Is anyone else concerned about the proposed “faster pace” of combat?

[Talek Krell]

Originally Posted by Accuser

optional(?) root effect and massive damage.

Yeah. "Ammo" is a recharging pool in GA. Primary fire uses up "ammo" at the normal rate but allows you to plod forward while spitting bullets. Secondary fire roots you, but it drains "ammo" much more slowly and slightly increases your damage.

[Traak]

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

real killwhores use the thumper.

If they have free to play, since I like the Thumper, I can just grieflock, new account, grieflock, new account, ad infinitum?

Wow, the Thumper is born anew!

[Bags]

Originally Posted by Accuser

A few reasons:
1. If I go medic to support my team, I'd like to have some chance against enemies indoors.

You do. It's called the Gauss Rifle if you're NC, or the Sweeper if you're TR or VS. The Thumper is also decent indoors too. Someone spec'd to be heavy infantry should be better at infantry combat than a medic. Sorry, you can't have everything.

2. Everyone using the same weapon indoors is dull. Having unique weapons which have upsides and downsides is interesting. Yes, those are opinions, but I don't think I'm alone in them.

Plenty of people snipe indoors, in addition to the weapons I listed above. Weapons commonly used indoors: Gauss, Cycler, Pulsar, Sweeper, Thumper, Radiator, Maelstrom, Bolt Driver, and Flamethrower.

3. If I put lots of certs into agile for exterior mobility, I don't want to be completely worthless indoors compared to 100% superior rexo/HA. Yes there's a tradeoff for those agile abilities, but a HA specialist should be able to help push outdoors and an MA specialist should be able to help push indoors.

You aren't 100% useless. Using non-HA, assuming equal skill, you have maybe 70 - 90% combat effectiveness indoors.

4. Insufficient versatility will lead to people dropping out of a location to go to a fight that uses their specialization. For example: If I was certed up to be a great tanker and we clear the CY, is there any motivation for me to go be fodder for enemy HA indoors? Unless HA had some downsides that a tank-certed player could take advantage of, I might as well drive my tank to the next exterior fight.

You really seem to be in the mindset that you cannot compete without HA.

TLDR of my red: stop whining and spec properly if you want to compete 100% indoors.

[Accuser]

Originally Posted by Bags

Why is HA being the only choice indoors (even though it isn't) a bad thing?

^ You asked why HA being the only choice indoors would be a bad thing... When I explained, you went on to say how lots of other things should be viable. So thanks for proving my point about how things should be in PS2.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by Accuser

^ You asked why HA being the only choice indoors would be a bad thing... When I explained, you went on to say how lots of other things should be viable. So thanks for proving my point about how things should be in PS2.

I never said they should be viable, I said they are viable.

[Kalbuth]

Originally Posted by Bags

You do. It's called the Gauss Rifle if you're NC, or the Sweeper if you're TR or VS. The Thumper is also decent indoors too. Someone spec'd to be heavy infantry should be better at infantry combat than a medic. Sorry, you can't have everything.
[...]
TLDR of my red: stop whining and spec properly if you want to compete 100% indoors.

(nota as intro : add Pulsar to the list of good MA indoor weapon, it has the best CoF control of the 3 ESMA, can be fired on the move without losing accuracy, and CQB negates its damage degradation disadvantage to other ESMA. To me the best CQB ESMA, tbh)

I'd prefer the heavy infantry being "better at infantry combat" because he has more tools at his disposal for this, not necessarily better tools. More grenades, secondary weapon slot, you name it. If he has "better weapons", they should have drawbacks (and PS1 experience tells you range is no drawback)
Not having headshots, movement penalty, these are drawbacks.

PS1 was unique because going up in levels did not give you really better tools, it opened your possibilities, you could do more things, not necessarily really better.

