Infinite revive isn't balanced for zerg/large scale play

[Stardouser]

Any time one force outnumbers another, but especially when talking about zerg sizes, infinite revives prevent smaller forces from inflicting losses on larger ones. There should be responsible limits of say, after 2 revives your next death must respawn (or only 1 revive for a max). I know there will be people claim this would hurt teamwork, but no, it just takes out spamming of infinite revives and supports pure numbers less - something that should fall under the "rich get richer" argument, except we're not talking about resources.

[bpostal]

With the state that most players revive in (slightly disorientated, no shields, possibly out of ammo, etc...) I don't see a major issue.
In my mind you have to not only destroy the enemy but move forward into their position to ensure that the area is properly clear. That is the phase of a fight were you make damn sure all their medics are dead and wait a couple seconds in case of a squad deploy.
I wouldn't mind, however, a return to the med juice system so that one medic isn't just reviving a platoon. That in turn, leads to issues then with the revive grenade and it's relative OPness if a system like that was implemented.

[Stardouser]

With the state that most players revive in (slightly disorientated, no shields, possibly out of ammo, etc...) I don't see a major issue.


That's an argument that supports it when there are even numbers of combatants, but when 30 are attacking 5 (or 5 on 1, or any other imbalanced fight), and the 5 kill a few guys before dying themselves, having 10 out of the 30 guys revive in a vulnerable state does not matter because by definition, there won't be any enemies to take advantage of it.

I do believe that when the game was being hyped, one of the romantic ideals, compared to say, standard shooters with 8 vs 8 or 16, or 64 player maximums, was the thought of lesser forces holding out against greater ones. Yet the reality is that the zergs are supported against that.

[bpostal]

When you're talking about ratios of that proportion then I would have to ask why Five people are trying to take on 30. Even with a perfect base design I can't see any kind situation where the defense should be able to hold against five or six times their numbers.
If those five were fighting 10, maybe even as many as 15 then sure...find their AMS, take it out and then swing around the other side of the base and hit 'em in the rear.
Lesser forces holding out against disproportional odds is all fine and well but not when you're talking more than three or four to one.
Besides, with the way the new resource system sounds there will be a disincentive to over pop regions with those kinds of numbers.

[Stardouser]

Well, I know that the romantic ideal I mention is "holding" out against superior forces, but I am not myself saying that a lesser force should be able to "hold" against a larger one. My actual issue is that a lesser force cannot even inflict mere losses on a larger one due to revives.

[bpostal]

Sure you can, but it's not all black and white like that.
If you toss a grenade, charge into a room and kill 2 out of 3 of the people in there, run back outside and then shooting the last guy in the face when he chases you...you've inflicted obvious losses.

If you charge into a room, kill one of the five guys in there then you've still killed one of the guys. Even if the medic has to revive him, that impacts the enemy inside the room even if the impact isn't as obvious or as direct.

You've placed the enemy off balance and it's a perfect time for a follow up strike from a different direction. Come at them from the roof or a window or something, shoot the guy who's reviving people and then fly/run away real quick.

[Ruffdog]

Any time one force outnumbers another, but especially when talking about zerg sizes, infinite revives prevent smaller forces from inflicting losses on larger ones. There should be responsible limits of say, after 2 revives your next death must respawn (or only 1 revive for a max).

I guarantee those "two revives per life" will hurt the smaller forces more than the zergs.
I say its okay. Maybe tweak MAX revives into a two-component deal, (medic and engi)

One tweak they seriously need to do is up the times on AMS spawns compared to building-based spawns. Attackers should not be spawning faster than defenders. Especially when compounded with the drop podding shenanigans attackers do straight onto the center of a base/roof.

[Stardouser]

I guarantee those "two revives per life" will hurt the smaller forces more than the zergs.
I say its okay. Maybe tweak MAX revives into a two-component deal, (medic and engi)

One tweak they seriously need to do is up the times on AMS spawns compared to building-based spawns. Attackers should not be spawning faster than defenders. Especially when compounded with the drop podding shenanigans attackers do straight onto the center of a base/roof.

Sure, if a smaller force is attacking, but that's doomed to fail anyway. If you don't have a sunderer or at least a good setup of beacons you can't revive indefinitely as the smaller attacking force. However, as the larger attacking force you most definitely can hole up in a cap room and take no or meaningless losses.


Defensively it would hurt the larger force, since the defenders have an indestructible respawn room.

[PredatorFour]

For someone who plays as dedicated medic and doesn't want to hurt people, i strongly disagree with this.

[War Barney]

The main problem is the medic can get a damn good gun, hell they can pretty much go toe to toe with any class and win even a heavy (though that is tougher for em). They have this combined with reviving other people, so of course you get a LOT of medics cos they get extra exp from heals and revives, are very useful cos normally a kill matters, when a medic is around it doesn't matter at all and as well as all that awesome stuff they don't suffer a penalty to damage.

the best solution would be give the medic access to worse guns so they aren't as potent in a fight as the other guys are, hell they even have a self heal they can activate and leave on to help out which functions sort of like the shield for heavy so if anything they are the second toughest class in the game AND can revive.

How have people not seen this as a major balance issue before?

Oh and they NEED to fix people being able to squad deploy onto a dead squad leader... that is just ridiculous and I see it exploited far to much for it to not be fixed. If the squad leader is dead you shouldn't be able to deploy to him, or perhaps let you deploy but deploy dead like he is

[Stardouser]

War Barney, you bring up a good point. Sometimes I've seen our smaller force blast a medic or two in the charge, but guess what? There are still more medics there, because they don't really suffer combat penalties. And revives are so fast, it's not like you are going to get caught and shot while reviving that often, and even if you do you probably already got half or more of the dead back up.

5 guys in a room can easily be 3 medics, a max and an engineer. And when you've got a 30 man zerg force occupying a room they can easily be 10+ medics. Throwing coordinated grenades in and getting multiple kills won't faze them.

[moosepoop]

they need to tone down the healing and reviving time. when a faction population is high enoughits nearly impossible for smaller forces to defend, because they will outheal your damage.

[KesTro]

This is something that's been bugging me for awhile too. Unless you seriously outnumber a force there's no pushing into a position because the position never wears down. It's infintely sustainable.

Now perhaps a limit to the amount of revives on a person isn't teh way to go but what about something along the lines of diminishing returns? After the second revive each revive there after puts some sort of stacking debuff on you until you resupply/respawn. Something along those lines might be interesting. As to what the debuff would be, maybe longer reloads or a cap to the amount of HP you can regen to.

[War Barney]

This is something that's been bugging me for awhile too. Unless you seriously outnumber a force there's no pushing into a position because the position never wears down. It's infintely sustainable.

Now perhaps a limit to the amount of revives on a person isn't teh way to go but what about something along the lines of diminishing returns? After the second revive each revive there after puts some sort of stacking debuff on you until you resupply/respawn. Something along those lines might be interesting. As to what the debuff would be, maybe longer reloads or a cap to the amount of HP you can regen to.

Aye that could work, say each time you get revived you have 25% less shields and health or something, perhaps if you get revived twice (or even after first one) your shields don't work as they got to damage when you died.

