it.



If I sound agitated, it's cause I am. You literally blame the AMS that's not actually in the game for the faults in the game that are there regardless of whether an AMS is in or not, instead of the game. If an AMS ever wants to get in, it should get in as soon as possible so the core game can take it into account, rather than first being tuned to the Galaxy and then needing another overhaul. That's just a waste of development time.

My cents

I think it would be fine if the sundy had a cert for spawn, but absolutely no cloaking on vehicles whatsoever a such important thing as a spawn point should be visible. So you need to defend it. If the galaxies have spawn as default then it would be alright for sundy drivers to cert in to it but it needs to be expensive so you have to dedicate to it not so every one spamms it and naturally at tradeoffs to functionality.

You either never did play PS1 or you're just weird. Cert points aren't expensive. The maximum amount of cert points you can stock in PS2 right now is 200, which is obtained OFFLINE in a week. Expensive my arse. Auraxium you say? Idling in a foothold offline over night to reap the auraxium bonus!



And hey... Spawnpoints should be "defended"? You really love spawncamping that much that you like them all those lovely "just spawned and loading the game" and afk people be visible and out in the open? Indeed...

But cloaking of either is just catering to people that are lazy and just attack with no sense of teamwork. And this game is about teamwork not solo zerging.

You go wash your mouth young man. Spawnpoints that need to be defended is only for zerging. That's not teamwork, that's forcing people to stay away from objectives and not contributing to winning, but contributing to maintaining a status quo.

Oh and can we stop talking about AMS please? its an option on the sundy or not at all, an dedicated spawn is not the way to go in ps2 vehicles with more options are much more interesting than one trick ponys.

No, let's kill of the functionality of all transport vehicles instead in favour of stationary spawnpoints. :rolleyes: Hello Lodestar 2 (Galaxy) and Lodestar 3 (Sunderer).


Sunderer is at most a temporary solution. I'd rather not see them have repair benefits either. And I'm a really, really big Sundy fan, but they should be storm rams and at most combat APCs, not spawnpoints or repair facilities. That is something best left to an AMS.

Which btw, even if it's invisible, would attract attention so you would eventually fight over it.

[Maarvy]

maybe they dont limit the vehicles and classes because they want the casual first timer to log in and maybe have some fun , maybe they dont want to suvive on the shoestring budget that the PS1 population provided .

Invisible spawns are bullshit , man up and defend your shit imo . keep em away from ps2 .

Sunderer spawns with some rework on where they can be deployed maybe , ams ... fuck no !

P.S. I also love how anyone you consider rolling with more than 10 people a zerg , you must get zerged a lot ....

"aww man were only 8 and they brought a galaxy full .... we were totaly zerged ! "

[EVILPIG]

What I don't get Figment, is that you seem to want a cloaked spawn point so that your outfit/group of a few can be sustained in a fight against larger forces. You don't seem to consider the impact on game balance by making that same cloaked spawn point available to the large forces as well. I still have to ask why the game needs this just for your needs?

Try not to get all hot about it, it's a legitimate question.

[Figment]

maybe they dont limit the vehicles and classes because they want the casual first timer to log in and maybe have some fun , maybe they dont want to suvive on the shoestring budget that the PS1 population provided .

Maybe they're killing the game by doing that like how they killed off what was left of PS1 with BR40 and with it increasing the presence of all heavy equipment and support certs to unhealthy levels...


Oh dear. Again you should think your argument through.

Invisible spawns are bullshit , man up and defend your shit imo . keep em away from ps2 .

You go use your Galaxy for that, let us subtle people do things our way. We're not you. You don't get to decide how we play. Man up and find our AMS, even if it's in a position you don't dare to take, because you're scared you might lose, meaning you're a coward and need to man up because it's too challenging for you.


Man up! It's what the big boys do! :rolleyes:

Sunderer spawns with some rework or where they can be deployed maybe , ams ... fuck no !

