Higby Streamed PlanetSide2 on Twitch

[RSphil]

watching the vid again and the bases look so awesome. so many places for ambushes and to set up defenses. think Higby needs a few shooting lessons though lol. would love to see this again but some night combat. full on dark with loads of people fighting.

[DarkChiron]

Originally Posted by Karrade

Being able to jump out the vehicle instantly with AV, seems a bit op'd, at least make the need to equip it. - For those who don't understand it, this will make 2 lightnings more preferable to 1 heavy tank. If one is going out of the fight, run away, jump out in cover and you've still got two people shooting at the heavy tank. This will also mean pilots are shooting each other out of the sky when bailing, a bit meh.

And 2 heavy tanks will be preferable to 2 lightnings. So....?

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

*Higby uses cheesy tactics, hops out of a tank right before the killing shot, and unleashes AV for the win. Please put in Enter/Exit animations and leave the cheese for BF.

He died in that fight. His opponent could have done the same even if Higby had gotten close to killing him (which he didn't).

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by DarkChiron

He died in that fight. His opponent could have done the same even if Higby had gotten close to killing him (which he didn't).

Irrelevant if he dies or not. He hoped out the tank as a soldier with AV capabilities. Essentially, he had a second life to use. Its cheesy.

[RSphil]

ok watched the vid again and the mag was also being hit by either another tank of from the air. Higby did little damage with the launcher as only 1 hit. plus i still the mag got away after it blew him to bits lol

i'll still take in a tank rather then out of one anyday

[haticK]

I don't think it's any more cheesy than having engineers stand behind a tank and non-stop repair it.

[Comet]

I am glad the bases are open. If you have enough people properly defending, you should be able to do it just fine.

The problem with cramping up the bases is you'll only create bottleneck areas where players just funnel to and it becomes a boring stalemate and the tactics used to defend/attack a base will just revolve around clogging the bottleneck areas. That's boring.

[DarkChiron]

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Irrelevant if he dies or not. He hoped out the tank as a soldier with AV capabilities. Essentially, he had a second life to use. Its cheesy.

And so did his opponent.

Is there a better reason for it not to exist besides personal distaste for the tactic?

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by DarkChiron

And so did his opponent.

Also, irrelevant.

[RSphil]

a second life which he got 1 shot in. if people cant aim then you may be at a disadvantage. but a tank shell on flesh with do far more damage then a rocket shell on composite armor. and if he got behind the rock id say the splash damage from the explosion would have killed him or seriously injured him.

[DarkChiron]

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Also, irrelevant.

I see you ignored the rest of the post. So you have no other reason than "I don't like it!" for why it shouldn't work. That's fine. I know the conversation is done now.

Have a good day.

[MrBloodworth]

Its a terrible design for a war-game. There needs be no other reason. This is not a game that emulates a single battlefield.

Jumping out of a plane before death and firing off an RPG at your attacker at 10,000 feet needs to stay in session based games. Apply that to other vehicles.

I like those games, but they are not a Persistent war game.

[Xyntech]

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Its a terrible design for a war-game. There needs be no other reason. This is not a game that emulates a single battlefield.

Jumping out of a plane before death and firing off an RPG at your attacker at 10,000 feet needs to stay in session based games. Apply that to other vehicles.

I like those games, but they are not a Persistent war game.

It's only shitty if it works.

So far, it hasn't worked in any of the footage we've seen, and I actually thought Higby had a decent shot at taking that Magrider out with all the damage that had already been done.

But I still think that the biggest factor here is exit time, which sounds like it won't be an issue in the final build (fast exit being something you have to sidegrade into as a tradeoff). Since HA aren't some kind of rambo-esque vehicle killing gods, and aren't objectively superior to the other classes in infantry combat situations, letting them drive has no real downsides. It would be arbitrary and stupid to prevent them from driving while allowing most other classes to drive.

[Flaropri]

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Also, irrelevant.

Nothing personal, was just reminded of that is all

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

Its a terrible design for a war-game. There needs be no other reason. This is not a game that emulates a single battlefield.

I'm not clear on why bailing from vehicles is good for single-battlefield and session-based games but not for large-scale persistent games. I'm also not clear why people seem to insist that having a rocket launcher means you are more valuable when bailing from a vehicle than having C4, placeable turrets, invisibility, or the ability to heal everyone else bailing from said vehicle.

You say it is a terrible design, but you have yet to (as far as I have seen mind) adequately explain WHY you think it is bad design other than personal distaste. I can respect your opinion, but if you want to convince others that it is the correct opinion to have you should put more effort into explaining why.

You say that HA gets a "second life" but the same is true of all other classes. Based on what I've seen of your other posts, I assume you just don't like having people live after blowing up their armored vehicles. But why is it bad design to allow people to get out of armored vehicles quickly? Especially when (as we've seen so far) it doesn't help much?

Jumping out of a plane before death and firing off an RPG at your attacker at 10,000 feet needs to stay in session based games. Apply that to other vehicles.

I like those games, but they are not a Persistent war game.

Again, why does the difference in game mode matter?

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by Flaropri

I'm not clear on why bailing from vehicles is good for single-battlefield and session-based games but not for large-scale persistent games.

Because it doesn't matter at the end of the match. I don't have a problem with people getting out of vehicles, I have a problem with the "pooping" in and out and the ability to do so instantly. Its fine, when the game is all about kill counts and boom head shots, Planetside is not all about kill counts.

Its janky, its cheesy, it looks ridiculous, and I feel it breaks the flow of the wargame. Session based shooters are built around the disposable experience, Planetside has persistence.

[Greeniegriz]

Originally Posted by TOCS

Since a lot of people weren't aware of the stream, I was so gentle to Fraps it for your enjoyment. =) The video might be a little choppy and it freeze quite a few times, but it's still pretty watchable at some points.

Enjoy 35 minutes of studio footage: 302 Found (It might still be processing)

Many thanks TOCS

Cheers,

GG


Sent from Auraxis using Tapatalk HD