Actual numbers and what not would need testing to make it not useless to revive people but it would work. I use to play warhammer online and they have a similar thing, when somebody got a rezz they had I think it was 25% less in every stat for a few seconds after. Despite it being a few seconds in WAR I think until the you respawn would be better for PS cos in WAR it was pretty easy to interrupt a rezz and if a healer was wasting their time doing that it meant everybody else might die due to lack of heals so there was an actual major downside to just rezzing anybody who died as they died.

I still think in combination with this though some kind of damage or defence nerf for medics is needed, this would make rezzing less useful but still wouldn't stop medics being the second best attack class in the game despite being a support.

[Figment]

Funny, when I said this during Tech Test, people went "but infinite revive helps small groups more!", even if it clearly doesn't since a big group has more medics, thus more chance that they can keep reviving infinitely...


Med juice and engi glue should both have limits. In fact, I'd say repairing or healing different types of units should drain med and engi supplies relative to the strength of those units.

[PredatorFour]

What we need then is some kind of revolutionary 'inventory' style system. A system where you have to personally stock up items on your desired loadout and hence you can run out of revive canisters, say if you are just a dedicated medic like me.

[Stardouser]

Med juice and engi glue should both have limits. In fact, I'd say repairing or healing different types of units should drain med and engi supplies relative to the strength of those units.

I'm glad you bring up engineers, because it's the same problem. Get 10 tanks, or hell, even 3 or 4, camping an outpost spawn room, and chances are, they will be blanketing it with splash damage and while a few shots will still get fired out and hit them, you won't actually be able to inflict any losses on them since, if 1 of the tanks actually gets in danger, it will simply hop out and repair, backing away behind a rock if needed. Note: I know that the BEST solution to such a situation is to counterattack from a different base. And, indeed, while counterattacking from a different base should be required to defeat an attacking zerg, it should not be required to inflict mere losses on one.

I'd also like to see optional Airburst AV shells that, when they hit a tank, they do a fraction of the damage a normal AV rocket would do, but do splash damage that hurts nearby infantry (say, 2 hits would kill a light assault within the blast radius - I am not suggesting a one hit kill thing). This would help curb the phenomenon of poorly placed sunderers/tanks/etc setting up in plain sight knowing they can outrepair damage.

[Calista]

If they did something like this (and I think it is a good idea to do so) it would likely need to be tied to resources. You could do something like each limiting these activities to resources per use. I think I saw on the MLG streams where an outfit primarily ran mostly medics so the decrement would have to be substantial to limit that type of style. But since most groups don't play like this is would penalize them a great deal. This is just another issue with the current class system letting anyone be anything at anytime and it isn't easily solvable because of it.

[findus]

...on the other hand...

You already get a xp bonus for reviving/repairing squad mates, right?

In the outlined scenario those who are not in a squad or are in a different outfit won't get a revive, because those will be concentrated on your fellow squadmembers. You already get punished for not being in a squad / outfit by not getting the xp bonus (thats ok), getting routinely kicked out of transports (mostly nowwhere in the wilderness), out there you are denied a transport, driven over by outfit members, tked and whatnot...

The usual solution for the endless revive/repair problem is already there, get the high priority target first, which is not the MAX, but the engineer behind. A zerg is a zerg, if i'm outnumbered i won't win, one way or the other.

There are many pros and cons, i find the existing system good, resource based system may lead to a fight which ends after some time with LAs and HAs only. I sometimes wonder, why after a long fight the skys are clear of aircraft and only cheap vehicles show up....

Interesting proposals, we will see where this leads....

[Stardouser]

I have always seen infinite revives as a problem, but it has become even more apparent when I see, for example, a 30 man force steamroll 5-10 guys across 5 straight latticed outposts and taking no meaningful losses throughout the entire run. Not saying the 5-10 guys should have a chance to win, but across 5 different base caps, being able to blow up a couple of tanks or MAXes and causing resource losses should be doable.

I've actually played around using smoke grenades to sneak in and C4 both a max, his engineer and anyone else nearby who are revive-camping the cap point room, it does work, but you can't kill the entire room and all it takes is one medic to wipe away everything you did. With responsible limits on revives, the second time you get in and C4 that MAX, he will have to respawn.

[Badjuju]

On the contrary, infinite revives are the only thing that keeps smaller coordinated squads in the game IMO, especially if they are attacking. Smaller forces would not stand a chance in any attack or defending a base with scattered objectives with limited revives.

[Lonehunter]

On the contrary, infinite revives are the only thing that keeps smaller coordinated squads in the game IMO, especially if they are attacking. Smaller forces would not stand a chance in any attack or defending a base with scattered objectives with limited revives.
Exactly. PS2 is a numbers game. If you have 5 people trying to take on 30 and all or at least most of your 5 aren't medics, you shouldn't expect to get anywhere.

[War Barney]

What we need then is some kind of revolutionary 'inventory' style system. A system where you have to personally stock up items on your desired loadout and hence you can run out of revive canisters, say if you are just a dedicated medic like me.

This is a good idea, they could make it be as you say revive canisters that need to be stocked up on like C4 meaning you can carry a maximum amount (say 2) and can increase the amount you carry by sacrificing nanomesh/flak. And of course make it something you need to spec for like you need to spec 200 then 500 for 2 C4 you need to spec the same for the revive canisters. This way to be a properly useful medic you need to spec a fair few points into it. Right now I've specced like 100-150 certs into the revive tool and nothing else and when I go medic for a bit it works very well. My heavy though I've had to heavily invest in to make him useful.

As for the engineer they could make it so repairing isn't as effective a short while after something is damage. One of the major issues I find is I sit somewhere shooting rockets at tanks or sundies and 1 engi will easily outheal all the damage I'm doing and the only way to stop the engi is to somehow get right up next to the tank so I can kill him and even then he will just jump back inside. The only problem with this is that it doesn't help to much as in a zerg people will still just back off and heal up to full making it quite hard to finish off tanks.

The best solution would be to increase the amount of damage done by non guided rockets, right now it takes about 3-4 rockets to kill a lightning (from a phoenix anyway) which is more than enough time for it to run far out of range so all a rocket launcher is really doing is making them pull back for a short while before coming back again instead of actually getting kills. This leads to tanks having nothing to fear when they zerg as the only thing that will really kill them if other tanks but when they zerg to hell theres so many of them its nigh on impossible to stay alive long enough to kill 1.

Again though the weapons that medics and engis can use should be looked at along with this, they just have to much fire power considering they are meant to be a support class.

Also... did they nerf the C4 despite poeple saying they wouldn't cos I tried to destroy a sundie last night and it took 2 C4 and 4 rockets... how is a heavy meant to be useful if it takes THAT long to kill a sundie? and thats with no engis repairing at all.

Part of the reason a tank zerg is so potent is that infantry have limited tools right now to deal with it, tanks should fear heavies with rockets but right now they don't as unless you have 2-3 heavies shooting you at once with lock on rockets in a wide open area you are pretty much safe. During a zerg most tanks just sit out in the open as they don't feel threatened at all.

