Balance Pass Post 2: Nanoweave and Related Features

150 meters for infiltrator? Are you joking?
The main idea in construction of bolt action sniper rifles is an ability to make just ONE shot to eliminate enemy. Their main features are damage and dexterity. Cutting the one-shot distance to 150 meters is a very bad idea. They become unhelpful. And precisesly this is a bad gameplay. With this snipers absolutely loose their function.
Snipers in reality need to be invisible and deathly dangerous.
As variant of making some balance it would be more natural to make changes in ballistics and loosing energy for bullets flying over 250 meter distances.

Removing some of the sillier ones, this should be seriously considered. Not because it should happen, but because it should not. As this limitation should have not. Unless there is some technical issue, you should have never limited the effective range a weapon in world sized battle map. At this point it seems like PS2 is hemorrhaging players. Not three months ago it was hard to get on or move continents without being a member. Now it's hard to fill any continent.

This is because of balance issues. It's not because things are unbalanced, but because a scale in motion can not find balance. People are afraid to invest time (never the less, money) into PS2 because they are worried that whatever they work hard for is going to be changed. It will effect more than just the weapon, it will effect their play-style. You can not and should not try to balance play-style. The 'typical FPS' games (which is an ignorant statement) that attempted to balance play-style with "limited sniper lanes" and "some type of visual mechanic that calls out the sniper’s location" resulted in the famous "quick-scoping".


I would like to take an excerpt from this thread.
-----
How do you balance a class that rarely faces a threat from the enemy through direct confrontation?

1. Time
2. Counter Sniping
3. Communication

Time:

The time it takes between kills is equivalent to the amount of kills a run and gun oriented player achieves between deaths. This is the primary factor of how long ranged sniping is balanced within a first person shooter, because lets face it...you can't balance a class that effectively avoids direct combat by the amount of deaths they take between kills.

Death is irrelevant in PS2. The only thing that matters within this game are the amount of kills you score and the other contributing factors that provide you with experience points and certification gain. Death is not a big deal, and those of you who play a run and gun oriented class are back into the fray fairly quickly upon getting killed.

Now, how does time limit a long ranged sniper?

1. The time it takes to establish an effective sniping location.
2. The time it takes to wait for an enemy to remain stationary long enough to nail a headshot.

These are the two primary time oriented factors when you're a long ranged sniper. A good sniper optimizes their time by getting to their sniping location as quickly as possible, unseen, and nails their targets quickly to ensure that their time between kills never falls to a level where they aren't gaining certification points as quickly as a run and gun oriented class.

1. If the battle moves, we have to move...time wasted.
2. If the enemy moves, we lose the shot...time wasted.

-----

This is a good representation of the 'long ranged sniper' play-style. This is not an unbalanced play-style. The 'quick-scoping' and '360 no-scope headshot' play-styles are unbalanced. The reason those play-styles are unbalanced is because they maintain their advantage under all conditions. PS2 doesn't support the latter two play-styles (thankfully) and has nearly eliminated the prior. It seems like a cruel joke to start the Infiltrator with a sniper rifle now. It would be far more appropriate to start them off with an SMG.


TLR
I feel that that by doing this you are saying you want the game to be played at 150m or less and I know a bunch of 'typical FPS' that are better shooters that I can go play if I want to fight at 150m.

lol, all this pr0 sniper mad skillz whine. why exactly should be your headshot from extremely accurate and fast bullet weapon be more "deserving" then 3 headshots from carabine?

Because the way i see it, guy with the carabine:
1) is being in enemy weapons range, therefore most of the time enemy actively tries to kill him
2) has to use movement, cover, approximate enemy ammo spent to guess his reload timing all the while timing his own reload, all the while his opponent is doing the same
3) has his relative motion speed to the target much, much higher, therefore to score a headshot he has to be able to TRACK opponent head, not just be able to put crosshair in correct place for a split second when he clicks.