Essentially nearly the same thing, just not as ergonomically suitable because it's designed for transportation, not for AMS duty and therefore infringes on the transport role as people have to start making a choice for one or the other (which according to your other statement where people have to have fun, is the opposite of what's intended? Ah. So basically you're now contradicting yourself). Also note that the Sunderer can do more as it can also transport people and can fight back.


But hey, you're scared of attacking a defenseless position, aren't you? Oh dear, yes, you are! Wait... didn't you say earlier it was too easy to place it such that you could... defend it?


I call hypocrisy on many of your points.

Anything else?

[Maarvy]

Your counter is frankly sad ill stop now , it seems your heart is set on the special needs invisibuss .

I don't want you having a heart attack or brain tumor over it .

[Figment]

What I don't get Figment, is that you seem to want a cloaked spawn point so that your outfit/group of a few can be sustained in a fight against larger forces. You don't seem to consider the impact on game balance by making that same cloaked spawn point available to the large forces as well. I still have to ask why the game needs this just for your needs?

Try not to get all hot about it, it's a legitimate question.

Those larger forces don't get the same benefits out of it as a small group do because they get people like the "Phoenix Noob" that sits next to it and a large string of red dots that leads every enemy straight to it.

Mediocre groups will have the advantage of it still, but large groups expose their spawnpoints continuously. However, if we're talking about what is able to be taken out by a small group, then an AMS is easier to take out even against a bigger group than a Galaxy, simply because it has less hitpoints. The critical treshold of it dieing is therefore easier reached.

The thing with big groups is they take less care of their spawnpoints because they assume someone else will. Of course the main benefit is that a small group can create a difference by getting an AMS into such a position that they empower the bigger group to breach a defense. That is part of the spec ops, non-zerg tasks.

Hence I'm not at all concerned with big groups bringing AMSes, hell, I'd rather have them bring those than those Galaxies which soak too much firepower for a small group to handle. I've been taking out AMSes in zergs by hacking them ever since 2004.


Again, I'm not just argueing for myself. Please stop suggesting that it's JUST for myself. I've repeatedly indicated I'm argueing in favour of all players AND yes, myself and mine definitely. Everyone benefits from it, small, medium and large groups. From a Galaxy, only few people benefit and they're not the surgical strike groups. Surgical strike groups need more subtle tools. If they can't be subtle, they won't exist. If they don't exist, that means you're driving players off and you're reducing the amount of in-game variety and capacity in strategy tremendously.





I may point out that some of the most important players of my outfit as well as a number of leaderboard players from NC Werner are considering not playing right now, because it's just a mindless slugfest and they as individuals and small teams can't make the difference they expect to be able to make. Things like the recent tactical change means a lot to them. As crude and blunt as the game is now, it doesn't befit me either. To me, it currently feels as if the only way to win is brute force. That doesn't fit my character and it's not how I want to play. Saying it's fine means you're telling me this game is not for me. Period. Basically you're telling me to wait for a next opportunity, for when PlanetSide 3 is made because maybe that'll cater to the sneaky among us.

They don't like to play as fodder and nothing but and all the systems combined and lack of available tools make them feel that way. That may sound elitist, but that's simply the case. This game should also be for them because they're a very significant population.

These are typically the people that kept the empire going in the background and sometimes foreground. These are the people that sacrificed time and effort and many times left 'fun fights' out of the strategic interests of their empire so the rest of the empire could play. If you lose these people, you lose the heart and brains of the empire, not to mention a lot of very skilled team players.

And yeah, team players. Team work is not defined by "DEFEND UR SPAWNZ", it is defined by what you mean for the empire and the other players. If they are brought down to the level of "watch the repair meter rotate" because that's somehow the epitome of teamwork instead of moving from your spawn as a group and obtain your objective as a group, then I don't think that's very respectful towards them. These people get their enjoyment out of playing together. Not about being the repair b**** and hardware babysitter of the team.

Again, if you enjoy that, great. Don't talk down to others for wanting to do and achieve a bit more during their precious game time than keeping a circle fully white.

Your counter is frankly sad ill stop now , it seems your heart is set on the special needs invisibuss .

