Top cause of players leaving PS2 (2014)

[KesTro]

Originally Posted by Mietz

As far as i know you couldnt one-shot headshot. The other player always stayed at like a sliver HP after the first shot, with stock rifles vs stock chars without nanoweave at optimal range. The only exception to this could be infiltrators themselves as they have 100 less HP i think.

In fact checking a backup of the weapon spreadsheet confirms this.

Afaik bolt-actions were specifically introduced to reward good aim but at the cost of long refire times and non-hitscan properites.

Are you talking during Beta times or something? Because I can remember one shot headhsotting peopel as the NC infil with the stock Bolt Action since Nov 20. O.o

[Mordelicius]

Originally Posted by HereticusXZ

IMO This list doesn't have much (if any) merit to it. It sounds like personnel grudges and not hard data.

In my post (point #5), I described a phenomenon in Emerald Indar:

New Lanes = Undefended base.
Undefended bases + Redeployside = factions (especially VS ) mass redeploying to steal a base. Then they use their superior VS Suppression weapons to stop you from getting to the points. If they fail, they just disappear in a wink (literally). They then wait and look for the next 'target'. This happens on and on and on. Is this a good battleflow?

This result in lack of fights that make the current Indar Emerald insufferable. Indar hasnt' been this bad post-lattice, outside of WDS events.

Now, can the PS2 Dev graphs and charts and red-dots-on map explain and transmit this phenomenon? Do they track these player movements chronologically? In able to make sense of this phenomenon, order of action, reaction and effect has to be known. This can only be understood while playing the game.

They can graph and plot all they want. These dots have no real-time date or order or contextual message that can convey this phenomenon is even affecting gameflow.

Lastly, if their faulty interpretation of gameplay through graphs made them create these new lanes in the first place, then how can they figure out this change was bad or flawed?

[Azzzz]

I've always liked Mordelicius's posts because they were well written, organized, and made actual points. Plus they have color. Even more impressive, is that I agree with all of it.

1) Snipers were fine before the OHK range buff. Still hate them regardless of what they get or take away.

2) Libs are perfect how they are now imo. They still have the survivability to do their thing yet are easily taken down with the right amount of force. Dalton splash radius I'm still trying to adjust to.

3) WDS I never cared for other than free XP boosters. Pointless.

4) Oh my god, Quartz sucks now please change it. In fact, I find myself avoiding that base at all costs. I just don't like the feel of it. It's like a light assault haven there now.

5) Lane wise I really can't comment on because I lack the sufficient knowledge on that because after a good fight I usually check my map and find where the next big fight is which can be anywhere, any continent.

[War Barney]

1. Definitely agree snipers are just an annoyance right now, you can NEVER stand still as you'll instantly die, even when running to bases you'll find yourself head shot with nothing you can do to prevent it. And its even worse for TR/NC as the VS have the best starting sniper rifle so you see SO many of them, I hardly ever see infs as NC and can't honestly remember the last time I died to a TR sniper, but VS.. about half my deaths are to VS snipers since this buff.

2. The main problem I have with libs is the amount of power they have compared to the lack of teamwork they require, get 3 people and you can slaughter huge numbers of people with almost no effort, the only way to deal with them is to pull 3 skyguards and hope the lib pilot is a idiot, in which case they'll be sitting still farming at a very low altitude, smart ones however keep moving at the sky ceiling so you can hardly hit them and they get away easily while still bombarding an area. Basically the only counter to air is air right now as skyguards shots scatter way to much at extreme range.

3. Anything that makes population imbalance worse doesn't even need explaining as to why its bad...

4. They just seem bad at designing bases in general, they've got combined arms but most bases tanks get trapped outside doing nothing, those where they can help its a flat open area where they easily farm people.. theres no middle ground it seems.

5. As for lattices, I like being able to sneak behind a enemy BUT it shouldn't be too easy as it does make zerging very easy. Its a tough balancing act but honestly I think they should do anything that counters zergs first and foremost as its the main thing that makes the game un-fun. Theres nothing worse than fighting a ppa zerg of never ending explosions...


