Medics, Engineers, Light Assault - should they have limited "juice/glue/fuel"? [Archive]

Figment

2013-03-11, 04:45 PM

Engineers have unlimited glue for the repair tool.
Engineers have unlimited ammopacks (only limitation in using two at once) and therefore unlimited ammunition.
Engineers have unlimited turrets.

Medics have unlimited healing juice for the medical applicator.
Medics have unlimitedly recharging group healing ability.

Jetpacks have unlimitedly recharging fuel and therefore can get pretty much anywhere over and over and over.

Is this a good thing for the game? Shouldn't these be part of a trade-off with for instance extra ammunition? Currently extra ammunition is for instance part of a trade-off with the Heavy Assault shields, which doesn't really make much sense.

Limited ammunition or limited juice/glue would result in attrition. For instance, ammopacks and turrets could cost a certain amount of "nanites" (glue) to construct, while repairs would use the same resource within a player. This would make it easier to wage war of attrition on tanks that pop in and out of view for repairs at longer distances: they couldn't keep that up indefinitely. It'd also increase the impact of the Sunderer's repair bay and any vehicle's self-repair slots. Currently there's no real need for them.

Medics currently predominantly help larger groups and larger groups of medics aren't really attrition sensitive in an infantry fight till you take them all out. Smaller teams require less reviving, so they would have a little less of a disadvantage when they can make enemy medics run out of healing and reviving power at some point.

Wouldn't it also be better for the gameplay (more strategic decisions) if certain areas weren't reachable by using the hug a building exploit by Light Assaults, simply because the jetpack can only be used as long as fuel hasn't ran out? Wouldn't this also make the drifter jetpack more important too in order to reach certain areas? Currently I see no reason to ever cert into that. I'd also see it make the infiltrator suit and Galaxy Dropship more important, since currently the Light Assault is not in good competition for that role as the Light Assault is easy to acquire and use to get anywhere high up and avoid any obstacles an infil might encounter.

There just seems to be too much convenience catering going on there.

Redshift

2013-03-11, 04:52 PM

Gonefshn

2013-03-11, 05:00 PM

with no inventory i don't think you can have a system without infinite ammo, otherwise you'd have no option to dig in anywhere, you couldn't plan to dig in and take a shed load of suplies in the maxes like PS1

Why would you need inventory to have ammo for med tools/ammo packs etc?

It works fine already with C4, medkits, heck even with guns.

A med applicator ammo would be no different than ammo in a gun, you just need an equipment terminal to resupply. And certs could increase the ammo you can hold.

I like this idea as long as its not TOO restrictive.

Figment

2013-03-11, 05:10 PM

An inventory system could be used for that, but as Gonefshn says, it's not entirely necessary.

You could do:

1. Have a bar with Z points. Sum X is the sum of all your ammo, Sum Y is the sum of all your spare glue/juice/fuel. Then Z = Sum X + Sum Y = a fixed total.

2. Do the above with fixed, bigger percentages of glue/juice and have ammo be allowed to fill up whatever percentage is left (kinda like inventory tetris, but simpler).

3. Inventory.

4. Separate base amount for glue/juice/fuel from ammo, so ammo and glue and all don't trade-off. (Basically C4 vs ammo)

5. Option 4 + 1 or 2 or 3. In other words, separete base amount, then trade-off for more.

6. Option 4 + trade-off in which thing you get extra (fuel extension + juice extension + glue extension or ammo extension)

Just to name some alternatives.

Lonehunter

2013-03-11, 05:27 PM

In my opinion it just helps facilitate faster paced gameplay. You could of course throw it in with certs and make a trade off for it, but that seems like trying to fit too much into that mechanic. I think it's fine as is

mrmrmrj

2013-03-11, 05:29 PM

Figment

2013-03-11, 06:16 PM

Does anyone really live long enough in this game to make this an issue to begin with? In a crazy battle scenario, it is unlikely that an engy or medic will live long enough to run out of whatever resource happens to drive their tool. And if they do happen to live that long, all the mechanic would do is force them to run to a sunderer to resupply which is unfun.

Inconveniencing someone isn't per definition unfun. Don't just look at the user, but the person he's opposing. Why is it that the "unfun" argument is always portrayed from the user perspective, never from the perspective of the person they're exploiting the lack of limitation against?

Ammo attrition forces a retreat of a tank currently. Why shouldn't repair attrition? The opposition worked hard enough to put damage on it, why shouldn't they be rewarded with fending the attacker off over time?

I can assure you people live long enough to have been constrained. Particularly tanks, ammo packs and other tools can be used for a long time.

Well beyond the time that was needed in PS1 to run out of juice. You needed a whole lot of repair gun cannisters to repair everything in a base or a couple tanks. In PS2, I and my outfit mates frequently last for well over half an hour in a couple vehicles and repair them constantly.

If we're talking jetpack stuff, you have any idea how much I use it without thinking about it? I spend 50% of my PS2 time in LA constantly jumping from building to building and climbing the silliest of cliffs, then walls, more buildings, more walls, more buildings... I sometimes survive for five to ten minutes in a base. Any idea how many jumps I've done then?

