now that the anti terrans are gone

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by MikeyGeeMan, Feb 20, 2015.

  1. MikeyGeeMan


    So your saying a dumbfire rocket and tossable lock on rocket has more skill? Dude its useless, no one uses it anymore because of that.

    But lancers and phoenix. All over the place. Lots of skill there.

    It was perfect before. But the NC cried to daddy higby and got it nerfed.
  2. Ronin Oni

    Malorn.

    Remember that Carv buff?

    #PraiseMalorn

    Banshee nerf was needed though it was a tad heavy handed... it could be slightly undone a LITTLE bit. But not a whole lot. I'd just return a shred of it's AoE damage. The dropoff on the AoE is too damn high.

    Vulcan got buffed, and is getting buffed on the MBT variant again very soon (tighter CoF)

    Marauder is getting... reworked? Not sure on the state of it but they're turning into a burst fire of sorts. It had mixed reception on PTS AFAIK

    I believe the Striker has been confirmed to be on the list of things to look into, but it will not go back to being a super Annhilator again. It's keeping the Coyote mechanic.

    Fractures are getting a buff when they do the MAX weapon tweaks which was on deck to follow MBT weapon rebalance that's almost done.... that was before restructure so not sure where it is on their priorities, but I doubt it's gone away entire...

    Lynx isn't bad. It was too close to Jaguar before which was just better. Now they're 2 distinctly different weapons. Lynx is a lil more niche now for CQB even more than before, but I've been effective with it and enjoy it. If you miss old Lynx, get Jaguar.

    am I missing anything?
    • Up x 1
  3. HadesR

    Blame Higby ?

    Even Stevie Wonder could see pre-nerf Banshee and Striker deserved to be nerfed

    The Striker is a perfect example to all those TR who didn't want a " Skilless Lock-on " ... Be careful what you ask for .
    • Up x 2
  4. Hatesphere

    the lancer has more skill then the old striker ever did. as I said the new striker is a good start and a possibility for a true unique and fun weapon. not just a lock on launcher. even in its current form its not that bad.
    • Up x 2
  5. Ronin Oni

    As a striker owner (who also has the Grounder and Annihilator) I like the new Striker actually....

    I think it needs one last tweak for higher velocity, but it's pretty good IMO.

    It's almost impossible to make a grounder or Anni hit an ESF because they'll just break LoS or flare it off, or force it into the terrain.

    Striker is virtually no warning damage in their face.

    Hitting evasive high speed ESF's flying perpendicular at range is.... difficult to say the least....

    but against Libs and Gals it's good out to much further ranges.
    • Up x 3
  6. TheBlindFreak


    Yeah, but the other factions didn't need those nerfs. The TR did. I don't think you understand how balance works.
  7. Ronin Oni

    well, as an LPPA user I am anticipating a nerf there :p

    The increase in render range has been a HUUUUGE buff to the LPPA.
    HUGE.

    lol :D

    It used to be actually quite hard to use effectively when you had to get well within Burster shredding range to use it, because of how long you have to sit and shoot with the thing.

    That's where the Banshee was so OP... it was crazy easy to zip into 150m of infantry, unload your clip in 1.5 seconds, land 2-4 kills easily, and zip off before they can kill you even if they opened fire on you as soon as you entered LoS (unless there were multiple Bursters that started shooting you immediately)

    NOTHING was like the pre-nerf Banshee. It was just instant death and then gone and back 5-10 seconds later on another vector to kill another 3-5 infantry.
    • Up x 2
  8. TheBlindFreak


    Honestly, I was expecting something too, but I attribute it to the SOE-DBG transition and the fact that the LPPA can't smear burster maxes quickly. And from my experiences against the LPPA recently, I find that distant Scythes spamming it don't seem to be much of a threat.
  9. HadesR


    It doesn't really need a huge nerf though .. If render range is staying the same as it currently is .. Then just increasing the Dmg drop off past 300m or w/e would suffice ..

    It just needs bringing back down to have the effective range it had pre-Render change .. It's doesn't need making worse than it was at that stage ..
  10. Ronin Oni

    Problem is the LPPA gets most of it's damage from splash, so damage dropoff wouldn't change that.

    but yes, somehow limiting it's range effectiveness seems to me the best solution.

    I think maybe the new PPA treatment might be appropriate. Faster firing but CoF bloom.

    No, frankly at those ranges you're kinda just hoping people don't move in the 3-5 seconds it takes your rounds to get there :p

    I still play it more like I used to and get in closer. Usually I go for the edge of Thermal sight range 150-200m

    If it's too hot, maybe I'll shoot at/near a sunderer or something... or shoot at tanks and stuff... from further back. Hitting infantry past the 200m range is pure luck really. Most my inf kills are thermal render range.