The saddest thing about PPA is its still going to be powerful as hell with half ammo but the VS are already claiming it will be the end of the PPA making it a worthless gun in attempts to stop it.. I'm surprised the devs listen to anything the VS say, they even keep trying to claim the magrider is the worse tank as if being able to hit max speed in seconds, strafe, and bypass walls is a bad ability...

[War Barney]

Aye I think the buff was so that nanoweave didn't affect head shots as if you had full level nanoweave a head shot wouldn't OHK you, so it wasn't a buff to snipers so much as a nerf to nanoweave, thus why its probably the least used skill now, surviving a extra bullet in close range was never really that great it was useful to let you survive snipers.

Now flak is the best option for survivability at all times, theres never ending explosions from tanks, nades, air and traps while nanoweave will let you survive 1 perhaps 2 more shots. They really need to either buff nanoweave or nerf ALL explosives, cos right now I honestly can't ever see myself using nanoweave again.

[Rahabib]

I havent left completely, but I rarely login. The top reason for me has nothing to do with that list - its boredom. The only reason to login is to grind out a few more levels. Theres no "winners," no real competition or competitive aspect like other old games like CS have. Theres no real persistence, taking a base really doesn't do anything for your team, yourself, or your faction. Locking a continent is a bandaid and doesn't do much but steamroll other teams with bogus bonuses to heap on the likely already over pop empire and remove choice.

The game needs a certain "quest" aspect to it. Something meaningful that adds a level of strategy to the game. Whether you take a bio or amp station, it doen't really matter. But if resources meant something, and were tied to types of bases, then making a choice for territory would add a level of fun to the game that will evolve the game into something more than just a TDM.

Anyway, I keep holding out hope, but until the game has something more to offer than just unlocking stuff, its going to be boring.

[War Barney]

True a reason to fight is very lacking, I thought locking would do it but it still doesn't feel like a worthy goal, most of the time because its not a very interesting bonus (though its a stupid one that gives a bonus to the winning side) and locks tend to happen while 1 side zergs with 60% pop.

[HereticusXZ]

The win condition or victory is completely irrelevant, even unnecessary, There's no reason whatsoever to win the war. The only thing you need is the "fight" itself and seeing as it's a video game it benefits no one if the war ends because of a win condition.

The "Top Cause" of players leaving if you want to attribute it to anything is the lack of content to busy yourself with.

You enter a fight and hold the objective. During this process you get XP by killing in the most efficient or effective method possible, Rinse and repeat. (This is where the hate is mistakenly directed at Liberators and needs to instead be focused at the broken Vehicle system in general, Or the hate against Snipers instead needing to be directed at PS2's lack of properly understanding the application of Long. Medium, and Short Range combat ) The game needs to get away from a XP incentive and reward contributions like Squad/Platoon leading, the Mission System needs to finished.

Continent locking and Continent bonuses in there current form are sufficient and serve the intended purpose. But considering the large time gap between these events, It's not enough to hold your attention.

The new Directive system being introduced (Achievements by any other name) is beneficial to the health of the game but ultimately serves as a temporary bandied solution seeing as its just polishing the Auraxium system that we already have, so outside of Aesthetics it's nothing new.

The eventual Ants and Resource system will provide logistical mindset type players with something to do and cater to a wider audience then just the action rambo inspired players.


With all that said, Strictly in my personnel opinion if I had to name -one- thing that needs to be done to improve the experience and expand the games health, Thus retaining player attention, is redo the Vehicle system entirely. Vehicles right now are only cardboard boxes that give the player a extra HP bar. What vehicles need to do is properly behave and perform like a vehicle with moving parts.

Ideally I'd like to see the vehicle system that's in War Thunder: Ground Forces or Red Orchestra 2 where you have hard-points over health bars.

Another thing that could be done to improve the health of the game and retain players is implement the base-modules of PS1 as part of the Outfit Capture system. Put a control console in a Facilities spawn room that is only accessible to the Outfit Officers of the Outfit who last conquered the facility.

