Will everyone have access to some AV/anti-MAX weaponry? - Page 3

exLupo · 2011-07-27, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by Redshift

It's not strawman

Actually, yes. That was a textbook strawman. You used the argument "One facet of one MAX was overpowered and bad design" to attack my argument of "All MAXes are marginalized by the over-availability of man-portable AV". You used a only vaguely related argument that you could knock down easily, the strawman, to attempt to discredit my statement.

if you make MAX's all powerful killing machines people will sit in them, just like they did with BFR's, people sit in them now and they're not exactly overpowered atm

No, you are correct. Neither are overpowered. Both are woefully underpowered. BFRs are a sad byproduct of a neat idea gone horribly awry and should be removed altogether. MAXes are a sad byproduct of a neat idea stomped on by cert proliferation.

The MAX was always intended to be the alpha unit in non-vehicle combat. With how easy it is for self healing, self repairing units to defeat them with a number of weapons, they have been, as stated before, marginalized. This is nowhere more obvious than the AI MAX. Intent: Powerful vs specific unit types. Result: Weaker than the units they are specifically designed to counter. This is contradictory at its core.

You seem to be arguing that Infantry should be more powerful than Anti-Infantry units. Is this what you're saying because this is how the game currently is. It's like medicine resistant infections and spray resistant bugs. A clear reversal of the intended design. If I'm wrong and you think Anti-Infantry units should be stronger than Infantry units, please say so.

FriendlyFire · 2011-07-27, 09:10 AM

What I was suggesting is, for infantry to rely on HA "specialists" instead of spamming Deci ammo. This will also allow for MAX "specialists."

I like what I read in another post (rephrased): instead of relying on rock, paper, scissors, bring your best rock, best paper and your best scissors.

Redshift · 2011-07-27, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by exLupo

You seem to be arguing that Infantry should be more powerful than Anti-Infantry units. Is this what you're saying because this is how the game currently is. It's like medicine resistant infections and spray resistant bugs. A clear reversal of the intended design. If I'm wrong and you think Anti-Infantry units should be stronger than Infantry units, please say so.

So you think what? the counter to a base full of AI MAXs is to bring an army of AV MAXs? The foot speed is so slow there's no way you're going to make that stick with FPS fans

FIREk · 2011-07-27, 10:23 AM

All infantry units should have _some_ sort of counter against MAX units and vehicles. Someone suggested grenades, which would supposedly be weak, but able to harm a MAX if timed right (let's say it's explode on contact).

Since all squishies can be hurt by anything, it would be unfair to make MAXes the only rock-paper-scissors unit, one that needs an exact counter in the form of a dedicated AV trooper or AV MAX.

Can you imagine defending a base entrance, when suddenly a MAX (or two) bust in through the main door and you have absolutely no means to do anything but run or hide? I would rather not...

I would prefer to hurt it, even if it's risky and won't do much damage (since I would be using a sub-par weapon).

Serious AV weapons should be limited to dedicated AV classes, but some counter to vehicles and MAXes should be available to anyone. A tank can't just waltz through infantry unmolested. Even if none are an AV class, a dozen infantry with pointed sticks should make a tank think twice before recklessly attacking them.

FriendlyFire · 2011-07-27, 10:36 AM

Originally Posted by FIREk

All infantry units should have _some_ sort of counter against MAX units and vehicles. Someone suggested grenades, which would supposedly be weak, but able to harm a MAX if timed right (let's say it's explode on contact).

Since all squishies can be hurt by anything, it would be unfair to make MAXes the only rock-paper-scissors unit, one that needs an exact counter in the form of a dedicated AV trooper or AV MAX.

Can you imagine defending a base entrance, when suddenly a MAX (or two) bust in through the main door and you have absolutely no means to do anything but run or hide? I would rather not...

I would prefer to hurt it, even if it's risky and won't do much damage (since I would be using a sub-par weapon).

Serious AV weapons should be limited to dedicated AV classes, but some counter to vehicles and MAXes should be available to anyone. A tank can't just waltz through infantry unmolested. Even if none are an AV class, a dozen infantry with pointed sticks should make a tank think twice before recklessly attacking them.

Any situation can be made to sound as bad (or good) if the right examples are used.

A well rounded team, attacking or defending, should always be stronger than a group of random, unorganized, players.

I.E. As you spawn, three people choose MAX load outs and head in the same direction. It would probably be best to grab your Engineer loadout/class and help repair them.

MAXs will almost always have an Engineer and/or Medic. MAXs will not be self sustaining in PS2. The counter should be to keep them from being healed/repaired.

FIREk · 2011-07-27, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by FriendlyFire

Any situation can be made to sound as bad (or good) if the right examples are used.

A well rounded team, attacking or defending, should always be stronger than a group of random, unorganized, players.

Stronger is one thing, constantly getting steamrolled as a random, unorganized player, is another. And steamrolling is what happens when an organized team figures out how unstoppable MAXes are if the opposition doesn't have a specific counter.

An advantage is fine, but if random players (which PS2 needs, as a game) keep hitting walls on a regular basis, even though they have individual FPS skill, they end up with a game that keeps punishing them.

This is what happens in APB and is possibly one of the reasons why people cheat there so eagerly.

You give a player any sort of counter against anything - he goes down fighting. Give him nothing - he goes down powerless and eventually feels cheated. He may learn and eventually start playing as an AV trooper, but he may quit the game entirely, before he has a chance to learn.

**Malorn** · 2011-07-27, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by Bags

I hate forcing teamwork via classes. I don't see why a heavy grunt can't carry his MCG and Deci.

