I LOVE vehicle spam, it's NOT the problem of this game

[Figment]

Originally Posted by sneeek

I used to think that vehicle / air spam was a problem that needed to be addressed, but now it seems to me that when your spawn room is camped by half a dozen tanks, liberators and a bunch of infantry, it's time to spawn elsewhere. You've already been beaten. If the enemy takes out the SCU, they're actually doing you a favour.

Sometimes a quick vehicle counter-attack can recover the base. There isn't much high-level commanding going on right now, so this happens more by chance than by design.

However, it means there's only uni-directional flow. If that's the case, there's no point in even trying to defend, it's immediately better to let them sit in the base, grab your own vehicles and make them the sitting ducks (provided you bring enough people).

And sure, that happens in high pop situations, yes, I've organised a couple of those zergs after a tech plant lost their spawns and we still had an outpost and formed up before the enemy zerg reacted (in other cases, it just meant the NC got pulverised one by one because they ran off individually alerting their zerg that overwhelmed the few vehicles that could spawn at a time and all the infantry around it got farmed).


But that being the only realistic option renders it small teams useless for both defense and counter attacks. As long as it's pwn or be pwned, then there's no really enjoyable fight. :/

Dealing with it for a while is one thing, dealing with it for 10 years another, I'm personally bored with it after two weeks.

Difficulty of base defence has already oscillated between extremes during PS2 beta, so it's clearly rather a difficult thing to balance.

Not really what influenced ground vehicle viability...

Tanks were nearly nowhere to be seen until they removed the Galaxy-AMS. Why? Because tanks could not keep up with the speed of battle induced by the Galaxy and because it was much faster to speed cap the base cap points by air (there were no spawns at first at all outposts!).

Not because they were buffed in the same period, they were simply made useful. Didn't take long before people realised just how strong they were too.

Defensibility has only increased since beta, with more fortifications and infantry cover placed, but far too little and not effectively (there are other threads for that though).

[Figment]

People also seem to not understand that if they increase the cooldown or resource cost for vehicles that by common sense they would have to increase the power of those vehicles as well. So to those people, could you really imagine a tank taking like 5 rockets to the back or 10 to the front, Liberators having the same health as a galaxy?

People who say this shouldn't even bother trying to understand balancing mechanics. It's not for them.


Read my post TimeAlude: PS1 tanks took up to EIGHTEEN shots from ANY DIRECTION (no directional hitboxes).


They were not a problem. Before that AV buff, they took over 20, mind you. We simply had better structures with high ground, EMP grenades and there were less to concentrate fire on and less to spam us to death.

[Illtempered]

I think some better base design would solve a lot of the problems. Tech Plants were more fun to defend before they got nerfed, and they weren't too hard to take. It just took some coordination and shield diffusers. I still would love to see more infantry-only combat, like we have in Biolabs.

I don't see vehicles spam as that much of a problem. It just makes for more targets. If you're getting owned by vehicles out in the open field too much, then maybe it's time to rethink your tactics.

[Bags]

lots of tanks is cool not fun

[Figment]

Tech Plants were possible to defend (too possible with too little variation causing all the render issues due to too dense concentrations for the engine to handle), but were not designed to break out off: the shield acts as a plug that keeps enemies out (till Sundy/gen goes down... or some smart people with a Vanguard raise their barrels and let infantry walk in), but also keeps players trapped inside and camped with ease. They were broken designs either which way you look at it.

[duomaxwl]

*cough* Make bases less open *cough* Stop making spawns out in the open *cough*

[Rolfski]

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

I wouldn't be surprised if this dude rarely plays infantry, or ever tries to defend anything as infantry.

Whether I'm lone wolving or play in my outfit, I play mostly infantry. And yes, I fight against vehicle spams a lot. Sometimes we can deal with them head-on, most of the time we have to use other tactics like the ones I described in my anti-zerg tactics thread.

Originally Posted by Figment

Funny, that's exactly what you're denying yourself mathematically...

Because if you buff infantry weapons even further, that won't do anything but make multiple forms of combat aggravating.

I haven't really played PS1 but if you suggest that infantry won't stand a chance anyway against vehicle spam, no matter how you buff them, I disagree. This game can use improvements in base/terrain design and weapon design. More defensible bases/terrain with infantry that have better AV/AA capability should be enough to balance out vehicle spam. No need to limit the spam.

