I LOVE vehicle spam, it's NOT the problem of this game

[Rolfski]

There, I said it. I know I will get fried for it in this forum, that recently seems to be "hijacked by drama queens" that only see doom for this game, so let the flaming begin.

The promise of this game is that size matters. It's the sheer scale that makes me having a blast every day I play it. Seeing my screen filled up with endless armor columns and huge swarms of air puts a big smile on my face every time. It makes me feel being part of a big war.
I also love the power this game is giving me. I can be anything at any time with almost no restriction. If a situation demands for it, I can instantly switch to the appropriate class or vehicle to handle the situation. It's this freedom that gives me a lot of joy in this game.

Lately, I'm reading a lot of suggestions that want to limit my power and freedom or want to turn this game into a small scale tactical shooter. Screw that, it's not what I signed up for in this game.

You can still have a very strategic game without limiting peoples ability to do whatever they want. Limiting vehicle spam (increasing timers and costs, etc.) is a solution to the wrong problem. Instead, the game should focus on giving me more power to fight vehicle spam: better launchers, deployable AV and AA turrets, artillery call-ins, etc.

I will probably not make myself popular by promoting vehicle spam but I truly see it as the essence of this game, so it's time to stand up and voice a different opinion.

[ringring]

Water runs downhill, it's NOT gravity's fault.

[james]

So you want a game where you get farmed by libs and HE tanks

[psijaka]

Originally Posted by james

So you want a game where you get farmed by libs and HE tanks

Not sure that I agree with the OP, but that's not what he is saying at all.

Originally Posted by Rolfski

Instead, the game should focus on giving me more power to fight vehicle spam: better launchers, deployable AV and AA turrets, artillery call-ins, etc.

[Rolfski]

Originally Posted by james

So you want a game where you get farmed by libs and HE tanks

I want a game were I have a fighting chance against them.

[p0intman]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

I want a game were I have a fighting chance against them.

Having a fighting chance means drawing a line at what is, and what is not acceptable. To give infantry their place on the battlefield, where it matters, in a combined arms engagement may actually mean having to reduce vehicle spam.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

I want a game were I have a fighting chance against them.

Funny, that's exactly what you're denying yourself mathematically...



Because if you buff infantry weapons even further, that won't do anything but make multiple forms of combat aggravating.

Do note that the damage dealt by handheld infantry weapons (both short and long range) is SIGNIFICANTLY MORE than in PS1 for handheld weaponry and therefore the TTK on vehicles SIGNIFICANTLY SHORTER.


Despite of that, the sheer mass of tanks turns out to far outweigh the effect of buffing infantry weapons. Remember that it took 18 shots for a Phoenix in PS1 to kill a Vanguard? Do you remember the TTK length of that feeling like an eon? From the right angle, it takes two AV shots in PS2 and even from the front only a few shots in comparison. Yet vehicles dominate beyond what PS1 ever had.

More forms of AV won't matter either, the basic AV necessities are there en mass. They don't help.


Do you want instakill infantry weapons against tanks? Will this help either form of combat to be more fun and fulfilling?

In the end, vehicles will still one shot you with dozens of guns trained in your direct at the same time. Like it or not, this situation is created by the sheer amount of guns pointed in your direction and the frequency of that occurance. Not by how fast you can remove them, because they can just pull something equally lethal even though you've become more than 5 to 9x as effective at killing MBTs since PS1 already and are twice as lethal against Lightnings.

Fact is, Lightnings have become 5x as effective as well, while MBTs have one or two guns of nigh instakill power and come in far greater numbers due to their manpower limitation removal. If for every infantry unit, you can have a tank unit in an engagement, then it doesn't matter if you can kill them a bit quicker, they will kill you even more quickly. And making them so vulnerable that they become token units and everything kills everything in one shot, just removes skill from the battlefield even more and turns it into a roll of the dice game. And nothing frustrates players in a competitive FPS more than random chance and lack of personal control, not to mention skill mattering less and less in engagements.


You called it freedom and power, I call it an addiction to a drug pretending to empower you, while it in reality enslaves you and burns you out quickly. The answer is not to fight fire with more fire, the answer is fire control.