While sniper:
1) is invisible
2) has his opponent oblivious to his presence, and even if he wasn't he can't respond with his weapon
3) doesn't need to use combat movement
4) can take his bloody time aiming, it's not like the target can do **** about it, and 99% of time, target doesn't even know sniper is there
5) has added "scope sway" which is another name for "press shift 0.5 before you fire to 100% eliminate your 'downside'"
6) can miss all his shots and not be killed by enemy because he is outside of enemy weapon range, and also far away AND INVISIBLE BETWEEN SHOTS.

Lol, tell me more about how hard sniping is and what not mad skillz one must have to be a sniper.

All I have to say is I really hope you take a good hard look at having nanoweave no longer work against headshots at all. That out of everything else is probably the biggest change here and could change how things work /immensely/, in that it could turn out to be a huge buff to the more accurate weaponry.

[Double Post]

You said it here josh, and you have noticed that everyone hates the 150m cutoff so I thought of a compromise.

Advanced Helmet - Suit slot that reduces headshot damange and ONLY headshot damage by X amount. So headshotting ppl will be like if they had NW on themselves and distance + advanced helmet suit slot can be balanced.

Hate the 150m cap?

Want to see a solution that SOE may actually go for?

Read this thread and show your support.

https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2...t-suit-slot-150m-sniper-nerf-response.157792/

here's a simple question:

how much "health points" that the shield gives?

i think the basic, non-NW, health is 500 points? where NW gives you a few hundreds more depending on cert? how about the shield? also 500?

For, u know, deciding if i should recert ACS when my NW4 gets refunded.... or just go with FLAK

150m is... short. Very short. In truth I bet it should be based on what weapon you have. For example the "standard" bolt action (NC's starter, 100 certs for VS/TR) I'm sorta fine for the 150m. I'd still like it at 200 or so but I digress. The next step up should be 50 to a 100m longer. And the last rank (RAMS .50, Longshot, Parallax) has draw distance range. I wouldn't be bothered if the last rank, as a balancing point gets even slower fire rate or a smaller magazine.
The idea being that this would further differentiate the rifles between each other, giving each an "optimal range" classification. So for the TR the M-77B is the "short" range bolt action. Effective up to 150-200m and has the fastest refire/reload rate. SR-7 is a step up range wise, being the "medium" range bolt action. Fires and reloads slower but is effective further. RAMS .50 is the "long" range bolt action, has the slowest reloads and refire times but if you manage to hit the head, you get the kill.

In an another way I find this change conflicting in ideas. I mean imagine, if you will, that you are an infiltrator and you are 500m away. Standing or moving, if you manage to hit your target's head at THAT range, nice job. I mean that is quite a bit away. The target can shift directions, move or stop in the time it takes for the bullet to reach the target and if you manage to land that shot dead on the head, why should you be punished for being "too far away" with a weapon designed around hitting from "too far away"
And as for the "shooting without chance of being spotted" isn't that the class GIMMICK! I mean isn't the infiltrator designed around being the unseen predator?

As I have expressed previously and reiterated elsewhere, Delta Force: Land Warrior and all of its sequels pretty much destroy their entire reasoning behind this.

Delta Force: Land Warrior was a game with huge maps and battlefield layouts incredibly similar to Planetside 2, it's actually why I became so interested in the general concept of PS2 to begin with. Instead of balancing sniping based upon a game that's far more similar to Planetside 2, they choose to misconstrue sniping balance and base it off new gen games that have smaller maps and support rampant quickscoping.

There is not a single sniper on the development team, I am now positive of this.

Balance, in regards to the one hit kill headshot, is not a product of small maps and narrow lanes of combat. DF:LW proves this, a game where sniping was even STRONGER than it is in PS2, yet people didn't complain about it because they knew it was balanced, challenging, and fulfilled a roll.

You know, there's this thing called flak armor.

Disclaimer: I almost never snipe at long ranges. But the reasoning for the change to the max OHK-range for bolt actions is imo extremely bad logic - or rather, it seems to have more to do with emotions. Especially the term "poor gameplay experience" is imo a badly disguised way of saying "I don't like it". Arguing with emotions is a bit dangerous. Ofc you can't completely avoid it, but it seems to me that Mr. Joshua Whatshisname? is too subjective in this case (or at least, more than me and definitely more than a dev should be).

