Planetside 2 Needs Prone

[mynameismud]

Originally Posted by Stew

try to avoid the personal stuff and insult please stay on topic

So as a reminder your very concern was about the pace

as a exemple ive send you a video of MAG domination and the pace and the flow is pretty solid and can you see the prone position afecting the flow ? if yes i would like to see when why and how !

Also i would have to say this (( not related to prone but related to the flow and pace arguments ))

Ive seen some other people here agains the prone saying it will affect the pace as well

But in another tread the same people was deeply agains a quick revive and even more about a instant revive mechanics wich if in MAg this mechanics of instant revive wasnt their the pace and flow could be dramatically reduce and remember thats in MAg almost everybody custumise their caracter with a medic and revive kit !

so whats you think about instant revive and also awnser my frist question if possible

I am not wasting my time watching your pointless video, like i said this isnt mag.

I dont really care either way on revive, if its instant, thats cool. i played lots of return to wolfenstein so im good there. and i played lots of planetside so if it has a five second or so revive thats cool too.

But please change the topic more and bring up more games not called planetside.

[Khrusky]

Originally Posted by mynameismud

So if i dont like prone the way you like prone im a casual gamer now huh?

So i have been "casually" playing games since i was 3?

Sorry, I wasn't trying to be offensive.

Someone else raised the point that games where you really need to learn a lot before you can properly play, like EVE, are off-putting to new players or those who don't view gaming as their main hobby.

Again, I wasn't using casual or new player as pejorative terms so my apology for the offence.

[captainkapautz]

Originally Posted by basti

You take BF3 here? Really? MY god, dude, get a clue.

BF3 does not support 2000 Players per map. You cant compare what 32 people (16vs16) do with what 666vs666vs666 do. ITs two completly different worlds.

Well, you have to admit, most of your questions could easily be answered by saying "Use a grenade.".

[Stew]

Originally Posted by basti

You take BF3 here? Really? MY god, dude, get a clue.

BF3 does not support 2000 Players per map. You cant compare what 32 people (16vs16) do with what 666vs666vs666 do. ITs two completly different worlds.

i can compare mag to a base battle in planetside 2 »»»»»»»»http://youtu.be/YCDuUIGsf34?t=2m3s««««««

the pace is pretty solid the flow cant be compare to any other game even battlefield

so i would like to see any problem link to the prone position in this ?

[mynameismud]

Originally Posted by Khrusky

Sorry, I wasn't trying to be offensive.

Someone else raised the point that games where you really need to learn a lot before you can properly play, like EVE, are off-putting to new players or those who don't view gaming as their main hobby.

Again, I wasn't using casual or new player as pejorative terms so my apology for the offence.

I understand now. sorry for my response then, reading things in my own head's context than what you really intended.

[TheInferno]

Stew, stop repeating the same damn thing. It's ridiculous.

You have shown prone works in a different game. You have not given any reason it is needed here.

Ah, why am I even posting, you aren't going to listen to what anyone says anyways because you have to be right and that's final. Off to more constructive threads!

EDIT: To those who have been posting well reasoned arguments on both sides, I don't mean any offense. But the last three pages just... arrrrgh. At this point the arguments for and against have been hashed, rehashed, and hash browned, and I can't really think of anything more constructive to post myself. The poll shows what the community thinks, and if they want to see the reasoning behind it, there's 50+ pages of that, and anything I post probably won't help.

[captainkapautz]

Originally Posted by Stew

i can compare mag to a base battle in planetside 2 »»»»»»»»http://youtu.be/YCDuUIGsf34?t=2m3s««««««

the pace is pretty solid the flow cant be compare to any other game even battlefield

so i would like to see any problem link to the prone position in this ?

The problem with your video is pretty simple, it shows MAG, so prone works in MAG that's fine and all, but that is not a valid arguement for why it should work in PS2.

I mean if prone works in MAG then by your definition it should work in every FPS, yet I don't see prone in Halo, CS or several other FPSs.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

The problem with your video is pretty simple, it shows MAG, so prone works in MAG that's fine and all, but that is not a valid arguement for why it should work in PS2.

I mean if prone works in MAG then by your definition it should work in every FPS, yet I don't see prone in Halo, CS or several other FPSs.

Good point have you play planetside 2 ?

How you know if its gonna work or not in planetside 2 ?

neither me and you have play planetside but the game yet

like i said i would like to have the most freedom of moovement as possible

But if after tested it in real multiple beta build if it do not work in planetside and if the prone mechanics are broken ill be the first to say to remoove it from the final build

beta will tell us but from my experience prone should not be a problem for the pace or for the flow or anything like this

[Malorn]

Originally Posted by basti

Lets make a list here. You pro prone folks have 24 hours to give proper arguments against the points made on the list. go!

1. Cloakers and PRone. Imagine a Infiltrator going up to a good spot, proning and cloaking. He sits there cloaked, shoots, and cloaks again. There is literally nothing you can do against him, as he got a extremly low profile.