So the OP is proposing an unfun mechanical solution to a problem that probably does not exist.

Speculative and poorly supported conclusion.

Ghoest9

2013-03-11, 06:29 PM

These are bad ideas that would just punish people who try not to die and encourage even worse banzai play style than we already have.

Silent Thunder

2013-03-11, 06:33 PM

These are bad ideas that would just punish people who try not to die and encourage even worse banzai play style than we already have.

Sadly this is pretty much true. If someone runs out of their "juice" so to speak, they'd have two options, run back to the AMS/SCU and rearm, or immediatly throw themselves into the meatgrinder, try to get a kill or two, and then respawn back at that same AMS/SCU. And I can damn well guarantee that it would be the second option most people would take.

Ghoest9

2013-03-11, 06:36 PM

And for the record the people talking about unfun play with repect to the LA are completely right.

Its a weak class in every way except the jets. People play the clas because the jets are so fun to use. And you use them ALL the time that you are moving practically.
The jets are the playstyle that define the class.

If you took that away after we learned to play the class with them - I would probably just play a lot less PS2 and maybe even quit out of resentment.

Carbon Copied

2013-03-11, 06:37 PM

Purely from an Engi and Medic player: rather than having to go back to "resupply <insert consumable fuel type for applicator here>" why not have it as a manual charging mechanic in the vein of Metro 2033's flashlight; this would give the user dilemma of "do I charge it now or have enough juice for one more heal" while still having that option to resupply at a terminal.

Level 1 applicators hold less "heal points" but take less time to juice up because of that however require more frequent charging as they heal slower to begin with

to the other end of the scale

Level 6 applicators hold more "heal points" but take longer to juice up because of this however require less charges as they heal faster anyway

Etc.. (think I've got that the right way round)

If something like this was ever considered this is how I'd prefer the implication - its a tactical decision but it doesn't rely on you being near a resupply point either to interrupt your battle too much; fun to me as a medic isn't supporting a push then defaulting to "rifleman" when I've run out of healing ability.

I don't think the tank rounds are really a good comparison though when the magazine is massive and secondly an ammo sunderer can just sit behind stat padding by re-supplying. Personally I think certain vehicles carry too much ammo full stop but that's another topic entirely..

ChipMHazard

2013-03-11, 07:14 PM

I think making nanites and fuel a finite resource would make for a lot of "back and forth" gameplay, which we have with vehicles if there isn't an ammo sundie nearby. Of course vehicles are faster than infantry, so backtracking isn't as punishing. You could argue that there is already enough infantry backtracking to S-AMS'/terminals that it wouldn't really be a problem adding in more.
I'm not sure that this idea would require for the nanites to be a finite resource, just something that can be depleted to such an extent that you have to wait for it to refill again slowly. Again you could argue that it would create an equal amount of backtracking as having them be finite.

For example allow a combat medic to spend all of the nanites down 0%, could make reviving require more nanites than just healing, and then have to wait until the bar reaches +10% before you're able to use the tool again.
Same goes for engineers. Have the nanites required be based on how damage a vehicle is?
An uncerted tool could have a slower regen rate, requiring a higher threshold to be reached before use etc.
I think you could make more tweaks if the nanites weren't a finite resource.
Same principle would go for LA, although that would be trickier to do. Perhaps have them deplete a set of tanks that replenish over time, the higher cert the more tanks? The more tanks that are depleted the slower the your fuel will replenish? I'm just spitballing here. I don't think making fuel something that can be completely depleted, until resupplied at a terminal, is such a good idea since you would still have to give them enough fuel to actually be useful.

What I'm trying to explain through my ramblings is that while I do agree with your premise; Wanting medics, engineers and LA's to have more downtime while also making certain certs more desirable as a direct result, I don't necessarily agree with your proposed solutions.

Redshift

2013-03-11, 07:54 PM

Why would you need inventory to have ammo for med tools/ammo packs etc?

It works fine already with C4, medkits, heck even with guns.

A med applicator ammo would be no different than ammo in a gun, you just need an equipment terminal to resupply. And certs could increase the ammo you can hold.

because you can't choose how much of everything to bring, if you're doing some organised squad stuff you want your medic to be full to the brim with juice and carry barely any ammo etc.

If you say "medics have 5 revives" then you effectly kill good squad play in favour of zerg and die.

OCNSethy

2013-03-11, 07:59 PM

I suspect that these proposals would favour the defenders over the attackers in a base scenario.

Since the defenders would have resupply terminals close at hand rather than have to run back to a Sundy thats out of harms way.

Hmmm.... I see merit in this.

Figment

2013-03-11, 08:01 PM

I disagree that it encourages more suicidal behaviour (no more than people wanting to get more AV missiles, which tbh, is a much bigger issue than running out of medic juice), it'd be more like what Carbon described: turning into a rifleman until a resupply is made.

