Hi, I'm writing this post as a shout out to the developers on some questions, comments, ideas and concerns I and many others in the community have with the game as it is. I'll warn readers now this is a wall of text. I hope that at least one developer can take the time out of their day to read this and give some feedback on some of the questions. Also this post is intended for the developers I don't want this becoming a discussions on what I have written. If something I have written is wrong and someone brings valid proof then I will retract what I have written but I don't want this becoming a place of argument. EMPIRES: What are each empires specific bonuses in each case (armor, infantry, air)? Do TR infantry have run speed bonuses? Do NC infantry have defense bonuses? I and many others in the community would very much like to specifically know what each empire gets in terms of the three areas of play. We know the standard TR get speed, NC get damage and defense and VS get no bullet drop and maneuverability. But we want to know where are these are seen specifically. From what I know at the moment almost all TR assets not only have extra fire rate but also larger clip size. The NC have higher damage output on everything and their vehicles are more resistant (almost feels like the infantry are as well). The VS have no bullet drop on only infantry with a negative to long range damage (I’m aware this was toned down) and the VS vehicles are just highly maneuverable since they can strafe. Well I’m going to start sounding like a lot of people but I think VS are getting the short end of the stick. Not to say the NC isn’t a tad bit but right now TR have the best deal when it comes to their empire benefits. Everything the TR has boasts both of their benefits or better to say to has both advantages of their benefit. As a side note, it seems a little unfair between infantry to give the team that has fire rate extra ammo just so they don't have to worry about missing, this doesn't apply to HA as I noticed it takes a lot of rounds to actually kill someone. If the VS get no bullet drop shouldn't this apply to vehicles as well? Especially when the Magrider’s main cannon is placed lower than other tanks. I guess before I go a little too far I should ask, does the VS still get shield and armor penetration on their guns? Team killing: Right now the current weapon lock system is garbage. It is way too lenient. As an example, I can kill an allied galaxy with the hailstorm on scythe and only then get weapon locked (and we all know how much health a galaxy has) or kill over 10 allied soldiers and only then get weapon locked. Due to how weak this system is too many people are getting away with accidentally or purposefully team killing or team damaging. I know an accident isn’t very controllable but the amount of bad drivers who don't learn from ramming allies and soldiers who can't check their fire are starting to severely dampen the play experience of the game. When it comes to people purposefully killing their teammates all their doing is creating a bad atmosphere within their own empire and they get away with it. Even if they get weapon locked they will either switch toon or just wait the timer. A great many players and I implore the developers to begin kicking...no, banning (only if temporary) people who can't learn to stop damaging/killing allies. As many others before me have said, I suggest you look back at PS1's grief point system. Engineers: Landmines: Right now landmines aren't really worth the certs it takes to acquire them. Considering how right now to create a mine field even capable of halting more than 2 vehicles you need a squad of Engis or at least 5 with the tool belt armor. Side note on the tool belt, awesome idea but very expensive especially when C4 is the first upgrade and not many engineers even grab C4. I understand why mines can 1 shot most vehicles but I think it would be best for all players if they did significantly less damage but you could place more of them. At the same time make them actually visible to people in vehicles and allow infiltrators EMP grenades to discharge them at greater radius than the EMP actual effect on enemies (infantry, armor, etc...). Not only would you be fixing a major bug in the game but also giving greater purpose to engineers other than "that guy who repairs ****" and more emphasis on infiltrators needed to infiltrate and sabotage defenses. These changes would most likely also get tank drivers to actually grab the mine guard. Heavy Assault: Rockets: I like the fact the decimator was added to the game. I like having a rocket launcher that can 2 shot MBTs from the back but as a VS player I don't like how the TR's basic rocket launcher does the same thing. The VS and NC starting launcher can 3 shot at best (this is testing on a Vanguard for comparison) when the TR's can 2 shot the Vanguard. I'm not very pleased at the idea of having to pay money or put in a lot of hours just to be on par with another empire. I hope you guys take these words heavily to consideration. Vehicles: Fighters: Well I'll be brief. Vanu rocket pods don't stand up to the other 2 empire's versions. Why does the NC's shoot faster than the VS version? Why does the TR's do the same damage as NC's when it should have the highest fire rate and it has a larger clip size? Splash damage for VS doesn't compare anywhere near to the NC and TR. Hailstorm for the VS isn't really worth it. Sure it has the second fastest fire rate and that's awesome but why does the TR and NC version both hit harder? Resources: Originally back in beta I remember Higby saying the idea of PS2 is resources are survival. Well right now that really isn't the case. After asking the people I play with "Do you ever think about the resource system in the game?” most of them said "Meh, only when it comes to infantry" People are only concerned with resources when they are spending a lot on infantry based items. When it comes to vehicles most dedicated drivers will last long enough on the field they won't ever care about resource. Sadly, resources return so quickly only acquisition timer prevents people from grabbing a vehicle and that is mainly directed toward ground vehicles. Now when I say resources return too quickly I'm referring to when an empire owns at least a third of the continent, any less and you do notice the resource drop. My question is what happened to the resource system in beta? I’m referring to the one that had a 4000 cap on everything except auraxium. Back then it all moved at the same rate but vehicles cost a lot more. At that time I felt that I actually had to think over which vehicle I wanted to grab because those resources I spent were an investment. Now I find it's not so much. A great deal of the time I just grab any vehicle and roll with it; if it dies I go grab a different one. Well I don't really have any specific suggestions but I'd say you need to slow down resource gain and add greater importance to them. Either by well slowing down the gain or by adding more resources to do specific things like say something that is paired up with mass producing MBTs like say "ok, you got a tech plant but it won't do you a lot of good without this specific resource to mass produce the tanks". At the moment in the game main bases (bio labs, tech plants, etc...) are the key focuses in attacking. No one bothers to go "hey we need this resource to get **** done so let’s attack 'that' instead" since resources have almost no real importance in the grab scheme of things. Most of the time people attack places just adjacent to where they are or to where the "zerg" on the continent is headed. Even organized groups only attack places based on their geographical position to a main base or to cut off enemies but never for resources. I have also noticed mainly on Amerish that areas with 'mine' in their name don't always seem to give the highest output of resources as the same goes for labs or production areas. Now I know this kind of refers to 80% of outposts but if you think increasing their resource gain would offset the balance towards the other types of outposts, you're wrong. What you can do is take the resources from the other outposts like communications arrays and such and give them to the outposts that sound like they produce resource. This does leave com arrays with nothing other than geographical advantages. That is why you could make is so say... com arrays give a bonus to radar systems or in that area it’s easier to communicate in some way or another. The main goal to these suggestions is to get back to the original idea of resources, bring more importance to them, punish the "zerg" so it has less chance of succeeding and adding more depth for leaders to actually make a decision on where to go next.
