Disposable Heroes - Page 4

MasterChief096 · 2011-08-07, 01:09 PM

1. Fast response is NOT a made up role. A good outfit that has everyone certed in mossie can mobilize and move out faster than a galaxy based outfit waiting for everyone to recall, pull gear/MAXes, and load up. The problem with this is that the mossies can fast respond to a base and pick off everything outside (provided there's no AA) before landing/bailing and getting out. If the mossie had no guns this wouldn't be an issue. The fast response mossie using outfit wouldn't be able to fly to a base/area and pick everything off before bailing. They'd have to figure something else out.

2. There are several disadvantages to having your outfit use mossie only rather than galaxy/phantasm. The primary being AA at the base you are fast responding too. Its interesting that the outfits that employ the fast response method (everyone has mossie) also know what it takes to defend against an outfit of similar nature. If you show up to a base that DT/TRx (amongst others) are holding you will almost always encounter AA MAXes, plus fighter craft active in the area. I know this well because when I decided to have my outfit go mossie required we thought we could just waltz into a base they were holding the same they did to us before, we were wrong.

Another disadvantage is everyone in your outfit is less combat effective until you can either beat the enemy back enough to where you can hack a terminal, or you can get an AMS out somewhere in the CY that the enemy is (hopefully) holding. Until then you are all agile. It doesn't matter if you have HA. You are at a disadvantage going against MAX suits, or Rexo users with MA or HA. If the enemy blows the terminals then bam, that just set back your plans for getting your outfit combat effective gear for awhile. IMHO, I'm not seeing anything wrong with fast response outfits in PlanetSide as they are. People failing to use the counter-measure (AA) deserve to lose to aircraft.

"Oh but bailing can still happen despite AA!!!" This is true, to an extent. However if you start hammering incoming mossies with 2+ AA MAXes its going to make those mossies AB and scatter and bail wherever they have to before dying, causing mass disorganization to the oncoming outfit. I can't tell you how many times we've had 2 AA MAXes out, maybe a skyguard, and maybe an AA BFR and we threw off the plans of 5+ incoming mossies/reavers.

Also, if you're actually holding the CY, with infantry/vehicles and not just a couple MAX units, those that bailed are going to get picked off by the MAXes/infantry you have out and about. If you have 1-2 guys at each entrance of the base, and you force that outfit to mass bail, they're still likely to get picked off by the entrance defenders unless your outfit is terribad and can't farm down a hallway with a lasher/MCG or for NC our amazing gauss rifle.

I think the problem being created here is from outfits that go and drop the tubes at a base and then hack the base and turtle in the hallways CC. While this is effective indoor tactics, the fact that you completely ignore the CY makes it so you have a 90% fail rate. It doesn't matter what the enemy comes in at that point, mossies or galaxy, or fucking ground transports. You ignored the CY, allowed them to quickly set up an AMS to get gear, and gave them a lot of time to begin pushing inside the base.

3. So what's better? Mossie based fast response or galaxy based? The truth is that neither is better, that a combination of the two would work the best. Both styles of outfits will get raped if they just try to fly to a base where the CY is being held. But at least a galaxy can take a shit load of AA fire before dumping off its inhabitants, which contain two maxes and shit ton of infantry. Not to mention it gets all of them there in one piece, and working together. Oh and everyone in it has the combat gear they want to use for inside the base, without the need to hack a terminal first.

4. So what's the problem with bailing? The only real problem I see is someone farming with a mossies gun, getting like 2-3 infantry kills, and then saying "Shit I'm half damaged" and then they bail on to a tower with a chance to get 2-3 more kills before going down. Once again, a problem easily fixed by removing the mossies gun.

I've advocated numerous times for a scout/response craft that was basically a mossie with no gun, to give it its intended role... being a scout/response craft.

5. Mossie style outfit promotes more one man army and less teamwork? That is one of the dumbest things I've heard by far. Not only does a mossie outfit have to mobilize everyone in a mossie and move out in a group, they have to then figure out how to breach CY defenses, get everyone in gear, possibly get base tubes/gen up, and push the CC with indoor tactics. If 10 guys showed up in a mossie to a base with the CY being held, all of which were in different outfits, those 10 guys would die rather fast, regardless of bail or not.

If mossie fast response bailing was really such an imbalanced role, then everyone would do it. Why is it then that only the "killwhore" outfits, AKA those outfits who are coordinated, are actually able to pull it off? I've seen numerous zergfits attempt the mossie deal, and most of the time I watched 15+ mossies get completely annihilated by a coordinated ground group with AA.

There's a lot more to it than:

1. pull mossie, fly to target
2. afterburn over desired entrance
3. ????
4. profit!