I don't want you having a heart attack or brain tumor over it .

Aaaah the good ol' "oh crap, I lost the debate, I'll better pull out" move. With an insult or three to add to it. Nice. And again a hypocritical statement too, because you're unwilling to consider the AMS al together without even having ran thorough scenarios.

You only run simplistic and incomplete current context scenarios and consider what can change without having any evidence to support that. All evidence supports that an AMS is not OP (nine years of PS1).

You consider the context fixed and only the unit adaptable. Hence you will never win this argument.

[Crator]

All you people arguing against options such as an AMS are going to make the game stale for players who want variety in the game. Yeah, they'll have fun for a bit cause the game is new to them then they'll most likely think what more they can do in regards to variety. And there will be nothing so they will just stop playing.

And, you're all just speculating without any kind of real data to go off of anyways. Both sides. I don't see why, if they did add a cloaking AMS type vehicle in, they couldn't add counters to it needed to make it balanced. I guess the real question here is, "What is SOE's vision of how game-play flow should go?". They've got to have some kind of overall vision. It's seems that it isn't really well defined though, and that they are leaving this part up to the closed beta testers to help them decide what feels right for PS2, a MMOFPS.

[Ouroboros]

The best part of the AMS was its relatively small size. You could weave it between some hills and get it behind enemy lines.

No one is going to miss noticing that gigantic flying barn.

[Rivenshield]

The best part of the AMS was its relatively small size. You could weave it between some hills and get it behind enemy lines.

No one is going to miss noticing that gigantic flying barn.

This, unfortunately.

Also, the gawdawful difficulty in flying the bugger and the gawdawful cooldown means Gals are fairly scarce. I spend more time running from my spawn (whatever it is) to the battle than it'd take to drive an old, slow AMS from any nearby vehicle pad to the next base or outpost or whatever.

[Maarvy]

Aaaah the good ol' "oh crap, I lost the debate, I'll better pull out" move. With an insult or three to add to it. Nice. And again a hypocritical statement too, because you're unwilling to consider the AMS al together without even having ran thorough scenarios.

You only run simplistic and incomplete current context scenarios and consider what can change without having any evidence to support that. All evidence supports that an AMS is not OP (nine years of PS1).

You consider the context fixed and only the unit adaptable. Hence you will never win this argument.

you compared new players coming in to ps2 able to spawn stock versions of the vehicles to over speced r40's in ps1 ... theres no comparison . The endless cert points you get is another matter .

AMS wont work with current mechanics all my scenarios are given current mechanics . and with those ams sunderer spawns will make the game worse .

If you want a spearate debate over base cap mechanics ... thats another thread i guess .

I really don't want you to start getting the blood pressure up again im seriously worried .

[Crator]

AMS wont work with current mechanics all my scenarios are given current mechanics . and with those ams sunderer spawns will make the game worse

Conjecture. That's like, your opinion man!

[Ouroboros]

Add a Galaxy variant that has a cloak bubble and wheels. BEST OF BOTH WORLDS.

[Maarvy]

Conjecture. That's like, you're opinion man!

No thats a fact .

Being able to pop a instant spawn point inside zurvan or a bio labs shields will make those bases incredibly hard to capture.

I mean maybe if your playing NC on EU1 and fold like a cheap suit at the first sign of a decent fight I can maybe understand how you might think that was better . But as a example VS held zurvan for 95% of the last week having spawn points deployable inside the main building behind layers of shields too would just be stupid .

[Crator]

No thats a fact .

Being able to pop a instant spawn point inside zurvan or a bio labs shields will make those bases incredibly hard to capture.

I mean maybe if your playing NC on EU1 and fold like a cheap suit at the first sign of a decent fight I can maybe understand how you might think that was better . But as a example VS held zurvan for 95% of the last week having spawn points deployable inside the main building behind layers of shields too would just be stupid .

You make the variety of options fit to the game, not make the game fit to the options. We are in closed beta. Things change. Balancing occurs. Nothing is a fact at this point.

