Solving the vehicle spam once and for all [Archive]

PredatorFour

2013-01-04, 07:39 AM

Gortha

2013-01-04, 08:12 AM

i like.

p0intman

2013-01-04, 08:36 AM

http://twitter.com/anemoose/status/258599218082615297
http://twitter.com/j_smedley/status/258602782540578816

John "We know better than our players and don't care" Smedley

welp

Figment

2013-01-04, 08:42 AM

Smedley looks only at the supposed "fun" of the driver.

Which as a driver, I disagree with the idea that getting to gun is per definition more fun, very subjective subject (I prefer to focus on driving when driving and if I gun to have a fixed forward gun).

Unfortunately, Smedley does not seem to really appreciate the fun of any opposition or the feeling of usefulness of the gunners.

Sunrock

2013-01-04, 08:47 AM

Too many vehicles ruining planetside ??? easy, just....

1. Bring in dedicated driver/gunner for MBT`s - instantly halves the amount of tank spam and increases the chances that squads of HA or other classes can take armour columns down.

2. Make ESFs and libs more squishy - give them less armour and weak points. Say you could shoot the driver (or gunner) out the cockpit, or blow up an engine and send it down.

3. Make the resource system all into one. Infantry, vehicle and air resources into one combined resource and increase the resource limit.

Any more suggestions ???

Nope IMO very bad ideas. Vehicles stats should stay as they are.

But what can be done is to make the resource system work a bit more hardcore. Make it hurt allot more to loose territory as you would have to wait longer to gain resources. As it is right now if your faction owns around 50% of the continent is almost impossible to round out of resources. Making the conquering game play allot viable then it is now would maybe stop the worst things. Because as it is now locking down continents does not mean mush. That would make you care more if you loose your vehicle, because you could not spawn new one every 5-10 minutes.

PS: Better they add a new type of tanks that takes 3 to drive. 1 driver with access to a kobolt or baselisk; gunner 1 with access to the main cannon and a kobolt or baselisk; gunner 2 with access to a more heavy machine guns then the dirver and 1st gunner have. Something that would be equal to what a .50-caliber (12.7 mm) M2HB heavy machine gun is in reality in the game. A long or medium range version of the G30 Vulkan perhaps. Then we would have something that would work as a M1 Abraham tank in the game.

Canaris

2013-01-04, 08:47 AM

Canaris

2013-01-04, 08:51 AM

p0intman

2013-01-04, 08:55 AM

that tweet is from Oct of last year.... as we have all seen, tunes change.
it took smed two and a half years to admit the NGE was wrong and he and his team fucked up. Good luck, I hope he changed his mind, for Planetside's sake.

Ghoest9

2013-01-04, 08:59 AM

Other than "make ESFs more squishy" those arent good ideas.

A tank gunner wont fix related to vehicle spam anything and we all know it. HE Lightnings are more wicked really due o their mobility.

And while resources costs do need to be heavily modified there is no real reason to change it to 1 common pool.

Sunrock

2013-01-04, 09:08 AM

make the infantry based AV launchers work similar to a javelin style missile instead of infuriating design we have now that's destroyed more of the ground/terrain than enemy vehicles.

heck even working out the kinks in the current AV lockon system would be a big start, I have more misfires than anything else from them.

Hmm what? AV locking misfires? You mean players use flairs or smoke to brake the lock? Or that they use the terrain to make the guided missile crash into a rock (or other solid objects) instead of taking the hit?

ringring

2013-01-04, 09:10 AM

I have to admit I like the driver/gunner thing (having been a critic) just as I liked the magrider on PS1.

But, tank spam is a problem. There are too many single person tanks around.

Two possible solutions:
1) Nerf the main gun and buff the secondary. Make it so a single person tank meeting a two person tank is at a big disadvantage. ie Encourage good behaviours.
2) make vehicle certifications a propert 'cert tree'. Everyone can only cert 1 of MBT. Lightning, Sundy, Mossie, Lib, Galaxy, with recertification available after a period of time (perhaps some combinations could be adjusted until the right effect was achieved)

Canaris

2013-01-04, 09:17 AM

Hmm what? AV locking misfires? You mean players use flairs or smoke to brake the lock? Or that they use the terrain to make the guided missile crash into a rock (or other solid objects) instead of taking the hit?

no I can live with a smart vehicle driver using the terrain to his advantage, when I say misfire I mean, locked on missile hitting the target and doing no damage, locked on missile flying wide or just falling to the ground before it hits the target even when fired from an elevated position.

