Let's Focus on Real Issues - Page 4

MrBloodworth · 2012-11-09, 03:17 PM

lol, no.

Chaff · 2012-11-13, 04:31 PM

Sometimes, the whining, ranting, and crying seems enough to make me want to NOT claim my roots as a PS1 vet. Not a very good player, but nonetheless I loved PS1 for 2 years...then,...the monotony drove me to boredom.

I loved the teamwork & comraderie PS1 rewarded. If the devs can make that a primary presence in PS2 I can't complain about the other elements that the market of younger players seem to want. PS1 is gone and dead. Hopefully, the devs have similar memories, preferences, and feeling to the vets that keep chiming in 'round here.

The more I play PS2 in Beta, the more comfortable I get. The more comfortable I get the more I like it. PS1 vets should keep putting in input. Many need to filter their nostalgia driven whining. Like it or not, it ain't never gonna be PS1.

btw. PS1 got BORING. Adjacency. Isn't that essentially a lattice system ? A horse of a different color.

I like the PASSION of the PS1 vets who come across as polemic ranters. I really do. However, they detract from their impact for change when it's so full of piss, vinegar, or plain ol' crying. Enough negative smoke in and around the message.....style matters. I want a better game than what I see now. I see a half FULL scenario. I do not lose my mind over the half EMPTY element. The devs, Higby, Smed, T-Ray,....SOE....I was SURPRISED when I heard PS2 was coming out. I thought PS1 would fade into online gaming folklore. I'm happy there's "something" based on the original. Things had to change. Decisions had to be made. Move on. Trust me, if I was on the PS2 dev team, I'd have a LOT of changes/tweaks I'd want to see implemented as soon as reasonably possible.

I'm looking for a lot of tweaks. Change needs to be a constant. It's a balancing act that I don't envy. The devs can't seem to win. The players that aren't satisfied seem to squeek the loudest while those that are essentially content just quietly play on. I hate "the squeeky wheel gets the grease" mentality that some companies give to major complainers. This is the best dev group....Top-to-bottom that I think the gaming industry may ever see. If we serve to kill that off - we are to blame - and in the end, we were our own enemy. Don't kill PS2. It's whatever we get, or nada.

I'm gonna hang with PS2 for quite a while. I'm open minded. Also, I'm a big fan of many who may read this and think I don't like their input. I don't have to agree or like the tone to respect the message. Still, delivery is important. Those that choose to ignore this fact....well, we're pretty much left little choice but to dismiss their input simply because they come across as "ranters". ....some may say I contradict myslef here, but methinks not.

Those who let the flame element be their priority prove to the sensible masses that they simply are about themselves, not the game. I'm glad the voices of reason are telling them to chill (but not STFU).

I agree with DukeNukems general ideal of upping the cert XP by 10%-20%......with a substantial gain for those in a squad. The more hotly contested the fight - the more XP/cert % gain for either side. It sucks to lose, but a fiecely contested defense against massive odds is satisfying. Winning with the Pop in your favor often is too easy. DEFENDING when the odds are against you can be extremely rewarding. A great fight is always rewarding. Obviously better if you prevail.

I suspect that SOE will find their current Station $$$ conversion rate tier will keep purchases low. I hope they see fit to make playerr $$$$$'s go farther.....it'll keep more players coming back each month. There's a fine line here, and some of the prices they show seem woefully out-of-touch with the F2P public. If they want young players to spend money, the price exchange into Station Ca$h has to reflect the fact that many young people have a tough time making ends meet in this global economy. Besides, many 18 year olds prefer to $pend their money on weed and women. I'm too old & brain-dead for that shit.

Tatwi · 2012-11-15, 04:18 PM

Am I allowed to complain that the VS seem to think that the magrider is actually some kind of "magrifle"? I am so sick of seeing them use that "tank" as nothing more than an avatar replacement, because they are so terrible they can't handle infantry on infantry encounters... Nothing like being at a meaningless outpost that is camped by 20 fail magrifles and one guy who actually has the balls to be the infantry dude... It doesn't help that the prowler is too weak and has to work (at least) twice as hard to do the same damage - this adds to the annoyance of the magrifle...

So very, very sick of the magrifles camping spawn rooms at outpouts. Also, unless you have a huge zerg going on, good luck keeping a sundy around with every VS "running" around in a magrifle as though it was a stupid over powered infantry unit. It's been like this for the whole beta and I am about ready to throw up or give up. I may do both, actually.

So apart from that, Hamma, I tend to agree with you that the game isn't perfect, but it's pretty darned good too. The main issue with the magrifle isn't the tank, it's the lazy jerks who just want easy mode all the time who take advantage of it's idiot proof aiming, high damage, and loads of hit points... People suck.

Hamma · 2012-11-15, 10:22 PM

Seems like a legit complaint.

DviddLeff · 2012-11-17, 03:38 AM

Spawns have to be camped to win a base if there is any kind of defence. The Mag is the best thing the VS have to do the job when it is equipped with the VPC plain and simple.

Every empire does it with their tanks. The real problem is that we have no other way to stop spawning - we need spawn control units on all spawn points.

Srixun · 2012-11-17, 04:12 AM

Real issues! Israel and hamas! Go!

Buggsy · 2012-11-18, 03:02 AM

Originally Posted by Hamma

[*]Complaining about how X PlanetSide 1 System is not included without reasons why it should be.

Let's talk about real issues about PS2.

