EVERYTHING sounds good except the immunity timer -general agreement?.

[Ghoest9]

Im not saying the patch fixes everything or that every change will be implemented properly - but every suggestion sounds like it could improve the game.

Except the immunity timer.

Even a one or 2 second timer is basically an invitation to rush enemy position and drop mines, plant C4 or some other offensive actions.
A 5 second timer would be much worse even.


I think its actually fair that if people are killed in the open that it may not be possible to resuscitate them.
And I dont think it will be a concern with Sunderers. Now that killing fresh spawns gives low xp people should be trying to blow the Sundies anyway instead of camping them.

Invulnerability offers a few potential benefits for the game - but the assured downsides are much more significant.

[Messatsu]

give no xp at all for 5 seconds except of no invulnerability => problem solved.

[Neurotoxin]

Immunity til the player has provided input and received a response. I hate spawning to find myself dead to someone who killed me before I had control of the character. But once I have control of the character, I should be fair game. No player who is able to attack and inflict damage should be immune to damage, only players who are not yet able to control their character.

[ShadetheDruid]

I still don't get why people are assuming it's going to be flat invulnerability, no conditions, for a huge amount of time.

They already said it will cancel when you do stuff in the notes, but it's like people see the word "invulnerability" and freak the fuck out. :doh:

[Brusi]

I don't understand what everyone is so pissed about the immunity timer for?

If it is short enough, we won't notice it unless we are bring cheesy!

This is a direct buff to medic gameplay, and there is no real reason not to buff them, imo.

I personally hate getting instagibbed as soon as i accept a rez! Don't tell me that i shouldn't have accepted it if i died in a dangerous place, cause there is no way for you to know if it's enemies that killed you have already been cleared out or if it is safe or not before you click accept.

[Beerbeer]

I wonder how buggy their invul change will be, considering there are known invul hacks.

[Rbstr]

They already said it will cancel when you do stuff in the notes, but it's like people see the word "invulnerability" and freak the fuck out. :doh:

What, and act rational on an FPS forum? :rofl:

[Ghoest9]

I read the notes literally.
Some of you are adding stuff in to make it seem more palatable.

The notes say it would be canceled when you use a weapon or get in a vehicle.

It wouldneed to be canceled simply when you start moving - otherwise it will simple be a powerful exploit to rush the enemy with explosives.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

What, and act rational on an FPS forum? :rofl:

Ha. ROFL indeed! :)

Im not saying the patch fixes everything or that every change will be implemented properly - but every suggestion sounds like it could improve the game.

Except the immunity timer.

Even a one or 2 second timer is basically an invitation to rush enemy position and drop mines, plant C4 or some other offensive actions.
A 5 second timer would be much worse even.


I think its actually fair that if people are killed in the open that it may not be possible to resuscitate them.
And I dont think it will be a concern with Sunderers. Now that killing fresh spawns gives low xp people should be trying to blow the Sundies anyway instead of camping them.

Invulnerability offers a few potential benefits for the game - but the assured downsides are much more significant.

So YOU say. I say everything is excellent except the AA buffs. We don't even know what the "player actions" are that render you vulnerable again. What if it's ANYTHING? Moving, looking around, equipping a weapon? and a 2 second timer as well so that you can accept a rez, take a beating for 1 second without moving at all and then run away *after* the tank shell hits your invulnerable arse? That scenario sounds wonderful to me. More infantry alive in the front lines = bigger and better fights.

What downsides do you see apart from suicide rushing? Because I see many potential benefits that outweigh those downsides.

Without knowing *how* it's implemented any commentary will be premature imaginings so we're all going to have to wait and see aren't we?

[p0intman]

i want to know what the context of the timer is, how long it lasts specifically, and why they thought its needed.

[Azarga]

We should not forget about huge loads of ammo wasted on those invulnerable targets.
And reload times that often come together with wasted ammo.

[Sledgecrushr]

If the immunity is a short duration plus any movement or action breaks immunity I think it would be ok. Though I think its pretty unnecessary and if its not done just right it will create an unbalanced gameplay.

[VGCS]

Why?? Why do I always seem to /Facepalm at every thread this guy starts. Everyone else on this board is just great, you're all terrific people.... but stuff like this, I just..... I don't even.

Case in point:
Even a one or 2 second timer is basically an invitation to rush enemy position and drop mines, plant C4 or some other offensive actions.
A 5 second timer would be much worse even.

YES, that is the ENTIRE EFFING POINT ... if they've surrounded you with Tanks or Libs, then a couple seconds to "Cheese" them back with weapons that require a second or two of Setup/Lockon-time is the entire point otherwise it doesn't even begin to address the Spawn camping issue.