When you fire the launcher, if you have it pointed upwards the missile will not leave the launchers tube from that direction but will fire straight from your chest.

Bloodeagle did a nice diagram of what I mean

http://i49.tinypic.com/sp9qnn.png

this is a big problem. Back in the start of PS1 with the stryker it would suffer from these problems but they managed to correct it's firing position and could then be used more effectively.

Sunrock

2013-01-04, 09:25 AM

1) Nerf the main gun and buff the secondary. Make it so a single person tank meeting a two person tank is at a big disadvantage. ie Encourage good behaviours.

Well.... To day if you have a gunner with anything that is not a kobolt or a walker and meet a MBT with only 1 player in it the MBT with only 1 player is in a very big disadvantage.

1 prowler with a gunner armed with a standard basilisk equiped with x2 zoom and some extra ammo can take care of 4 magriders that just have a driver in it. That should say something about how big disadvantage it is to not have a gunner in your MBT turret.

Ok it takes some skill from both the driver and the gunner to pull that off. But if I have manage to do that at least 90% of the player base could pull that off too I believe.

Chowley

2013-01-04, 10:48 AM

it took smed two and a half years to admit the NGE was wrong and he and his team fucked up. Good luck, I hope he changed his mind, for Planetside's sake.

Did they ever admit the CU was a fuck up? :p I didnt last until the NGE, that ripped the heart out of the game for me.

Its actually something I have been worried about lately, they will do something drastic and incredibly stupid to change PS2 if numbers get low enough.

Tooterfish

2013-01-04, 10:54 AM

I'm proud of Smedly's approach. Everyone with something to complain about instantly becomes a professional game designer. He's sticking to his guns, as he should. Despite popular opinion, balance issues are critical and what may appear as an obvious imbalance to you, may just reflect a problem with how you want to play. Unless, on a massive scale, players want Callofdutyside 2, I would expect vehicles to continue to be a major factor, not to say infantry couldn't use more incentives that don't require a nerf everything else solution.

p0intman

2013-01-04, 11:16 AM

Did they ever admit the CU was a fuck up?

Nope, though in my titanic archive, I actually have the original and leaked CURB design and concept documents saved. What was released was about 1/10th of what they wanted to do, apparently.

PredatorFour

2013-01-04, 11:36 AM

Despite popular opinion, balance issues are critical and what may appear as an obvious imbalance to you, may just reflect a problem with how you want to play.

Thats all well and good but when i am the one driving the mag or scythe ? I am part of the problem i want to help solve.

I want to know if the game has become what the devs envisaged? Would be great to find out.

Canaris

2013-01-04, 11:36 AM

Nope, though in my titanic archive, I actually have the original and leaked CURB design and concept documents saved. What was released was about 1/10th of what they wanted to do, apparently.

bite the CURB..... http://img.badassbuddy.com/buddies/badassbuddy_com-bitecurb.gif

p0intman

2013-01-04, 12:03 PM

bite the CURB..... http://img.badassbuddy.com/buddies/badassbuddy_com-bitecurb.gif

Literally clueless. I assume you mean that in jest.

Canaris

2013-01-04, 12:10 PM

Literally clueless. I assume you mean that in jest.
;) aye just a little joke about what the CU did to SWG

Sunrock

2013-01-04, 12:36 PM

Thats all well and good but when i am the one driving the mag or scythe ? I am part of the problem i want to help solve.

I want to know if the game has become what the devs envisaged? Would be great to find out.

As a player it's your duty to crush your opponents with every method allowed in the game.

If any twat say that you're a part of a problem because you use a weapon or a vehicle they don't like they are a bunch of noobs that need to learn to play the game or get the fuck out.

PredatorFour

2013-01-04, 01:01 PM

As a player it's your duty to crush your opponents with every method allowed in the game.

If any twat say that you're a part of a problem because you use a weapon or a vehicle they don't like they are a bunch of noobs that need to learn to play the game or get the fuck out.

You just dont get it. Your views don`t seem to be relevent to the thread so far.

Sunrock

2013-01-04, 01:40 PM

You just dont get it. Your views don`t seem to be relevent to the thread so far.

What do I don't get? That on every forum for any online game you have 101 noobs that QQ in 101 threads over some one killed them? No I got that part. I been playing games online the last 18 years and I seen it before.

