Could BFRs work better with the new resource system? - Page 21

Atheosim · 2012-03-19, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by Ragnafrak

No mechs, please.

Mechwarrior Online's got that one covered.

No mechs because another game has them!!!!!!!!!

Mastachief · 2012-03-19, 07:28 PM

BFR's should never ever ever ever feature in any game that has tanks in it. Can all the mech/gundam fanboys please feck off to mechwarrior online or something. This thread has been done over and over again since they announced ps2.

Ruwyn · 2012-03-19, 07:35 PM

OMG NOOOOO Biffers are OP!!!!

Please....
3 man infantry teams took them out.....
dropping into a good minefield killed them....Done it.
a cloaker and reaver team could send them retreating....

Just because you can't solo kill something does not make it OP. The timer being higher then every other vehicle kept drivers from wanting to lose them, thus they would retreat A LOT. Not to mention the number of cert pts you needed to spend into them to even make something that was versatile. Allowing them onto the battlefield and not making them primary targets = newb. Don't be a newb.

I also find it funny that several have posted how everyone had one....which plainly wasn't the case. I never saw more then 10 in the field for one empire and they were never focused in the same "area". I'm willing to bet that most of you that are VEHEMENTLY against BFRs are not playing the current version or haven't even in the past few yrs.

Were BFRs difficult to go against at first...for players without a plan? Yes.
Are they still "OMG I WIN"? No.

Did BFRs kill PS1? No
Core Combat? Much more likely.
Coca Cola and Movie ads in-game? Much more likely.
Call of Duty(2003), BF2(2005), and the ability of players to have much better frame rates with fewer players and the appeal of round based gameplay for many in the FPS genre while playing for FREE? HUGE probability.

HitbackTR · 2012-03-19, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by Ruwyn

OMG NOOOOO Biffers are OP!!!!

Please....
3 man infantry teams took them out.....
dropping into a good minefield killed them....Done it.
a cloaker and reaver team could send them retreating....

Just because you can't solo kill something does not make it OP. The timer being higher then every other vehicle kept drivers from wanting to lose them, thus they would retreat A LOT. Not to mention the number of cert pts you needed to spend into them to even make something that was versatile. Allowing them onto the battlefield and not making them primary targets = newb. Don't be a newb.

I also find it funny that several have posted how everyone had one....which plainly wasn't the case. I never saw more then 10 in the field for one empire and they were never focused in the same "area". I'm willing to bet that most of you that are VEHEMENTLY against BFRs are not playing the current version or haven't even in the past few yrs.

Were BFRs difficult to go against at first...for players without a plan? Yes.
Are they still "OMG I WIN"? No.

Did BFRs kill PS1? No
Core Combat? Much more likely.
Coca Cola and Movie ads in-game? Much more likely.
Call of Duty(2003), BF2(2005), and the ability of players to have much better frame rates with fewer players and the appeal of round based gameplay for many in the FPS genre while playing for FREE? HUGE probability.

Didn't ever say BFR's were OP. They were easily solo-able but that's not the point. What I did say is that they were SOE's attempt to cater to the people who wanted to have too much power in the hands of one very poorly designed machine so that new subscribers could be attracted. They were implemented poorly and caused many vets to leave PS, (and new subscribers). They caused frame-rate issues and tried to perform roles that were already being performed in much more efficient ways by other vehicles/classes in game.

The flavour of the month argument seems to be "yes BFR's in PS1 were implemented poorly so PS2 is a chance to correctly implement them" doesn't wash with me and your logic/argument/whatever is flawed if you try and see otherwise. thankfully PS2 devs concur with this, the question is whether they will essentially permanently 'honor' their decision to not have BFR's in PS2.

Planetside has a formula which is proven to work but also bears witness to what doesn't work, i.e., BFR.s. PS1 vets who agree with this in my opinion have a duty to continue to remind PS2 devs and the moderator's and posters on these boards, of that. Yes we may do it in our own ways at times but if it finds any kind of resonance with other members it shows that it is legitimate.

**Malorn** · 2012-03-19, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by Atheosim

I definitely think that once the game has been running for some time, there can be found a niche for a Mech unit.

This thread has a serious cart-before-the-horse issues.

What problem are you attempting to solve by adding mechs to the game?

