News: Totalbiscuit and Matt Higby Live Stream Discussion!

[Gandhi]

Something I noticed right away: The color minimap is back!

[Malorn]

Not only is the map color a lot better but the HUD is also flatter. It used to be sort of angled and the one we saw in this stream was flat. I much prefer the flat version as opposed to the more 3D look.

Flat also means they might be enabling customization to move the HUD around. I'm excited about that. HUD customization is quite important and I'm happy to see the recent improvements.


I was a bit concerned at how much the Scythe seemed to feel like a floating camera. I get the impression that thing can ravage whatever it wants to with ease, particularly ground targets.

Although I also noticed a few other notable features of the scythe...

1) It was noticeably slower than the reaver, though I am not certain if that was because Kevmo set the throttle low. It looked like it was around 185 kph, while the Reaver was in the 205-220 range. For comparison the Mosquito in one of Total Biscuit's videos was easily cruising at around 245 kph. The slower speed of the Scythe makes sense to counteract the extreme maneuverability. Slower will mean it's an easier target and so it will be forced to utilize that maneuverability.

2) It's acceleration was extremely abrupt, both when using the afterburner and after the afterburner was disabled. It quickly shot up to afterburner speed and then immediately dropped back to the 185 kph. By comparison the reaver took a bit longer to get up to speed but also coasted a bit on the speed boost which the scythe didn't do.


Aircraft speeds are much higher than in PS1 and that might make the game world seem smaller. Clearly the facilities are larger than PS1 and the area looks bigger, but it doesn't seem all that big to me, which is a bit disappointing if we're expecting > 1500 people crammed into that continent. I roughly expected Indar to be at least 2x the size that it is.


Also I see Total Biscuit is like me and absolutely loves Ceryshen. Perhaps they are holding back on Ceryshen because it really needs snow storms and a good weather system to truly capture the awesomeness of the gloomy, rocky, dark wintery greatness. Esamir must retain its Norse theme and names, and I expect to see northern lights, which I imagine will look quite spectacular with Forgelight. I'd also like to see a fjord in part of Esamir. Howling Fjord in WoW was a really cool zone and it would make a great environment for Planetside combat. I could actually see an entire continent that was a Fjord, so perhaps you should save that for another continent idea. It's a good one.

[UKSwiFT]

Looks like they're really polishing that UI. It's really looking good. I wonder if there is an ability to increase/decrease the UI somewhere in the options.

[Graywolves]

Esamir was my favorite continent in PS1, I can't wait wait to see it reimagined, personally.

And the idea of seeing Ceryshen with similar harsh terrain and harsh wheather piled on top it is just a really awesome thing to see in the possible future.

[Levente]

i dont like the out of bounds shit. also there are spaces where it could use some hexes.

[Malorn]

When Ceryshen appears I hope she is a brutal unforgiving mistress with gloomy days and very dark nights. And storms. Lots and lots of storms. But there should be occasional clear nights illuminated by the northern lights.

Skyrim and Howling Fjord of WoW are awesome environments. Can't wait to see one or more continents designed after them. In fact I think Esamir would be quite well suited for it. I could really get behind that. Then release Ceryshen as the brutal unforgiving wintery hell after weather gets added in post-launch. Hossin would be another great jungle/swamp continent that would be particularly enhanced by weather. I could see those continents coming along post-aunch to highlight the great things a weather system can do.

[Notser]

Originally Posted by UKSwiFT

Looks like they're really polishing that UI. It's really looking good. I wonder if there is an ability to increase/decrease the UI somewhere in the options.

You will like your micro ui thank you very much! Just squint when you're locked in a fight to the death to see your cloak energy or jumppack fuel.

[UKSwiFT]

Originally Posted by Notser

You will like your micro ui thank you very much! Just squint when you're locked in a fight to the death to see your cloak energy or jumppack fuel.

I have a fairly large screen so the the UI being too small isn't an issue for me. Not to mention, if I'm locked in a fight to the death I'm likely not looking anywhere but my surroundings and enemy.