I cannot defend anywhere against 10:1 odds without 20 landmines, 10 spitfires, 10 motion detectors, and a cloaked AMS. In fact nobody defends, players just roll around with the zerg and cap undefended bases. 20 attackers sit outside aiming at the spawn doors while the 2 defenders in the spawn room shoots out the doors, base is capped, I leave 2 claymores inside the spawn room and then redeploy somewhere else, then the zerg rolls on. This is a typical non AMP-Tech-Bio base battle.

If I had a cloaked AMS I could put it 100 meters away from base the zerg is rolling into. If I had 20 landmines and 10 spitfires I could put them in areas that tanks/infantry can camp the spawn. And I could certainly use 10 motion detectors, at the very least to get the enemy to shoot at them so I can hear where they are at.

TheStigma · 2012-11-18, 04:53 AM

Originally Posted by Whalenator

I'm arguably the most whiney guy on these forums but wholeheartedly agree with Hamma here.

The time for major developmental changes was months ago. I know people will say "Beta is beta", but Beta is almost over. Although it sickens me so to say that the game is just too complete for some changes, it just is. Don't count on required gunners for MBTs. Don't count on an increased TTK. Don't count on a latice system or a slow pace of combat.

This is not Planetside 1. It's a completely different game now, geared towards a completely different (Or rather, changed) audience. I played Planetside 1 since a little after launch and I can still agree that, in the context of today, this is the true successor to that great game.

Actually, regarding the gunners on MBT - Higby himself (in one of his streams detailing patch changes) said that it was a goal to eventually allow some sort of cert sidegrade for tanks that would allow dedicated gunners of some sort to tanks. Because this would obviously be non-mandatory there would be higher tier main-guns to use under that type of configuration to make up for the extra crew required. He did say that this was something they had planned for later though - so its not worth hoping for at launch (or realistically probably not within the first few months either) but it does give some hope that they haven't just said "oh well, too late now" for implementing those kinds of wishes from the community.

-Stigma

Eyeklops · 2012-11-19, 12:51 PM

Putting aside "bugs", the biggest issue I have with PS2 right now is that the main feature, "zergs collide", does not happen enough. Can't tell you how often I zone into a continent where the two larger empires are dominating over the third smaller empire and not engaging each other. Then after the third (small) empire is WG locked, it still takes hours before the main fight begins. If they don't get this issue fixed, I foresee a slow population exodus starting after a few months.

The other thing I will say, and you can take it however you want:

PS2 gunplay is modeled after BF3 gunplay, and nobody does BF3 gunplay better than DICE. Sorry, hate to say it but..well, go play PS2, then BF3, it will be VERY obvious. This is nothing personal against the PS2 devs but there are many mechanics taken from BF3 and implemented improperly, or lacking the right amount of detail, and the incoming BF3 players WILL NOTICE THIS. Fix grenades, fix recoil, and FFS kick teleporting HPB's.

I played BF3 last night and it became readily apparent (after mounting a 3.4X sight) that PS2 gunplay has a long way to go.

I loved Planetside 1, and I want to love Planetside 2, but it just isn't happening, and sadly, most of my outfit feels the same way.

Tatwi · 2012-11-19, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by Eyeklops

Putting aside "bugs", the biggest issue I have with PS2 right now is that the main feature, "zergs collide", does not happen enough. Can't tell you how often I zone into a continent where the two larger empires are dominating over the third smaller empire and not engaging each other. Then after the third (small) empire is WG locked, it still takes hours before the main fight begins. If they don't get this issue fixed, I foresee a slow population exodus starting after a few months.

Indeed. This annoyed me in beta, when the NC and VS seemed to refuse to fight anyone other than the TR, pre-wipe. Sadly, it IS impossible to stop two entire faction zergs as they roll up the opposite sides of the map, especially when your faction has less pop than either of them.

This is another example of the problem being with the players and not the game though. The bottom line: People take the easy way out and people don't really want to be challenged, they just want to "win".

Eyeklops · 2012-11-19, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by Tatwi

Indeed. This annoyed me in beta, when the NC and VS seemed to refuse to fight anyone other than the TR, pre-wipe. Sadly, it IS impossible to stop two entire faction zergs as they roll up the opposite sides of the map, especially when your faction has less pop than either of them.

This is another example of the problem being with the players and not the game though. The bottom line: People take the easy way out and people don't really want to be challenged, they just want to "win".

The removal of "base defense" experience points made this problem worse. Prior to the aforementioned change, when the enemy zerg was starting an attack on a base, some defender zerglins would flock there in hopes of getting a "base defense" bonus against the first wave of attackers. Now with the "tug-o-war" mechanics, most of the zergites feel it's more lucrative to quickly steamroll undefended bases as opposed to defending established territory. So what we end up with is two zergs that have no desire to fight each other because they can grind EXP faster if they don't.

I am pretty sure it has been said many times on this forum, but a mission system would really help create proper fights. The dev team has made major strides in providing tactical information on the main map, the problem is zerglings rarely read the map. This is where the mission system is supposed to step in and provide incentive (exp bonus?) to go attack/defend based upon input from other experienced players.

Higby said it best, "ships passing in the night", and that's what we have right now. Two zergs passing each other, going to where the other just came from, in order to re-plant the empires flag and collect empty exp.

TheBladeRoden · 2012-11-20, 05:57 AM

Indeed perhaps the fastest way for everyone to get XP would be for every empire to rapidly ghost-conquer a continent each. Then say the TR would abandon their continent so that the NC can ghost-conquer that, and said TR would move to the continent the VS had just abandoned. And the Circle of Cert Farming goeth on!