[PredatorFour]

Thing is Star, numbers will always roll over small teams in a game like this. Revives are a great help that really good small teams can use against overwhelming numbers to put up a decent fight. It's the classic 'zerg with biggest zerg wins zerg fight'. Even with proposed changes to the reviving system, you will still get the same problem because of sheer numbers.

Team with most medics = most revives/healing whether they are on timers or wateva.

[War Barney]

Exactly. PS2 is a numbers game. If you have 5 people trying to take on 30 and all or at least most of your 5 aren't medics, you shouldn't expect to get anywhere.

It should take more people to attack than to defend but that just doesn't happen right now. The problem is that no base is really defensible, sure theres turrets and things but infantry just rush right through the shields and kill everybody on the turrets while LA jetpack up and kill everybody. All this combines to make defence much harder than it should be.

In some bases it works properly like howling pass because theres a large open expanse to get across and of course point A is very well held and that area gives a good vantage point to attack anybody taking the towers. Most bases however the mountains are so close that people use them to bypass the walls as well (with both infantry and tanks) and it makes the turrets a lot less helpful as people have tons of cover to use.

What should be worked on is ways to make bases more defensible, perhaps make it so nobody can get through the shield but theres a few other smaller doors people can use or something. The gateway is just a giant come on in for a zerg making it impossible to hold them back. Or perhaps make it so you need to galaxy drop in to bypass a shield on the inside to let infantry in. Right now tactics can't really stop a zerg it will just steamroll over everything, in a perfect world tactics would at least be able to slow down a zerg and a zerg would need to use tactics to win instead of just swarming like ants over everything

[DOUBLEXBAUGH]

When you're talking about ratios of that proportion then I would have to ask why Five people are trying to take on 30. Even with a perfect base design I can't see any kind situation where the defense should be able to hold against five or six times their numbers.
If those five were fighting 10, maybe even as many as 15 then sure...find their AMS, take it out and then swing around the other side of the base and hit 'em in the rear.
Lesser forces holding out against disproportional odds is all fine and well but not when you're talking more than three or four to one.

Well, I know that the romantic ideal I mention is "holding" out against superior forces, but I am not myself saying that a lesser force should be able to "hold" against a larger one.

Sure, if a smaller force is attacking, but that's doomed to fail anyway.


...when I see, for example, a 30 man force steamroll 5-10... Not saying the 5-10 guys should have a chance to win,

Why should superior numbers always trump skill? A good squad in PS1 (10 people) could hold out against, or even take bases from, a platoon+ (30+) of bad zerglings. One of the selling points of PS2 was that skill was going to matter (as if it didn't in PS1), yet all that really matters is sheer numbers.




What we need then is some kind of revolutionary 'inventory' style system. A system where you have to personally stock up items on your desired loadout and hence you can run out of revive canisters, say if you are just a dedicated medic like me.

If only... if only :(

[Stardouser]

Thing is Star, numbers will always roll over small teams in a game like this. Revives are a great help that really good small teams can use against overwhelming numbers to put up a decent fight. It's the classic 'zerg with biggest zerg wins zerg fight'. Even with proposed changes to the reviving system, you will still get the same problem because of sheer numbers.

Team with most medics = most revives/healing whether they are on timers or wateva.

Taking a defensive example, 5 guys defending against 20, when do revives even factor in for the defenders? When you are taking fire the instant you step out of your spawn room and are generally respawning only, when are you reviving? I have been in situations where we outnumber the enemy as well, and I've never seen a situation where the outnumbering enemy all dies and respawns at their sunderer, giving the smaller force time to revive. Usually the smaller force all dies and has to respawn; I'm just not seeing where this factors in for the smaller force.

Now, with attacking small forces, sure, you might get a chance to do some revives because the enemy can't confront you all at once, but you still aren't going to cap a base out from under 20 guys with 8.

Question : I am talking about situations where your entire empire has only 5-10 guys against 20+ enemies. Are some of you talking about situations where your empire actually has a lot more than just your own squad, but you are talking about your own personal squad of 5-10 guys using revives for themselves and they are operating in coordination with each other, but in isolation from the rest of their empire that's nearby? If so, I guess that has to be considered, but it sounds like a situation where while you are talking about 5-10 guys only, your empire isn't outnumbered greatly.

[Chefkoch]

Med juice and engi glue should both have limits. In fact, I'd say repairing or healing different types of units should drain med and engi supplies relative to the strength of those units.

No no you can't limit med and engi juice because that would be clever game design we had over a decade ago in the Original Planetside. :D:D

Personally i agree 100% on longer spawn timers aka death panaltiy and limited revive and repair capacity.

[War Barney]

Why should superior numbers always trump skill? A good squad in PS1 (10 people) could hold out against, or even take bases from, a platoon+ (30+) of bad zerglings. One of the selling points of PS2 was that skill was going to matter (as if it didn't in PS1), yet all that really matters is sheer numbers.






If only... if only :(

Indeed right now theres so many ways into a base and its so easy to camp spawn rooms that a zerg has it easy. Most of the time people in a zerg will sit out in the open as they don't care if they die cos they will respawn 5s later or get a revive from 1 of the 5 million medics who can revive a infinite number of times.

what needs doing is as follows really

1. Make respawn time on a sunderer twice as long if not more, this way defender can respawn quicker so have a chance to overwhelm bad attackers.

2. Limit the number of revives by making it something you have to spend resources to buy and are limited in how many you can carry at once.

3. Make big bases either have small posterns infantry get in through OR just make it so they need to galaxy in to get down the shields. Right now the huge gate infantry can get through means a zerg will always steamroll a base cos theres no way to really hold them back. If people needed to galaxy drop in at at least people could try to setup a lot of anti air to stop some of the galaxies getting in and it means stupid zergs with no brain at all would eventually stall.

4. Armour should be more vunerable to explosives so they have to take more care or sit further back, right now tanks just sit in the open right up close with 1 engi repairing and generally they have nothing to fear.

[typhaon]

I think people are on to something here...

Rez mechanic seems a bit over the top and could use some limits.

[Sledgecrushr]

I like the idea that sunder respawns need to be longer. This will definitely slow attackers down a bit. But if you are trying to make defense a little easier then medic rezzes should stay the same. I mean how are you supposed to hold a line when you gimp medic rezzes.

[PredatorFour]

1. Make respawn time on a sunderer twice as long if not more, this way defender can respawn quicker so have a chance to overwhelm bad attackers.

2. Limit the number of revives by making it something you have to spend resources to buy and are limited in how many you can carry at once.



Come to think of it , all this furore about resources and costs of items would be solved by simply having an inventory system. So you wouldn't have to worry about buying stuff (which is quite a complicated system) but simply only be able to carry so much because of space restrictions.

To me an inventory would be a far simpler way of carrying items/balancing what items classes can have, to the current resource system there is now.

[Calista]

Sure... just say a medic can't carry a gun for example. That would really cause squads to limit medics and/or engys but this conflicts with the overarching problem of the business model. They do not want to limit inventory items too much because it limits monetization.

