Lancer is coming ... !

[Baneblade]

The thing about the Phoenix (which I loved on my TR/VS alts) is that you are a meat sack while you are using it. Enemy snipers will love the Phoenix.

[PredatorFour]

Originally Posted by Baneblade

The thing about the Phoenix (which I loved on my TR/VS alts) is that you are a meat sack while you are using it. Enemy snipers will love the Phoenix.

Infils too! Slicin' and dicin'...

[Figment]

Pretty much, every time I saw a TR/VS Phoenix user, I made it a personal mission to kill them while in camera mode so they'd realise just how much of a handicap it is.

[Lee]

Originally Posted by Brusi

The problem with the phoenix would be the fact that you would be able to one shot (head-shot) enemy infantry with the explosives model in PS2. it would take like 6 direct hits to even make a ReXo in the original Planetside decide to move using the original Phoenix!

+1 on that. The TTK was way longer in PS1, phoenixing infantry was only usefull as a sniper deterrent, but you could hardly kill someone unless he was low on hp. It was really effective against maxes, but those big moving tuna cans deserved it...

In PS2 they will have to find a way to make ii just powerful enough against armor and maxes. Maybe not so powerful against turrets as they can't move a normal rocket launchers do the job already.

[Badjuju]

I cannot tell you how annoying getting phoenix sniped was! But that is part of what made faction rivalries great. You know we have decent balance and distinct factions when everyone despises the other two for their OP/Cheap/Obnoxious weaponry.

[Badjuju]

Originally Posted by Lee

+1 on that. The TTK was way longer in PS1, phoenixing infantry was only usefull as a sniper deterrent, but you could hardly kill someone unless he was low on hp. It was really effective against maxes, but those big moving tuna cans deserved it...

In PS2 they will have to find a way to make ii just powerful enough against armor and maxes. Maybe not so powerful against turrets as they can't move a normal rocket launchers do the job already.

I would think they would have to drastically reduce the Phoenix's maneuverability, as well as limiting the damage all faction specific AV weapons do (particularly to infantry). Assuming they fallow the same model as PS1.

[Bobby Shaftoe]

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

Anyone else find it funny that they seem to introduce more AV weapons than anything else?

Because they gave Infantry shit for AV weapons, so with a limited ability to fight vehicles on foot, everyone then bundled in tanks, then airchav to spam the tanks, giving us the roundabout buff/nerf ride between Ground Vehicles/AA/Air, with Infantry just getting farmed by everything.

Decent Infantry AV (also useful against air) = less threat/farming by ground vehicles, less need for stupidly OP airpower rockets/zephyr to keep the tank hordes in check etc, bigger ground pounder footzerg fights between bases that can actually progress without getting nuked.

The game would have been far more fun using Infantry as a baseline with vehicles providing support/specific roles, instead of Infantry just being what everything else feeds on.

[Sleepy]

Originally Posted by Bobby Shaftoe

Because they gave Infantry shit for AV weapons

And boring. Hardly anything reflects PS2's BF3 designs more than the insufferable HA rocket launchers. PS1 had Empire Specific AV which:

1) Worked
2) Fun to use for all 3 factions
3) Added greatly to Faction differentiation

Operating these BF3 launchers are not fun in comparison to what was offered in PS1. The rockets are slow, take too long to reload, and you're out of ammo in 4 shots sans an Engy following you around. All 3 empires' operate exactly the same. Despite the rage which would follow, I hope that the Lancer, Striker and Phoenix are all introduced and are superior to the nonsense available now. The game needs better AT weapons which are at once fun to use and give each side a feel remarkable for their theme.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

Originally Posted by Bobby Shaftoe

then airchav to spam the tanks,

Oh man... I just lost my shit laughing.

Brusi had a good idea back on page 2. Like the WH40k plasma gun. I like it - they can do whalloping damage at close range but if they want to hit long distance targets they have to tickle them to death.

[Figment]

Infantry AV in this game is three to nine times as strong as in PS1.

Yet they are perceived as less powerful, why?

Because of six things:

1. Stronger tank firepower per player - 2 players in tanks is two players that can kill you very fast, if not instantly. Driver = gunner. HE cannons on all tanks.
2. Base designs. Could talk a year about that.
3. More threats with low ttk
4. No third person view, less situational awareness, yet threats coming from more directions (including often above)
5. Less control tools: no EMP grenades, no proper mines
6. Infantry AV weaponry are less reliable, less consistent and not everything deals at least some AV damage (even white ammo Scatmag used to deal damage to tanks). Not only are others more dependent on HA users, the HA more dependent on other units to get enough ammo on target, your fire is frequently interupted. On top of that, the accuracy has been reduced, especially against long range targets (TR feel this least since Striker was always flawed for that, but at least its dumbfire isn't have ballistic issues).

[Rat]

Would love to see a return of the EMP nade...nothing more fun than stopping a tank in its tracks.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

Proper minefields (3x75 yellow resources is pretty expensive) and emp grenades would be lovely.