Revisiting Artillery, because its in.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by Turdicus

Not necessarily, I mean do kills generate resources? Just xp I thought

I mean in the sense that if your empire is doing well then you have lots of resources, so you can spend more on OS, so your empire does better. and so on.

I actually liked the OS during my time in PS1 2004/5, so if they balance this right it could work for me, but I will watching closely in beta.

[kadrin]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

Kadrin, while it's good that you enjoy doing artillery, have a thought for a second about the players on the receiving end who have no direct way to fight back. And then think about them being on the receiving end of many players who enjoy doing artillery. Then think about them logging out and going to play another game.

Done badly, something like artillery can break this kind of persistent world. It's not like a map where you get spammed a couple of times during a 30minute round. It could be a continuous experience during gameplay, and while fun to play with, not fun to play against.

You don't fight back directly versus indirect fire weapons, that's kind of the point.

All players potentially have a direct way to fight back versus artillery. In PS1, if you had an air vehicle certed, all you had to do was just spawn at a base that wasn't getting shelled, grab your air vehicle and hunt it down. The problem is people lack the mental facility to not spawn right into meatgrinders constantly. You cannot cater to these people, they will complain about anything that kills them, be it Air, Ground, Arty, MAXs, or even Heavy Assault weapons.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in PS2 it looks like we don't have to actually cert for vehicles, but we cert for specializations of them. With this being the case, anyone can simply grab an air vehicle and hunt down the offending artillery.

And this is just one person, there will surely be a number of other people, some of them dedicated to air vehicles, who can easily also hunt down artillery units.

I'm not saying artillery doesn't need balancing, the Flail in PS1 sure could use some restrictions like a longer timer for acquiring them, not being able to deploy within a certain range of warpgates and capitol shields. But then, unless the Flail was doing direct fire into a base, you needed a second person to aim for it, it's essentially a 2 person vehicle. If it was doing direct fire into a base, you have nothing to complain about, it's right there for you to shoot back at, stop feeding into the meatgrinder, take 2 seconds to think and go out a different entrance or better yet, spawn some place else.

What I don't understand is people arguing that they'd rather have an OS which anyone can call down at any time assuming they certed for it (and at some point the vast majority of people will have certed for it when enough time has passed). You're essentially arguing for no artillery spam and few OS's now and a crap ton of OS's a month or 2 down the line, something that is essentially an I-Win button with no counter, versus artillery which would need a spotter to be effective and is easily counterable by aircraft.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by kadrin

You don't fight back directly versus indirect fire weapons, that's kind of the point.

All players potentially have a direct way to fight back versus artillery. In PS1, if you had an air vehicle certed, all you had to do was just spawn at a base that wasn't getting shelled, grab your air vehicle and hunt it down. The problem is people lack the mental facility to not spawn right into meatgrinders constantly. You cannot cater to these people, they will complain about anything that kills them, be it Air, Ground, Arty, MAXs, or even Heavy Assault weapons.

The "artillery" that's being discussed here is the replacement orbital strike. It could be delivered by off-map artillery (analogous to how it worked in PS1). If so, there will be no countermeasure except to take cover. Such a weapon being spammed by potentially dozens of players could be a game breaker.

[kadrin]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

The "artillery" that's being discussed here is the replacement orbital strike. It could be delivered by off-map artillery (analogous to how it worked in PS1). If so, there will be no countermeasure except to take cover. Such a weapon being spammed by potentially dozens of players could be a game breaker.

Which is what I'm arguing against. Off-map support is a terrible idea in a game where players are supposed to fill all the roles.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by kadrin

Which is what I'm arguing against. Off-map support is a terrible idea in a game where players are supposed to fill all the roles.

OK, but Higby has said there should be no indirect fire weapons, which has been interpreted on these forums as meaning that true artillery pieces like the Flail from PS1 will not be returning. There has been several threads on that topic.

So if you don't want off-map artillery and there will be no on-map artillery according to the devs, then it seems we are sorted

[kadrin]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

OK, but Higby has said there should be no indirect fire weapons, which has been interpreted on these forums as meaning that true artillery pieces like the Flail from PS1 will not be returning. There has been several threads on that topic.

So if you don't want off-map artillery and there will be no on-map artillery according to the devs, then it seems we are sorted

Unfortunately OS's are a form of off-map artillery. Which is why I was arguing for on-map player used artillery instead of OS's.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by kadrin

Unfortunately OS's are a form of off-map artillery. Which is why I was arguing for on-map player used artillery instead of OS's.

I see what you're saying Kadrin, and the truth is we don't know exactly what is in the game or not. We can only express our preferences for now and hope it works out for us gameplay wise. SOE win if they make most of us happy enough to want to keep playing the game.

So I would prefer to have rare and "reasonably" powerful OS-type artillery and no on-map artillery. And you would prefer no OS but on-map artillery. Both are reasonable positions, so let's see how it goes,

[kadrin]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

I see what you're saying Kadrin, and the truth is we don't know exactly what is in the game or not. We can only express our preferences for now and hope it works out for us gameplay wise. SOE win if they make most of us happy enough to want to keep playing the game.