Until you try to coordinate an outfit to use all mosquitos and resecure/take bases doing so, don't speak on the issue because you'll never understand that it takes just as much if not more teamwork than loading everyone into a galaxy and flying to a target.

Effective · 2011-08-07, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by exLupo

"Taking out bailing would remove absolutely none of the scout and fast response ability the mossie provides."

Nothing in your diatribe made that any less true.

Actually it did, I stated specifically why having to "land" for fast response works only against terrible outfits.

Keeping bailing in the game hurts ABSOLUTELY nothing, it never has.

Originally Posted by exLupo

edit: "a couple AA maxs and then they can't do anything except go cert another vehicle. "

You missed a good part of the quote, let me fix that for you

"Fast response will become impossible because all you have to do, is have aircraft of your own, and a couple AA maxs and then they can't do anything except go cert another vehicle."

Notice the key part you're missing of what you quoted. A competent outfit has NOTHING to fear against mossies hotdroppers. You hold the outside with aircraft, some AA (aa maxs, skyguard, etc). Put 2 people on every entrance, 1 person on CC with a AI max with DL, 1 cloaker in spawns, 1 person running around laying CE continually, 2 people floating between entrances to take care of any surgers or shore up any breaks in the defense. If one entrances completely fails you collapse to where you need to in order to keep the CC defended.

Bam this just made mossie hotdropping extremely unreliable, unless you drop with 20 people all at the same time. If you try to stay and fight you'll die to air and AA. If you try to bail, you may get killed on the way down while bailing if the enemy has a mossie. If not, you'll hit mines and die. If you EMP you still have 2 rexo opponents who have a huge advantage over you in terms of defense, boomers, choice of weapons for the area they're fighting in. You may want to consider having your outfit stop using tactics that were never really that effective

As for the rest of your post concerning ABing past AA maxs...

Sure, a aircraft has nothing to fear from an AA max while afterburning, that's kinda the point. What point would afterburn serve, if not to get away from AA. If your complaint is that this makes aircraft OP, then complain about aircraft having powerful weapons, not against bailing.

Duddy · 2011-08-07, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Effective

Keeping bailing in the game hurts ABSOLUTELY nothing, it never has.

Well sorry Effective, but that just isn't true.

If you go by PS1, it hurts AA balance because you have pilots jumping out of their aircraft and then using Decimators on the AA that tried to kill them.

Maxes can't hop out of the armour to avoid dieing to AV now can they?

Effective · 2011-08-07, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by Duddy

Well sorry Effective, but that just isn't true.

If you go by PS1, it hurts AA balance because you have pilots jumping out of their aircraft and then using Decimators on the AA that tried to kill them.

Maxes can't hop out of the armour to avoid dieing to AV now can they?

Sounds like you need a skyguard! I'm kidding before you shake your head.

That depends on the circumstances and the location. If the max is smart, he can just run away, the only max that has a serious chance of dieing to a bailer is going to be the burster since his special ability doesn't increase his chances of escape. And if it really comes down to it, the AA max still has a faster ttk then that decimator.

If they nerfed AA maxs TTK to be slower, then they still can start autorunning. The chance that a 3rd deci is going to actually hit a full speed autorunning max at a distance (while not impossible) is going to be fairly slim.

Bailing out of a powerful aircraft is the issue, not the bailing itself.

Duddy · 2011-08-07, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by Effective

Sounds like you need a skyguard! I'm kidding before you shake your head.

That depends on the circumstances and the location. If the max is smart, he can just run away, the only max that has a serious chance of dieing to a bailer is going to be the burster since his special ability doesn't increase his chances of escape. And if it really comes down to it, the AA max still has a faster ttk then that decimator.

If they nerfed AA maxs TTK to be slower, then they still can start autorunning. The chance that a 3rd deci is going to actually hit a full speed autorunning max at a distance (while not impossible) is going to be fairly slim.

Bailing out of a powerful aircraft is the issue, not the bailing itself.

Well what you just said is wrong, IMO.

The fact that the pilot can lose his aircraft but then still kill the thing that was there to counter what he was doing is wrong.

AA Maxes having to run away from pilots that they shot down (or would have shot down) is wrong.

The fact the pilot gets the chance to take out the AA Max after losing his aircraft is wrong.

I have little problem with pilots being able to bail from their aircraft should it be in the game, I have an issue with said pilot then being able to immediately switch "role" after his previous "role" was just destroyed.

QuakCow · 2011-08-07, 02:30 PM

Well...why don't we just limit the armament a pilot can carry? I mean, thats why we're designing PDWs now is because full size weapons take up a lot of space in a cockpit...

And I never really considered anything except the harasser as disposable, and even then I'd do my best to keep it alive. I understand what you mean as a lot of people just threw their vehicles out there without regard.