Getting yourself killed takes you out of the fight and forces logistics on you and your team anyway. Thus it creates attrition - which currently lacks in a lot of cases. You're of more use staying alive a bit longer. But considering the other argument where long term lives aren't there anyway, it's mostly an issue for people that are able to hold out a long time.

I don't agree that "back and forth gameplay" is bad. For lazy people maybe, but then it can be argued that catering to people using "lazy" as an argument creates bad games in general and doesn't force creativity.

If there's such an increase in deaths, you can always penalize getting killed (and especially killing yourself) with longer respawn timers to the point it becomes more attractive to simply stay alive and retrieve or attain new gear from some other source.

And no, short respawn timers aren't necessarily a good thing for gameplay, as long as downtime doesn't become too long.

What I'm trying to explain through my ramblings is that while I do agree with your premise; Wanting medics, engineers and LA's to have more downtime while also making certain certs more desirable as a direct result, I don't necessarily agree with your proposed solutions.

That's what discussion is for though, isn't it? :)

Only named a couple of alternatives before. There's plenty of other ways to do it. You and CarbonCopied named a couple of others.

Figment

2013-03-11, 08:07 PM

because you can't choose how much of everything to bring, if you're doing some organised squad stuff you want your medic to be full to the brim with juice and carry barely any ammo etc.

If you say "medics have 5 revives" then you effectly kill good squad play in favour of zerg and die.

You use a very low number here on purpose I suppose, but that's simply a poor argument. Especially since you black and white the argument by supposing the medic would barely have any ammo left for himself. Check out some PS1 vids that have players with medical power in it: a single canister of 100 juice would be sufficient to hold out for some time. In PS1, one cannister would be sufficient to revive 4 fallen players (25 per player). So with one cannister, an advanced medic could already revive 8 times. Most would carry about 3-4 cannisters and it would suffice for a long time without resupplies. Iirc, one point of med juice would restore 4hp, so you would carry 400hp per cannister to be used either for healing or reviving.

You should understand that in terms of squadplay, this minimizes casualties and injuries on your own side if there's limited healing and reviving possible. Thus this could be argued to stimulate good, careful squad play in the case of medics.

Oh btw, speaking of meatgrinder behaviour, if you have an infinite medic on your hand, you'll be far less careful too and will throw your numbers against a small group without caring how many of them die till you overwhelm them. Ever seen large groups of medics move together? There's no attrition you can use on them since if you die and face them again 15 seconds later, they'll all be alive again if you left one alive. Over and over.

Ghoest9

2013-03-11, 08:16 PM

I disagree that it encourages more suicidal behaviour (no more than people wanting to get more AV missiles, which tbh, is a much bigger issue than running out of medic juice), it'd be more like what Carbon described: turning into a rifleman until a resupply is made.

Getting yourself killed takes you out of the fight and forces logistics on you and your team anyway. Thus it creates attrition - which currently lacks in a lot of cases. You're of more use staying alive a bit longer. But considering the other argument where long term lives aren't there anyway, it's mostly an issue for people that are able to hold out a long time.

I don't agree that "back and forth gameplay" is bad. For lazy people maybe, but then it can be argued that catering to people using "lazy" as an argument creates bad games in general and doesn't force creativity.

If there's such an increase in deaths, you can always penalize getting killed (and especially killing yourself) with longer respawn timers to the point it becomes more attractive to simply stay alive and retrieve or attain new gear from some other source.

And no, short respawn timers aren't necessarily a good thing for gameplay, as long as downtime doesn't become too long.

That's what discussion is for though, isn't it? :)

Only named a couple of alternatives before. There's plenty of other ways to do it. You and CarbonCopied named a couple of others.

This thread largely sums up why your ideas are often bad.

You dont understand that fun game play is a key element of a successful long term game.
Long timers as a punishment would make you happy.
They dont make regular players happy.
Things should be limited that adversely effect other play but you should not add limits to simple fun things in an effort to add depth.

In this thread you have
1 Proposed a change that most players of those classes wont like.
2 You have proposed additional punishments if those players then react in the instinctive but undesirables way.

As usual your suggestions and ideas are absurd with respect to a game that actually wants a large player base.

EDIT: Bonus lack of understanding on your part - you accused people who dont want to play the GAME the way you want of being "lazy."

OCNSethy

2013-03-11, 08:28 PM

And so it begins....

Rothnang

2013-03-11, 08:36 PM

Ghoest9

2013-03-11, 08:55 PM

And so it begins....

It always comes to this because his ideas are mostly about taking stuff away from and adding more limits to players.

OCNSethy

2013-03-11, 09:03 PM

It always comes to this because his ideas are mostly about taking stuff away from and adding more limits to players.

This is between you and Figment... Im just interested in where this thread is going.

While I can see the proposals having some merit in a base fight, I am realistic enough to realise that if the devs nerf these tools, there will be a "great disturbance in the Force... as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. .... " :)

Ghoest9

2013-03-11, 09:20 PM

Also its odd that he didnt ask for infiltrators to run out of stealth.