If any Infantry die to this "Cheese" then it's their own damn faults for being BAD and they deserved to LOST TEH GAME. ....would we all prefer tons of base changes instead? OF COURSE we would. But in the meantime this requires a very aggressive Band-aid right now before any more blood is lost. I have never in my 17 years of online gaming ever seen a game start off with such a huge population only to then hit such an unbelievably steep downward spiral that this one took in only one month. And the incredibly lopsided spawn Spamming obviously played a big role in that. Hamfisting is the only course of action that could hope to reverse this trend.

[GLaDOS]

I don't really like the idea, but I think we should try it before complaining too much, as it does have potential. I just hope the community doesn't react to it like they did the health regeneration in late beta, that was embarrassing. Everyone freaked the hell out, SOE said they would remove it, people forgot about it, then SOE put it back in and nobody noticed. Hell, I can't think of a single time that has helped me out, I really hope they come up with a better biolab bonus.

[james]

Immunity will work fine. It causes next to no problems in battlefield. This is the second bf game with it.
It keeps inf from just sitting by a bang bus farming, and general just being a douche moves, that have caused this to be put in the first place

[Fear The Amish]

yeah we will see how it goes... not gonna start flipping out until we actually see what happens

[Sunrock]

give no xp at all for 5 seconds except of no invulnerability => problem solved.

Yea.

You can't give some one an invuln. buff after being killed in a game like this. Who in the world does not understand that? It will be exploited in horrible ways. :eek:

[maradine]

I don't think it's a big deal if the timer's a second or less. I don't actually see it having much of an effect except at shield doors.

[VGCS]

Yea.

You can't give some one an invuln. buff after being killed in a game like this. Who in the world does not understand that? It will be exploited in horrible ways. :eek:

Can you cite any specific scenarios without using very subjective definitions for "Exploit"?

[Dkamanus]

If this invulnerability means actually being invulnerable for 3 seconds after a rez and DON'T TOUCH ANYTHING TO ALLOW the full 3 seconds to pass, I don't think it would be much. But once the char starts moving, it's fair game.

[Ghoest9]

If it dropped as soon as you start moving or within a 1/2 second moving yes it would be fine.

But that is not at all the conditions he mentioned - he said firing a weapon or getting in a vehicle.

[Sunrock]

Can you cite any specific scenarios without using very subjective definitions for "Exploit"?

Who/what do you want me to cite? ;)

But I guess you want some examples where this can be exploited. Well if the invul. buff goes off every time you spawn you can easier defend a sundy that is being attacked.

If you get this buff after you got a res you can just imagination the lemming train spaming resurrection grenades to get the zerg moving forward.

[Strategy]

Immunity til the player has provided input and received a response. I hate spawning to find myself dead to someone who killed me before I had control of the character. But once I have control of the character, I should be fair game. No player who is able to attack and inflict damage should be immune to damage, only players who are not yet able to control their character.

I agree. This is exactly how it should be. Honestly, I like the way BF3 does it. On fresh spawns you only have a very small time (like maybe 2 seconds at most) of immunity and if you move you lose it. The invulnerability only works on fresh spawns, not revives.

[TheRageTrain]

Immunity til the player has provided input and received a response. I hate spawning to find myself dead to someone who killed me before I had control of the character. But once I have control of the character, I should be fair game. No player who is able to attack and inflict damage should be immune to damage, only players who are not yet able to control their character.

Pretty much this. If you aim.. u should die aka u used your charachter.

[gunshooter]

Most of this patch is just bandaid fixes and the immunity timer is one of them. Why try to code in spawning inside the sunderer or give it a cloaking field or something that would actually take effort when you can just tack on an immunity effect? Something needed to be changed, but giving an immunity effect to people who spawn at a vehicle which can be deployed anywhere is an awful idea. Any scenario where your enemy is immune to all damage but can shoot back should never occur in an FPS, but I guess this is soe.

[Sturmhardt]

I understand why invulnerability is a good thing if you spawn somewhere, but I don't get why they want it for revived players. It's your choice if you want to be revived, you should be able to make a bad decision. If you are invulnerable after being revived there will be no downside to say yes. I want to be able to make a bad decision because that makes me proud of my good decisions.

.sent via phone.

[LoliLoveFart]

Wait and see how it turns out before lighting the torches and picking up your pitchforks.

[Mastachief]

Hate the idea of invulnerability.

Revived people able to run to cover will make groups even harder to take out considering the range of the med app and revive grenade.

You another feature for the hackers to exploit.

It's not needed if you are getting camped spawn else where...

The waste of shots and time on a target that isn't going to die will only get you killed.

SOE introducing this without testing it......... that'll be another week not worth clicking play for.

[Helwyr]

Immunity after spawning and worse being revived does seem a pretty bad idea, just how bad is yet to be seen... depending on the actual details.