RykerStruvian

2013-01-04, 02:32 PM

To be honest, I feel dedicated MBT drivers / gunners would help stop vehicle spam as an alternative to not having a cert cap with vehicles which require certifications to use. If we can't have dedicated drivers, the driver shouldn't control the MBT primary cannon but rather a fixed machine gun of some sort. IE ground liberator

Ironside

2013-01-04, 04:51 PM

MBT's dedicated driver/gunner,
Buff AA
Redesign bases/towers to actually be defendable, spawn areas should be away from vehicle spam, not solo buildings that can be surrounded by tanks

TheSaltySeagull

2013-01-04, 07:52 PM

Vehicle spam is a result of base design and nothing else. The driver gunner argument for tanks is irrelevant considering damn near every vehicle in the game can steam roll infantry in numbers so making that change does not have any significant impact on vehicle spam other than to push people more towards using lightnings, ESF, and libs. All of which farm infantry just as well as an MBT.

The reason for vehicle spam is because there are few places that they cant be effective at. Aside from biolabs and a few outposts like the crown there is no where infantry can go to get away from vehicles. Most building have multiple doors and windows that allow vehicles to shoot through them. The hard spawns are exposed to vehicles. And most outposts don't even have walls. Until you have more areas inaccessible to vehicles that promote infantry combat you will continue to have roaming armor zergs because the current base designs allows you to partake in capping bases without ever leaving your vehicle.

MaxDamage

2013-01-04, 08:02 PM

Give engineers access to 20 anti tank mines. Ai anti air turrets. Etc.
Enable ai on base turrets to fire on air and land vehicles moving at a certain velocity.

As it was in the original planetside.

Also make turrets operable when repaired to half health from broken, as it was in planetside.. so much makes these base turrets a waste of time.

Figment

2013-01-04, 08:02 PM

What do I don't get? That on every forum for any online game you have 101 noobs that QQ in 101 threads over some one killed them? No I got that part. I been playing games online the last 18 years and I seen it before.

Actually, that is your problem: you assume every complaint is a qq to you, valid or not, you stopped caring for anything by default.

For the record driver=/=gunner is a vehicle quality buff and only a nerf in frequency of acquisition. You simply don't know what the hell you are talking about since you don't know any other situation than the current implementation as it is copied from your old game series.

Blynd

2013-01-05, 06:23 AM

its not just AA ythat needs a buff but AV too if smedly doesnt have the balls to admit that making the main driver in a tank the main gunner was a mistake and they will fix it then the only way is to make those vehicle easier to kill from an infantry point because you see time after time a mass of vehicles heading from base to base and camping the spawns

all bases need redesigning to allow for some kind of a defence to be done atm its instagib city as soon as the first 3 tanks and sundy arrives - you maybe able to hold those for a few minutes then the rest of the tanks roll in and you get pushed into the spawn room by tank spam and mossie rockets base is lost - its far to easy to take territory bases have been designed so badly that if they were inrl the designers would have been shot for allowing the enemy such easy access to all the vital elements of the base.

vehicle spam and base defence are the 2 elements i think need addressing Now not after the next cont comes out and some meta game - if you cant defend a tech plant/amp station then you will never encourage the zergs to go head to head and allow smaller outfits to do prep work spec ops etc. atm its just nc zerg goes left - tr zerg goes right and vs zerg up the middle and they wont meet and if they do they soon move away from eachother.

ps1 allowed for the zergs to meet and bang heads for days (laka anyone :D ) yes it was a little annoying finding yourself at the same front line days after you were there the last time but it was more intersting then the spin dryer effect we have atm when its race around the map capping quicker then the other guy move to next cont and repeat go back to first map do it again gotr to 3rd map do it there.

Figment

2013-01-05, 07:30 AM

AV doesn't need a buff if there's less vehicles out there (even if per piece they'd be stronger, it's the sheer amount of missiles you need to send out and the amount of instakill shells being fired back) and engineers couldn't repair unlimitedly.

If you'd have to fire 1.5x MORE missiles PER TANK, while there'd be 3x LESS TANKS, which fire 1.5x to 3x LESS ROUNDS (depending on two or three crew per vehicle), you actually buff infantry, do not buff or nerf AV, remove heavy solo tanks and buff crewed tanks a little and infantry would still be better off than they are now.

And yeah, I'd say Lightning HE shells should do pretty much half damage to what they do now, they'd still be much better at killing infantry than HEAT and AP rounds.

gunshooter

2013-01-05, 07:32 AM

Vehicle spam isn't going to change, it's pretty much how they designed the game. They want everyone to be able to do whatever they want at any time. You could get a bunch of people and all go make BR1s on a server and immediately spawn MBTs and go roll over shit if you want to, then when you die you can spawn another MBT or a lightning. If you had to pick and choose, oh man, that sure would suck!

-smedleys philosophy

Vehicle spam is a result of base design and nothing else.