I dislike this RPG mindset stating that you should be better because you "certed" into something. You're better than your opponent because you have better FPS skills. That includes aim, movement & evasion, situational awareness, knowing your team mates positions and your own, using crossfire as much as you can, etc... So reading "I should be better because I have cert X" makes me cringe a bit

[kidriot]

you should be better indoors if you've spec'd and are using proper weapons for it. that only makes sense. why not award the person that has the foresight to equip properly? you want "twitch" to overcome "smarts' and that doesn't make sense to me.

the RPG mindset is that of a person spending more time doing something. experience is the best teacher and knowing what how to approach a situation should give you the upper hand.

remember the 7 P's

proper prior planning prevents piss poor performance

[Kalbuth]

And because you are having grenades, more diverse, because you have a secondary support/supression weapon, because you have armor allowing for 1 more implant, etc..., being specced correctly gives you the edge, through planning more than just "being specced", you can use your grenade, your additional weapon, your implant, you have an advantage over the other (who has another advantage, for example he can heal, or repair...) without this "specced" actually changing too much the core of the FPS between you and your foe, aka the shooting.
In other words, if you're heavy infantry specced but don't use your specificities, you'll end up on equal foot with a non infantry specced character. This would require from you actually MORE planification than just "being specced, thus having the weapon auto-magically giving you the edge".
Ofc, I'm making things bigger than they are in PS1, HA is not automatic win currently. I just ask for the best possible shooting experience for average grunt, and that goes, imho, through lowering as much as possible imbalances in the very core of the FPS game, shooting.

Speccing is not being smart, it's easy and doesn't require much brain, tbh.

[Captain B]

Well, what we've been told (whether we "know" it or not is still speculative) is that the highly armored class will have the heavy assault weapons, and that probably includes AV weapons. Whether the agile suit (engineer class?) will have 'em too is up in the air, but likely. Looking at the weapons from PS1 and then considering them for PS2, they more than likely will not benefit from things like sights (imagine hefting a minigun or a jackhammer to shoulder - if you do pull the trigger it would insta-gib you or at the least rip your arm off).

I'm imagining this will balance it. Yeah, minigun's got more bullets and "spray and pray"; jackhammer will probably insta-someone at near point blank ranges (and rightfully so if it's nearly useless in the open). But ultimately, someone with a Gauss or a Cycler or whatever should be able to bring up their sights or scope, put the crosshairs on someone's face, and choke the trigger.

I'm just hoping at medium-long ranges the assault rifle outperforms the heavy assault, statistically. I think they should all be rather close-quarters oriented in that regard (filling a hall with three barrels of buckshot, fanning 200 rounds in a nice arc to suppress troops behind cover or explosive lasers that kill indiscriminately). In open field combat they can still provide support, but their killing power is reduced (the jackhammer would be the odd man out with a shotgun in an open field scenario, but would more than make up for it in a building with triple-tapping kills).

[Traak]

How about adjustable chokes on the shotguns that can adjust pattern for distance? This isn't exactly new technology, and the shottie MAX used it.

[Captain B]

Maybe for the sweeper, that'd be cool. I think the Jackhammer could have a moderate spread as normal and go wild with the triple shot for close range kills.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by Kalbuth

I dislike this RPG mindset stating that you should be better because you "certed" into something.

So everyone should be as good as healing as a medic? Because it's not fair that a medic is the best at healing because he certed into it.

Either show up with the right equipment or expect to lose, assuming equal skill.

[Kalbuth]

Originally Posted by Bags

So everyone should be as good as healing as a medic? Because it's not fair that a medic is the best at healing because he certed into it.

Either show up with the right equipment or expect to lose, assuming equal skill.

I explained above how I would like to see Infantry specced implemented. You apparently skipped over it

[ThGlump]

Help he is specced as MAX. I cant kill him with my pistol as fast as other soldiers. Specializations will matter.

Choose your weapon for specific situations. Or you dont want some variability in weapons and all should be indistinguishable?

[Kalbuth]

You guys only read what you want to read
I never said I want all weapons equal and limit variety in weapons. Stop putting words in my mouth
I'm just, and only, talking about the infantry fight, and how I don't see why, in this area, you cannot give an edge to specialized heavy infantry without having to give him a weapon "only" better than others.
Against a MAX, AV doesn't make you suddenly better than the MAX, it brings you on par with the MAX. SA is only giving you another option above your primary weapon.

Why HA having a drawback is bad?