Overview of changes currently on test - 12/10/2013

How am I biased?

Because I said something that the NC has shouldn't have a specific capability?

Because I base my opinion on the fact that when it COULD OHK infantry, it was the most powerful launcher in the game by a massive margin?

I don't know ... You have to think about the explosions near you that screw your aiming and also take into account that if your crosshair is a bit of, it might mean a few seconds more to lock on and you still get the problem of ESL sniping. And let us not forget about lag compensation which is felt the most on the receiving end so to them it might feel as you were cheating.

So a major buff to the farming maurader harasser....

The main counter the the maurader harasser is the halberd harasser. Dedicated AV and will now get screwed over because of this silly change buffing the mauarder. Oh well better drop all the skill I learned with a halberd and just use a lock-on.

Obviously this complaint applies to all factions but, hitting a harasser with a PPA (low projectile speed or an E-mod (shotgun, flying pellets) is much harder than a maurader

Lawl.

Otherwise changes seem good enough.
UBGL nerf is slightly sad, but well deserved.

Interesting: how will BASR 150m OHSK limit and AV MANA range limit play along.

Some testing to be done.

I've VR tested it.. Sniper Rifle Nerf Is To much Please Increase this to 200m. Also the lock on times are far to short for the annihilator.
The Striker is now a waist of Station Cash I may ask for a Refund.. I think the Devs are adjusting the lock time to make it easier to lock on to harassers when they should just Be making the harasser have less HP. Also Nerfing the range on Rocket launchers make it to where you cant hit that Dang lib up at 500 meters. Or to where you cant support your friendly's from enemy air attacks. I know on many many occasions i have tried to get a lock on a enemy lib to help cover friend ground forces and i couldn't because i was just alittle out of range, now support is going to be next to hopeless. I do like the New Projectile Speed on them though. MY SUGGESTION is Leave then Ranges and lock on times as is on live but Decrease Reload Speed for lock on weapons. I do like the H-version weapons for the Harasser. Thank you have a nice day.

I see absolutely no reason for such a harsh hard cap on OHK headshots with sniper rifles. Could someone on the dev team please explian why they feel it is necessary?

I'll have to see how the flak armor changes play out, but, from what I see in these numbers, infantry will have no trouble taking a faceful of tank cannon fire. Which is... strange, to say the least. Tank spawn camp should be solved with base layout changes, not blanket explosive nerfs, IMHO.

Infantry lock-ons: seems like it will be much easier to land shots on tanks and ESF that get too close to your position while the working range as a whole gets a reduction. Okay. I do have to note that ESF are perfectly capable of hitting your sundy while remaining out of lock-on range for the infantry around the thing as it is on live though, do you really need to reduce it even further?

Eh, AV MANA begged for range reduction from the first day, but what about the Striker? Since the list says nothing about its most recent change to 'maintaining lock required' mode of fire, will it have to contend with that on top of the reduced range? And with up to ~3.5 seconds of lock-on time before that? Or will the range reduction only hit the regular G2A/G2G launchers? Either way, I'd say it calls for dumb-fire (or MAX lock-on) option at this point.

UBGL: that's just T_T. I just hope will get to see the projectile arc change reveresed someday.

For me, If this hits live it will be the final straw for this game. I enjoy long range sniping. Its what i do, if you destroy that element of the game then i'm gone, i promise.

Instead of this stupid idea.. why don't you tackle the ACTUAL problem. If you want to help people who are getting headshot constantly then why not EDUCATE them about what they are doing wrong in the game.

Add hints to the death screen with tips based on what killed you. The information you need to derive the hints is ALREADY there on the death screen (the class and weapon). All you need to do is add a text box to the UI and do a switch statement, i will do it for you if you want ! An example of a hint for a death by a sniper headshot with a bolt action rifle maybe something like:

1) Try not to stand still for long periods, it makes it easier for snipers to head shot you
2) Attempt to use cover when enemy snipers are on the battlefield
3) Spot enemy snipers so that your team mates can help you deal with the threat
4) You can use light assault to scale terrain to clear out a snipers nest

I'm sure you guys could come up with something better in 5-10 minutes.