The reason is teamwork and balance. If everyone has AV it means vehicles and max are very strong and infantry are more or less forced to use them. If they are more limited vehicles and max can be weaker, as well as give those av classes more value. That said, they could still have AP ammo. In ps2 you might even have to use it and (omg!!) make a tradeoff decision.

**Malorn** · 2011-07-27, 11:20 AM

Also, there could be a more generalist "grunt" class that might have more versatility but not the most specialized weaponry, like AV\MA w a choice of either med or bank. That would help against the problem of everyone switching to HA anytime there is an indoor fight. If engies are better at AV then perhaps they will have value too and we will see a mix of classes indoors.

For that to happen the do-it-all rexo grunt template must die.

FriendlyFire · 2011-07-27, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by FIREk

Stronger is one thing, constantly getting steamrolled as a random, unorganized player, is another. And steamrolling is what happens when an organized team figures out how unstoppable MAXes are if the opposition doesn't have a specific counter.

An advantage is fine, but if random players (which PS2 needs, as a game) keep hitting walls on a regular basis, even though they have individual FPS skill, they end up with a game that keeps punishing them.

This is what happens in APB and is possibly one of the reasons why people cheat there so eagerly.

You give a player any sort of counter against anything - he goes down fighting. Give him nothing - he goes down powerless and eventually feels cheated. He may learn and eventually start playing as an AV trooper, but he may quit the game entirely, before he has a chance to learn.

PS2 should be balanced around team work not "OMGMUHMIZZILZPWNEVRYTHNG." It sounds like PS2 is going to be a team based game and not balanced around being a Super Soldier. We are essentially saying the same thing. With the class system players will have the opportunity to "balance" their side.

Just to be clear, I am not wanting MAXs to be one man, indoor, tanks, but I think the balancing should be done so they can fill their role and excel at it. Just like HA/AV/MED/ENG excel at their roles.

I agree with Malorn.

FIREk · 2011-07-27, 11:57 AM

Just to clarify, I don't want to resurrect the current everyone_has_badass_AV_on_their_back scheme. I don't want universal super-soldiers.

My point is to give everyone a pathetic (when compared to proper AV weaponry) counter to MAXes and vehicles, so that a room full of grunts will be able to kill a reckless MAX or two, at the cost of ignoring any infantry that may have flooded in behind them.

Whether it's a grenade, a light rocket launcher (RPG/LAW-ish) or AP ammo, I don't care. I just want _something_ to even the odds, and don't want the MAX to be the only infantry class that needs a specific counter-class to be killed, unlike every other class.

animagic · 2011-07-27, 01:24 PM

The biggest problem with AV in PS1 wasnt the fact that everyone could have it. Yes, this is true, but it was large and you couldnt carry much ammo for it especially if it was a second or third weapon in your backpack. Personally, I carried 1 Deci in every loadout and had a seperate loadout with all Pheonixes, nothing else. It worked well in PS1, giving me enough AV to take out a max if he was alone, or enough AV to take out a tank/multiple maxes if I had support.

The problem was that everyone wanted to be a superhero, running into CCs with their silly max suits all by themselves, or running around with their tank and just a gunner. No supporting elements helping them, and then they cried and felt weak and useless because they didnt value the usefullness of teamwork. Regardless of what people thought, the actuality of the game was that AV wasnt really very strong at all. It was the inability to work together that brought silly maxes down.

I've seen a group of guys in pajamas in a spawn room, freshly spawned, take out a max with their Suppressors (sp?) just by using standard ammo. I've also been one of those freshly spawned guys quick enough to run to the terminal, grab my standard Grunt loadout with 1 Deci and run off through a door before the max could turn fast enough to kill me, then swing back through and kill him without a thought. It was pitiful, yet the lone idiot sitting in a spawn room by himself or doing other similar stupid things thus whines about "balance" and why his super max suit cant stand up to a grunt is simply because of teamwork.

Learn it. Embrace it. Live it, and you will be much the better.

**Malorn** · 2011-07-27, 01:50 PM

I like ap ammo. It has a clear tradeoff and is also not as effective as true AV.

EASyEightyEight · 2011-07-27, 04:48 PM

You'd be surprised how fast a MAX being pelted by 3-4 guys using standard ammo will go down. The problem is most people have it ingrained in their heads to run like hell when they see a MAX, instead of focus firing upon it. 2 guys with AP ammo will cut it down without ever needing to reload. Most VS really don't know how easy they have it in that regard. The pulsar is a beast, but that and the armor is all I miss about the VS.

The counter to MAXes without access to AV weaponry is to simply shoot at it... from behind cover of course. They're pretty damn slow. Use that advantage.

Talek Krell · 2011-07-27, 09:00 PM

Just so we're all on the same page: no one is suggesting that maxes be immune to small arms fire or anything, right? So it's not that infantry *couldn't* take down a max without AV, it would just take concentrated fire.

Vancha · 2011-07-28, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by FriendlyFire

MAXs will not be self sustaining in PS2.

Source?

Of course you're probably right, but I think people are being far too assumptive in here.

We don't know what MAXs will be weak against, we don't know how fast they'll move and we don't know whether any of them will be specialized for an AI role...

Yes, they probably will be AV-weak, slow and capable of killing infantry, but with the new pace of the game and the new weapons, assuming the only decent counter will be AV weapons seems a little premature...and if it ends up that MAXs run riot against anything without a rocket launcher, it'd probably be changed in beta.