EDIT: just for the record:

PS1 Decimator (max of 3 shots per Decimator carried) :
MAX 3 shots
Lightning 4 shots
Prowler 11 shots
Magrider 9 shots
Vanguard 12 shots

PS1 Phoenix (clip 1, 9 missiles per ammo box) :
MAX 3 shots
Lightning 6 shots
Prowler 18 shots
Magrider 14 shots
Vanguard 18 shots

PS1 Striker (Clip 5, 15 missiles per ammo box) :
MAX 6 shots
Lightning 12 shots
Prowler 36 shots
Magrider 28 shots
Vanguard 36 shots

PS1 Lancer (Clip 6, 18 energy cells per ammo box) :
MAX 6 shots
Lightning 9 shots
Prowler 22(?) shots
Magrider 17(?) shots
Vanguard 23(?) shots

Source: http://wiki.planetsidesyndicate.com/...Anti-Vehicular (last updated: dec. 2006, which is I believe post-40% AV buff)

EDIT: indeed it was: http://wiki.planetsidesyndicate.com/...p?title=3.11.6 (April 2006)

[Rolfski]

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

I wouldn't be surprised if this dude rarely plays infantry, or ever tries to defend anything as infantry.

Whether I'm lone wolving or play in my outfit, I play mostly infantry. And yes, I fight against vehicle spams a lot. Sometimes we can deal with them head-on, most of the time we have to use other tactics like the ones I described in my anti-zerg tactics thread.

Originally Posted by Figment

Funny, that's exactly what you're denying yourself mathematically...

Because if you buff infantry weapons even further, that won't do anything but make multiple forms of combat aggravating.

I haven't really played PS1 but if you suggest that infantry won't stand a chance anyway against vehicle spam, no matter how you buff them, I disagree. This game can use improvements in base/terrain design and weapon design. More defensible bases/terrain with infantry that have better AV/AA capability should be enough to balance out vehicle spam. No need to limit the spam.

[PredatorFour]

Right now they are making more conts for the game. If these have the same base designs as we already have, i don`t think we are going to see any radical changes to base design. Which DOES make vehicle spam a problem. I agree that better base design would significantly aid defense and furthermore fun for infantry.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

I haven't really played PS1 but if you suggest that infantry won't stand a chance anyway against vehicle spam, no matter how you buff them, I disagree. This game can use improvements in base/terrain design and weapon design. More defensible bases/terrain with infantry that have better AV/AA capability should be enough to balance out vehicle spam. No need to limit the spam.

You haven't been keeping up to date on the PS2 Base Design thread by Wahooo haven't you? >.>
http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=51193

^ Think you'll want to read that, fully.

Base design are the basics to work with as infantry, currently there is far too little favouring infantry (pretty much everything around a base should be biased to infantry for them to make a competitive chance). I fully agree with you there and aren't going to discuss that. But let's hypothesize that you have a functional base that isn't spawncamped by vehicles (come on SOE, make it happen...)




However, when it comes to balancing them out numerically, numbers become more important. There are simply too many tanks and Sunderers available to keep up as infantry units.

Keep in mind, they kill you in one shot.

You kill one in what, 2 from behind 5, 8 shots from front, assuming you don't miss too much, so on average... 5 shots? You carry 5 shots by default, so you can take out one before you need to resupply two if you're lucky and get at them from behind and lead well.

But you don't engage one in this game, you engage between 3 and 30 in regular fights (from all kinds of directions too, too many to keep them in front of you and ensure no angle from any of them on you). That's in between 3 and 30 guns of INSTAKILL aimed at you. Someone will hit, especially since they can take more time aiming than you and are not penalized with as much gravity as you. They will kill you and send you flying to the spawn point, which leaves your allies vulnerable since they can't fight back, nor flee because they're not fast enough.