Outfit Officers could use this control terminal to switch out base turrets or move generators to different structures at the cost of Certs, This way every Facility becomes to a degree a unique experience. Outfits could decide if they want to put all AA turrets onto a Tower, or we could see more use out of the rare Anti-Infantry turret.

I dare say to even allow Outfits to modify Phalanx guns with zoom optics or Thermal optics.

[End Rant]

[Chefkoch]

I Agree, base mods would be cool together with real sanctuarys !! Personally the biggest flaw is the respaw aka teleport redeploy system. You can travel way to fast around conts.. thats why ppl can avaoid fights so easily

[War Barney]

A major improvement would be a LOT more detailed commands for platoon leaders, all you have right now is waypoints, smoke and the attack/defend icon. This makes being a leader a thankless chore, you end up making less exp and spending your whole time on the map managing numbers (as instant redeploy means there are no tactics, just numbers management).

It would be nice to see more commands and abilities for leaders, perhaps an artillery bombardment somewhere they can use once an hour or something (just an example, not a good one at that..). Basically leading needs to have depth, right now it has non.

[Baneblade]

The problem with the Lib was never the ability to deal damage, nor the ability to take damage. It always has been, and still is, the ability to fly it like its an ESF. Same with the Galaxy.

[War Barney]

Originally Posted by Baneblade

The problem with the Lib was never the ability to deal damage, nor the ability to take damage. It always has been, and still is, the ability to fly it like its an ESF. Same with the Galaxy.

Hmmm this is actually true, in real life bombers are slow lumbering things that get protected by fighters, in planetside 2 as you said Gals and libs can very quickly get out of range of anti-air, especially if they fly at the sky ceiling.

That is part of the problem with libs/gals.. they don't need teamwork they just come in solo get 20-30 kills, then come back again.

[Gatekeeper]

I agree - the fact that powerful vehicles in PS2 don't require much teamwork is a key problem with the game design IMO. Clearly SOE wanted the game to appeal to more casual players (which, honestly, I appreciate to some extent) and hence we get MBTs without dedicated drivers, Lib-gunners jumping from belly to tail gun and back and Libs that can dogfight (or roll in place and have their belly-gunner one-shot fighters...).

As a lone-wolf type of player, I do appreciate that not everything in PS2 requires teamwork and I can still make an impact on my own - but I'd be happy to see a return to PS1's teamwork ideals for the more powerful vehicles.

[Boildown]

I actually agree with everything the OP said, including the comments about VS redeployside, and the hypothesized thought process directing SoE's hand.

[Figment]

None of these affected my choice to stop playing (even if I agree with the snipers shouldn't be infils thing, but mostly for CQC reasons that anything heavier than a pistol is broken with cloak).

To me the most important things are a combination of:

TTK: too short to get situational awareness and respond to a threat. Especially the amount of one hit kills.

Base design: main reason at first was the constant spawncamping. Well, my topics on this have been legendary enough I would say. Main bases too big, spawns in the wrong, open locations, disconnected flow.

Examples of disconnected flow base design:
- One side can teleport in and the defender has to cross long distances to take over a nearby base while also defending the teleport room is just "meh".
- Frequently can't even exit spawns to reach objectives as defender to get to objectives without going through a crossfire of vehicles with one shot kills + infantry with super-low TTKs.

Jetpacks and open bases: (vertical) ease of access + horizontal defenses on huge base design simply make defense next to impossible and a counter offensive virtually unthinkable.

Zerg-overpromoting gameplay: medics with infinite revive/healing juice, engineers (and therefore others) with infinite ammo.

Whack-a-mole gameplay: largely fixed, still exists here and there.

Vehicle combat design: instant seat-switching, solo-heavy tanks (resulting in surges of tank spam that can hardly be countered, overwhelm everything and then die out because of resources, rather than there being a somewhat constant, even fight),

Too many bases leading too information overload, combined with short timers make it next to impossible to "read the map" proper, since anything could happen (lattice improved this a little). Too few continents, non-optimal command features and warpgates that are sanctuaries: leading a campaign for global conquest is practically impossible.




Those are my main reasons.