Vehicles are far too SQUISHY!

[WNxThentar]

I don't know if I agree. MBT where taking a fair bit of damage. I watch one where a magrider was hit with 12 times by a lightning before going down. The vehicles have positional damage too. Get in behind a tank and its toast fast. Hit it from the front and expect to be wasted. Many of the times where I've seen a tank or air craft get destroyed fast the death screen showed that it was being attacked by multiple players at once.

Honestly things like this aren't worth bitching about IMHO because that is what the beta is going to be for.

[Rbstr]

I don't think you can count the terrain damage as something representative of how the game is supposed to work when all is said and done.

[WNxThentar]

Originally Posted by RSphil

combat they seem ok to me but if you hit a wall or something thy take way too much damage. aircraft come in a little hot for landing and you are in flames. i think they need to tweak the environment collision a little

Ok... you grab a quad bike in real life. Run it into a brick wall at full speed and tell me how the quad comes out.

I have no problem with almost anything besides the killer cactus. If you clip a cliff with your aircraft then you should be kissing it good bye unless you are a great pilot. Land wrong should do some damage.

Just my opinion.

[Haro]

Originally Posted by WNxThentar

Ok... you grab a quad bike in real life. Run it into a brick wall at full speed and tell me how the quad comes out.

I have no problem with almost anything besides the killer cactus. If you clip a cliff with your aircraft then you should be kissing it good bye unless you are a great pilot. Land wrong should do some damage.

Just my opinion.

I think it varies. Head on, absolutely, but if a tail clips or something like that, I'd be willing to give it maybe half damage. Enough to hurt, but not always totally lethal. The main concern is how hard landings are, since even a great landing can knock off a fair amount of health. Even the devs don't like landing.

I like the cactus though. I think our scientists in the NC are already weaponizing it as an upgrade to the liberator.

[Bags]

I'm okay with vehicles killing each other fairly fast if hit from behind, but frontal fights should last more than 4 shots. At least 10+.

[Zhane]

Yes, landing wrong should do severe damage. But landing very well shouldn't cause the engines to burst into flames.

betabetabeta SWING

[QuantumMechanic]

I was pretty happy to see that MAXes seem more vulnerable than before (especially to infantry). Vehicles though, definately need some better armor protection.

[Shade Millith]

The thing is, it's in Alpha, and hasn't been tested with lots of players yet. From what I've seen, the tanks HP's look pretty similar to BF tanks. 3-4 shots from Anti-Armor.

This is one of the many things that are going to be looked at during beta. Infantry HP, Tank HP, Aircav HP, what damage weapons do, how much ammo they have, how fast they move, what weapons they have.

[Vetto]

While I some what agree they need to be fair easier to take out then they are in PS1.

[Malorn]

I agree with this. Especially when you scale it up to even more players, shit is just going to die way too fast to make any progress.

I can understand how the TTK is fast when you only have a few squads worth of people to test with, but as you increase the population there's just a lot more damage flying around.

You can't really have a game balanced well for small populations and large populations. Large populations require more durability for vehicles and players to survive the huge amount of damage. But when you take something with a lot of durability and put it in a smaller scale setting it becomes a lot stronger. Happy medium is where it should be.

I would simply say damage needs to be tone down across the board by about 30% and see where that puts things.

[Virulence]

I'm kind of torn on this, although I'm leaning towards "ground vehicles are too squishy." Based on what we've seen, yeah, they die pretty fast.

Thing is, most of that has been in close-in, tight quarters combat with what seem to be pretty rudimentary certifications/loadouts. I'm sure there will be certs that increase vehicle survivability, and it's a very different game when you can maneuver at medium to long ranges and use terrain as cover and minimize your silhouette.

In my eyes, it's more of a, "Okay, I'm making a note to keep an eye on this when I play the game in beta," and not "oh god this looks horrible they better fix this before beta."

[Grimster]

Originally Posted by Virulence

I'm kind of torn on this, although I'm leaning towards "ground vehicles are too squishy." Based on what we've seen, yeah, they die pretty fast.

Thing is, most of that has been in close-in, tight quarters combat with what seem to be pretty rudimentary certifications/loadouts. I'm sure there will be certs that increase vehicle survivability, and it's a very different game when you can maneuver at medium to long ranges and use terrain as cover and minimize your silhouette.

In my eyes, it's more of a, "Okay, I'm making a note to keep an eye on this when I play the game in beta," and not "oh god this looks horrible they better fix this before beta."

I agree.

[GuyFawkes]

roll on beta and release , most of this stuff has to be taken tongue-in-cheek for now

[Nasher]

They did seem a bit pathetic compared to PS1, same with MAXes.

Vehicles were so powerful in PS1 because the terrain was mostly open ground with no cover. That isn't the case in PS2, it will be very easy to sneak up on vehicles with explosives etc.

The fact is though, most games change very little once they go in to open beta (or even closed beta in many cases). It's mainly to stress test, bug fix and do minor tweaks.

[Redshift]

The gal needs to be able to take a bit of a beating, but only if it's in troop transport mode, if it's GG it needs to be weaker. Tbh it's prob a good thing if vehicles are a bit weaker than they were in the first one.