    I imagine it must kinda feel like the mountain top PPA Harassers to the ground troops though.... though because of AA Scythes have to reposition a lot more often so a fair bit less constant.
    • Up x 1
  11. Demigan

    No, I can't remember. Someone explained it some time ago. You might be able to find it somewhere.

    The Striker was incredibly powerful in the beginning, the Phoenix as well... The Phoenix however was instantly nerfed to incredibly low power instantly. While it's powerful in a single strike, it's downtime due to no reload while missile is in flight make it the weakest ESRL in the game. Only it's camera-guided utility make it useful.
    The Striker in the meantime remained ultra-powerful for months on end, annihilating everything in it's path. When the Developers finally got around to it they tried to do two things at once: First they wanted to reduce it's power to more that of the other two ESRL, and then they wanted to give it unique properties rather than being an improved version of the lock-on rocketlaunchers.
    This backfired, and they continuously worked into improving it. While there are lots of people who still think the Striker is bad, there's still a large stigma around it and the statistics show it's not the greatest, it's far from the worst either. It's average in everything when compared to all the other rocketlaunchers with the exception of anti-infantry work, which shouldn't be any rocketlauncher's forte anyway.

    They didn't need to. The Banshee was easily 30% better than either the LPPA and AH. The AH has some utility as AA, but that doesn't make up for the fact that it was underperforming compared to the other two.
    The Developers accidentally overnerfed it, but even if it remains nerfed for half a year before being buffed to equality compared to the other two, it would still mean the TR managed to get out on top due to the long, loooong time the Banshee was scoring much better.

    did they need to? You can keep screaming about nerfs, but you keep ignoring that the nerfs were justified, that the developers were overzealous and nerfed them too hard is irrelevant and needs to be fixed anyway. Don't play the victim if you plucked the fruits of the pre-nerf weapons when they were OP.

    I understand that you personally were hurt due to this. That doesn't mean it wasn't justified. I might have been hostile, but I think you can be reasonable. Try to see the global picture rather than your personal grievances. The Nerfs were justified, but wrongly executed. They definitely need changing, but so do other things. They were not an act of willful harm against the TR, not by Higby, not by other developers.

    And they managed to do it in one instant stroke with the Phoenix. I can't easily find any update notes about nerfs to the T7, if you could guide me to those so I can see it?

    I think you are replying to someone else. But the point of the one I think you are replying to was that all ESF are fast, and the fact that they mounted a highly accurate, AOE bullet slinging, powerful weapon on it with almost no bad side. The AH needs close range, the LPPA has a lower fire rate and slower bullet velocity as payment, but the Banshee simply didn't have any real drawbacks in anti-infantry play, which it was designed for.

    Now you are setting yourself up for the comment: "Yes, they did have to be contained, the TR was OP and needed the nerfs".

    Ok, so what are we going to do about it? You see my standpoint as to why the TR wasn't nerfed wrongly. I think I see your viewpoint, but neither of us agree so far.
    • Up x 1
  12. Demigan

    Now this is a reasonable post, now you explain a few fair points as to why the TR might need a lift. And I agree, the TR does need a lift. But not due to some vendetta that the Developers had against the TR.
    The NC do have the most versatile infantry weapons. They got high DPS, they also got some accuracy weapons and can even swap to high fire rate, where the TR and Vanu are much more limited in their weapon choices.
    The Vanu also have strong points in their tanks, and especially the Betelguese that is simply a textbook case of OP.
    The TR also have strong points in their Prowler, and no one will dispute that the Vulcan Harasser is a powerhouse against both infantry and tanks. And so all factions have their weaknesses and strengths.

    All I try to do is make a discussion more fair, I get hostile when I see arguments that I perceive as unfair and unjust. It's one of the reasons I back it up with proof so I don't turn a hypocrite.
    • Up x 2
  13. MikeyGeeMan

    I see your point. My one question is what justification was used? The only thing I saw was crying forum posts, which turned into a Nerf.

    Lets just use the striker as an example. Lets say you bought the phoenix because its a camera guided rocket launcher. And then they took the camera away. and made it dumb fire and stopped working against ground targets. While the other factions got to keep theirs the way it was originally designed, would you feel it was justified? Would you feel slighted?

    Now lets also say you had non vocal devs working on your side? And the other factions had people on the ground talking with the players....