[Goku]

Everyone needs to calm down, otherwise I'm going to start giving out infractions.

[Crator]

Yay! We get to try it now! :)

http://www.reddit.com/r/Planetside/comments/zk8q4/is_the_galaxys_role_already_cemented_as_a_respawn/c65kvaw


Radar_X 12 points 16 hours ago

The Sunderer will have a loadout that allows respawn but the Galaxy will continue to provide this role as well. Together you'll be able to mount an aerial or ground assault.

Something I posted in the beta forums:

Crator, Today at 4:08 PM (http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/how-the-ams-really-tied-the-room-together.14608/page-7) I'd rather have the AMS then the current amount of GAL and static spawn points that are showing up on my map. I'd even opt in for only one AMS spawn, one static spawn, and one base spawn (all nearest to me). With option to bind at each type of spawn point except an outpost spawn point.

I'd even compromise with the above scenario by saying you can still spawn at any deployed Galaxy as long as it is deployed within a hex that your empire owns. You will still be able to spawn at the nearest deployed Galaxy regardless of hex owner still though.

This will allow the spawn mechanics to have direction and focus for battles instead of the existing chaotic system.

[Craftyatom]

I know this thread's a bit old, but I just wanted to inject this little anecdote.

When I join up with my specops squad on East 1, I'm usually the guy who pulls a Gal, because flying is my passion, and it's probably the easiest thing to do at 10fps. I proceed to fly out to wherever they are, and land just outside of the base they're hitting, on a nearby ledge or something.

I sit there with my glue gun, healing the Gal through even reaver barrages, as they spawn right where they need to be. Once we've capped the point (or in some cases, decided to double back), I get everyone that I can in the Gal, take off, and head to the next base's LZ.

I keep this Galaxy alive for 5 or 6 different bases before I get a miscue and fly it somewhere too hot, and even then I can sometimes keep it alive with my repairs.

If making a safe, mobile spawn point whenever and wherever I want (mostly due to the help of my trusty glue gun) isn't considered viable, I don't know what is.

[Raka Maru]

I know this thread's a bit old, but I just wanted to inject this little anecdote.

When I join up with my specops squad on East 1, I'm usually the guy who pulls a Gal, because flying is my passion, and it's probably the easiest thing to do at 10fps. I proceed to fly out to wherever they are, and land just outside of the base they're hitting, on a nearby ledge or something.

I sit there with my glue gun, healing the Gal through even reaver barrages, as they spawn right where they need to be. Once we've capped the point (or in some cases, decided to double back), I get everyone that I can in the Gal, take off, and head to the next base's LZ.

I keep this Galaxy alive for 5 or 6 different bases before I get a miscue and fly it somewhere too hot, and even then I can sometimes keep it alive with my repairs.

If making a safe, mobile spawn point whenever and wherever I want (mostly due to the help of my trusty glue gun) isn't considered viable, I don't know what is.

I see this happening all the time. There is no shortage of busy engies to pick off with my sniper rifle. Did this for about 2-3 hours.

[Craftyatom]

I see this happening all the time. There is no shortage of busy engies to pick off with my sniper rifle. Did this for about 2-3 hours.

I have a spawn point right there, I'll walk around the other side this time :3

[Tamas]

Best spawn. So many option where to land it - won over some bases just because of galaxy spawn points.

[Mechzz]

The Galaxy provides some real excitement, I have to say. Crash landing onto a tower's pads with a full squad, then trying to keep it alive while your team storms the tower is a moment that is totally amazing and was just not available in PS1. Indar's terrain is very unfriendly to vehicles, so driving off-road is a real PITA. The Gal can fly over all that and drop off or touch down and set up shop.

So far so good.

But as many have pointed out, it's just too big and clumsy. There are many, many places I would love to try and sneak a spawn-equipped Sundy into, and I'm glad we're going to get the chance to try.

Props to SOE for letting us at least try. The future of this game lies in variety, and that seems to be what they are giving us. Bring it on!