To kill 3-30 tanks, you need to get between 6 (3 tanks hit from behind) and 180 shots on target. If you have 3-30 people as well, a good portion of those are dedicated to AI (including snipers), medic, engineer and AA. They can't disable vehicles with EMP, so they're completely reliant on the few AV units out there. Now in case of a small group of tanks, it's not too hard to handle even with a small group, but the more enemy tanks there are, the harder it becomes to take them out. Given the right situational circumstances (like extreme high ground and a canyon pass), it could be done, especially if they come from one direction through a choke point, panic and flee. But in normal circumstances, chances are they beat you to crap by simply spamming you all and cutting you off from reinforcements. Especially if you consider that each shot they fire is a potential kill and they carry up to 40 shots, before they need a refill and the more tanks there are, the bigger the volume of shots and thus the bigger the chance they hit something.



So okay, let's say you half that. 3 shots on average from the front. Still some power distance, but more managable. Still 6 to 90 shots needed and still most of you aren't HA, so it's going to be tricky given that you're still one shot kills and still die equally fast, though the amount of volleys should reduce faster as you kill or drive of more sooner.

So sure, it'd be a easier, no mistake about that. Would it be more fun though? For infantry maybe a little less frustrating, I still wouldn't quite call dieing all the time before you can apply much skill fun.


In the new situation though, tanks die even more quickly than they already do (and don't get me wrong, when engaged advantageously, you can kill a single tank really, really quick) and they start to get annoyed to the same degree infantry are that get one shot consistently... So now you have annoyed infantry and annoyed ground vehicle users. Don't forget, these people hauled that thing over from miles away, it's going to bother them that infantry is killing them with that much ease. Make no mistake about that!

Even more so if the render issues remain.

And yet, they would probably still steamroll the infantry due to their powerful group volleys that still kill 3 times as fast as a similar number of HA users, so you'd still need loads of HA users continuously.

>.>



Now, if you'd simply reduce vehicle numbers and keep their armour the same, you get a different effect.

What less numbers do, is keep vehicle users happy that they have survivability, but it cuts the pressure on infantry units (less guns aimed in their direction) and reduces the dependency on the individuals in the group who carry AV, allowing infantry players to their own prefered roles a bit more, like taking out other infantry.

The game becomes less forced, individual vehicle units survive for a longer period of time, but don't have as much impact, even if they still one hit kill. There's plenty of hectic stress and adrenaline flowing, but not as much frustration type stress.

In fact, it may become so leniant, that you can increase the armour level of tanks a bit again, making vehicle driving more fun.


(Of course, that is dependent too on how effective engineers are in repairs, currently it's already too fast on vehicles (IMO) at the slowest rate of repair: often outrepair enemy fire on my own, they will run out of missiles at some point...).

[RodenyC]

I doubt that I am the only one who wants to stay in a tank to have a fair chance of fighting.But I might be wrong.

[ShadetheDruid]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

You can still have a very strategic game without limiting peoples ability to do whatever they want. Limiting vehicle spam (increasing timers and costs, etc.) is a solution to the wrong problem. Instead, the game should focus on giving me more power to fight vehicle spam: better launchers, deployable AV and AA turrets, artillery call-ins, etc.

I get what you're saying and I agree that having lots of vehicles around is fun, but the issue I have with more powerful AV and AA as a way to counter zergs is the effect is has on people who are rolling around in smaller groups rather than in zergs.

[Rolfski]

Originally Posted by ShadetheDruid

I get what you're saying and I agree that having lots of vehicles around is fun, but the issue I have with more powerful AV and AA as a way to counter zergs is the effect is has on people who are rolling around in smaller groups rather than in zergs.

Smaller groups should not go head-on in armor but play more tactical: capping smaller or secondary objectives devs said they will add to this game or defend bases that I expect will be more defensible against zergs in future updates.

[Fear The Amish]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

Smaller groups should not go head-on in armor but play more tactical: capping smaller or secondary objectives devs said they will add to this game or defend bases that I expect will be more defensible against zergs in future updates.

Interpretation: My version right now is perfect for me so you small groups well just come back later....

Yeah they did, they all left for the most part. Why you have so many half empty servers.... and they probably wont be coming back.

[Sledgecrushr]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

Smaller groups should not go head-on in armor but play more tactical: capping smaller or secondary objectives devs said they will add to this game or defend bases that I expect will be more defensible against zergs in future updates.

In a lot of situations, especially how this game flows a small group might be best served in flanking a larger group, fighting from high ground, ambushing larger groups in some of these naturally constricted areas. Small groups really have to play smart.