Duddy · 2011-08-07, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by QuakCow

Well...why don't we just limit the armament a pilot can carry? I mean, thats why we're designing PDWs now is because full size weapons take up a lot of space in a cockpit...

And I never really considered anything except the harasser as disposable, and even then I'd do my best to keep it alive. I understand what you mean as a lot of people just threw their vehicles out there without regard.

I imagine that this is a likely outcome, I'd expect a "pilot" (could be for ground not just air) role might be created and they would balance what they can use around the fact that they would be driving something.

They did say that the creation of "roles" was a decision made out of improving balance.

Avirau · 2011-08-07, 03:05 PM

I don't know that longer timers on vehicles is the right answer, but I do agree that some changes need to be made. I like the idea of having the timers increase/decrease based on frequency of player death (or rather, the destruction of the vehicle) similar to how infantry spawn timers work in PS1.

Effective · 2011-08-07, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Duddy

The fact that the pilot can lose his aircraft but then still kill the thing that was there to counter what he was doing is wrong.

AA Maxes having to run away from pilots that they shot down (or would have shot down) is wrong.

The fact the pilot gets the chance to take out the AA Max after losing his aircraft is wrong.

I have little problem with pilots being able to bail from their aircraft should it be in the game, I have an issue with said pilot then being able to immediately switch "role" after his previous "role" was just destroyed.

I'll solve the problem now

Originally Posted by Effective

bailing does need to be changed. Something like "received damage in the last 'x' seconds, can't bail" would be better then just outright removing bailing, OR "Less then 1/4 health, can't bail".

Talek Krell · 2011-08-07, 05:51 PM

I'd like it if bailing was something you could only do as the passenger of an air transport. This callous disregard people seem to have for their vehicles leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Expecting people to land doesn't seem like that much to ask.

Baron · 2011-08-07, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

I'd like it if bailing was something you could only do as the passenger of an air transport. This callous disregard people seem to have for their vehicles leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Expecting people to land doesn't seem like that much to ask.

That is a good suggestion/idea; also you could have the option for the pilot to bail/eject as a very specialized cert/skill that only the most dedicated air cav pilots would even have a chance to get (so the bailing HA guys or occasional mossie transport guys would have to land and get out).

Duddy · 2011-08-07, 09:49 PM

Originally Posted by Effective

I'll solve the problem now

Does it really solve the problem? I don't think you've thought that through.

Solution 1 means that should you then be taking any pitiful amount of damage, say like from some CE, then you wouldn't be able to bail at all. That would be a hindrance when trying to bail over somewhere like a tower or base (when thinking of it in PS1 scenarios).

Solution 2 means that, even if you survived your encounter unless you can repair (which may not always be available) you would be stuck in what is essentially a flying coffin.

Both your solutions allow bailing to remain whilst solving the situation I proposed. They both however introduce their own problems which I imagine would be really annoying for anyone using aircraft as their main role.

This again is why I prefer the limited load out for pilots. It prevents the issue I previously described, but would still allow pilots to bail freely without causing more issues for others. Others being the key word.

DashRev · 2011-08-07, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by Duddy

Solution 1 means that should you then be taking any pitiful amount of damage, say like from some CE, then you wouldn't be able to bail at all. That would be a hindrance when trying to bail over somewhere like a tower or base (when thinking of it in PS1 scenarios).

He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that was his intention in offering that as a solution. You can still fast-respond to an area, but it severely limits a player's ability to just hot drop on a hotly contested building to score a few easy kills with little to no expectation of actually contributing to its capture.

Solution 2 means that, even if you survived your encounter unless you can repair (which may not always be available) you would be stuck in what is essentially a flying coffin.

Again, even if vehicle repairs are for some reason difficult to find, you can still actually land your vehicle and get out if it.

CutterJohn · 2011-08-08, 12:05 AM

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

I'd like it if bailing was something you could only do as the passenger of an air transport. This callous disregard people seem to have for their vehicles leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Expecting people to land doesn't seem like that much to ask.

Worrying about a callous disregard for vehicles in a game where people have a callous disregard for their own lives seems a bit crazy.

Bailing is a valid style of gameplay. If people want to bail on a tower and maybe get a kill or two before dying, great. Its no different than the other completely self serving styles of gameplay in the game.

I agree that going from combat vehicle to hotdropping stormtrooper is annoying. And is the only thing that needs nerfed. Aircav wears a flight suit, except the individual transport mossie variant, which has no weapons. There, everything is solved.

Talek Krell · 2011-08-08, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Worrying about a callous disregard for vehicles in a game where people have a callous disregard for their own lives seems a bit crazy.

That also worries me.