Aren't they reworking Medic class this next update pass? I seem to recall it was medic or cloaker but not sure. Either way it is a good time to start discussing changes to medic.

[Ruffdog]

They are reworking resources as well. Perhaps they will look at a revive costing a resource like a grenade will. This would satisfy me more than a fixed inventory of revives.

[Ghoest9]

Infinite revive help the game far more in terms of playability than it hurts the game in terms of conceptual strategy.

[KesTro]

I think it was briefly touched up upon but what about if the med gun and engi tool had an ammo counter like any other gun? I don't see this one doing much at all unless the ammo pool was very low in which case I wouldn't like it too much. :F

Just throwing around ideas at this point.

As far as the combat ability of the medic. I think they're fine as is. After all they're 'combat' medics. Their healing aura works a lot how the heavy resist shield works only to a lesser degree since it doesn't effect their shields as well. It is mitigating damage though.

Now if the medic had grenade launchers and RPG's than we could talk about OP haha.

[Rolfski]

Infinite revives promotes people playing together and sticking as a team. Limiting it would definitely hurt smaller teams (that need to rely on team play) against zergs.

I also don't see any reason to give medics a nerf, give them a worse gun or any other means to take the fun out of this class. If there's anything this game does right, it has to be class balance.

Sure, medics get a lot of points and a decent gun but so does the engineer (carbine class is not per se "worse" compared to AR class) and having a disproportionate amount of medics in a team means you're missing out on fire power (Max, HA, Engineer with turret) or other special fighting capabilities abilities (LA, Infiltrator).

In BF3, the medic was OP. Not in this game imo.

[War Barney]

I think it was briefly touched up upon but what about if the med gun and engi tool had an ammo counter like any other gun? I don't see this one doing much at all unless the ammo pool was very low in which case I wouldn't like it too much. :F

Just throwing around ideas at this point.

As far as the combat ability of the medic. I think they're fine as is. After all they're 'combat' medics. Their healing aura works a lot how the heavy resist shield works only to a lesser degree since it doesn't effect their shields as well. It is mitigating damage though.

Now if the medic had grenade launchers and RPG's than we could talk about OP haha.

They have the ability to heal and revive people though and are the second strongest class in the game thanks to their self heal and having access to such potent guns. I'd say this makes them OP as while they don't have more dps potential than other classes and they are only the second most survivable class they also have great support skills so they have everything. Its not wonder theres always a TON of medics in platoons, why wouldn't people play a medic when they are so awesome right now?

[moosepoop]

Funny, when I said this during Tech Test, people went "but infinite revive helps small groups more!", even if it clearly doesn't since a big group has more medics, thus more chance that they can keep reviving infinitely...



what allows smaller groups of players to defend against larger groups is chokepoints.

in ps1 it took about 30 seconds to fully heal up, and the healing gun took ammo

Infinite revives promotes people playing together and sticking as a team. Limiting it would definitely hurt smaller teams (that need to rely on team play) against zergs.

In BF3, the medic was OP. Not in this game imo.

infinite revives promotes suicidal behavior, because there is no consequence. as a medic I routinely revive entire squads within seconds.

there is only one thing that effects tactics and teamplay, that's the downtime/respawn time. counterstrike is ridiculously twitchy and fast, but because of the long respawn time its one of the most tactical shooters.

BF3 had fast instant revives to increase the flow of combat and make the game seem like there are more people fighting. planetside 2 doesn't need that, and the healing and respawn time should reflect that.

[Stardouser]

There are a few people claiming infinite revives help smaller groups but I think the other side has clearly demonstrated it helps the larger groups. There are just too many situational ways you can describe zergs taking ZERO losses against smaller groups, and smaller groups unable to stop and revive because the larger opposition just doesn't stop coming. Defensively, why would you revive, anyway? You have an indestructible respawn base. As smaller-force attackers, you have a sunderer, and if you don't, why should revive be so powerful that smaller-force attackers can stay alive?

I see it ALL the time. 30 guys hole up in a capture point room and EVEN when their sunderer is blown away, 10 guys with the benefit of their FIXED BASE respawn can't get them out due to revives (edit: I don't mean to imply that 10 guys should have a great chance of wiping them out, but after 10 minutes cap time, all 30 are still alive without respawning. This is what "no losses" means). How do you argue against that point?

Revives have always been like this, but I think it's only been recently that the majority of outfits/zergs figured out that it was this easy.

[Mordelicius]

Just implement:

Progressive Revive Timer

first revive: 10 seconds to revive
second revive: 20 seconds to revive
third revive: 30 seconds to revive

- Dying nonstop will lockup the medics (for example, a 4th revive will lock them up for 40 seconds. The likelihood is that the medic will just leave and the dead will simply have to respawn).
- Make the timer reset in 30 minutes.
- Respawning resets the timer.

[Ruffdog]

Following this thinking then and making the revive gun use ammo:

You merely need an engineer to top up your med guns. Zergs have more engineers than smaller forces. Boom, extra imbalance for smaller squads.

And the day 10 defenders can kill off 30 attackers, I want destructable spawn tubes.

[Stardouser]

Following this thinking then and making the revive gun use ammo:

You merely need an engineer to top up your med guns. Zergs have more engineers than smaller forces. Boom, extra imbalance for smaller squads.

And the day 10 defenders can kill off 30 attackers, I want destructable spawn tubes.

Not to beat a dead horse, but it's not about "killing off" the enemy when outnumbered 30-10, but about at least being able to force a few of them to respawn as the battle goes on. Especially MAXes so that the zerg actually risks resources.

On the point of destructible spawn tubes, I am all for the ability to reduce or even stop defensive spawns!

[Calista]

Well you bring up a point in that in PS1 you couldn't pull maxes from AMS, they had to come from an tower or a nearby base. I believe you could pull one from a hacked terminal within the base though but the point is you had to work to get to that point without maxes, requiring a pop advantage to crack into a base and any decent group of players would blow the terms once a base had been compromised. I think SOE just wants a fast paced game in PS2 to the point of numbers being the only strategy and that is a shame but maybe things get improved over time.

[BlaxicanX]

Just throw a revival limit in there, like the limit in Gears of War (in certain game modes, you can get revived up to three times per life iirc, after the third revive, being downed results in permanent death until respawn).

Simple. Easy. Clean.

If you as a player die 3 times in a single life, you deserve to respawn. lol.

Beyond that though, this game's TTK is too low to make limited revives or limited healing from the gun work.

[Ghoest9]

infinite revives promotes suicidal behavior, because there is no consequence. as a medic I routinely revive entire squads within seconds.


For the most part this is false.
I ussually play solo - in base attack where there are friendlies.
I play really aggressive and die a lot.
Usually this means dying where you cant be revived in any timely fashion so you respawn.

[BlaxicanX]

As well, suicidal play is one of the most efficient ways to play this game. When you're in a meat-grinder like a biolab, where you're trying to push into the lab via the teleporter or landing pads, it isn't the "cautious players" who poke their heads out of the shield fields and pop back in when they take damage who take the base. It's the fools who leroy jenkins as deep into the base as they can and gain ground who do so- and that takes dying an awful lot.