OCNSethy

2013-03-11, 09:27 PM

Also its odd that he didnt ask for infiltrators to run out of stealth.

They already do. The only variable there is how many certs you have in your cloak slot.

Not the same mechanic in play, my friend.

Figment

2013-03-11, 09:43 PM

I think the class features are not the right thing to attack when it comes to introducing some attrition into fights. The system shouldn't take away the basic things that make the game fun, [..]

It doesn't take any features away, it merely restricts them to be used more carefully (!). Taking away would mean the complete removal of features. Unlimited healing "doesn't make the game more fun" than restricted healing. :/ In fact, it can make the game excessively frustrating for the party that faces unlimited healing. It's a two-sided argument and I wish people would stop and look at things from the self-interested player point of view (only).

That overconvenience and snuggle the player to death attitude hurt the game enough as is and it is still driving players out of the game every day. It has made gameplay and players boring, apathic, spammy, lazy, selfish, entitled, anti-social, spoiled and incapable of creativity and improvisation, because they're never forced to make due and can always turn to the tools best suited for the job at the nearest dispenser.

The other part of the sentence is true for both unrestricted and restricted gameplay, so I don't really see the relevance as an argument in this particular case.

As for Ghoest9, he's been on my ignore for ages for... obvious reasons. I'm not going to dignify his bullshit, strawmen and ad hominems with a response.

Silent Thunder

2013-03-11, 09:46 PM

They already do. The only variable there is how many certs you have in your cloak slot.

Not the same mechanic in play, my friend.

Actually it is, because he's talking about the recharging powers having a limited power source too, such as LAs actually running out of fuel to the point of needing resupplying. And engies running out of nanites in addition to their overheat.

OCNSethy

2013-03-11, 09:50 PM

Actually it is, because he's talking about the recharging powers having a limited power source too, such as LAs actually running out of fuel to the point of needing resupplying. And engies running out of nanites in addition to their overheat.

So they do, I stand corrected. I do wonder where my head goes sometimes lol

Silent Thunder

2013-03-11, 09:55 PM

Also not to get inbetween a good argument, but it's really a pet peave of me when people in a constructive forum use ignore against each other, as it leads to two seperate threads of conversation going on, as one person who is contributing is unable to see what the other is. I dont care if it's argumentative or disruptive as hell, it still causes problems with the flow of conversation.

DirtyBird

2013-03-11, 10:04 PM

oops wrong thread :D

Mietz

2013-03-11, 10:10 PM

This might work, however, as long as the AMS sunderer has an infantry terminal and free class-changes are part of the balance, this will only have minimal impact on the battlefield.

It will make AMS sunderers almost necessary in the field to continuously resupply.

(assuming its how you refill your nanites)

Ghoest9

2013-03-11, 10:29 PM

They already do. The only variable there is how many certs you have in your cloak slot.

Not the same mechanic in play, my friend.

wrong
absolutely wrong
so wrong that you could not even be honestly confused

Jets and stealth are analogous abilities(and HA shields for that matter.)
They are active abilites on recharge timers.

His posts are just requests for nerfs on people who enjoy parts of the game he doesnt.

Figment

2013-03-11, 10:38 PM

@Silent Thunder: I rather not put people on ignore and it takes quite a bit of badgering and second chances, but persistent trolls ask for it.

The reason I put Ghoest9 on ignore is because he pretends to know my "real, hidden agenda". He reads incredibly selectively for instance in the quotes above, he accused me of only encouraging restrictions. In fact, I've always favoured less arbitrary class restrictions in terms of opening up options (weaponry and tools) to all grunt classes. In return, I'd rather see these tools and abilities be suit specific gameplay advantages.

Only infils an MAXes would have furher restrictions due to their extreme designs. You can find more of my thoughts on it in a crossover ps1-PS2 inventory system thread from quite some time ago.

Edit: found thread for those interested in my most prefered alternative:
http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=46088

The tool specific changes here are in line with the infiltrator scout tool, which currently starts with three barely usable scout darts. Why has this tool been arbitrarily restricted, while more impacting tools have not?

He also continuously accuses me of "deliberately undermining any usefulness of the current infil to somehow make my prefered design of the infil more likely". That's not true, he simply any accept that I find shotguns, smgs and sniper rifles OP in the hands of infils. He'd be right if he said I find them OP and also want a more ps1esque infil design, but he used the word because. He is a very biased person and it is simply too frustrating to deal with someone who can't handle someone else's arguments at face value due to inherent paranoia. Bassically, he fears that I propose to nerf his killing power in favour of objective oriented stealth gameplay and will go to any length with ad hominems to undermine my character, rather than my argument.

Trust me, it is better for the flow to have me have him on ignore. For I don't usualy ignore constant flame bait and lies without lashing back.