Everyone says that Planetside 2 has a harsh learning curb, people don't like getting killed over and over. This learning curb could be fixed by giving context based feedback on a player death ! Destroying a valid type of gameplay that exists in pretty much every other first person shooter since the dawn of time because you are too lazy to address the actual problem is NOT the answer.

Instead of dumbing your game down and adding some stupid restriction how about you try and RAISE the skill level of players by telling them what they are doing wrong? If they cannot learn and adapt their play style then honestly.. Planetside is not the game for them, there are so many things to kill you. Honestly Snipers come pretty far down the list.

I've been waiting for the infiltrator pass to improve the class, instead.. THIS is what comes down. Why so much hate for the Infiltrator?

There was no mention of the changes to NV sights or thermal so I am not sure if these are bugs or plans for the future.

Oi...

I'm going to reiterate this:

I'm going to re-post this here because it's relevant. The following quote was in response to an individual expressing hatred towards Infiltrators, allegedly, boasting about their kill to death ration. I started to rant...but it's an informative rant.

Furthermore,

This video from Koolaid is also relevant.



The following are threads that I have made detailing my thoughts on the complete and utter destruction of long range sniping and ZOE. It's blatantly obvious that there's not a real sniper on the development team who understands the fundamental mechanics behind sniping as a whole, even a close ranged sniper who understands this would not seek the destruction of the complete unique playing style that is Long Ranged Sniping. This essentially leads me to believe that there is no one on the development team that understands sniping in gaming...and your reasoning for why sniping needs this cap goes to show this even further. You base sniping balance off games that are nothing like Planetside 2, rather than look at games that are MUCH more similar which actually DO have long ranged sniping far SUPERIOR to Planetside 2.

This leaves snipers feeling as though they were subjected to a bait and switch. We were lured under the pretense of actual long ranged sniping only to be blatantly stripped of this entire playing style in the hopes that we resorted to a more close range form of combat.

300m is short ranged sniping in almost any game...and you're restricting it further? Whatever happened to this game being different than the others, huge scale battles played out over massive battlefields? It seems to me that you're pushing everyone closer and closer to the bases until it's like every other new gen game out there. This is ridiculous, and completely destroying the entire feel of Planetside 2 being different from other games.

In regards to Long Ranged Sniping:

• The Infiltrator (Discusses the Infiltrator as a whole, including Long Ranged Sniping.)
• Long Range Sniping (Discusses the balance, role, and overall system of Long Ranged Sniping.)

In regards to ZOE, which needs removed and replaced:

• Potential Replacement for ZOE (Discusses a potential replacement for ZOE.)

Our dear developers, you weaken (nerfing) almost all weapons. But one important question: at which century we live on the Auraxis? At 29-th century!!!!!!! But our weapons (meaning infantry's and vehicle's) are more weak than weapons of 21-st century. I am fully and with all my heart against this constant nerfing, already many update patches nerfed our weapons. And you continue to weaken our weapons. On the contrary you must make very powerful weapons which suit 29 CENTURY!!! I am very disappointed by your constant and regular weakening of our weapons. On the contrary, please make them stronger, and more technologically advanced as it must be at 29 CENTURY!!!

In combination to my previous comment, I'm going to say this:

Remove ZOE until a better, balanced, ability can be developed; we will use Charge until you do.

Also...

The graphs that were provided to us worked against you. It's obvious that the NC and TR MAX abilities need tweaked to make them more lucrative to those playing that particular faction. At least 50% of their population should be using their faction based trait, and your graphs show that this isn't the case...meaning their abilities need to be tweaked accordingly until they are more lucrative to the two factions. There are many ideas upon the forum that delve into this and detail some really good ideas for both of these MAX abilities and even the Ammunition Canisters.