When a biolab fight starts, the K/D of everyone involved probably drops 50%. lol

[bpostal]

As well, suicidal play is one of the most efficient ways to play this game. When you're in a meat-grinder like a biolab, where you're trying to push into the lab via the teleporter or landing pads, it isn't the "cautious players" who poke their heads out of the shield fields and pop back in when they take damage who take the base. It's the fools who leroy jenkins as deep into the base as they can and gain ground who do so- and that takes dying an awful lot.

When a biolab fight starts, the K/D of everyone involved probably drops 50%. lol

The momentum is the key issue with this particular example. The tempo needs to be switched from the offensive to the defensive factions.

[moosepoop]

For the most part this is false.
I ussually play solo - in base attack where there are friendlies.
I play really aggressive and die a lot.
Usually this means dying where you cant be revived in any timely fashion so you respawn.

some players don't need incentives to be suicidal, they are just stupid.
the cert grind can also promote blind rushing. if you go slow and be tactical, you don't gain any certs.

[Snipefrag]

I somewhat agree with this, its a slightly romantic notion of a small force fighting off a large enemy.. But it used to happen in PS1. It really doesn't happen that often in PS2, extremely quick revives without limit are surely one of the big reasons behind this.

[Figment]

On the contrary, infinite revives are the only thing that keeps smaller coordinated squads in the game IMO, especially if they are attacking. Smaller forces would not stand a chance in any attack or defending a base with scattered objectives with limited revives.

Bullox. That small group needs less revives than a zerg.

Say you can heal 5 people total, a zerg will run out sooner than a small group. Besides, since that small group is usualy on the defensive, they'll have access to a nearby fixed spawn. They simply have less need for INFINITE revives. Zergs on the other hand can have 20 die and then one medic revive all 20. That small group would have no chance if that medic wouldn't run out of bandages.

[Carbon Copied]

The idea of an inventory to tailor their specialities of healing gel and revive grenades for the support classes - focussing on the medic though and as a dedicated medic I'd welcome it as opposed to an ammo counter. As well as just echoing the points made by Figment and those in a similar stance; the idea of having more thought behind the revive rate than just looking for the next dead body is a good step I think.
This should also pave way for non-medics to think more about what they're doing rather than just throwing themselves endlessly into harms way (both attack and defense) - ergo you don't need a "spawn cost" mechanic as much because per life to rez does actually mean alot more.

Thats just my marginally wandering off topic interpretation though.

[Figment]

I see it ALL the time. 30 guys hole up in a capture point room and EVEN when their sunderer is blown away, 10 guys with the benefit of their FIXED BASE respawn can't get them out due to revives (edit: I don't mean to imply that 10 guys should have a great chance of wiping them out, but after 10 minutes cap time, all 30 are still alive without respawning. This is what "no losses" means). How do you argue against that point?

Revives have always been like this, but I think it's only been recently that the majority of outfits/zergs figured out that it was this easy.

Add the infinite ammo packs to this and you basically have a no-attrition situation.

[PredatorFour]

You know what if they change the medic class i might as well just stop playing. So far everything i have liked in this game they have changed at some point, dumbing it down and making it nowhere near as fun. The medic class is the last straw for me.

[moosepoop]

You know what if they change the medic class i might as well just stop playing. So far everything i have liked in this game they have changed at some point, dumbing it down and making it nowhere near as fun. The medic class is the last straw for me.

if balancing the game will make you quit, good bye.

[KesTro]

You know what if they change the medic class i might as well just stop playing. So far everything i have liked in this game they have changed at some point, dumbing it down and making it nowhere near as fun. The medic class is the last straw for me.

I wouldn't consider it a dumbing down of the medic. Medic is pretty dumb with it's ease factor as is. All I'm saying is that I would eventually like to see the game move away from 'infinite sustainability'.

In order for a lot of this to happen though we have to get away from the lattice system as it is now. IE: If you don't zerg you fail. Anyone remember those little 12v12 skirmishes? I miss those, don't happen nearly enough anymore.

Now with that being said the medic wouldn't be the only class touched with a change, if they change anything with the medics infinite revives you can be damn sure the engineer is going to get hit as well.

[PredatorFour]

if balancing the game will make you quit, good bye.

It's not though is it? It's people getting pissed off for the sake of something and falling off the high horse. It's not game breaking.

And like Kestro said, if they change medic then engy will have to be changed, then every other class to 'balance' around these changes.

[Figment]

"Dumbing down" would imply "increasing the ease with which something is done and reducing the need for tactical choices".

INFINITE revives (for example):


...removes the tactical choice of "who do I heal?" and leaves it at "who do I heal first?".
...removes the logistical travel need to and from a supply point. Making the medic more independent and invulnerable to supply attrition with regards to healing.
...removes logistical travel from large groups as they don't need to respawn far away regularly.
...thus removes attrition from large groups when used in numbers, making it easier to sustain a large assault.
...allows friendlies to be less careful with their lives as death comes at no logistical travel cost and therefore stimulates lemming behaviour.


Basically, infinite revives dumbs down the tactical side of the game tremendously in favour of large groups and at the cost of tactical play of small groups.

It's not game breaking.

Actually, it is when used in large groups, it completely removes attrition as a valid strategy for small groups. Attrition is the basis on which guerilla warfare works.

And like Kestro said, if they change medic then engy will have to be changed, then every other class to 'balance' around these changes.

That's not the point he was making and he didn't mean that negatively as you try to make it sound.

Medic and Engineer are the only two units with INFINITE supplies of repair/heal.


No other classes would be affected by a change to finite healing or repair.

[PredatorFour]

Ok, had this game been designed like PS1 environments then yeh i would be for this. But this is a BF clone, on a massive scale. So it works imo. If it was closed spaces where you had chance to take heed of who needs healing first then you could determine who got your juice. In an open mass frantic killfest that is PS2, you can't really make a decision who needs it the most, as most of the time people are dead in 2 seconds anyway.

[Figment]

So basically, you're saying it's the most dumbed down fight game in the history of medic design because there's no decision making involved, whatsoever. :p

Then at least you can't complain they'd dumb it down by changing it. ;)

[KesTro]

Ok, had this game been designed like PS1 environments then yeh i would be for this. But this is a BF clone, on a massive scale. So it works imo. If it was closed spaces where you had chance to take heed of who needs healing first then you could determine who got your juice. In an open mass frantic killfest that is PS2, you can't really make a decision who needs it the most, as most of the time people are dead in 2 seconds anyway.

The only time I can see a change to the medics infinite revives being really effective is when an enemy squad or more is grouped up on a point to stop the defenders from getting to it. Without their infinite revives the people who owned the base would 'eventually' be able to take back the point without completely and totally overwhelming them.

Granted if it was just a squad a good enough couple of players could likely push them out regardless. When is it ever 'just a squad' though? Hah.

Just about anywhere else a defending medic would be able to resupply at a terminal or Sunderer. At least if we're talking about implementing an ammo counter to the revive gun.

My whole gripe here is being against 'infinite' anything.

Imagine tanks and harassers with an infinite ammo pool. Then they would never have to leave the front to go back for ammo (Provided they don't already have an ammo sundy).