So if he asks if infil's cloak should ever run out, then my answer would be: with the current weapons I feel they have too much cloak (in fact... any) as is. If it is only pistols and a bit longer ttk, then no, it shouldn't. Unlike grunts, they wouldn't have killing power. However, I have always asserted infils should make trade-offs between tools and ammo and have extreme inventory management issues due to having the least room for inventory available and therefore the most competition between tools and no killing power to compensate for it. It is therefore consistent with demanding other trade-offs.

That is something Ghoest9 however would completely ignore. Especially since the cloak is a special ability more akin to the medic's healing aura special and HA shield, where the scout tool, med app, repair tool are all tools. The jetpack could be argued to be a bit of both.

Btw. On the jetpack, I wouldn't mind for instance to have it semi-limited: fuel would only be used to sustain longer periods (reaching higher levels in one jump). Imagine you could make unlimited fence high jumps, but limited wall/building high jumps. Currently I use the LA (and spawn beacons) almost constantly when not in HA and it makes me ignore the Galaxy as option for reaching high places and places inside enemy compounds instead of the infil. I also constantly use the jumppack to change attack vector on a building. It is too easy and too much of a default choice for me because of that under-restricted flight power.

Hamma

2013-03-11, 10:45 PM

I can see limiting everyone but the Light Assault I don't think it falls in the same category. As someone else mentioned I can't see how this could be done without an inventory system.

OCNSethy

2013-03-11, 11:11 PM

wrong
absolutely wrong
so wrong that you could not even be honestly confused

Jets and stealth are analogous abilities(and HA shields for that matter.)
They are active abilites on recharge timers.

His posts are just requests for nerfs on people who enjoy parts of the game he doesnt.

Yeah, steady on there killa, I did the mia culpa in post 26.

Kail

2013-03-12, 12:20 AM

I don't think jumpjet's should need to resupply, as no other class power requires that. If LA is too mobile, I think there are better ways to solve that. Like giving it the MAX sprint treatment (using your jumpjets consumes all the fuel, and while you can cancel early if you don't need the full height you still must wait for full fuel to come back) or making them show up on radar while jumpjets are active, etc.

I'm not convinced JJ's are a problem though, more just base design issue where having them makes it about 10x faster to reach objectives instead of 2/3.

I'd be really OK with repairing / reviving requiring resupplying; I'm not sure whether healing is quite the same, but that may make for an interesting alternative medic ability (single-target instead of AoE, but stronger). And I think it would open up secondary objectives in bases; like a generator that continually trickle-fed defenders with nanites for repair, or another for healing (if the defender is within the compound, not necessarily anywhere in the hex).

Edit: I wouldn't tie constructables to the repair tool, but I definitely wouldn't mind a counter on ammo packs before needing to terminal-resupply, like grenades.

Mordelicius

2013-03-12, 03:02 AM

It's just the LA. It's stupidly OP :lol:

It's one thing that they can go to high places, snipe on infantry and drop on vehicles to blow them up. That I understand.

It's another that they can jetpack and shoot while in combat. This needs to be nerfed due to horrible hit registration and accuracy when shooting a moving object. To me, it's a superhigh bunnyhop and you know how annoying bunnyhoppers are.

They should have massive accuracy penalty while jetpacking. It's being abused in combat. They just pack high and fast to throw off shots (cheese move) and land easily and aim. They even shoot while jetpacking and can land head shots.

The higher the jetpack is, the higher the penalty is and the longer it is in place after they land.

Figment

2013-03-12, 06:16 AM

Yeah, steady on there killa, I did the mia culpa in post 26.

See what I mean by the random character attacks and insinuating hidden agenda's OCN? I'm quite sure somewhere in the world there are people that "just requests for nerfs on people who enjoy parts of the game he doesnt".

But let's see about his actual "argument". The semantics are wrong? :rolleyes: Oh dear Ghoest, you got me there! I'm so confused. :rolleyes:

The only difference between the engineer's overheating of his repair tool and the Jetpack running out of fuel is that the repair tool is handheld and doesn't need to be taken out so you can't use a weapon at the same time (indeed like the cloak, shield and medic group/selfheal). Yes, all of those are tools.

Difference is in the keys you press: some use the special ability button, while others are operated by a button you have to hold rather than tap and one that normally activates a different ability (equip tool and hold left mouse for engi, hold spacebar for jumpjet, rather than "tap F"). Hence I said it's a bit of an inbetween because it is inherent but you control the time of use more directly. The difference isn't stupendously large, no. Does it matter? No. The group/selfheal thing is on the same resource use list for me if you read the opening post, because it largely performs the same role as the medical applicator: it's a tool.

Probably why I spend 50% of my time in LA, because "I don't enjoy it". I mean, it's not like I've argued the LA's mobility (and spawnbeacon's drop on top of a base) heavily interfere with the Galaxy Dropship need and the infiltrator role as saboteur. Did I argue something about attrition not being applicable on a group of medics in a firefight or an engineer who has endless ammunition to spam? Right? Naaah. I'm just out to make people grumpy over "things I don't enjoy", rather than critically look at design effects on gameplay and checking if I or others can't do too much with certain things and too little with other things.