As for us, we'll wait until you develop something completely different that actually works and isn't incapable of being balanced. We can deal with using Charge while you tweak the other two faction's abilities and give us something new and exciting that doesn't trample across balance only to be completely and utterly destroyed.

Also,

The following quotes are extremely relevant:

I agree with everything this individual has expressed.

ZOE was never an interesting ability, it was just extremely effective which is why we all used it. The NC have an interesting ability, it just needs to be tweaked a bit to make it more lucrative. The TR have the short end of the stick with an ability that's not interesting nor that useful...it too needs tweaked.

About 50% of the population amongst each faction should be using their faction oriented MAX abilities. Or, if you go with what the individual I'm quoting next has to say, it should be divided evenly amongst Charge, Ammunition Canisters, and Faction Flavored Abilities.

I forgot the Ammunition Canisters even existed.

I agree with everything here except ZOE.

ZOE is dead, there is obviously no way to balance this ability out due to the fact that the only lucrative reason for taking ZOE is the exact same reason that the other two factions believe it to be overpowered. This means that ZOE needs removed and replaced with something completely different, because its current incarnation is dead, you killed it, you flat out murdered it in a way that only a slasher movie could truly appreciate.

Then the TR maxes should also get a cooldown timer to be fair with the other two factions.Against armor ,NC would be able to use shield ,VS to use and move more quickly while the TR maxes stay at long range (~100m)deploy themselves and snipe the armor.
My mag just got busted with 2 deployed maxes on a roof of spawn building,I had AP but it would take 2 shots for each to kill,so even if I fired accurately 4 times, would take at least 10-15 seconds but I couldn't even last for 2 shots,which didn't even hit because of bullet drop and range.

I main VS and im liking the ZOE changes. Not so much how the cooldown system is, but as described its cooldown is reduced the more ranks you've got in it, so it might not actually be that bad.

I think it's fair that you're not as fast as infantry now. But you're still faster than the other maxes, so it's still got a point of using.

The reduced damage taken with rank could also turn out to be pretty nice, paired with kinetic armor you might be even more durable than the ZOE currently on live servers

I see where you are coming from but I think this is a bit harsh.

Perhaps you have not spent much time playing the VS but seriously ZOE was not ever balanced and it resulted in a significant decrease in enjoyment for a lot of people.

Just yesterday I logged on to play and it was nothing but extraordinary the number of ZOE MAXs that were being fielded. In one large engagement it would not be an exaggeration to say that there were more MAXs than non-MAX units- honestly, it was to the point of being laughable. Now, while I understand that a portion of that is likely due to the sense that VS players have that they had better use it now before it gets changed, it still does not change the fact that ZOE was not meshing well with the rest of the game.

To say "you killed it" IMO is a bit off. First, it never should have been in the game in this state to begin with so you should count your blessings that you had something like that for as long as you did. Second, and more importantly, any blame for ZOE should fall squarely on the developers- I do not begrudge VS for using ZOE because players should be expected both to use ES items (otherwise, what is the point of differences) and use things that are effective. I also do not begrudge those who spoke out against ZOE because I think it is pretty clear that it was disruptive to balance and gameplay in general. True, on both sides, there was hyperbole and unnecessary personal attacks, as is often the case with balance issues, but honestly these exchanges would not be so negative if either a) there was better balance in the first place and b) the developers spent more time engaging the community and actually moderating these discussions with sound evidence.

Consider the Striker, for instance. It was poorly balanced and poorly implemented and that has nothing to do with the players who were using it but rather, everything to do with the teams responsible for its creation and implementation. People spoke out about the Striker, rightfully (since it was having a significant negative effect on gameplay), but that does not mean that they killed the Striker- it means that the Striker (as it was initially implemented) was dead on arrival because it was not properly integrated with the rest of the game and that is entirely in the hands of the developers.

Because Nanoweave has been nerfed, making OHKs easier otherwise.