The whole January update was disappointing tbh, there's some good things in there, but Higby went and built it up like it's addressing all the major community concerns, which it clearly isn't.

[ShadetheDruid]

You know what would be the sensible idea? Asking for a clarification. These are just a brief overview of the upcoming changes, they're not going to be in depth.

Rather than freaking out, we could ask for what they're planning the exact conditions to be, if it turns out it's just getting in a vehicle or using a weapon, we can suggest that it be on moving or pressing any button instead. We can also find out how long it will be for.

If it lasts for 1-2 seconds, or until you move or do anything at all, there's not going to be any issues.

[MaxDamage]

Anyone opposed to damage immunity is a cheap fuck.
The immunity timer is the single best idea in the patch thread.

A necessary addition that was already present in the original game, and is common for good reason in many other MMOs.

It is anti noob-farming.

I don't agree it should be used for revives though, that is dangerous.

It should just be available for sunderer/spawntubes spawns.

It is posts like this that show the confusion some players seem to have:
(the immunity is broken when the user performs any function, precisely as this person wishes)
Immunity til the player has provided input and received a response. I hate spawning to find myself dead to someone who killed me before I had control of the character. But once I have control of the character, I should be fair game. No player who is able to attack and inflict damage should be immune to damage, only players who are not yet able to control their character.

[Happytrail]

it may force players not to spawn camp just right outside spawn, which i think is good, may make the fights longer and harder :)

[KaskaMatej]

IMO, the spawn invulnerability is acceptable (depends on the limitation and duration) but the revive one is bad because you have the ability to accept or deny the revive request.

[ShadetheDruid]

IMO, the spawn invulnerability is acceptable (depends on the limitation and duration) but the revive one is bad because you have the ability to accept or deny the revive request.

Like people have said though, you can't really tell what's going on most of the time so you can't really make an informed decision on whether to accept or not.

[Gortha]

I still don't get why people are assuming it's going to be flat invulnerability, no conditions, for a huge amount of time.

They already said it will cancel when you do stuff in the notes, but it's like people see the word "invulnerability" and freak the fuck out. :doh:

It´s only okay, when it wears of with MOVING.

Evertything else is FAIL.

[Gortha]

This is just a solution to buff stupidity.

[PredatorFour]

It´s only okay, when it wears of with MOVING.

That's really terrible ! Think if someone got revived and just stood there invulnerable not moving !

It simply can't just wear off when they move it really needs a 2 second timer at most.

[Figment]

Like people have said though, you can't really tell what's going on most of the time so you can't really make an informed decision on whether to accept or not.

Suggestion: talk to your squadmates and base it on what occured just before.

This is an acceptable risk: if you die, eh, you were dead before anyway and about to respawn.

[Baneblade]

Umm, doesn't immunity cancel upon movement?

[Rago]

I basically not against a Spawn Protection on Sundy´s
However on a Turrent ? C´mon thats Stupid, i shoot the Turrent down and the Gunner gets out alive without taking Damage from the Bomb or the Rocket ?

NO WAY !

[Assist]

I just don't understand why it's needed. Do people really get farmed at Sunderer's that much? How is the immunity going to change that if it works like some here suggest? To me it doesn't solve anything.

The only thing it does is add immunity to revives, which makes no sense to me at all.


If it's not broken don't fix it, I personally didn't see anything wrong with how it has been working.

[Figment]

A necessary addition that was already present in the original game

Ehr, no it was not.

We had painfields instead indoors (only after some years) and cloak fields outdoors to obscure your presence to the enemy (less chance of shooting what you can't see).

AMSes often had you spawn and die to an OS that had launched before you had even spawned.

[MaxDamage]

Ehr, no it was not.

We had painfields instead indoors (only after some years) and cloak fields outdoors to obscure your presence to the enemy (less chance of shooting what you can't see).

AMSes often had you spawn and die to an OS that had launched before you had even spawned.

I remember camping AMSs for kills (when I didn't have anything to kill it with).
If a player spawned, there was an electricky effect on them, and my first few shots wouldn't register.
The same occured in regular spawn tubes, the effect was so short and temporary as to barely be noticeable, it just gave the person spawning the briefest of chance to look around.

It was effectively an immunity shield.
You couldn't kill a player until they had control.

The fact that you don't even realise it existed is precisely how "game breaking" this change is. Rofl.

In hindsight, I had always assumed it was just lag, but it was very much real.

[Gortha]

That's really terrible ! Think if someone got revived and just stood there invulnerable not moving !

It simply can't just wear off when they move it really needs a 2 second timer at most.

Use common sense! :doh::eek: Of course it should last a maximum of one second.
BUT should waer of/break with every kind of action, ADS, shooting and MOVING!!!