[PredatorFour]

Right now they are making more conts for the game. If these have the same base designs as we already have, i don`t think we are going to see any radical changes to base design. Which DOES make vehicle spam a problem. I agree that better base design would significantly aid defense and furthermore fun for infantry.

[Ghoest9]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

it's NOT the problem of this game

wrong

It may be balanced. You may enjoy it.

Its a problem because most players dont enjoy it and many hate it.
And thats what matters. Because more players spend more money.

Most of us want primarily a gun fight not an attack helicopter fight.

[Sturmhardt]

As long as infantry does not have real place in the gameplay I will hate the vehiclespam.

If we get real defensible bases where you need to get out of your comfy tank to capture it, you can tank spam all you want.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

I haven't really played PS1 but if you suggest that infantry won't stand a chance anyway against vehicle spam, no matter how you buff them, I disagree. This game can use improvements in base/terrain design and weapon design. More defensible bases/terrain with infantry that have better AV/AA capability should be enough to balance out vehicle spam. No need to limit the spam.

You haven't been keeping up to date on the PS2 Base Design thread by Wahooo haven't you? >.>
http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=51193

^ Think you'll want to read that, fully.

Base design are the basics to work with as infantry, currently there is far too little favouring infantry (pretty much everything around a base should be biased to infantry for them to make a competitive chance). I fully agree with you there and aren't going to discuss that. But let's hypothesize that you have a functional base that isn't spawncamped by vehicles (come on SOE, make it happen...)




However, when it comes to balancing them out numerically, numbers become more important. There are simply too many tanks and Sunderers available to keep up as infantry units.

Keep in mind, they kill you in one shot.

You kill one in what, 2 from behind 5, 8 shots from front, assuming you don't miss too much, so on average... 5 shots? You carry 5 shots by default, so you can take out one before you need to resupply two if you're lucky and get at them from behind and lead well.

But you don't engage one in this game, you engage between 3 and 30 in regular fights (from all kinds of directions too, too many to keep them in front of you and ensure no angle from any of them on you). That's in between 3 and 30 guns of INSTAKILL aimed at you. Someone will hit, especially since they can take more time aiming than you and are not penalized with as much gravity as you. They will kill you and send you flying to the spawn point, which leaves your allies vulnerable since they can't fight back, nor flee because they're not fast enough.

To kill 3-30 tanks, you need to get between 6 (3 tanks hit from behind) and 180 shots on target. If you have 3-30 people as well, a good portion of those are dedicated to AI (including snipers), medic, engineer and AA. They can't disable vehicles with EMP, so they're completely reliant on the few AV units out there. Now in case of a small group of tanks, it's not too hard to handle even with a small group, but the more enemy tanks there are, the harder it becomes to take them out. Given the right situational circumstances (like extreme high ground and a canyon pass), it could be done, especially if they come from one direction through a choke point, panic and flee. But in normal circumstances, chances are they beat you to crap by simply spamming you all and cutting you off from reinforcements. Especially if you consider that each shot they fire is a potential kill and they carry up to 40 shots, before they need a refill and the more tanks there are, the bigger the volume of shots and thus the bigger the chance they hit something.



So okay, let's say you half that. 3 shots on average from the front. Still some power distance, but more managable. Still 6 to 90 shots needed and still most of you aren't HA, so it's going to be tricky given that you're still one shot kills and still die equally fast, though the amount of volleys should reduce faster as you kill or drive of more sooner.

So sure, it'd be a easier, no mistake about that. Would it be more fun though? For infantry maybe a little less frustrating, I still wouldn't quite call dieing all the time before you can apply much skill fun.


In the new situation though, tanks die even more quickly than they already do (and don't get me wrong, when engaged advantageously, you can kill a single tank really, really quick) and they start to get annoyed to the same degree infantry are that get one shot consistently... So now you have annoyed infantry and annoyed ground vehicle users. Don't forget, these people hauled that thing over from miles away, it's going to bother them that infantry is killing them with that much ease. Make no mistake about that!

Even more so if the render issues remain.

And yet, they would probably still steamroll the infantry due to their powerful group volleys that still kill 3 times as fast as a similar number of HA users, so you'd still need loads of HA users continuously.

