proposal on an NBC certification

[d0rian]

why is the future any better than today.

it should be WORSE.

we need NUKES, CHEMICALS, GERMS in the future and young naive hive minds to weild the wepons of DOOOM.


it can just be a crate of phosgene grendades for the pounder. or cluster mines deliverable by an airship.

or a nice NUKE available to a commander of high enough rank and only if a certain key objective is met. it can be deployed on the global map.

ohhhh ohhhh i think i just soild my pants.

wouldnt you like to be a TR waiting at a gathering point designated by your supream commander and get a nice view on the horizon of a slaugter of NC or VR's (iwould prefere to see NC nuked) as indicated by a gigantic mushroom cloud .

[r3d]

They said they wanted NO weapons of mass destrustion
It would unbalance the gameplay
They said they wanted no one person to be better than the other becuase he could do things someone else couldent, within reasonable ranges
Like certs
Heavy weapons is not unfair if you have a supressor, you just need more cert.
Nukes : Unfair to all cause, well its a nuke.

[d0rian]

but only the commander can get it. which would be very rare.

it is pretty hard to be a commander in the game. you have to be able to be a real leader and frequently to accomplish being a commander. not any old joe can be one.


i am not suggesting that it be a frequent thing. just an occasional "wow" effect. overal effect would be to devisate a base sized field of influence.

i think they are shying away from the political incorrectness of WMD.

this still does not mean that chemical weapons cant be used. they are not really wepons of "MASS" distruction but are more very local and short lived. it can be the same thing as the plasma grendade but with a lingering effect of a few minutes.

[Prolific]

nukes and other weapons of mass destructive IMHO would just totally ruin the game in the long run...

[Tieom]

A) I doubt it, the devs have said no Weapons of Mass Destruction. An orbital strike ability is planned, but it will be much more limited in scope.

B) Go to the official forums. You have earned 100 I-don't-like-you points by not using capitals except when emphasizing a word. Also through use of 'l33t' in your name, you have earned 500 I-don't-like-you points, and the use of the phrase "ohhhh ohhhh i think i just soild my pants" earns you a number of I-don't-like-you points not expressible in conventional scientific notation. Go directly to the official forums, do not pass 'go', do not collect $200.

[Airlift]

If they won't give us the hell of artillery, there's no way they are going to let us play with wmd. Yikes, think about what a griefer could do with some kilotons.

[d0rian]

"think about what a griefer could do with some kilotons"

you are all missing the point....(and so am i, the devs said no already)

griefers will never get the option. only the best 1% who ever even become the higest rank commander. and that 1% i can guarantee you will never be griefers.


but thats just adding some flair to the game.
kids today just want FAIR games. thats why the wine about the NC being raped continiously by the TR becuase it aint FAIR that the TR have better weapons.


woopdy doo... they dont have to play the NC right.

[r3d]

The best 1%?
Right now about 20-30% of the commander out there ar cr4+
Just cause they took place in like 10 battles on the new lattice system

Lets see, about 200+ people nuking left and right
Sounds pretty gay to me !

[Airlift]

That is a good point. Griefers theoretically won't get access to them. I don't necessarily think they should make wmd in the game, but I would love to see some arty.

[edit] But first, I want a bomber, a 2 crew heavy assault aircraft, and a half squad blackhawkish transport. Also, I want a common pool energy weapon so all sides can have access to energy ammo boxes, and I want plasma mines first too. More grenades would be nice.

[d0rian]

Right now about 20-30% of the commander out there ar cr4+


i can bet you that is going to change.

i dont think they are going to want 20-30 percent of the players out there in the end yelling broadcast messages telling people what to do.

it is my impression that there will definitely be a pyramid of elite players in the end with this command point system with only a few very deserving players at the top.

i think sony has inveted the perfect system when it comes to sharing very valuble resources to its players in a game. only make those resources available to those players who have proven themselves to be dedicated, serious, and demonstrate the ability to lead and form groups.......griefers dont form groups. they are individual anarchists. and sony recongnizes this.

well at least i hope they did. and this system was an invention to combat it.


we cant have everyone fighting over who gets the coolest wepons...only the uber class deserve those weapons.

[r3d]

20-30% will get higher post release, with MORE people playing the game itll be about 2000+ players cr4+
Day 1-3 will be pretty boring, but then after people start leveling, watch the insanity resume

[1024]

this is the dumbest idea ever and has been discussed WAY too many times. THink about it like this: you're gathing with your outfit when you get surprised by a lone NC. You easily kill him and in about 2 min the area, alongwith you, is covered with the blast and radiation of a nuke. Wouldn't that suck?

[Harps]

yep.... and if u could nuke or something where would the strat be .. why not just nuke a base get rid of all outside defenders and send the rest of your squad in ?????

The thing with the bombers i think that would be really cool as long as they are easily countered

[Delirare]

how bout tactical nukes? =D

[TekDragon]

I posted a joke thread on fuel air bombs and anthrax strikes but it was just that, a joke. Having WMD in a FPS game would be... hmmm... whats that word? Oh yes, UNBALANCED.

Id love to be in a squad and work my way through a bridge, over some hills, and manage to penetrate my way into the courtyard of a base when all of a sudden: WHAM, im nailed by a tactical nuke strike. Sounds fun
/sarcasm off

[Hamma]

Not gonna happen.

[Camping Carl]

WMD would be cool-looking but not very fun. They'd suck cause you can't fight back against them. Say a few outnumbered soldiers put up a brilliant and tenacious defense, and repel a group of attackers again and again. Then an enemy comander shows up and nukes them. They lose.