2. Medics/engis and Prone. They simply chill behind, absolutly save from direct fire, and heal the guys up front.

3. Light assault and Prone: Would completly deny them the use of jumpjets, making the whole thing a rather nasty tradeoff. Mobolity is key for them, making prone absolutly useless for Light assault.

4. Defending and prone: Have fun trying to break a line of people just proning everywhere. Its almost impssible.

5. The zerg and prone: In planetside, heck, no, in EVERY game you have the problem that people are afraid of dying. Instead of Rushing, they just chill and wait around the corner. With prone, they have even less reason to move, as they have a smaller chance of killing a dude if they hop around the corner due to low profile, have more enemys shooting at them as prone allows 2 people behind one another to fire at you, and on top of that even gives a damn good reason not to move at all in the first place. The zerg would be proning EVERYWHERE, making Infantary engagments the most boring expirience ever.

Try to give arguments against these. I know you wont...

Nice post Basti. The 5th one is the one that I believe is the worst part of prone. When you lower the cross section of someone, attacking becomes more difficult. When you multiply that by hundreds and thousands of players with tons of cover, lights, etc and even darkness you're going to get situations where people simply aren't encouraged to attack.

By not having prone, you encourage attack and make things harder for defenders. People claiming prone helps attackers to don't understand that they can simply add more (and higher) cover for exterior places to help give attackers a better chance and don't need to add something like Prone which cuts both ways.

And the bottom line is that in spite of what the subject of this thread says - no, the game does not need prone. It can and will be successful without it, and prone is a threat to the gameplay that we know we like. There's been enough poor gameplay as a result of prone in the past that the risk vs reward for prone is not even remotely worth it.

[mynameismud]

Originally Posted by Malorn

And the bottom line is that in spite of what the subject of this thread says - no, the game does not need prone. It can and will be successful without it, and prone is a threat to the gameplay that we know we like. There's been enough poor gameplay as a result of prone in the past that the risk vs reward for prone is not even remotely worth it.

^^^

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Malorn

By not having prone, you encourage attack and make things harder for defenders. People claiming prone helps attackers to don't understand that they can simply add more (and higher) cover for exterior places to help give attackers a better chance and don't need to add something like Prone which cuts both ways.
.

Sniper team ? sniper team huhu !

Do they run ? do they atack ? no they dont they are sniper team !

««««« Here

this is the way in is in everygame prone or no prone not having prone will not encourage anyones to work the objective at all

turning into a circle with irrevelant sentence !

Prone is a standing position not a way to play

playstyle isnt a stand position please try to understand this

[ThermalReaper]

Originally Posted by Stew

-snip- not having prone will not encourage anyones to work the objective at all -snip-

Please tell me you wrote that incorrectly.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Malorn

1. By not having prone, you encourage attack and make things harder for defenders. People claiming prone helps attackers to don't understand that they can simply add more (and higher) cover for exterior places to help give attackers a better chance and don't need to add something like Prone which cuts both ways.

Some prone opponents seem to want to power up the defenders. Are you saying power up the attackers(even if the "power up" is merely encouragement to attack)?

Also, no one has offered any proof that not having prone will encourage attacking or vice versa, that prone will discourage attacking. Most of you have stated that you do not accept other games, and their implementations of prone, as proof that prone works, because they are not large scale MMO FPS games. I will therefore reciprocate and state that since PS1 did not have prone, it is therefore not acceptable as proof that it doesn't work. As a result, the only way to settle this is to test it during beta.

If the prone opponent faction is right, then there should be obvious problems that arise in the beta, and you will all be proven correct.

[Phellix]

Originally Posted by TheInferno

Stew, stop repeating the same damn thing. It's ridiculous.

You have shown prone works in a different game. You have not given any reason it is needed here.

Ah, why am I even posting, you aren't going to listen to what anyone says anyways because you have to be right and that's final. Off to more constructive threads!

This. I can't believe Stew is still going on with the same exact rants telling everyone they don't have proof and they're wrong and he's right.
Majority doesn't want it. And most people who have said yes admit they haven't played PS1, What does that say? I mean really. Let it go.

[Retaliation]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Some prone opponents seem to want to power up the defenders. Are you saying power up the attackers(even if the "power up" is merely encouragement to attack)?

Also, no one has offered any proof that not having prone will encourage attacking or vice versa, that prone will discourage attacking. Most of you have stated that you do not accept other games, and their implementations of prone, as proof that prone works, because they are not large scale MMO FPS games. I will therefore reciprocate and state that since PS1 did not have prone, it is therefore not acceptable as proof that it doesn't work. As a result, the only way to settle this is to test it during beta.

If the prone opponent faction is right, then there should be obvious problems that arise in the beta, and you will all be proven correct.

There's also no proof that prone won't encourage sitzkrieg. The rub is that since prevailing opinion is that prone will harm the game, it's up to the proneponents (I'm sorry don't shoot me) to provide evidence that it will benefit the game.