Knives (and infantry combat in general)

[Beerbeer]

If there's one aspect that clearly states Sony's intention of marginalizing infantry combat in general, it is knives.

Here's why:

Knives require three hits to kill usually. Now to do this, you have to be standing next to someone, not an easy thing to always do. All that effort, all that cunning to get up close and personal and it takes three hits to kill someone.

Now take a tank or esf. I can one shot most infantry from a couple hundred yard away.

Which one is harder to get into position yet requires three mouse clicks to achieve? It's comical how much they don't want us to play infantry. Bases especially cater towards vehicles.

[Daliahita]

I don't understand how you feel that they don't want us to play infantry. Simply because a single soldier isn't as powerful as a tank?

Bases support vehicles and infantry, vehicles support infantry. Ergo, Bases support infantry as much as they support vehicles - there is no favoritism.

[Beerbeer]

You're kind of missing the point, but that's okay.

[Furber]

Yeah bases need to be designed with infantry combat in mind, instead of camping the isolated spawn point with vehicles. That will give infantry combat more of a place in the game, among fixing other problems discussed in the "Huge outfits" thread.

[Daliahita]

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

Knives require three hits to kill usually. Now to do this, you have to be standing next to someone, not an easy thing to always do. All that effort, all that cunning to get up close and personal and it takes three hits to kill someone.

Now take a tank or esf. I can one shot most infantry from a couple hundred yard away.

Which one is harder to get into position yet requires three mouse clicks to achieve? It's comical how much they don't want us to play infantry.

Originally Posted by Daliahita

I don't understand how you feel that they don't want us to play infantry. Simply because a single soldier isn't as powerful as a tank?

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

Bases especially cater towards vehicles.

Originally Posted by Daliahita

Bases support vehicles and infantry, vehicles support infantry. Ergo, Bases support infantry as much as they support vehicles - there is no favoritism.

There. Made it easier for you to read. You should certainly be able to understand what I am saying now.

[The Messenger]

Knives are typically best used in close quarters after already hitting someone a few times. If you managed to sneak up on a static person (usually an infi) put a quick burst and then knife them. With the way the lag works, they won't be able to react before the knife connects.

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by Daliahita

I don't understand how you feel that they don't want us to play infantry. Simply because a single soldier isn't as powerful as a tank?

Bases support vehicles and infantry, vehicles support infantry. Ergo, Bases support infantry as much as they support vehicles - there is no favoritism.

It's not as much as a troop being as powerful as a tank but rather having so little skill needed for vehicles than troops.

A good tank can kill anything it wants if it knows ranges and has a bank to leverage the main gun to a higher angle. The only vehicle that takes real skill is the ESF in my opinion, but that's only limited to flying the damned things. Once you get to know the movement of any vehicle. killing with it becomes very easy.

Troops on the other hand need FAR more skill to do well. The melee attack is a good example of that. It takes more risk than anything to go for a melee, yet according to the OP it takes 3 hits from 100% health (I thought it was 2, never tested it) to kill. 3 swipes is several lifetimes at those ranges.

Risk v Reward doesn't seem to add up in PS2. Vehicle play has much less risk to them than being a troop but have FAR greater rewards. Vehicles do have a cost to them, but with res being near infinite that cost is more or less negated unless the vehicle is a sundy or gal. As they cost 400 out of the 750 total.



Iv been thinking about possible fixes for this, but can only think of a few things that "might" work.
- Nerf the hell of out res gain.
- Lower the res cap to 500
- Merge the 3 res types into 1 nanite bank
- A mix of those ideas.

[Beerbeer]

You're still kind of missing the point; I should have never added that last statement regarding bases.

Anyways, I agree, bases support vehicles and infantry: vehicles spawn camp infantry. That's about it really.

What I'm saying is that infantry to infantry combat is marginalized. An in your face knife takes three hits to kill, while a one-man tank, with NO access restrictions, can do the same deed 200 m away with one shot. No one else finds this strange???

[Daliahita]

Having a cooldown and cost offsets the Risk vs. Reward already. You spend the resources, you put it on cooldown, and you get to play a tank and fulfill a role. Yes, it is easier, but that's why infantry respawn and tanks don't. It's why infantry are required to take points on almost every single outpost. You cannot make comparisons between the role of infinitely spawning infantry and the role of a tank.