The 150m OHK nerf is outright stupid.
In many situations there are even no proper sniping spots that allow killing inside that distance.
The change will not affect me much, since I am a rather low skill player but its not like Sniper Rifles are AV turrets or AP tanks or other weapon systems that still will OHK you from >150m even without a headshot...
The fact that I could have seen that tank is irrelevant when I have no weapon with me that could have taken it out.
If you want PS2 to turn into an open world Counterstrike just state that and let us move on to other games.
Dying to unseen factors is part of the open field experience.

I've played the VS since launch, I don't play TR or NC.

I just haven't played much for a verity of reasons.

I understand that, which is why I've been calling for a complete replacement ever since the complaints started. I also advocated buffs for the TR and NC to bring them on par with ZOE, but I've now backed down from that and simply express that they need tweaks to bring them into a more lucrative state...light buffs rather than bringing them up to par with what ZOE currently is.

The graphs show that none of the faction oriented MAX abilities are proper side grades to the Charge ability.

You don't turn the ability into a handicap to make up for implementing something overpowered, that's illogical and destructive to the overall popularity of the game. What they have done to ZOE has effectively killed the ability because the only thing that the Vanu players cared about was the mobility it provided.

The damage boost isn't something that the majority of us cared about, nor does it even match our faction. Now, it's been made the focus of attention and weakened by the fact that it now only works in close quarters situations where our weakness actually becomes extremely prominent. They are essentially banking off the idea that anyone who turns this ability on will become Rambo while wearing glowing tissue paper...and that's just not going to happen. People focus fire upon MAX units as is, so what's the incentive to turn this ability on? A slight increase in mobility and damage boost only when you're in range to be torn apart by focus fire?

Everyone will take Charge. The ability to get yourself out of danger whenever you might have overextended yourself is far more lucrative than something that is literally going to handicap you on the battlefield to a worse degree than the counter balances of the TR and NC MAX.

I'm not saying that they killed the initial overpowered incarnation of ZOE, I'm saying that they killed ZOE.

The mobility was the only lucrative aspect of the ability, the damage wasn't something that most anyone on our faction cared about...just a second thought, icing on the cake. It's now been made the focus of attention and limited itself...the thing we didn't care about is now the core of the ability AND watered down.

That's what I mean by them killing the ability.

No one will use it because Charge is the better ability, by far. You are handicapping yourself by taking ZOE in its new incarnation, not even counter balancing yourself with a weakness.

...the alterations to Nanoweave don't make one hit kills any easier; they simply ensure that when you nail a head shot...the target actually dies. This doesn't increase the ease of making a headshot at all, don't be silly...the fact that they altered the hitbox of the head even makes headshots MORE difficult.

Sadly that does seem the way this "balance pass" is going, at least viewing it from the outside. Ah well.

I'm glad to see some balance changes incoming. I may not agree with all of them (I do like quite a few of them), but I also have a limited viewpoint with far less data available to me than the devs.

Mostly happy that they're able to divert some resources back to making game adjustments now that the initial optimization burst (which was needed and was worth doing) has been done. Maybe we'll see Hossin and the resource revamp before too long as well.

lock on rocket launcher changes are good/bad mix - they should never of been so powerful in the first place

i dont agree with them having a 1.0/1.5 second lock on time up close that extends out to 2.5/2.0 - they should start at 2.5/2.0 and extend out to 4.0/3.0 imo as 1.0/1.5 is way too fast and 2.5/2.0 is a good starting lock time not a "best case" lock time imo

REALLY liking the striker changes and they were REALLY needed especially "Fired projectiles now behave like the normal launchers (less hitting vehicles behind cover)" as those projectiles will follow you to hell and back no matter how much cover you get behind

"Adjusting infantry survivability against vehicles in some areas"
infantry dont need any more survivability - they already have it pretty easy against vehicles as infantry has enough of an advantage by getting behind cover and shooting vehicles from places that vehicles cant hit them back

i hope you tweak these changes more as some are good and some are bad for gameplay