Let me just state why this is a bad way of arguing.
1. In this game not just snipers but everyone can shoot you from every direction and you often won't see what killed you.The answer to this could be that your allies can see the guy and shoot him for you. That is also possible in case of snipers. The cloak partially protects a sniper from getting spotted before he fires his shot.

2. You already impaired the infiltrator class by giving it 100 effective health less and not allowing it to carrry weapons like assault rifles or shotguns (no hard feelings, just mentioning this). For this it got a cloak (that has indeed some downsides, not being completely invisible being one of them).

3. A sniper, while scoping for a headshot is extremely vulnerable and usually oblivious to what's happening around him. Unlike infantry, a sniper has to reload after every bullet he shoots (talking about bolts here obviously), giving his target a chance to fight back or run into cover if he isn't dead. Like any other class, snipers projectiles have trails that show an enemy where the shot is coming from. Also, if you don't use a suppressor, you will turn up on the minimap (can't remember from how far away this can be seen on the map).

4. I do not get what he means by 360° one-shots. If he means that a sniper can turn in every direction, this works for all classes.

5. Back to the "can't see what killed me": A tank being 200m away also can kill you and that one is way safer from retaliation by infantry than a sniper (breaking LoS). You saw him, but you can't really defend against him as an infiltrator or fight back. Which brings me to

6. "Poor gameplay experience". Now I am getting really emotional: (Side note: When I started this game I got dropped into the middle of nowhere and the first thing I met was a tank shell hitting me in the head. It's nice to hear you start caring about gameplay experience. But there are topics that deserve your attention more imo.)
A sniper hits you in the head from far away. Either you

a) stood still -> Your fault. take cover, start moving. Most of the time in this game you are more safe while moving. Why should game mechanics make up for your mistakes?

b) You moved: The sniper calculated your movement (horizontal and/or vertical) correctly -> This guy was good. It DOES take skill or extreme luck to get shots on moving targets (terrain being a problem but also sudden changes of direction, the target stopping, similar things). Now, this is indeed a VERY opinionated point but if he can do that, why shouldn't he get a kill? A heavy also can kill you from 150m if he has decent aim. And he has more bullets in one mag than an infiltrator in total.

7. Coming back to point one: As an infiltrator i constantly have to face "poor gameplay experience". When you argue "We need to ask ourselves: 'Is it fun to use? How is it to be on the receiving end?''", you should be prepared to apply this consequently. Shamelessly quoting myself here:

All these are experiences I have to make in this game. I can't do much against tanks, ESFs, harassers, liberators, I won't see the UBGL-grenade coming soon enough to get out of it's path, I usually won't be able to fight the MAX and my odds against a heavy with resist shield or a guy with a shotgun in cqc are poor (Also: If "heavies are supposed to be owning in close to mediun range", why shouldn't infiltrators in long range?). Even dying to a more skilled player is a poor experience insofar as it makes me feel helpless(Yes, I am stretching the term "poor gameplay experience" a bit there. This is intended.). These are all things that IN MY OPINION are poor gameplay experiences.

There will never be a perfect gameplay experience but from what I get, people worry more about the things I posted above than about snipers OHKing people. Browse the forums, the number of posts calling for a OHK removal from bolt action headshots are negligible. Meaning:
You should worry about people getting OHKed from render range AFTER you worry about the more pressing matters aka "poor gameplay experience".
(Another side note: Only when you propose to change something in favor of infiltrators, people will come out and scream "no". Not because it's going to be a real issue, but because they don't want to worry about more things. Screaming "no" will mean their experience won't get WORSE than it is now. Most people don't feel empathy if something doesn't concern them directly and affects them negatively.)

TL;DR Enhance your reading skills or just read the green stuff. Too lazy to look for grammar and spelling mistakes now, so if you find some, keep them and reuse them.

We have flak.

Kind of the point of an ambush. Don't you think?

It kinda sucks that if you pull of a nice ambush the opponent still has the chance to do a 180 and kill you.