No i'm pretty sure it's because the ONLY limiting factor to it is an inconsequential cooldown.

Redshift

2013-01-05, 07:48 AM

atm i'd settle for EMP grenades ..... they currently only exist on infiltrators, i don't even know if they work like PS1 jammers, but regardless they'll never get used while frags are lolkills.

All infantry should just get 2-3 jammers automatically each time, at least then tanks would have to camp from range -_-

Paperboy

2013-01-05, 01:21 PM

http://twitter.com/anemoose/status/258599218082615297
http://twitter.com/j_smedley/status/258602782540578816

John "We know better than our players and don't care" Smedley

welp

Lol Smedley is a retard... just listen to this:

John Smedley ‏@j_smedley
@rodneya15 @anemoose @sethketa driver as gunner is fun. Plain and simple. Haters gonna hate.

The haters gonna hate, wow!!! low arguement coming from a Company president!!!

Fuck this game and fuck all SoE games.

All hope for planetside 2 is lost, this is it folks, the game is already as they want it to be and there will be no changes, gameplay will stay shallow, there will be no sanctuaries, there will be no owned continents, there will only be the everlasting 3-way battle.

Man what a failure.

Beerbeer

2013-01-05, 02:19 PM

Ensuring this game is only fun for people in vehicles, neglecting or just not realizing there are consequences for this, is such great one dimensional thinking.

What are the consequences of having powerful, spammable, one-man vehicles? I bet a Sony response would be absolutely laughable as they fail miserably to see things from more than one perspective.

That's why this game, which is absolutely free to play, is just bursting at the seams with people, lol.

PredatorFour

2013-01-06, 09:37 AM

All infantry should just get 2-3 jammers automatically each time, at least then tanks would have to camp from range -_-

I believe this would be a step in the right direction. What about taking it a step further ? How about some kind of projectile you could fire straight like the saron that disables vehicle systems, notably aircraft. Like that evil rek orb they put in PS but faster firing like a gun.

Redshift

2013-01-06, 10:02 AM

I believe this would be a step in the right direction. What about taking it a step further ? How about some kind of projectile you could fire straight like the saron that disables vehicle systems, notably aircraft. Like that evil rek orb they put in PS but faster firing like a gun.

because that would be overkill

aircraft need sorting out by upping the leathality of bursters and making the second arm free or cheap. Trying to grab cash from a piece of equipment that is needed will just ruin gameplay and kill the game.

Figment

2013-01-06, 10:07 AM

because that would be overkill

aircraft need sorting out by upping the leathality of bursters and making the second arm free or cheap. Trying to grab cash from a piece of equipment that is needed will just ruin gameplay and kill the game.

Quite so. That'd completely ruin vehicle game play.

They tried the EMPlet (variant on Rocklet/Flaklet) on the PS1 test server, but it was simply too powerful as it jammed everything at extreme ranges as it was as accurate as a Rocklet (straight fire, relatively big cof to normal weapons), had the same 6 round clip and worked on wall turrets and vehicles too, making it extremely easy to use.

Wall Turrets in particular were rendered useless.

They could however, create a single shot dumbfire Flak EMP missile (only works on air) as alternative to standard missiles. Would mostly be useful against Liberators, those attacking you in a straight line and hovering units as it'd be pretty hard to fire at dodging aircraft.

yadda

2013-01-06, 10:09 AM

aircraft need sorting out by upping the leathality of bursters and making the second arm free or cheap. Trying to grab cash from a piece of equipment that is needed will just ruin gameplay and kill the game.

Burster damage is scary as hell and if you walk into 2 of them unaware you may not walk out. I think the real problem is critical equipment that is required for play costs money and most people don't want to shell it out when they know full well that all they accomplish is annoying someone rather than an investment which will make a return (certs).

Of course, when you fly it feels like there are too many burster max's and when you're on the ground it feels like there aren't enough.

PredatorFour

2013-01-06, 10:50 AM

They could however, create a single shot dumbfire Flak EMP missile (only works on air) as alternative to standard missiles. .

Thats kinda like what i was thinking, a one shot emp style weapon. If you miss you might be screwed but at least you got a chance against the odds.

Beerbeer

2013-01-06, 11:11 AM

Emp is nice, but we're still going to swamped in vehicle spam.