It's called opinion and vision on improving gameplay. We don't all have to agree Ghoest, but that doesn't mean it's a subversive sneak attack on other people. Don't be such a dramaqueen.

Good one Ghoest. Good one. As usual and expected.

Sledgecrushr

2013-03-12, 07:53 AM

Ghoest9

2013-03-12, 08:17 AM

See what I mean by the random character attacks and insinuating hidden agenda's OCN? I'm quite sure somewhere in the world there are people that "just requests for nerfs on people who enjoy parts of the game he doesnt".

But let's see about his actual "argument". The semantics are wrong? :rolleyes: Oh dear Ghoest, you got me there! I'm so confused. :rolleyes:

The only difference between the engineer's overheating of his repair tool and the Jetpack running out of fuel is that the repair tool is handheld and doesn't need to be taken out so you can't use a weapon at the same time (indeed like the cloak, shield and medic group/selfheal). Yes, all of those are tools.

Difference is in the keys you press: some use the special ability button, while others are operated by a button you have to hold rather than tap and one that normally activates a different ability (equip tool and hold left mouse for engi, hold spacebar for jumpjet, rather than "tap F"). Hence I said it's a bit of an inbetween because it is inherent but you control the time of use more directly. The difference isn't stupendously large, no. Does it matter? No. The group/selfheal thing is on the same resource use list for me if you read the opening post, because it largely performs the same role as the medical applicator: it's a tool.

Probably why I spend 50% of my time in LA, because "I don't enjoy it". I mean, it's not like I've argued the LA's mobility (and spawnbeacon's drop on top of a base) heavily interfere with the Galaxy Dropship need and the infiltrator role as saboteur. Did I argue something about attrition not being applicable on a group of medics in a firefight or an engineer who has endless ammunition to spam? Right? Naaah. I'm just out to make people grumpy over "things I don't enjoy", rather than critically look at design effects on gameplay and checking if I or others can't do too much with certain things and too little with other things.

It's called opinion and vision on improving gameplay. We don't all have to agree Ghoest, but that doesn't mean it's a subversive sneak attack on other people. Don't be such a dramaqueen.

Good one Ghoest. Good one. As usual and expected.

Umm the part about "his posts" was aimed at you.

Either you purposefully focus your ideas on nerfing everyone who doesnt play the way you like or you completely lack self awareness and unintentionally construct game vision that ends up asking for nerfs to everything that other people enjoy.

As I have said before. Its reasonable to ask for nerfs if something is directly ruining your enjoyment your(or any group players) enjoyment.

Its unreasonable to ask for nerfs (over and over) that simply remove stuff other people enjoy in an effort make them play the way you want.

Figment

2013-03-12, 08:48 AM

Umm the part about "his posts" was aimed at you.

Uhm... Duh? Why do you think I'm addressing YOU?

Either you purposefully focus your ideas on nerfing everyone who doesnt play the way you like or you completely lack self awareness and unintentionally construct game vision that ends up asking for nerfs to everything that other people enjoy.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

What the hell is this supposed to be? Another random accusation?

As I have said before. Its reasonable to ask for nerfs if something is directly ruining your enjoyment your(or any group players) enjoyment.

Its unreasonable to ask for nerfs (over and over) that simply remove stuff other people enjoy in an effort make them play the way you want.

Over and over and over and over and over and over. :rolleyes:

Alright then, how many topics have I made on this issue? Go on then. Come on? Go on. Back up your statement of absolute tripe. Ghoest, stop being a liar and stop making character attacks and I still haven't seen a single argument why UNLIMITED is AN ABSOLUTE MUST and GOOD FOR GAMEPLAY.

Go on then, I'm waiting.

While you're at it, why don't you tell us why we don't have unlimited ammo? Why don't we have unlimited clips of ammo? Why do we have overheating? I'm quite sure there'd be "people who would enjoy the removal of those limitations" and you should stop making people play the game the way you want with limited ammo and all that. :rolleyes:

Same line of argumentation. Why is it okay to limit ammo and a scouting tool, but not okay to limit other tools that have an equally large impact if not more? Go on then. Make an argument for once instead of waving "enjoyment" around as if you have the monopoly on it and don't need to examplify what it entails or how it's affected.

Convenience by itself is a horrible argument for gameplay, since inconvenience often creates opportunities for opponents and planning challenges that conveniences remove. If a convenience design removes an opportunity or disadvantage, it should be questioned if this is warranted. I've explained how it impacts others (and I always do), so your accusations based on your second line is absolute bull.

Since you only ever look at things from one side (the one exploiting any convenience), I don't expect you to really understand that this is a mere logical tweak to put it in line with other tools and uses and create a bit more challenge in what I perceive as too forgiving gameplay, particularly for large groups that suffer no attrition in these fields.

Whether you like it or not Ghoest, I'm completely entitled to that opinion. And you're completely entitled to liking the way it is, but you should stop your harassment strategy and stop acting as a total drama queen and start making some actual gameplay arguments, because the tripe you're posting now has no argumentative value.