So I would prefer to have rare and "reasonably" powerful OS-type artillery and no on-map artillery. And you would prefer no OS but on-map artillery. Both are reasonable positions, so let's see how it goes,

We can only wait and see, but from how it looks now, I see it only being a matter of time before it's just as spammed as OS's in PS1.

I'll be playing either way, despite any changes made I do not like.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Well, orbital strike for CRs is from PS1, but if a lot of people get it, that's more like Battlefield Bad Company 2. In BC2 all recon can choose Mortar Strike which reloaded in like 30 or 45 seconds and was unlimited in ammo.

This. Why does every single mechanic have to be a copy off the Battlefield series? Is it because Smedley is a huge fanboy and writes your paychecks? Or has SOE given up on actually having to think for themselves?

Might as well just remove Orbital Strikes at this point, I don't want to randomly get instagibbed like in BC2.

The proposed mechanic:


Source:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nl3UduQprZ4#t=32m34s

The funny part is Higby mentions they have to come up with "creative ways to prevent AOE spam." How bout not implement this terrible mechanic at all? You say you don't want indirect fire but then you rip a mechanic straight out of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 which can instagib players with basically no warning just because someone took out some stupid device and clicked it in your direction. At least OS had a good warning and had a meaningful cooldown. Just because it costs resources doesn't mean anything. Eventually people will have resources banked, man.

[Turdicus]

deleting this post because it was silly and misdirected

[Nick]

Originally Posted by Turdicus

deleting this post because it was silly and misdirected

Yeah, think before you reply.

[Graywolves]

Not sure if this has been said yet but I also feel like a warning of some kind is also important with firepower of this magnitude.

In the original Planetside the OS would perform an animation in the targeted area for a few seconds before going off. As an infantryman you could potentially escape it most of the time if you reacted quick enough. Especially if you had a stairwell or something to run into.

I'm guessing artillery type ordnance could have an alarm warning but that would be harder to evade as it does not tell you where it is going to land.



Only be able to hit the deck and hope for the best while your surroundings are baraged by ordnance you had no power to avoid or predict would be troublesome. Even if only on occasion.

[Shade Millith]

I despise the concept of 'Automatic, off field' artillery. I'm sorry, but for this type of game, it's absurd. Shock horror that in a TEAM game, you have to have TEAM work!

There are plenty of ways of making an artillery piece that is NOT a flail, and will not cause the problems the flail caused. And I've given several ideas before on this forums.

The problem is this stupid "OMG ARTILLERY EQUALS FLAIL!!" mentality that people have stuck in their heads. And I don't care if you think that it's boring to man. There are people, myself included, that will use these vehicles to give long range fire support.

There is nothing, NOTHING, more boring and uninteresting than this unimaginative automatic 'Artillery' crap. It's arcade-like to the extreme, so either do it right, or not at all.

[Grognard]

Originally Posted by Warborn

What a pointless thing, conflating artillery with orbital strikes. When you say artillery people think flails or vehicles like them. That isn't what this is. This is glorified grenades or something. Items you spend money on that create a big blast someplace, one time. Who cares. It's not artillery.

That closed minded? "Conflating" on my part? Seriously? Well, ok then I refer you to this:

http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...59&postcount=1
Timeframe: 11:15 - 11:40

Not everyone thinks simply in terms of flails, or even vehicles, in a game medium, and for good reason. I'd imagine Higby knows this game pretty well, and he "conflates" the two himself. So, it looks like I am in good company, since I am going by the developers own words, and explanation.

In fact... this version of artillery is more familiar to me for the reasons I mentioned, and for one that I didnt... When I was in the USMC, part of the armorers job was to be the company radioman, and on an exercise I would be right next to the CO calling in "strikes". I never saw any vehicles, but I saw the results... So, what people think when they hear "artillery" is based on their experience. So, this is the game manefestation of that RL call for fire mechanic.

In the context of this game, OSes are artillery. You may continue to take this up with the developers if you wish, but its pretty clear what he said.

[Grognard]

Originally Posted by Shade Millith

There are plenty of ways of making an artillery piece that is NOT a flail, and will not cause the problems the flail caused. And I've given several ideas before on this forums.

The problem is this stupid "OMG ARTILLERY EQUALS FLAIL!!" mentality that people have stuck in their heads. And I don't care if you think that it's boring to man. There are people, myself included, that will use these vehicles to give long range fire support.

Ive agreed with you for as long as youve said this, Ive just accepted that its not going to happen for a while, if at all. The new mechanics of the "OS" is very much like the artillery mechanics of many other experiences I have had in the past, games or otherwise. Big guns are very often much further to the rear than the map sizes we have in PS2, so it stands to reason that artillery strikes would be called-in via (OS) strikes.

So, just like Higby says, for all intents and purposes, as far as indirect fire goes, this is the same thing, and I agree. I for one am glad to have it, as long as it is balanced, and not out of control, which I admit is a possibility. Then again, thats what the beta is for...