Regardless though, was why I asked if you could increase/decrease the size of it.

[Notser]

I don't believe there has been any screenshots of the options but they must have it in for launch.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I do want to be fair, he didn't say anything IMMEDIATELY problematic, but I think it's something to be watched. I don't even know that we need to fly kilometers off the coast, 500m would be enough.

That was pretty much all you could do in PS1 ... but it is useful. If you have your platoon in gals you don't want to be interrupted by rude reavers and shot down before you get to your target.

[Malorn]

Originally Posted by Gryphon

Side grades is in reference to micro transaction purchases. Upgrading via certs is different than purchasing upgrades via cash.

The cert system looked a lot like EVE Online to me with flat power increases. More damage. More control. More speed. Shorter acquisition timers.

All of these things are pure advantage to a veteran and punish new players who don't have them by comparison.

I don't like that much at all.

I also think upgrades should cost resources. Management of resources is supposed to be an important part of PS2. So far the only resource management I see is...

- grenades / consumables
- vehicle purchases

I also have a hard time seeing how people will be motivated to go after certain territories due to resources when they just give people resources simply for fighting anywhere. If fighting -> resources then specific territories becomes completely irrelevant. If I don't have to make meaningful loadout choices then resources also become irrelevant.

Also, by the look of the resources and the little bar below them, I estimate that the current resource caps are 5000 for each of the 3 (non-Auraxium) resources

Costs:
- Flash 10 (resource 1)
- Sunderer 150 (resource 1)
- Lightning 80 (resource 2)
- MBT 100 (resource 3)

So if there is resource deprivation it is targeted at specific vehicle sets, like transportation (sunderer/flash), the lightning (AA), or the MBTs. Usure where aircraft come in. I expect Galaxy is probably the same resource as Flash/Sunderer, with the Lib/ESA each matching to either the lightning or the MBTs, hard to say which.

Grenades were 10 resources.


The resource cap of 5000 seems high given those numbers. I can pull 50 MBTs before I'm drained, assuming no incoming resources. It seems at that rate I would care little about fighting for resources on the continent if I had a healthy surplus. Losing a territory that provides my tank resource is unlikely to motivate me if I can pull 50 tanks without any income whatsoever. That's many hours of entertainment before I actually start caring. And even then if even a small amount of resources is trickling in I might never care.

Based on all this I'm not much feeling that the resource system is set up for success. The caps seem high, and the fact that we get lots of resources by fighting lowers the value of territory. And even then I can fight for a good long time without risk of running low on any resources, especially if fighting nets you a significant sum. Making matters worse is that if I run out of my Prowler resource I can then go pull over 60 lightnings while I let some passive income restore my prowler resources. I might not ever care about any specific territory if I juggled between different resources.

If you want resources to matter that cap needs to be probably 1/5 of what it is now, or at least half. I'm not sure how to balance out the fighting resources vs the territory resources. The territory resources need to matter and be a significant factor or nobody will ever fight for them. Perhaps if you only got the resource provided by the territory when fighting over it would be a step in the right direction. However that would limit the things that could be done in that territory to mostly the vehicles/consumables that use that territory's resource.

[UKSwiFT]

Resource costs and cap still need to be tested. Pretty much the majority of systems still need to be balanced in an actual play-tested environment above the usual in-house numbers. Don't expect the numbers to stick at all, so basing any theories or estimates off of those numbers is a bit fruitless right now.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by raykor

For those of us that live on the West Coast and have jobs, is there any way to view what we missed?

Check the totalhalibut channel on Youtube, tb will be putting it up there.

[Coreldan]

[Alderego]

What I do wonder is, once they implement the weather system: will we get some sort of weather-prediction system? Visibility can be quite important if you plan an action: covert wouldn't mind going in in a big rain/sandstorm where as a big vehicle action might prefer clear skies.

I'm not saying that it would have to be accurate, heck if the system "gets it wrong" it might even be funny

But some sort of meteo might be nice.