[Raka Maru]

I have a spawn point right there, I'll walk around the other side this time :3

Usually the other side is getting bombarded, that's why I take the long way, all the way to the other side. :)

I don't really enjoy spawning into a barrage of explosions, especially with low FPS. I end up dead again fast.

[Whiteagle]

Ok, sorry if I haven't read through everything, but here are some things I've noticed about the Galaxy.

Being Spawn Capable
Now, I'm not one of those people who are against Gals being Mobile Spawn points, but this is a bit of a problem...
Namely, it is a Default ability, so every noob and their brother is coming in and spamming Galaxies all over the map.
This undermines the importance of static spawn points and makes the ground war seem unimportant by comparison!

The biggest suggestion I've seen for correcting this is to make a Gals "Spawn Tube" a piece of equipment that the pilot needs to Certify for.

My own version has Vehicles using a "Module" system, where Galaxies and Sunderers have "Package" modules that represent their cargo.
The Galaxy's default Package would be "Transport", that cluster of six seats in the back. (I've also seen a lot of suggestions that this should be the only sub-type of Gal that allows Hotdropping.)
Galaxy Pilots could then Certify for other Package Modules like they do for different Weapon Attachments.

These other Packages would be:
Spawn Generator (60 Certification Points); Trades those six seats for "Spawn Tube" that only functions while the Galaxy is deployed.

Lightning Rack (??? Certification Points); Load a Lightning into the back of your Galaxy who can continue to use his gun in a limited faction instead of six passive passengers!

Aerial Resupply (<60, perhaps 40 Certification Points?); Orignally the Gunship Package, I figure this would take too much way from the Liberator.
Instead, we will go with the more interesting of JaegerZero (http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/concept-galaxy-variants.13347/) suggestions for this set of Equipment and trade the six seats for three Turrets that fuction like an Engineer's Repair Tool, repairing and rearming allied Aircraft while they are still in the air.

Bomb Bay (<60, perhaps 30 Certification Points?); Something I just came up with so that the Liberator and Galaxy can have different Ground Attack roles.
This Package fills the space those six passangers would take up with a whole lot of bombs!
It could probably could be given to that remaining seat behind the Pilot so he'd have something to do instead of spotting.

A Modular Equippent System like this makes both Ground and Air transports far more appealing and customizible.

Like different Wing Attachments; Turrets (Current Default), Flash Pylons (Hardpoints that allow a couple of guys on Flashs to ride under your wings and possibly fire like the Ligthning if they have guns mounted), or Bomb Racks (MOAR BOOMS!!!)!

Or a roof attachment that allows you to replace those two turrets with an AEWC (Airborne Early Warning and Control) Unit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_Early_Warning_%26_Control) that will highlight enemies for allies!

(Sorry if I went a little crazy here, it's just annoying that eleven different threads pop up every minute on this over in the Beta Forums that bury your suggestions, back to the discussion at hand...)

Armor:
Now, this may just be a symptom of low server populations and everyone focusing more on attacking then defending territory, but the Gal has WAY too much front and behind-enemy line surviviblility right now.

I've seen it claimed that this invalidates Ground Combat, since why bother navigating around any obsticals if you can just fly over them.
Again, this might just be do to a lack of manpower to field anti-air...

Still, being able to just park a Spawn capable Gal on a contested Base's Air Pads does seem a bit cheap in my opinion.
You should not be able to set a near permanint Spawn Point right on top of the point you are fighting over!
If you are setting something like that down anywhere, it should be behind your own lines so that your side can keep up constaint pressure.

Perhaps a Vehicle with Spawn equipment should somehow have weaker armor then its Transport equivlilant?
That way, Spawn Gals would park a short distance away from the fight, and Transport Gals would ferry in the troops that spawn there for Hotdrops! (Packages effecting a Transports Base Armor value would also help expain why a Spawn Sundy could do the same things my Siegebreaker Sundy (http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/sunderer-the-galaxy-of-the-ground.13337/page-2#post-218873) concept could do.)