That brief little respite more often than not is what lets people get between their lines and start causing some havoc. Now take that idea and apply it to medics. As it is now there is no 'respite' period. You can use and hold it down for as long as you want whenever you want.

Perhaps rather than an ammo counter something like the engineer's heat gauge could work?

[Figment]

Perhaps rather than an ammo counter something like the engineer's heat gauge could work?

Does the engineer's heat gauge stop Harassers from infinitely repairing?

No?

Then it doesn't work I'm afraid. :/

[VaderDSL]

Turn the healing gun into a heat style affair? one revive on max = full heat bar like AV turret which slowly cools down until it hits zero then you can start healing again. revive on infantry puts heat bar to 1/3 or 1/2 until it needs to cooldown/recharge.

Change triage/refund certs and change it to a substantial decrease in healing tool cooldown. That way max revives are more challenging, and infinite revive spam is curtailed somewhat.

Gives the max medic tool cert line a distinct advantage, in that you can revive at full health.

I play medic a lot and wouldn't mind a more tactical usage for the tool.

[bpostal]

...
Basically, infinite revives dumbs down the tactical side of the game tremendously in favour of large groups and at the cost of tactical play of small groups....

Would now be a good time to assume that you realize that you're talking about PS2? The most dumbed down game in any franchise since the Serious Sam series?

Of course this game has been watered down, to ease new players into it. This was stated prior to launch and again shortly afterwards.

[Figment]

Would now be a good time to assume that you realize that you're talking about PS2? The most dumbed down game in any franchise since the Serious Sam series?

Of course this game has been watered down, to ease new players into it. This was stated prior to launch and again shortly afterwards.

Well duh.

I'm not the one calling a removal of infinite revive/healing "dumbing down the game". ;)


I'd call that an upgrade.

[Stardouser]

There is no need to make the heal gun have an overheat, the low TTK makes that unnecessary. The problem is in zerg vs fewer situations (or holed up in rooms), you kill the lesser enemy, boom revive all your dead, zero losses. In even combat situations, the low TTK allows you to kill people as they are revived and you'd probably never reach a 2 revive limit a lot of the time anyway, so instituting responsible limits on revives would not harm that section of the game. It would literally only hurt zergs, and small groups who try to rely on revives instead of sunderers/spawn beacons, and that's not really smart play anyway.

[Wahooo]

It would literally only hurt zergs, and small groups who try to rely on revives instead of sunderers/spawn beacons, and that's not really smart play anyway.

I don't see the effect on zergs actually. The random revives I get in the zerg are often not helpful and i'm crossing my fingers they've put more than one point in the revive gun which more often than not they haven't. limiting revives I don't see really affecting the zerg much at all, hell that's why it is called a zerg they are running from some ponit en'mass to another. Revives are hardly a tool the zerg is able to utilize properly.

Now this second group? This alone is a reason to make no change. Not smart play? Then you haven't seen it done by a quality group of players using coordination and team work. This would be such a huge nerf to good small ops sort of teams it is just pointless.

[Baneblade]

What gets me is the medic tool has no heat build up, but every other tool in the game has either heat or ammo. Why do medics get a pass?

[Stardouser]

I don't see the effect on zergs actually. The random revives I get in the zerg are often not helpful and i'm crossing my fingers they've put more than one point in the revive gun which more often than not they haven't. limiting revives I don't see really affecting the zerg much at all, hell that's why it is called a zerg they are running from some ponit en'mass to another. Revives are hardly a tool the zerg is able to utilize properly.

Now this second group? This alone is a reason to make no change. Not smart play? Then you haven't seen it done by a quality group of players using coordination and team work. This would be such a huge nerf to good small ops sort of teams it is just pointless.

As I mentioned above, 30 guys sitting in a room, firing on the door, and reviving their dead for zero net losses. 30 guys camping a small outpost against 10 is what I would consider a zerg, regardless of whether it's an organized outfit or not. Same thing for the small squads - they may be using coordination and teamwork but they are still relying on a lynchpin of infinite revives. And in your example of quality small ops teams, who are they attacking? Similarly sized groups?

[sylphaen]

What gets me is the medic tool has no heat build up, but every other tool in the game has either heat or ammo. Why do medics get a pass?

Because downtime is bad.
(hint: I'm not the one who said it)

[Baneblade]

Because downtime is bad.
(hint: I'm not the one who said it)

Irrelevant.

[KesTro]

Does the engineer's heat gauge stop Harassers from infinitely repairing?

No?

Then it doesn't work I'm afraid. :/

The thing is though, that yes it does. If you keep up your pressure for long enough the engi will have no choice but to repair until he overheats or until he's just about to and has to wait a few seconds for some cooldown to the tool.

It's not much of an opening but it is an opening. Medics don't have to worry about that. As I've stated earlier though if there's any sort of change to the medic's revive tool you will likely see a similar change to the engineers repair tool.

*Edit*: Now that being said I do think there should be a limit to the numbers of players that can repair one thing at a time, perhaps only 2 engineers at once? Have you ever seen 6 engineers all repairing a sundy from a barrage of tanks shells? Feels bad, man.

[Stardouser]

*Edit*: Now that being said I do think there should be a limit to the numbers of players that can repair one thing at a time, perhaps only 2 engineers at once? Have you ever seen 6 engineers all repairing a sundy from a barrage of tanks shells? Feels bad, man.

A change to the medic tool does not have to be a change to the engineer tool. That said, yes, a limit on number of engineers repairing would be great. Alternatively, I would love to see special ammo for AV rockets that does very little AV damage but when it hits a tank/etc it airbursts and damages nearby infantry (and therefore engineers that are zergrepairing).

And, this doesn't mean it will be an abused AI rocket, for one thing it could be made only to do this when it actually hits a vehicle, for those worried about it being used as a close range instagib weapon for close quarters infantry combat.

[Baneblade]

It has long been my opinion that stacking engineers shouldn't result in faster repair so much as it should result in 'shared heat'. Two engineers wouldn't repair twice as fast, they would each have their heat rate halved.

[Wahooo]

TTK from everything against everything is so fast, repair/heal/revive seem about right to me.
I really fail to see how in the big scheme of this game this is even remotely on anyone's radar as an issue.

Kill the medics first if you really have a problem, then come back and kill everyone else.

[Stardouser]

TTK from everything against everything is so fast, repair/heal/revive seem about right to me.
I really fail to see how in the big scheme of this game this is even remotely on anyone's radar as an issue.

Kill the medics first if you really have a problem, then come back and kill everyone else.

In open ground combat killing the medics is possible and so this wouldn't harm anything. How, however, do you kill the medics when 30 guys, and 10 of them medics, are camping a cap point room, and even if you kill 4-5 guys per grenade salvo(you and a couple of other guys at once), even if all 5 kills were medics, there are still 5 left to get them up?

I really think responsible revive limits need to be tested on PTS, everyone will find that the reality is it will only bring the zerg into balance and won't really harm others.

By the way....instead of a hard cap on revives, ie, your third death you must respawn, if you stay alive at least 60 seconds, one of your deaths could "fall off" the counter so to speak.