>.>



Now, if you'd simply reduce vehicle numbers and keep their armour the same, you get a different effect.

What less numbers do, is keep vehicle users happy that they have survivability, but it cuts the pressure on infantry units (less guns aimed in their direction) and reduces the dependency on the individuals in the group who carry AV, allowing infantry players to their own prefered roles a bit more, like taking out other infantry.

The game becomes less forced, individual vehicle units survive for a longer period of time, but don't have as much impact, even if they still one hit kill. There's plenty of hectic stress and adrenaline flowing, but not as much frustration type stress.

In fact, it may become so leniant, that you can increase the armour level of tanks a bit again, making vehicle driving more fun.


(Of course, that is dependent too on how effective engineers are in repairs, currently it's already too fast on vehicles (IMO) at the slowest rate of repair: often outrepair enemy fire on my own, they will run out of missiles at some point...).

[Chaff]

.
I like how this thread was crafted - it really made me address and rethink my cynicism about gameplay.

Sometimes it's good to cool off and let all the different opinions and observations truly sink in. We are a tough community to please. Like it or not, the weapons are fairly well-balanced. I have to accept the fact that the Devs DID (and continue to) put a LOT of time & thought into this.
If they buff AV weapons for infantry so they can stop or slow a huge Zerg, then when it's a random squad or 2 vs a random squad or two ...... the side with the OP weapons has too much of an advantage. That's not good gameplay when the numbers get small(er). When you're at an outpost and it's a few dozen vs a few dozen .... one ESF
should be able to fly in and turn the tide. Not get insta-gibbed by Op AV or AA.

STEP-1 to gameplay improvement ?......address base (re)design. Give infantry more cover - where some HA with current AV or AA in the right bunker (w/an engie & med or two) can do a LOT more to hold the vehicle Zerg from overunning their side of a base/courtyard. Give Maxes some Max-specific cover at bases .... perhaps with some well-protected trenches where an Engie or two can help keep them alive & full of ammo. They can die, but give infantry a little better survivability within a fight. It should be HARD to fight back against a huge VEH & AIR Zerg, but defenders deserve a better hand than what's currently available to them. (IMHO)

Vehicles should have a tougher time getting mass quantities inside a base. Bases with no walls or outer defensible structure(s) are inherently flawed. Defense is TOO difficult. People won't make a stand if they feel there is NO HOPE. Significant numbers of MBT & LIBS can & should always be able to force opposing forces inside the base/perimeter. Actually breaching INTO a base (especially the Large ones) should require superior numbers or at least near-flawless tactics of seasoned fighters.

FIX THE BASES. Improve defensabilty. Lessen vehicle proximity to the big important bases. Create more openings to fire out of - and make them LESS PRONE to vehicle Spammage. A well dug-in force should be harder to dislodge. I found my most enjoyable fights where against overwhelming odds....that sometimes went on for HOURS.....now THAT is my version of FUN.

This game needs to create better opportunity for SATISFACTION within the gameplay.

[NewSith]

Originally Posted by Chaff

If they buff AV weapons for infantry so they can stop or slow a huge Zerg, then when it's a random squad or 2 vs a random squad or two ...... the side with the OP weapons has too much of an advantage. That's not good gameplay when the numbers get small(er). When you're at an outpost and it's a few dozen vs a few dozen .... one ESF should be able to fly in and turn the tide. Not get insta-gibbed by Op AV or AA.

Well, there are many ways one can buff a weapon, especially with all the rocket launcher aspects:

Damage
AoE Radius
Accuracy
Maximum Range
Reload Speed
Missile Speed
Missile Drop
Ammo Storage Capacity
Lockon Speed*
Turning Speed*
Path Prediction (On/Off)*
Flares/Smoke Response*

[Chaff]

....elaborate on "Path Prediction " please.

[Rolfski]

@Figment
I've seen many base improvement suggestions, including your studies. Or windows that work as spawn point doors for example. Infantry can shoot out the windows but tanks cannot shoot in. Suggestions like these only confirm my idea that you can do a lot by just base design to balance out vehicle spam.

And as much as there might be good arguments going for your more-power-by-smaller numbers vision, in the end it will reduce this game to a small scale tactical shooter.
And that is not the direction this game should be going.