With WMD you completely take skill out of the picture. And skill based combat is what really separates planetside from the other MMOs out there. Anything you can't fight back against is bad.

[d0rian]

you people are missing the point.
i am refereing to tactical nukes that would only be available as only a VERY RARE option available only to the highest commanders on ALL TEAMS.

so explain how this is imbalanced. it just adds a bit of interesting combat and "wow" effect.

it is not like the battlefield will be covered in nuke blast marks or there would be a MARV intercontenental NUKE available for 2 certs.


get real. and if it is discussed so many times why doenst anyone seriouly consider that perhaps sony could be the first compnay to implement a balanced implementation of it.

but i dont think that is the real reason they decided not to do it.
the real reason is PC.


and NONE of the arguments have been able to discredit the use of limited small chemical weapons.

the key word is "LIMITED".

it is an option that is "LIMITED" to players who are not griefers but serious players who can give the battlefield a little more danger and color.

a 1 kiloton NUKE available to the higest comander once a day or week is NOT going to imbalance the game.

and limited chemical use is NOT going to imbalance the game either.

and i have read plenty of posts from plenty of people who dont care for BALANCE as it makes the game uncolorful and boring.

thats why the NC suck vs the TR. only people who want a REAL challenge play NC.

and thats why SONY implemented the plus/minus experience modifier to add balance incentives to team stack.

[d0rian]

gosh i dont remember the NUKE being such an imbalance to the NOD in command and conquer?

it was a hard thing to get and you only got one usually.

it is a stategic element and not a tactical element in the game.

thats why you would HOPE to have good commanders on your team and chances are you will.

[Happy lil Elf]

I don't think they are going to want 20-30 percent of the players out there in the end yelling broadcast messages telling people what to do.

It is my impression that there will definitely be a pyramid of elite players in the end with this command point system with only a few very deserving players at the top.


You can think that, you're wrong, but you can certainly think that. All it takes to get CR5 is being the leader of a squad that helps cap a base many times. There is no "elite" requirment. In fact you could be the crappiest player out there but as long as you make squads with good people you could get CR5, it'd probably take forever but you'd get there.

Then again you could just be like ZProtoss and exploit your way there :p

[d0rian]

then that is a dissapointing flaw in the command point system.

it should be very difficult to get it.

remineds me of the saying: to many chiefs not enougth indians.


always the case with team based conquer games with limited resources. I am sured you played infantry (which does not supprise me if it is the engine to this game).

remember what a pain in the ass it is to have to fight over who gets the mechs and vehicles. It always resulted in a mad rush to see who got there first. and then some people exploited bugs to kick someone out of a vechile.

that was chaos in an unpleasent way.

i remember back in the days with netrek....people where ALWAYS fighting over the starbase. some people with no skill would get IMMEDIATELY "ogged" (a very old term for wasted). but you would get the occasional awsome supream being of god like abilities to wreak havoc in one. i was very impressive to see a good players in a starbase resist wave after wave of attacks and suicides from all directions. thats the type of player i want for a commander. not some twink who exploits his way up. command ranks should be exponentially difficult and should have a pyramid shape.

or else what the hell is it good for.

[Jarlo]

Most chem and bio agents would be worthless in PS anyway since most everyone is armored and has a helmet with a rebreather I'd imagine.

Nukes would be neat if you got them at CR5, could use one each 24 hours (real time), and anti-nuke facilities could be captured/built/etc.

[LesserShade]

subspace > infantry!

ok back on topic. The ability to gain CEP needs tweaking because as it stands a guy in my outfit started at CR0 last friday and by monday he was CR4. The game is just a tad bit generous with the CEP ;)

[d0rian]

thats what i am saying.
rare occurances of "yikes" and "wow" depending on what side you are on.

i dissagree about chem weapons. there was another thread that talked about AP rounds versus normal rounds.

i liked the explanation of why AP rounds suck against infantry.

they guy said that they had some futuristic liquid round that ate though armor like crazy but did nothign to skin.


that in a way is a chemical weapon.
an imaginative designer would say. why can there be chemical environmental effects that cause some sort of discruption to the afflicted enemy. it could have a small radius of lets say the bottom floor of a tower for a duration of a minute or two. and with only one round per crate.



i am also infavor of cluster mines that an airship could drop.

just more things that parallel current events and offer more than just combat infantry roles.

[Hamma]

Here is why it woudl not happen:

People do not like to get lit up by some enemy on the other side of the continent. It's just not fun.

[d0rian]

ok.

(i dont like being lit up by a reaver either or being lit up by a turret some guy put down and is no where in site for me to kill)

what about chemical weapons? wepons with a lingering effect of a minute or so? whats the arguement against this?

[Harps]

jeez dorian it seems your always protecting a argument of yours hehe I say no, my argument is that like hamma said people dont like getting lit up across the map. (i dont like being lit up by a reaver either or being lit up by a turret some guy put down and is no where in site for me to kill)
Yes i dont either but at least u can stop those kinda attacks if u dont see them thats bad luck and it sucks for u

[d0rian]

i will restate:
what about chemical weapons? wepons with a lingering effect of a minute or so? whats the arguement against this?

nukes seem to be frownd apon because well no one is smart enough to invent a balanced use of it appearently.

but that still does not answer chemical weapons.
it is an engineer's tool no different than a turret or mine.

[Sp3ctre]

You want this for the highest commanders. The reason why high commanders are rare is because a lot of people don't want to command. If there was a nuke available, everyone would be a commander just so they could use the nuke

Air Strikes would be good though, just not nuke scale

[d0rian]

air strikes are cool.

but people would whine about getting lit from some deskcommand general far away. (wait aren we all desk command in this game...no some are desk command and others are desk warriors).