I Love facing a sniping opponent as a careerer engineer, The tactics I employ to baffle snipers are fun to do and are a sight to see.
I Zig, I Zag, I stop randomly, I jump, I crouch and basically act like I'm playing dodge ball. And on many occasions I close the distance and introduce him to close range. But on the occasions he or she does head-shot me I relish the chance to make him do it twice, and when he proves it wasn't luck I appreciate his skill and apply alternate tactics to remove him.

If long range sniping becomes less of a issue then a entire slice of the game for me will be lost and I don't want that for all our sakes.

150m limit is just stupid. It's annoying when games introduce arbitrary rules and exceptions. There is a reason that infils have less hps then any other class. There are reasons why high mag scopes have scope drift. Against anyone with a clue, you're not going to get a second shot at a target 150+ meters away. All you're doing with this change is punishing skill and rewarding poor game play.

There is almost no reason to pick a top tier BASR with a 12x scope now.

The point is that there is a trade off for no bullet drop. Damage reduction. The damage reduction is spread over 200 meters. And yes, thank you for making my point. 200 meters is way too far. The no drop and the damage reduction associated with it need to be less than the effective range of sniper rifles.

The only VS weapons that actually get an advantage from no bullet drop the scout rifles, the battle rifles and the slug shotguns, big difference, I don't know what it has to do with the BASRs anyway.

I think snipers should be careful about complaining the long range sniper rifles are useless now.
Odds are SOE will fix that by making the short range sniper rifles have a huge damage drop off like 50% over 150m
Therefore you will have to once again have the long range version.

IF a new set of rifles is coming out like is rumored i suspect this will happen anyway.

When I read this yesterday I was pretty.. upset. I decided not to respond, let my game patch up, and hit the VR to do some in game testing. I had a good sleep. Today I'm still pretty upset - time to post.

I have a fair amount of sniping experience. I think I'm pretty good at it. I've spent a lot of time understanding the process, and in most cases sacrificing my own gain for my team's. Do I sometimes want to just sit up in the hills popping shots at people and not talking to anyone? Sure, but instead I come and play PlanetSide 2.

On the nanoweave changes: I was with you until you said it doesn't protect against headshots at all. That's just foolish. We have gear now, in the real world, that can help to some degree. This is the future? Where they just designed armour to not help the most important part of the functioning soldier (not including Vanu, everyone knows their knowledge is just downloaded to their body at the time of need). Consider giving NW 50% protection to the head or something. Zero is just... silly.


"PlanetSide 2 isn’t a typical FPS game and neither of the above is a valid limiter given the size of our world and the scale of our battles. The massive size of our continents means snipers can be a threat from all directions, and a visual callout on each individual sniper isn’t possible considering the amount of players we render at one time."

Planetside 2 isn't your typical FPS, I agree. However the massive size of the continent means that EVERYONE is a threat from ALL directions. As a sniper my threats are tanks I don't know are targeting me, people I didn't know that spotted me, my cloak being very freakin' loud, spotting through a built in suit megaphone, that plane that flew over and has radar, any vehicle with radar, more than 2 shots from the same spot... the list goes on and on. Nothing ABOUT being killed is 'fair' - it's often about getting the drop on someone, snipers included. Believe it or not we are not immortal and we do not rack up crazy kill streaks in a time-meaningful way.

Is there something wrong with a sniper or a group of snipers being effective enough to warrant enemy attention, making the enemy come to them in some fashion? If so better start considering what to do about planes, tanks, sunderers.. umm.. everything in the game.. Large, massive maps should encourage all types of game play, not tight knit in your face bullet fests. Why have a large map if you can't use it?

"On the other side, giving snipers a 360° one-shot kill with unlimited range against all other players is not something we want to introduce into the game. Dying to a sniper that you never had a chance to see is a poor gameplay experience for everyone on the receiving end."

Range is limited by render.

It's not a poor gameplay experience since dying to people you never had a chance to see, it happens to everyone for MANY reasons. How is it any different than the counter-sniper, or the guy that walked up behind you while you crouched near a door and shot you? Again, believe it or not, snipers have been on the receiving end of some "where the heck did that come from" deaths. I don't cry no fair, I learn and move on. I fail to see how a sniper's "360" is any different than any other player's ability other than the weapon used is balanced around the fact they have a long range ability.