[Baneblade]

Killing medics is all well and good, but 80% of the time I see someone being rezzed, the medic is shooting the green beam from cover. So naturally I just end up killing the guy being rezzed until he gets tired of dying.

[Stardouser]

Killing medics is all well and good, but 80% of the time I see someone being rezzed, the medic is shooting the green beam from cover. So naturally I just end up killing the guy being rezzed until he gets tired of dying.

Or, he waits to take the rez until you're out of ammo and then gets up to safety. Removing that immunity might be a good one, too.

[BlaxicanX]

Let's be real, that^ happens... what? One in one thousand instances?

No one has ever seriously thought "I'm going to wait until the guy shooting at me runs out of ammo, THEN I'll revive my ally! Muhahahaaaa!"

Serious case of exaggerating in a vaccum going on in here. It's like people being concerned about some weird 4th empire outfit going into a base with a full platoon and deliberately throwing grenades and shit around in order to deplete a base's resources after the resource revamp.

Is that really going to ever happen in-game? No.

[KesTro]

Let's be real, that^ happens... what? One in one thousand instances?

No one has ever seriously thought "I'm going to wait until the guy shooting at me runs out of ammo, THEN I'll revive my ally! Muhahahaaaa!"

Serious case of exaggerating in a vaccum going on in here. It's like people being concerned about some weird 4th empire outfit going into a base with a full platoon and deliberately throwing grenades and shit around in order to deplete a base's resources after the resource revamp.

Is that really going to ever happen in-game? No.

I fail to see how people are seriously exaggerating anything in here. As far as medics waiting to revive people until their ammo is depleted it might not happen exactly like that but a smart medic will make sure to res someone so that they're not in immediate harms way. Beyond that most players once revived will immediately run back into the room the zerg is trying to hold.

As far as the resource update goes you better believe people will do shit like that. Maybe not as coordinated as an entire outfit swapping over but you will definitely have your 4th factioners. To think otherwise is ignorant, you don't even need to make another account or launch a new client. It may as well be considered a legitimate strategy.

[Stardouser]

It doesn't even have to be the medic waiting to revive someone, but the person being revived waits. All it takes is waiting a couple of seconds when we're talking 30 round magazines. It's not "running out of ammo", it's simply waiting for him to have to reload his 30 round mag then you can easily get up and make it 2 feet around the corner. It can happen at complete random as well(hell I tab out to check email), it is NO exaggeration that the immunity you get while waiting to accept the rez prevents you from being properly executed and re-killed.

[KesTro]

It doesn't even have to be the medic waiting to revive someone, but the person being revived waits. All it takes is waiting a couple of seconds when we're talking 30 round magazines. It's not "running out of ammo", it's simply waiting for him to have to reload his 30 round mag then you can easily get up and make it 2 feet around the corner. It can happen at complete random as well(hell I tab out to check email), it is NO exaggeration that the immunity you get while waiting to accept the rez prevents you from being properly executed and re-killed.

I hadn't thought on this too much. Perhaps it would be interesting to see some sort of mechanic on the PTS regarding 'securing' kills. Perhaps you would have to run up and knife someone when they're in their 'downed' state. Or if people would say that woulddl render medics useless perhaps make it a utility item you have to give up your c4/medkits for to render some sort of balance.

[Figment]

I really fail to see how in the big scheme of this game this is even remotely on anyone's radar as an issue.

Then read the thread again? :/

Kill the medics first if you really have a problem, then come back and kill everyone else.

The whole problem is you can't do that because the medics keep themselves up and no matter how many times you shoot the medics, they will just keep reviving eachother and the engineer with his ammo pack.

By the time you come back to "kill everyone else" all medics live once more.

TTK from everything against everything is so fast, repair/heal/revive seem about right to me.

Fast TTK only makes matters worse and rewards infinite revive even more. Those smaller groups die before they can kill all the medics. This means that ANY KILLS YOU DO INFLICT can be considered "never happened".

And that very frequently happens. In the meantime, while inflicting those kills as a small group, you can't get revives yourself (as any medic coming to your rescue would be killed instantly), so having infinite revives doesn't aid you at all.

[KesTro]

Send this thread to your friends and have them give their opinion. I'd really like to see this thread get more attention.

[Wahooo]

The whole problem is you can't do that because the medics keep themselves up and no matter how many times you shoot the medics, they will just keep reviving each other and the engineer with his ammo pack.


I know but there is a limited number of medics usually. Think of PS1 Gen holds or point holds in PS1 especially AMP stations or Drop Ship Centers. You target the softies first then the maxes right? Why? Because once the softies are dead they can't rep and rez the maxes. In PS1 EVERY softie had the potential to be a medic AND engineer.

Granted there were ammo and the med juice and limited glue BUT it needed to be because everyone was a medic and engie. In PS2 the limit is the classes. Since the inventory system is already nerfed and other parts of the game dumbed down as has been pointed out restrictions on revives seems counter to the game.

A group in a room self reviving and holed up to hold the point isn't some game breaking problem and it isn't insurmountable. It just requires a coordinated push and lobbing plenty of grenades INTO the room. (oh the friendly grenades bouncing back *sigh*) Point is a coordinated couple pushes will get them out, but the argument is "whaaa helps the zerg" when the example is 3:1 odds for the attacker? Really? That is the reason to nerf the revives because people win with 3:1 odds? really? This would hurt soo much more the other way around when a team of 1 or 2 squads is holding an area against 40 or or more base defenders.

I just don't see the real problem in the game play, other than the fact that what people call a "boring stalemate" in this game equates to a few minutes of a fight in one spot rather than just rolling through the map.

[Figment]

I know but there is a limited number of medics usually.

Too many in my experience. And that's only one way to solve the genhold.

If you kept killing and EVEN DAMAGING the players inside that genhold, then the medics in the PS1 genholds would run out of juice and need resupplies (so you would want to stop anyone resupplying them). That's another way of taking them out by attrition: just ensure they need to revive so many times they can't do it anymore.

Also, those were the guys under siege. Now they're often the ones sieging.

[Wahooo]

Too many in my experience. And that's only one way to solve the genhold.

If you kept killing and EVEN DAMAGING the players inside that genhold, then the medics in the PS1 genholds would run out of juice and need resupplies (so you would want to stop anyone resupplying them). That's another way of taking them out by attrition: just ensure they need to revive so many times they can't do it anymore.

Also, those were the guys under siege. Now they're often the ones sieging.

PS2 crowd does not have patience for that kind of attrition.

[KesTro]

PS2 crowd does not have patience for that kind of attrition.

Nearly every other aspect of the game operates with some form of attrition. Why is the revive tool exempt?

[Figment]

PS2 crowd does not have patience for that kind of attrition.

PS1/PS2/BF/CoD/Whatever crowd needs to be underestimated and strawmanned less. Tbh.

[Wahooo]

PS1/PS2/BF/CoD/Whatever crowd needs to be underestimated and strawmanned less. Tbh.

Fair enough. But attrition takes time and from what i've seen here and more on the official forums people are fairly impatient about progress. I feel my opinion on how long it takes to break a group through attrition is not the same as others. Normally attrition I don't understand to be a really fast process.