2nd part Bases attack/defend and continent rewards: What ever happened to the dynamic attack/defend reward system? If it's still in development then cool, if not then I think you need to adjust the current temporary system. Currently the reward for attacking a base is pretty fair but since there is no reward for defending most people don't see the need to hold onto territory unless your empire is close to taking the continent. I'm aware the reason you took away defense rewards was because people were abusing it but I feel that a smarter system in place can deal with that to some degree. Make it so that defending gives a quarter or a fifth of what the attackers would gain and make it so a reward is only given if the enemy gets the capping process far enough for their bar to begin filling. This makes it so there is an actual incentive to defend outposts and it would take people longer to try and abuse the system by win trading the base. When it comes to continent benefits sure 10% off a type of purchase is nice but with the current resource system only Indar and its infantry bonus is even really worth fighting over. Instead of changing the continent's benefit, for the moment that is, I think it would best if you gave some sort of reward to those that took the continent as in a reward to each individual soldier. Best idea is to create a system that rewards say 10 certs if you as a soldier helped enough in the capture of a continent. The measure for a player to be able to gain the reward could be they must have helped in the capture of say 1 main base and 10 outposts. Obviously these numbers would adjust per continent since Esamir has the least amount of outposts but some sort of system to ensure the reward goes to those that deserve it for their hard work. Command Structure: As it stands in the current version of the game command structure within empires is very poor. Since it’s so easy to be able to acquire the only method of communicating across a continent and to all the other leaders anyone who wants to voice their opinion on where empire resources should be put can do so. This has created a system of who can say things across a continent and who can't. Most people with the cert don't really have a clue as to how to effectively analyze enemy movements and lead people. Thus when an actual leader is trying to instruct people on what they need to do in order to win you have others interfering by saying the insignificant base on another continent they are solo defending is more important than the larger goal at hand. This happens all too often since there isn't a proper structure within command to give power to those that deserve it. I know you guys, the developers, hate to hear this but you need to look at PS1's command system. Sure it was a bit of a grind but back during PS1's day once you made it to CR5 you most likely had earned it since you needed to succeed at commanding in base captures. Now it's any idiot who thinks his/her opinion is more important than their empire can give orders continent wide. The thing that made PS1's command structure a success was a combination of effort per reward and restriction. It took a great deal of time and effort to acquire each CR and in each one that leader would be rewarded with increasing power but enough that suited their station. Please refer to this link for those who don't know anything about the PS1 command system structure and its rewards. http://wiki.planetsidesyndicate.com/index.php?title=Command_Rank When reading what each rank gets please read carefully as to what the rank receives and to what they DO NOT have. CR1s and 2s were best for squad leading while CR3s were best for platoon lead. CR4s for multi platoon leading and infiltrating. CR5s were best for army leading and cross continent strategy. Without a system that restricts global communication too many people can give those willing to listen the wrong orders or ideas on what to do. Now I’m not saying that this system is perfect, it does have its drawbacks, but something a kin to this would definitely benefit the growth, playability and depth of Planetside 2. Continents: Back in beta every few weeks the ownership on the warp gates would rotate to give people a different starting point and change of pace. As it stands now it is getting a little tiresome having to fight on the exact same parts of the map and deal with the same areas of the map designed against your empire. It would be awesome if you could set it up to where whenever an empire takes a continent for its benefit it also rotated the warp gate ownership giving the next round of battles a fresh start. Not only would this increase the longevity of the current game but also allow players to see all sides of the continents.
I agree. Also, one thing that is killing the game for me right now is the feeling that the devs aren't doing anything to address these issues as well as the bugs in the game. Hell, some of these bugs have been a problem since beta, like the memory leak that leads to the textures flickering and the game freezing. Sure they've fixed a few minor bugs here and there, but I'd like to see some of the long standing bugs ironed out.
