Devs: Engineers Should carry Ammo packs..not LA's.

[DayOne]

And it seems most people have forgotten about the customisability in this game. If engineers have the ammo pack then perhaps they can't have the ACE and so become more of a combat engineer than a 100% support guy.

Light assault can't have the ammo packs as they are gonna be the forward assault force. HA should NOT have ammo packs. They already have a ton of ammo. Medics shouldn't as they are medics.

it makes sense for the engineer to have the ammo, so long as they have to trade something else out for it.

[Arokel]

Originally Posted by DayOne

And it seems most people have forgotten about the customisability in this game. If engineers have the ammo pack then perhaps they can't have the ACE and so become more of a combat engineer than a 100% support guy.

Light assault can't have the ammo packs as they are gonna be the forward assault force. HA should NOT have ammo packs. They already have a ton of ammo. Medics shouldn't as they are medics.

it makes sense for the engineer to have the ammo, so long as they have to trade something else out for it.

Yeah I think I and others ar falling into the trap of thinking like they are BF3 type classes.

[DayOne]

Originally Posted by Arokel

Yeah I think I and others ar falling into the trap of thinking like they are BF3 type classes.

Exactly. PS2 classes have so much potential for diversity within each class. This is something you cannot forget while discussing class balance.

[Arokel]

Originally Posted by DayOne

Exactly. PS2 classes have so much potential for diversity within each class. This is something you cannot forget while discussing class balance.

A big part of this problem is we don't know all that many details about the individual class customization and anything we do know can change.

[Antivide]

Engineers should be holding the frontlines with their team mates. Turrets allow them to do that and giving the ammo packs would make them even more crucial in keeping the frontline intact.

I'm pretty sure LA gets smoke grenades? Correct me if I'm wrong. Give him more special grenades to make him like a "jump jet grenadier" class.

[sylphaen]

Idea: a one-time use resurrection gadget for infiltrators or LA.
(of course, the trade off would be losing another module slot like grenades)

Yes or no ?

[ringring]

Judging from Purrfectstorm's comment on TB's live feed the DEVS have got this. In short she said that Light A. was a scout type role, moving on ahead and flanking while Engineer was the support role and more suited for supply.

She said this just after we'd witnessed a Light Assault drop an ammo pack on the roof of a building where ofc no one but a another Light Assaault could access it.

[Envenom]

Who needs ammo the most? Front line troops. Obvs LA's can't. (and won't) This means the only logical class would be the HA's.

I would be fine with this decision should they go in that direction.

[Knightwyvern]

Originally Posted by Envenom

Who needs ammo the most? Front line troops. Obvs LA's can't. (and won't) This means the only logical class would be the HA's.

I would be fine with this decision should they go in that direction.

The problem here is that you are giving the people who need the ammo, all the free ammo. This destroys teamwork just as much as the lone wolf mentality that was happening to LA. Inter-dependency is key.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Knightwyvern

I love engineers that can set up field bases. Due to the territory control system in PS2 there will be a lot more fighting in open areas where this capability would be very useful. Deployable turrets, shield gens, perhaps at a high level, vehicle repair and resupply points and cloaking fields; etc.

I'd love to play an engi like that.

And I'd hate to have an engineer in a MBT completely trivialize the vehicular support role of a Sunderer. Vehicle repair (structures) and resupply points should be WAY out of an infantryman's scope, IMO. I'd rather see shield gens on a customized vehicle, too, and not see cloaking fields at all.

[Envenom]

Originally Posted by Knightwyvern

The problem here is that you are giving the people who need the ammo, all the free ammo. This destroys teamwork just as much as the lone wolf mentality that was happening to LA. Inter-dependency is key.

Knightwyvern, I think you've raised a good point there. The question is, what is the role of an engineer? Assaulting in the front lines? I'd say no. They are more backline defence and base camping roles. It really doesn't make sense to stick them in the fray up front. What are your thoughts?

[Knightwyvern]

Originally Posted by kaffis

And I'd hate to have an engineer in a MBT completely trivialize the vehicular support role of a Sunderer. Vehicle repair (structures) and resupply points should be WAY out of an infantryman's scope, IMO. I'd rather see shield gens on a customized vehicle, too, and not see cloaking fields at all.

Then perhaps the trade off for having those utilities would be not being able to operate vehicles. Also I did forget about the Sunderer's repair field, so that bit can be ignored.

I like the idea of several engineers needing to collaborate in order to create the higher end stuff. More teamwork needed, bigger rewards for it.

Originally Posted by Envenom

Knightwyvern, I think you've raised a good point there. The question is, what is the role of an engineer? Assaulting in the front lines? I'd say no. They are more backline defence and base camping roles. It really doesn't make sense to stick them in the fray up front. What are your thoughts?

I think the intent of the class customization is to allow for many different play styles within each class. So, maybe you have a "siege engineer," a "fortification engineer," and a "combat engineer" much like the cert system in the original PS.