Tapman · 2012-03-19, 08:35 PM

There were two things that made sense about BFR's, the first being more customization options with your weapons but not having that with other vehicles made it unfair. The second was that gunning them (at least the NC) was an exercise in overcoming motion sickness but if you got the hang of it, you were greatly rewarded but really only if you had a driver who knew when/where to attack, retreat, and hold. Having roles and play-styles with varied learning curves that also rely on other roles/styles is a great way to balance potentially OP results and also give depth to the game. BFR's took it one step too far though, tipping the scale from light-medium-heavy to -heavier on the ground and in the air. Even though I love gunning BFR's in Planetside as it exists today, I will be happy as a clam to have them gone so we can get back to open-field battles as they were before.

There is so much more potential in Planetside 2 with the engine and the development team behind this combined with an openness with the community. We do want variety with vehicles but please finish the requirements for the Planetside experience (Buggies!) and then think aquatic and outer space before even considering something like the BFR. Let Planetside be their resting place, an Alternate Universe to the Auraxis that will be in Planetside 2.

UnknownDT · 2012-03-19, 09:38 PM

Originally Posted by BREWKO

Tell us how you really feel...

lmao made me laugh pretty hard.

Hitback is right though. Stop being retards and suggesting lame ass ideas to get BFR's back in a game when they ruined the previous.

Fenrys · 2012-03-20, 12:43 AM

mech =/= BFR

They could be lightnings with jumpjets that are better suited for rough or vertical terrain.

Atheosim · 2012-03-20, 12:50 AM

Originally Posted by Fenrys

mech =/= BFR

They could be lightnings with jumpjets that are better suited for rough or vertical terrain.

Sounds like a fucking fantastic idea to me.

artifice · 2012-03-20, 12:51 AM

Originally Posted by Ragnafrak

No mechs, please.

Mechwarrior Online's got that one covered.

While we're at it, no tanks either, World of Tanks has them.

**Malorn** · 2012-03-20, 12:55 AM

BFRs are just another name for a mech. The proper noun "Mech" might also be trademarked so they could have created a new name simply to avoid any issues there.

Regardless, around here those terms are equivalent. Even if it drives the purists nuts.

Atheosim · 2012-03-20, 12:58 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

BFRs are just another name for a mech. The proper noun "Mech" might also be trademarked so they could have created a new name simply to avoid any issues there.

Regardless, around here those terms are equivalent. Even if it drives the purists nuts.

the only game where mrch=bfr is planetside 1. In Planetside1, everybody hated mechs (bfrs) or bfrs (mechs).

We're moving away from planetside1. Away from BFRs. Towards non-planetside 1 mechs.

artifice · 2012-03-20, 01:07 AM

The fact that the MAX is a type of mech must be driving the people who don't like mechs crazy.

Eyeklops · 2012-03-20, 01:21 AM

Originally Posted by artifice

The fact that the MAX is a type of mech must be driving the people who don't like mechs crazy.

A max doesn't appear to be a mech to me. I think it looks more like a piece of very heavy body armor and not a vehicle.

**Malorn** · 2012-03-20, 01:34 AM

Originally Posted by artifice

The fact that the MAX is a type of mech must be driving the people who don't like mechs crazy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mech

A mech is distinct from powered armor in its larger size..."Mech" typically does not refer to form-fitting garments such as the Iron Man armor. Armored suit mechs tend to be much larger and bulkier than the wearer and the wearer's limbs may or may not actually extend completely into the respective limbs.

The term "mech" is used to describe such vehicles considerably more often in Western entertainment than in Asian entertainment. "Mech" as a term originated from the BattleTech series (where it is often written as 'Mech, short for BattleMech or OmniMech),

Thus MAX are not mechs.

Mech originated with Battletech, which is described as...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BattleTech

Chicago-based FASA Corporation's original, 1984 BattleTech game focuses on enormous robotic, semi-humanoid battle machines called Battledroids.[4] Their name was changed to BattleMechs in the second edition because George Lucas and Lucasfilm claimed the rights to the term "droid". The visual design of the earliest line of BattleMechs were taken from Macross and other anime, including many signature images.

BFRs are mechs by another name, likely to avoid naming rights issues with FASA.

MAX are power armor like the Fallout series and Ironman.

Lol BFR H8R educating the mech fanbois.