    That's how I feel about it.
    • Up x 1
  14. Rogueghost

    I find it a bit ironic claiming that Higgs hated the TR when most of his play time was playing TR.

    Higglies currently has 12 TR weapons aurax'd, 9 NC weapons aurax'd, 7 VS weapons aurax'd, 2 NS weapons aurax'd, and his most used weapon is the Bull, a TR LMG.
    • Up x 2
  15. Ronin Oni

    Uhm, for the record, the Strikers fundamental change was NOT because of VS/NC crying but rather TR crying after it was nerfed to be an active lock (it's trade off for higher damage output in comparrison to Anni).

    TR were asking for wire-guided, or coyote like lock for the Striker, and the devs delivered.

    First iteration was pretty bad, and it underwent 2 buffs from initial inception following teir new model of "release UP, and buff into relevance" rather than their old method of "release OP, and weeks or months later nerf to hell"

    It's unique now (unlike any prior Striker, original FnF lockon was flat out OP. The active lock version was UP, and not really worth it) which makes it a good ESRL. Like the other ESRL's it's situational. When Air is attacking a fight you're in though, it's unmatched for HA/no resource options IMO. (as both a pilot and user of ALL forms of AA, on all factions.)

    When I'm on VS/NC, I'm kinda glad all the striker users haven't picked them back up though. I laugh when I see a G2A lock fighting the TR because I know they won't get any damage on me. Striker is just "OH ****!" and you're eating rounds to the face, much like a burster actually. If there were 3-4 Strikers doing that, I'd be dead without any real counter, or forced to use flares which I've long since stopped using since missile trajectories changed to something you can actually cause to miss you.

    Striker is the best anti-A2G farmer weapon available w/o a cost.
    • Up x 1
  16. Ronin Oni

    Well, to be fair on the Bull... that's probably because it took the longest to Aurax :p

    It's a pretty bad weapon.

    Carv, MSW, and TMG are great though.
  17. Rogueghost

    Higgs used it for almost 300 kills past auraxium :eek:
  18. Kloz

    Stop making straw man arguments, all I'm saying is that the Vanguard is the best MBT vs MBT tank and that using the Vanguard as an example of bad / average weapons on NC is wrong in my opinion.

    Oh and as a bonus I found a quote of yours from january 5th this year, in another thread talking about the tank balance:
    So a few weeks ago you were fully aware of and referring to the fact that the Vanguard was the best MBT vs MBT tank... but now you demand that I prove it to you?

    (A link to the entire post incase you try to deny saying this: https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2...guard-shield-and-prowler.211458/#post-3067810 )
    • Up x 1
  19. Demigan

    The original striker was based on "look at general direction of target, wait, pull trigger, deal great damage". It was too much similar to the other lock-on launchers while the NC and VS got unique weapons. THis was actually one of the things not just the TR complained about: The Striker wasn't unique.
    But let's look at the original Phoenix: It could hit infantry and OHK them with headshots (not sure if it killed with bodyshots), It could OHK infantry turrets no matter if it hit a shield or not and they were generally powerful.
    Then they removed the ability to hit infantry and turrets and reduced it's tank damage (If I recall correctly). Just looking at that, it's only missing the removal of the camera and making it a dumbfire. They later put the damage against infantry and turrets back in but with reduced damage.

    The Striker still needs a buff or two, but I don't think it needs some big one's. It's finally a unique system worthy of ES that's going to be niche.
    • Up x 1
  20. Demigan

    "Straw man" arguments? I'm the one providing backup and enlightening the others. While others are comming with the wonderful arguments like saying "I don't think it is" and "but that's not true!", while doing nothing to provide any proof.

    Funny, did you look further and find the thread where I made the same claim, but hat to take back those words because someone refuted it with evidence? That's how I work. The data I used was old and I had made a mistake in my assessment of the new statistics, assuming nothing had changed.

    So yeah, nice digging work, but if you dug deeper you would have noticed that using my own words against me doesn't work that well. I work as much as I can to the scientific method: you provide proof, you present it for review for others who can check to see if it's valid, they agree or disagree based on being able to reproduce the findings. This means that I can change my opinion, people actually can sway me to change my standpoint. But you need to provide proof for it. I haven't seen that yet.
    Your nice little quote here is nothing more but a good example how you can sway me. Prove that the Vanguard is the best, show me that proof.

    Why would I refute it? I'm the one using proof and open to people providing counter proof. If you had put half the time you put trawling through my posts, you could have already found the truth on the statistics sites.

    Edit: But I like the way you are going, at least you are trying to prove stuff now and doing research.