Making players make choices is the best thing that can happen to gameplay. There's too little diversification, too little attrition and too much spam of everything right now to make the game enjoyable and feel unique.

psijaka

2013-03-12, 09:11 AM

No; don't agree with your suggestion, Figment.

Each class has a key ability;

LA - jet
Engi - repair
Medic - heal
HA - shield
Infil - cloak

What you are proposing is to limit the use of this ability in the first 3; thereby making the classes less distinctive - and giving even more incentive to play HA!

I do think that the MANA turrets are a bit too disposable though; perhaps they should cost resources, and/or be on a cooldown. As it is, I just spam an AV turret, fire a few missiles, and then abandon it before a sniper or tank spots me, only to spawn another in a different spot a few seconds later to shoot off another missile or two.

Figment

2013-03-12, 09:18 AM

What you are proposing is to limit the use of this ability in the first 3; thereby making the classes less distinctive - and giving even more incentive to play HA!

Eh, I'd rather not play as much HA as I do now, but the arbitrary AV restriction to HA and CONSTANT RETARDED VEHICLE SPAM are the culprit of playing so much HA. Not the class abilities like the shield, barely use the HA shield (in part because it won't activate when I press it while running... :p).

I do think that the MANA turrets are a bit too disposable though; perhaps they should cost resources, and/or be on a cooldown. As it is, I just spam an AV turret, fire a few missiles, and then abandon it before a sniper or tank spots me, only to spawn another in a different spot a few seconds later to shoot off another missile or two.

That's one of the reasons I'd propose they become part of trade-off and limitations. Though I'd say the turret designs could use some work (shield design in particular - cover the head, leave the feet a bit more open) while we're at it. Plus I feel anyone on the same empire should be allowed to use a deployed turret. That actually is a rather arbitrary restriction. :/

psijaka

2013-03-12, 09:31 AM

Eh, I'd rather not play as much HA as I do now, but the arbitrary AV restriction to HA and CONSTANT RETARDED VEHICLE SPAM are the culprit of playing so much HA. Not the class abilities like the shield, barely use the HA shield (in part because it won't activate when I press it while running... :p).

Yeah, HA the class to pull if the tanks are getting too close, as happens all too often due to CONSTANT RETARDED VEHICLE SPAM (there; felt good to say that).

What arbitrary AV restrictions are you talking about, by the way?

Figment

2013-03-12, 10:38 AM

What arbitrary AV restrictions are you talking about, by the way?

HA being the only grunt class with mobile ranged anti-vehicular (bazooka/stinger type weaponry).

I don't quite understand why medics and engineers aren't allowed to give up their rifle in favour of AV. I recognise they want to make classes unique, but that's not a sufficient argument to deny them ranged AV when there's so much of it. Not even at the cost of a clear trade-off.

I mean I could see them argue that LA would get into good positions to use rockets too easily (perhaps) and sure, Engineers would ammopack resupply themselves (ammo packs and worse unlimited ammopacks are a rather weird concept anyway). But really, why force everyone into HA all the time? :/

Rothnang

2013-03-12, 10:47 AM

That overconvenience and snuggle the player to death attitude hurt the game enough as is and it is still driving players out of the game every day. It has made gameplay and players boring, apathic, spammy, lazy, selfish, entitled, anti-social, spoiled and incapable of creativity and improvisation, because they're never forced to make due and can always turn to the tools best suited for the job at the nearest dispenser.

Restricting repairs and heals won't fix that though, all you're doing there is take away the tools of people who actually try to keep units in the field instead of just spawning more and more, which IMO is the biggest overconvenience in the game.

Figment

2013-03-12, 10:58 AM

Restricting repairs and heals won't fix that though, all you're doing there is take away the tools of people who actually try to keep units in the field instead of just spawning more and more, which IMO is the biggest overconvenience in the game.

Keeping units in the field has a bigger effect on lack of attrition if the game tries to balance numbers by putting them on spawn timers and resources. (True in particular for repairs).

HiroshiChugi

2013-03-12, 12:07 PM

two words: Solar panels. :D

Silent Thunder

2013-03-12, 12:38 PM

I'd like to add that the only way I could realisticly see this being in the game in a non-frustrating way is if they added in an inventory system like in PS1. However that simply isn't going to happen I wager, so the point is moot.

wasdie

2013-03-12, 12:43 PM

I've always wondered this myself. I could see them implementing such a system.

Glue guns, light assault jetpacks, healing guns all can have limited ammo + their standard overheat/cooldown/recharge. I feel like it would do a bit more to slow down the zerg and make AMSs even more important on the battlefield. It would also make holding inventory terminals much more important.

You could tie that in with a generator system that powers all terminals for a big base.

We already have an inventory system in PS2. It's just a lot more streamlined and restrictive than in Planetside 1. It works better with the classes. However it still exists and can have stuff added too it with ease.

The idea of "slots" instead of a "backpack" works a lot better with dedicated classes.