How is it any less fair than the tank that shoots from 300m out and kills, or the plane that's waaaay up in the sky raining down on groups of people? I mean, other than the sniper's shot only hitting one person, using a higher degree of skill, with less ammo capacity and slower reload speed... Everything has a counters, snipers included. One of the effective ones is to sidestep. There are times when you can't (certain rockets, turrets), you'll have to pay the price/run the risk.

"We are capping all one-shot headshots on a full health target at 150 meters."

Are you f-ing kidding me?

"The 150 meter range is a starting point. It may be adjusted during tuning, and we’ll be monitoring the range once it is live to see if it needs to be adjusted to be shorter or longer."

The possibility that it could be adjusted shorter even being mentioned is laughable.

As I said, last night I went to the VR to do some 'testing'. From 150m out I could reliably score headshots with a RAMS 50 and a 7x scope. At 150m there is basically no bullet drop to account for. I could get to about 280m with a 7x and score headshots 3 out 5 times with roughly 1 dot of drop. I can reliably score headshots from double your starting range with a 7x scope.

I loaded up a heavy with a TMG-50 and a 4 x scope and could kill faster at 151m than I could with a bolt action, assuming I now need two shots to kill with the bolt action (shot, rechamber, reaquire, shoot, bullet travel time). At 151 meters a heavy is a more effective killer than a sniper. Or, a sniper within his 150m one shot kill range is easy pickings for a heavy with a 4x scope.

I loaded up a max (TR) with two M1 heavy cyclers. I could effectively kill from about 55 to 60m. Usuing max charge I can cover about 30 meters. It puts a max's range from 85 to 90 meters, or about 3/4 the distance of an effective one hit kill sniper.

Loaded up a lightning with 2x optics and could hit a target (player) from 240m out. Zero risk, they'd never see it coming.

And don't think this little nugget from the PU1 updates slipped by either:

"The Infiltrator’s recon dart will now send found enemies to the minimap of all allies in a 150m radius. Previously this tool had a range limit of 50 meters"

Meaning any dart lets everyone WITHIN THE SNIPERS EFFECTIVE KILL RANGE know he's there. Why not just attach the firework effect above each sniper's head when they shoot? I jumped in the VR while doing this, I can place a dart on a target at 150m.

The bolt action and long distance sniping is not a mass killing super weapon. It is a selective killing tool. It is balanced around the fact that it SHOULD be a kill shot to the head. It has low ammo capacity, it has a slow rechamber rate (making follow up shots very difficult to a player capable of thinking "I got shot, I better move or heal up" - which would be the case with NW2-5 as is now or a 150m cap). It has a low clip capacity - keeping in mind the TMG-50 I used has almost double the ammo in one clip than the RAMS50 does in it's full load out, the TMG-50 that I could kill effectively with at 150m.

Again, the sniper is not a mass killing machine and is not immortal and untouchable on the battlefield. It is a high time investment, high risk, low reward (in terms of certs) job. Properly played it can be a big asset to the TEAM but not the individual. A sniper, or a few snipers, can break a row of rocket shooting guys, or engie turret guys*, but will be relatively ineffective against a moving battle. It is a balance and a job you need to be dedicated to do. You have to be willing to sneak behind enemy lines, sometimes for a couple minutes, get caught, do it again, maybe get to your spot this time to crack off a few shots before having to move.

Somehow you've come up with a 'solution' that's actually worse than the problem for snipers. At least with current NW settings I have a chance to kill outside of 150m, just have to hope they're wearing flak. With the change as is there is zero chance, therefore, zero reason to take the shot, be out there, or really even use a bolt action.

What you're effectively doing is neutering the sniper. They aren't meant to be close range killers and they are balanced around this fact. Either remove the range limit, leave NW5 as it is, or rework the functionality of bolt action sniper rifles.

Follow up post will be real map 150m locations and limits, and how far can the cloak be heard...

*guys being a generic term and not meant to apply to male or female specifically but as a whole.