How much time is sufficient for the attrition of a 3:1 force holed up on a cap point? Shorter than the already not to long cap time? Would putting a cap on the number of revives even hinder a force with that kind of size disparity? Yet still drastically effect a smaller coordinated group?

I really think putting a hard cap on revives is a bad idea, it sits bad in my gut and I simply disagree with all of the counter point opinions in this thread. I would give in to heat on the gun just like an engineer tool, as it would stop the constant heal spam and make medics choose to revive or heal. That way you COULD break down the medics.

[Figment]

I don't think it would help to use the heat thing unless the downtime was around half a minute. Or more. Why? Engineering tool is used for much longer periods of time on a single object, healing small amounts of health takes no time investment effort, nor does healing major wounds. (The (too) short ttk here has quite possibly been a design argument for short revive time). This is likely also one of the main reasons why they didn't do heating on the tool because the applied time is too short to ever become noticable unless the effect is drastic.

So say you want to keep this infinite revive - could it be adjusted?

Increasing revive time might expose medics to more danger, in comparison to "heat". "Heat" is better a minimum downtime ("recharge time"?) between revives and heals (feels arbitrary?). One might as well then just add a charge to the tool that works like ammo, but takes recharge times of a minute after it emptied.

That way you still enforce attrition and choices. Unless the group is big enough to have medics who fill in while others recharge or when they are logistically distant enough that that isn't hard. Hence I would prefer to just limit it like with med cannisters in ps1.

The annoying thing about the short ttk to me withrespct to these scenarios we are discussing is that one can hardly pick one's targets tactically anyway. By that time you are often already dead. If only you had a fraction of a second more...

[Wahooo]

Have it heat up faster?

I don't play medic much but I know in the large zergy battles the thing is constantly spamming and if it heated up like the engy tool if you are holding down the button even if you aren't healing it would make it a bit more tactical. Also in those scenarios it is kinda a mad dash for the different medics to rush and rez the downed teammates. Maybe some don't like that, but as someone who runs around un-squadded adn lone wolfing a lot I don't like the idea that random medics would save their revives for only their squad/platoon mates, or maybe pick and choose who you revive by ??? what ? if you have limited revives how do you choose who to revive? max first, then ? the guy that spent money on camo, he must be better right? ugh not that cloaker he wasn't helping this battle.

Canisters like in PS1 were great but I just feel they would need to be tied to a better inventory system. Honestly in a battle like we are talking about with massive numbers in a small space is anything but consumables not unlimited in this game? I've never run out of ammo when in a group. As a loan max or sniper or LA with a shottie but not in a big group where the medics and engies are clustered. IF this is the problem it isn't isolated to medics.

Hard for me to suggest something different when I simply fail to see this as a legitimate problem.

[Kirotan]

Haven't seen this suggested yet, so here goes:

- Keep infinite revive

- The medic gun now revives in 5 seconds, or 3 seconds at max rank.

- The medic must STAND STILL to revive someone. Any damage taken interrupts the process and it takes longer.

Result:

- Medics can't just circle strafe around a corpse for .5 seconds to dodge bullets out in the open while reviving a squad. The Medic now has to use discretion and consider the risks involved before trying to revive in an intense firefight. Since the medic is vulnerable, good teams/players will take the necessary steps to cover their medics, reinforcing and rewarding superior team play.

- Good teams and players will also take care not to die in areas where their medics may not be able to reach them, further rewarding good teamwork and coordination.

- A coordinated platoon can stand against a zerg with superior positioning and tactics. Zerglings will find revives hard to come by as teamwork oriented players will stop medics by setting up kill zones that prevent easy access by enemy medics. On the other hand, if one of their teammates goes down, cover fire is laid down and precious seconds are then given for an allied medic to perform a revive and retreat to cover.

- High level matches will involve positioning, flanking, cover fire, and all sorts of other maneuvers will dictate who wins; a flank by a LA or infiltrator is no longer, "Oh he killed 3 people. I'll just have them up in 5 seconds and it'll be like it will never happened." It will now be, "Oh they're getting flanked by an Infil! An engineer and 2 medics are down! The other team is moving in while they try to lay down cover fire but the remaining medics can't get them up in time and the front line has collapsed as they withdraw inside the building to guard the point. A MAX and two Heavy Assaults are outside the building and they won't be able to get a revive. They try to counter the push but there's too much sustained fire on the doorway and they can't afford to lose anyone else! The enemy now has MAX'es covering both doors! One more push and this match could be over!"

Sounds a lot more exciting to me, anyway. :)

[GS Ourous]

Idea:

Medic tools can only revive x number of times before having to resuply at a terminal/sunderer. x will increase with cert upgrades. Reviving a MAX subtracts twice as much from x as a standard infantry revive.

[KesTro]

Fair enough. But attrition takes time and from what i've seen here and more on the official forums people are fairly impatient about progress.

Wait.. People still use the official forums? O.o

[Wahooo]

- The medic must STAND STILL to revive someone. Any damage taken interrupts the process and it takes longer.

Result:

- Medics can't just circle strafe around a corpse for .5 seconds to dodge bullets out in the open while reviving a squad. The Medic now has to use discretion and consider the risks involved before trying to revive in an intense firefight. Since the medic is vulnerable, good teams/players will take the necessary steps to cover their medics, reinforcing and rewarding superior team play.


As someone who plays more sniper than anything I support this.
Also as figgy pointed out hard to pick targets with such low TTK this makes it easier medics are the stationary ones :)


So the REAL issue as I understand it is, you've just killed two or three enemies and feel pretty good about yourself going 3 or 4 on 1 and taking most of them with you, only to see during the death screen a medic run up and start reviving and now you feel bad?
I don't see this as justification for a nerf.

[Stardouser]

Idea:

Medic tools can only revive x number of times before having to resuply at a terminal/sunderer. x will increase with cert upgrades. Reviving a MAX subtracts twice as much from x as a standard infantry revive.

People don't want to punish the medic, why not punish the dead player instead by having a player be revivable twice, then he must respawn, after which he can be revived twice again (with him possibly getting a revive back for every 60 seconds he remains alive)?

With this idea the medic is not himself punished, he can keep reviving others. The dead player is the one really being limited.



So the REAL issue as I understand it is, you've just killed two or three enemies and feel pretty good about yourself going 3 or 4 on 1 and taking most of them with you, only to see during the death screen a medic run up and start reviving and now you feel bad?
I don't see this as justification for a nerf.

Under the 2 revive and you must respawn idea, 1 guy killing 3-4 guys but not their medic will not be affected...presumably if you kill the one guy who killed almost all of you, your group could stay alive for 60 seconds before he comes back?

[Kirotan]

As someone who plays more sniper than anything I support this.
Also as figgy pointed out hard to pick targets with such low TTK this makes it easier medics are the stationary ones :)

That's a risk a medic might have to take. You could have a MAX stand over the medic. You can use smoke. You could just not revive someone who's running out in the open because hey, sometimes a medic can't just get to you if it's too dangerous.

edit wait what?