Using different utilities and cert customization, you could alter your Engi to fill whichever specific role you liked. Combat engi would have ammo crates, fortification engi would have a buff to wall turrets much like PS1, etc. Of course those are all just random ideas; but you get the picture.

[sylphaen]

Originally Posted by Envenom

Who needs ammo the most? Front line troops. Obvs LA's can't. (and won't) This means the only logical class would be the HA's.

I would be fine with this decision should they go in that direction.

Are you saying an assault role should go out of his way to resupply his support role teammates ? Let the medic guard the gates ?


I think engineers should have the ammo role (along with the fortifications role, the explosive traps role, the forward MAX support role and the special assault role). It's not because engineers in TF2 are stuck with the turret camper stereotype that it means PS2 follows those narrow mindsets.

We already know that infiltrators get the sniper role, gadgeteer role and infiltration role.

Light Assault gets the high mobility forward assault/flanking role, harrass role and should focus on assaulting. They should also be given tools to be autonomous and have decent chances of coming to resupply when they go behind enemy lines. Infils should have tools for that too.

Heavy assault get the more durable front-lines assault role. They take the ground and hold it like infantry should. They are viable vs. any kind of opponent but need support.

MAX are the ultra-heavy spearheading assault role and ultimate ground holder. Their weakness is the need for very specialized support (the engineers).

Medics/engineers are not assault classes. They can be combat oriented but their role is NOT to hold the front line or make it move forward. They are here to consolidate the advances and prevent breakdowns in the war machine.

The reason I wrote all that is to explain how I see things and why I think the role of supplying other with ammo should be with the engineer:
- if it was LA, how are other classes supposed to follow a class that jumps walls and meant to always be moving around and probing defenses ?
- if it was infil, how are other classes supposed to go get ammo from a class who is either behind enemy lines or sniping away from the main fight ?
- if it was medic, why should they be able to heal others and/or also supply ammo to others ? What happens when people need both healing and resupplies ?
- MAXes/HA on ammo duty ? Why not but they are supposed to be on assault/guard/protection duty.
- Engineers are the right choice IMO because they are a support class and can work in parallel to medics. Of course, having support oriented options for engineers wouldn't mean you cannot be a combat engineer. Customization is key.

Imagine medics had a special grenade with large AoE that did damage over time ? Well, they would have to sacrifice a slot (e.g. their AoE revive grenade) for that more offensive oriented customization. They would still be playing a medic support role with revive/healgun being their staple skill.

Edit:

Originally Posted by Envenom

The question is, what is the role of an engineer? Assaulting in the front lines? I'd say no. They are more backline defence and base camping roles. It really doesn't make sense to stick them in the fray up front. What are your thoughts?

I think you are pigeon-holing a class into archetypal roles needlessly. Open your mind because Planetside's scale will open up your world !

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Knightwyvern

I like the idea of several engineers needing to collaborate in order to create the higher end stuff. More teamwork needed, bigger rewards for it.

The Sunderer and Galaxy both act as resupply points for infantry, as well. Which is why I'm not keen on the notion of constructable ammo supplies. But on to the bit I quoted.

I do like this idea. Creating larger, beefier, and/or more dangerous field fortifications with multiple engineers could definitely feel very cool.


I'm still not sold on moving ammo boxes away from LA. I think the notion of a lone wolf will just follow the ammo boxes around, and that the LA is probably the most vulnerable option to give it to -- the idea being that the vulnerability, once the player recognizes it, will discourage the lone wolfing. Or, at the very least, the vulnerability will limit its efficacy.

[sylphaen]

Originally Posted by kaffis

I'm still not sold on moving ammo boxes away from LA. I think the notion of a lone wolf will just follow the ammo boxes around, and that the LA is probably the most vulnerable option to give it to -- the idea being that the vulnerability, once the player recognizes it, will discourage the lone wolfing. Or, at the very least, the vulnerability will limit its efficacy.

IMO, LA should not need to distribute ammo to other classes. They only need to be able to get ammo and HP while they are flanking behind enemy lines, away from their team.
e.g.: limited amount of medkits to self-heal, extra ammo packs.

When they run out of autonomous options, they move back to their team to resupply their kit.

That way, you have lone wolves but they work in the vicinity of their teams. Or at least, they have a risk of overextending/being cut from their main supplies and a large incentive to help the front line (and thus their support classes) be closer to them.

Without jetpacks, going around a wall can be complicated for a standard class. With jetpacks, it's only a few jumps away.

It will always be a better option for LA to move back to their support classes than the contrary. Infiltrators are another issue and should be given options that give them more autonomy (e.g. nanite generator that can be converted to health or ammo and whose energy replenishes slowly over time).

EDIT: FYI, I feel like while both the LA and infiltrator class are mean to play "behind enemy line" roles, one is meant to stay they longer -cloak- and the other is meant to get there (or out of there) faster -jetpacks-. Similar roles, different gameplay.

Note that while we have seen capture-the-flag gameplay at E3, there will likely be other capture/objectives mechanics in the game such as hack&hold or seek&destroy for which LA and infils will play a more important role.