Tanks are weapons of opportunity. They need the support of air, or infantry, or other tanks. They cannot adapt to situations, they are tailored to one specific situation - infantry are not. Infantry can go back and change their role - tanks cannot. Tanks are limited to the opportunity they present themselves with during their operational life, while infantry can fulfill multiple roles, and adapt to different situations within the same operational life and more.

This is why you can't compare the two. This is why it takes 2 backstabs (3 against a shielded heavy, maybe) to kill an infantry, while a tank only needs one shot from 100m with relative ease. And it's completely fair.

[Beerbeer]

What you're saying only applies to a perfect world, on paper. People will find ways to maximize tanks over infantry no matter what the circumstances. You said it yourself, tanks are superior to infantry, besides, I run out of infantry resources on med kits and grenades faster than I do spamming tanks. That cool down is nothing at all.

But, you are missing the point entirely of what I was trying to convey.

[Daliahita]

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

Anyways, I agree, bases support vehicles and infantry: vehicles spawn camp infantry. That's about it really.

You're the one missing the point.

Anti-Air Turrets, Anti-Vehicle Turrets. Those aren't manned by vehicles. They are part of the base. The base helping infantry. The base helping infantry kill vehicles.

Next, tell me how a Bio Lab lets vehicles spawn camp. Yes, spawn camping is a problem, but infantry can do it just as well on their own.

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

What I'm saying is that infantry to infantry combat is marginalized. An in your face knife takes three hits to kill, while a one-man tank, with NO access restrictions, can do the same deed 200 m away with one shot. No one else finds this strange???

A one-man tank has no access restrictions? Don't tell me you're gonna see on waltz into an Amp Station alone or into the Bio Lab and get behind someone. That's something only infantry can do. I can turn it around and say something just as dumb like "How come only infantry can go into amp stations and blow generators?" or "I have to shoot enemy tanks multiple times when infantry can just place a mine with zero effort involved in the actual kill? Doesn't anyone find this strange?"

This all goes back to roles and how they fit into gameplay. No, infantry are NOT supposed to get kills like tanks do. If playing a tank is so easy, and just as rewarding, why don't you play one all the time? Oh right! You can't. They have a cost, and they're not usable in every combat situation. But wait a minute, infantry are!

[Beerbeer]

But I do. You think I get a tank and instantly die? That's all I play and I rarely run out of resources. I'm sure other vehicle-honks could attest to the same thing.

I never said anything about the macro aspect of me waltzing into a base all Rambo-like versus some coordinated effort. Not sure how this even applies to what I was trying to say.

[Daliahita]

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

What you're saying only applies to a perfect world, on paper. People will find ways to maximize tanks over infantry no matter what the circumstances.

Bio Lab. Sky Mesa on Indar. Done deal. This isn't World of Tanks; you NEED infantry.

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

You said it yourself, tanks are superior to infantry,

Never have I said that. "Simply because a single soldier isn't as powerful as a tank". That has nothing to do with superiority.

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

besides, I run out of infantry resources on med kits and grenades faster than I do spamming tanks. That cool down is nothing at all.

If you're having trouble playing infantry, no one will blame you for sticking to tanks because they're easier.

This could all be avoided if you read carefully, and didn't just spout the classically ignorant excuse of "you just don't get it".

[Beerbeer]

Oh, three bases.

A soldier not being as powerful as a tank sure sounds like the tank is superior to the soldier...

And again, you're missing the point and telling me I'm ignorant without knowing a thing about me and what play style I enjoy is kind of ironic when it comes to ignorance.

You assume a lot...lol.

[Daliahita]

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

I never said anything about the macro aspect of me waltzing into a base all Rambo-like versus some coordinated effort. Not sure how this even applies to what I was trying to say.

"Tanks are weapons of opportunity. They need the support of air, or infantry, or other tanks."

Read and be educated. Don't skim my posts, please.

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

That's all I play and I rarely run out of resources.

So you only play tanks, huh. I guess you wouldn't know about the countless infantry supporting you, defending you, and capturing the bases for you. This applies to what you said because you believe tanks are better than infantry by far. As if everyone should just be tanks? You think anything will get done that way?

Look, stick to tanks if that's what you're good at. But don't whale on the other roles because you haven't given them any real thought.