I honestly believe there are three viable solutions without introducing another game mechanic:

1. Nerf the quantity/availability through hard timers or a heavy resource nerf while keeping the current damage model OR

2. Nerf the infantry damage of vehicles. Get rid of HE guns completely OR

3. Buff infantry AV/AA weapons. Two shot kills with the weakest AV weapons to the front. 75% damage with the decimator to the front. All one hit kill from the rear. All infantry AA weapons two hit kills. I know the vanguard can soak up more damage than the others, maybe apply the two hit model to the prowler and scale up and down accordingly per empire. Rear hits are the same regardless.

Rolfski

2013-01-06, 12:43 PM

All three ideas are bad:
1. Dedicated gunner-only is a typical nostalgic hardcore PS1 idea that would un-empower the casual player (= majority) and infuriate the BF3 crowd, to which this game was targeted. Instead, introduce a more powerful tank canon that requires a dedicated gunner.
2. Shooting pilots out of cockpits, fine. But making ESF's more squishy would horribly unbalance the game.
3. Combining resources to a single type would not limit vehicle spam and would remove a strategic element (albeit flawed atm) from the game that is already low on strategic game play.

Personally, I have no problems with vehicle spam. It helps giving this game its massive scale and seeing the air and ground filled with vehicles duking it out is one of the greatest sights in this game. They just need to give more love to infantry to put up a proper fight against them: better launchers, AV deployable turrets, defensible positions, etc.

Beerbeer

2013-01-06, 12:48 PM

What's so massive about empty servers? Clearly you don't see the root of the problem.

Rolfski

2013-01-07, 09:15 AM

What's so massive about empty servers? Clearly you don't see the root of the problem.
Guess you're on the wrong server then. At Miller I have no problem getting into a good fight.

Figment

2013-01-07, 09:24 AM

Guess you're on the wrong server then. At Miller I have no problem getting into a good fight.

Not for long. Even Miller is emptying rapidly. Remember those queues to get into the server? Then when in the game, remember those queues to switch continent?

Take off the rose teinted goggles please, it's pretty damn clear Miller is losing population, despite having been the busiest server (plus we probably attract more people who leave the other servers to compensate). :/ Many outfits lost 50-75% of their activity. Especially when they're veteran outfits.

I don't like where this is going and I feel sorry for PS2, but at least I'm able to distinguish there's a problem and where the root of the problem is, rather than go in denial (with regards to certain elements at least).

Rolfski

2013-01-09, 05:52 PM

Not for long. Even Miller is emptying rapidly. Remember those queues to get into the server? Then when in the game, remember those queues to switch continent?

Take off the rose teinted goggles please, it's pretty damn clear Miller is losing population, despite having been the busiest server (plus we probably attract more people who leave the other servers to compensate). :/ Many outfits lost 50-75% of their activity. Especially when they're veteran outfits.

I don't like where this is going and I feel sorry for PS2, but at least I'm able to distinguish there's a problem and where the root of the problem is, rather than go in denial (with regards to certain elements at least).
All this doom, negative thinking. As said in other threads, it's getting out of hand, really. It's not even rational as games like these will always see downfall after the newness wears off. I'm all in for constructive criticism but tbh, this place is rapidly becoming a graveyard for people that only stick to wearing black darkened goggles.

PredatorFour

2013-01-09, 06:19 PM

this place is rapidly becoming a graveyard for people that only stick to wearing black darkened goggles.

No its not just TR voicing their concerns... Theres VS and NC too!:D

PredatorFour

2013-01-09, 06:46 PM

Sorry double post here but i just came up with an idea....:)

Higby stated that "air should be the main counter to air .."

Well what i say is that tanks should be the main counter to tanks and other armour in general.

How to do this ??

Well maybe remove the HE MBT weapon and reduce the damage of the standard MBT weapon against infantry. Make them target armour firstly, infantry second.

Make the lightning an anti-infantry only vehicle with no AV threat kinda like the Panzer 1 german tank. Making it either anti air (skyguard, with certs) or anti infantry (some would argue it is already)

If they buffed anti vehicle infantry weapons and did something to help infantry from air attacks it might help this idea.

Blynd

2013-01-10, 03:05 PM

Sorry double post here but i just came up with an idea....:)

Higby stated that "air should be the main counter to air .."

Well what i say is that tanks should be the main counter to tanks and other armour in general.

How to do this ??

Well maybe remove the HE MBT weapon and reduce the damage of the standard MBT weapon against infantry. Make them target armour firstly, infantry second.

Make the lightning an anti-infantry only vehicle with no AV threat kinda like the Panzer 1 germa n tank. Making it either anti air (skyguard, with certs) or anti infantry (some would argue it is already)

If they buffed anti vehicle infantry weapons and did something to help infantry from air attacks it might help this idea.
Solid idea pred