JesNC

2013-03-12, 01:04 PM

Wouldn't this emphasize dying & respawning over co-operative teamplay even more?

Why play Medic or Light Assault if your class tools only hold 2-3 uses? Why not play HA instead, more staying power and fights are going to revolve around infantry terminals to resupply on anyways.

Keeping a squad up & fed is going to be next to impossible without constant respawns or a terminal nearby.

Cats

2013-03-12, 01:13 PM

This would only push more people to HA if anything. If everyone else's defining tool is going to be use-limited, why bother?

Half the point of the LA is endurance, to skirt around the fight and find a backdoor. If you have it so it can only drain its jetpack 5 times, then it becomes absurdly useless because you need to stick with the blob, and at that point you may as well roll HA. In short, this is another "nerf fun" suggestion

Sturmhardt

2013-03-12, 01:39 PM

I don't think that restricting these things would make the game more fun.

.sent via phone.

Figment

2013-03-12, 02:46 PM

Wouldn't this emphasize dying & respawning over co-operative teamplay even more?

Not really.

Why play Medic or Light Assault if your class tools only hold 2-3 uses?

Why presume two-three uses? I currently use Light Assault for what, 100+ jumps?

Medics in PS1 had around 4 revives worth of juice at minimum, 12-16 revives with 3-4 cannisters. People die faster in this game. More logical would be to have it be 5-10-15-20-25 as levels.

I mean... Why presume 2-3? >.> Are people dieing so fast as medics right now that they can't get even 4-5 revives out of it that 2-3 has to be the restricted version? >__>

JesNC

2013-03-12, 04:20 PM

Not really.

Why presume two-three uses? I currently use Light Assault for what, 100+ jumps?

Medics in PS1 had around 4 revives worth of juice at minimum, 12-16 revives with 3-4 cannisters. People die faster in this game. More logical would be to have it be 5-10-15-20-25 as levels.

I mean... Why presume 2-3? >.> Are people dieing so fast as medics right now that they can't get even 4-5 revives out of it that 2-3 has to be the restricted version? >__>

Because 2-3 was an arbitrary number I pulled out of my behind - but that's not the point.

By putting a hard cap on support abilites I fear the game would chain people even more to spawn rooms and equipmet terminals than it currently does.

The game is too zergy as it is and all this would do is to lessen the battlefield survivability of small units even more while making extended flanking moves and behind-the-lines action nearly impossible.
Its effect on the zerg would be negligible at best. People would still spawn, run up to the fight, die and spawn again. They would probably not even notice the change. This would really only hurt/hamper organized play.

And this is what I don't get. You're leading a squad-sized outfit. You said that TTK is too low in your opinion. Yet you propose something that would reduce the staying power of small squads even more.

Ghoest9

2013-03-12, 05:05 PM

Whether you like it or not Ghoest, I'm completely entitled to that opinion. And you're completely entitled to liking the way it is, but you should stop your harassment strategy and stop acting as a total drama queen and start making some actual gameplay arguments, because the tripe you're posting now has no argumentative value.

And Im entitled to point out that your arguments often miraculously end up asking for nerfs to the stuff you dont enjoy but other people do even though its not directly hurting you.

Ghoest9

2013-03-12, 05:12 PM

Wouldn't this emphasize dying & respawning over co-operative teamplay even more?

Yes this obvious to everyone but Figment.

The same thing already happens with ammo to LA when they opperate behind lines.
Once the ammo is used up you start going banzai with your knife till you die.

Or you recall. Most people when they run out of what ever they use will just play super aggrisive commando till they die so they can respawn.

MaxDamage

2013-03-12, 05:16 PM

Some people have a lot of fun with infinite self healing.
https://players.planetside2.com/#!/5428010618030932545/weapons

Redshift

2013-03-12, 05:21 PM

You use a very low number here on purpose I suppose, but that's simply a poor argument. Especially since you black and white the argument by supposing the medic would barely have any ammo left for himself. Check out some PS1 vids that have players with medical power in it: a single canister of 100 juice would be sufficient to hold out for some time. In PS1, one cannister would be sufficient to revive 4 fallen players (25 per player). So with one cannister, an advanced medic could already revive 8 times. Most would carry about 3-4 cannisters and it would suffice for a long time without resupplies. Iirc, one point of med juice would restore 4hp, so you would carry 400hp per cannister to be used either for healing or reviving.

If i was playing medic on an outfit night i'd carry a few medpacks, 6 canisters of med juice and some thumper ammo for the SA guys, the only ammo i'd take for myself would be in the MCG on my back.

Now without an inventory system you can't make that decision.

So you either balance the loadout around a generic player, in which case in old tems you'd have 1 spare canister, i.e 8 rezs and no heals. a Loadout which is completly useless for organised squad play.

Or you balance it around squad play so you give them 28 rez's of the original loadout, without an inventory you'd still need to give them the ammo of the solo player too, so the limit doesn't really effect the casual anyway.

Without an inventory, bag space or weight system you can't put limits on them without ruining the ability to dig into an area.