___________
But i really think, this change is just not needed and if implemented in the wrong way, gives smart players loads of ways to exploit it. I.e. break enemy lines of defense with shield(invulnerability) if moving would not break it.

In short: It just buffs stupidity. Not more or less.
Accepting a revive is your decision... do not accept it, if you know u´ll die directly after the rezz.

[Frotang]

So you have proven it was there in PS1 or just assume? Bc im pretty sure there was no invuln in PS1 at all. Also this is a stupid idea, it does nothing for spawning in a spawn room as those are protected anyways. And if it truly only cancles when you fire a weapon or enter a vehicle (as Higby stated) then it will be insanely cheap.

Here is a scenario where there is no spawn camping and the invuln fucks over an attacker. 1 guy attacking a small outpost, hes half way to capping when 2 enemies show up. The lone attacker takes down an HA and injurs a medic but not before he can chuck a revive nade and run around the corner. The attacker then positions his crosairs over dead dudes rising body. His body pops up and attacker blasts 5 rounds to his head that do jack shit, recently revived HA switches to Decimator, strafes left, then fires his rocket thus breaking his invuln but 1 shotting the attacker. There are numerous other scenarios where this game mechanic will completely fuck over small engagements where there was no spawn camping going on in the first place. People who like this change are the baddies who get spawn camped all day.

[psijaka]

Immunity til the player has provided input and received a response. I hate spawning to find myself dead to someone who killed me before I had control of the character. But once I have control of the character, I should be fair game. No player who is able to attack and inflict damage should be immune to damage, only players who are not yet able to control their character.

^ this

I'm occasionally guilty of farming hapless sunderer spawnees who have not "woken up" yet. Easy headshots if they are motionless for a second or 2, too easy.

A short immunity timer to oversome this would be appropriate; not too long mind you.

And yes, OP, everything else does sound good, multiple steps in the right direction.

[NewSith]

As long as the thing works so you are vulnerable after moving your mouse and/or shooting - it's okay.


Dying before my loading screen disappears happens to me alot; especially when triple loading bug occurs.



As for people here saying that it is a backdoor for Invulnerability hacks, - the game already has it. Admin console allows you to do things, you don't normally do, like flying, not taking damage, teleporting, spawning vehicles in random places...

[maradine]

Here is a scenario . . .

As opposed to the medic just, you know, shooting the guy.

Brother, I feel you, but that's hella contrived.

[Rahabib]

if its only 2 seconds, I could live with it. But they better show indication of who is invulnerable - like a blue cloud or something.

[Frotang]

As opposed to the medic just, you know, shooting the guy.

Brother, I feel you, but that's hella contrived.

Lol ya i needed to think of a better scenario but u get the jist of it. As long as the invulnerability is cancled upon any sort of keyboard / mouse input and/or after a set time period then it will work fine. It's just that Higby's vague description of the parameters for breaking invuln dont make it sound that way, we shall see though.

[typhaon]

Feels like an example of trying to fix a problem... where there isn't one.

[LeefyG]

My opinion:

If you accept a revive, you should die if you're shot. Even if invulnerability lasted only 1-2 seconds and broke upon any input, that's enough time for an opponent to empty most of a clip and then have the revived player unload for an easy kill. A logical player would use this to their advantage upon every revive. It also gives enough time to scout the area, hear where fire is coming from, plan an attack, know what mouse movements need to be made, a direction to sprint in, etc.

Any spawn invulnerability turns a tactical disadvantage into a potential tactical advantage. It rewards players for making poor spawn choices.

Someone a few pages ago mentioned that this would make for better/longer infantry battles and maybe allow infantry to seek cover from vehicle spam while they're reloading. Probably true

This is a great change for players who are new or more casual, and likely a majority of the PS2 playerbase, so I can see why SOE would include this in their first large "we're listening to community feedback" patch.

Personally, I hated this in Battlefield 3 and I assume the same will be the case however it is implemented in PS2. I have no problem getting slaughtered if I knowingly spawn into a shitstorm instead of somewhere behind shields.

edit: One thing I would like to see is for players to not appear until they've loaded the game, which might fix some of the desire for spawn invulernability? I dunno.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

edit: One thing I would like to see is for players to not appear until they've loaded the game, which might fix some of the desire for spawn invulernability? I dunno.

Yeah, well, that'd be ideal for me. I don't like seeing the loading screen, then the death animation and nothing in-between. It's obvious I've just been farmed and I don't like that.

I don't care how they stop it, but I don't want to be a target without having any capacity to defend myself at all - and I'm not talking about a medic vs a tank here. I'm talking about not having control of my character but being a target for others to shoot at. That's not fair.