Game Update 04: Coming soon!

Balancing a weapon based around the people that use it.

What a silly idea.

Why not let the player decide what specialization to take if too many vehicles of a certain type is the problem. Either go Aerospace or Mechanized but not both. (with a limited certification number you had to make choices like that in PS1)
I favor tanks but it saddens me when I have to wait 10 minutes to spawn a new tank. things like these in other games leads to half the team camping in base to get the vehicle they want pissing off the other half and really who want to be put on hold?
Recources would be of much more value if you strip the timers.

Unless it works like that for infantry it's a tremendously bad idea.

Much easier to just unify Mechanized and Air resources. Perhaps slightly increase the cap to go along with it or reduce the cost of Sunderers and Gals.

Until base designs are fixed we are just going to see constant buffs/nerfs to infantry and vehicles. It will just go back and forth till they decide to make bases a 2 tiered fight where vehicles dominate everything outside and around bases and infantry become the deciding factor to all fights.

Not sure about that, especially given the way the weapons fitted into their inventories in PS1.


TR's strength is supposed to be 'more dakka'. The striker was pretty much the epitome of that in PS1 - it was basically an automatic rocket launcher with a 5 round magazine and a laser designator. Lots of burst damage if you could keep track of your target (missiles tracked fast, at least as well as G2A rockets in PS2), you could choose to take single shots popping in and out of cover as well (handy against MAX units), and in PS1's early days it had a pretty unique ability. Basically, a good player could launch two or three rockets into the air before designating their target - the missiles already in the air would then start converging on the target, giving the target very little warning of their impending doom.

That latter ability was nerfed out (i think), but even without it the TR basically have a weapon that's much more flexible than the M9 or AP-30. With PS2's damage mechanics you could use this as an AOE machinegun against maxes (and infantry), which could turn this into a nightmare for bio-dome camping hacksaws.


The NC were always about hard hitting point weapons - something the Pheonix worked into well given it's long recycle times. You basically have to wait for the first shot to hit before you can even reload for the next. That said, it was a great compliment for both their tanks and their MAX units, providing long range suppression fire while their armour and MAXs advanced. Great for battlefield intelligence as well, which let the NC plan ambushes and really exploit their other weapons strengths.


The Lancer was basically the VS's first choice for any field battle. Never really saw them use other AV options unless they were inside a base or tower. Accurate, nigh on impossible to defend against if the operator held their fire until you were away from cover. A lot like the Orion in that respect.
The thing is, giving it to the other factions would be a pretty harsh nerf to the magrider. The mags greatest tool is its ability to evade incoming fire. You can't evade the lancer. Half the time you couldn't even tell where you were being shot at from - you'd be clear one second, the next your armour's just disintegrating with that familiar 'tunk... tunk... tunk...' sound.

Like many others, I can understand the Prowler reduction, but not the "All Vehicle" splash damage. This is a huge change with potentially big consequences to vehicles - especially in the wake of even more infantry anti-vehicular weapons. Was it really necessary at this stage? How much of a reduction? 10%, 20%, 50%? It would be good to have some clarification / reasoning behind this change, before it happens, because there are going to be a lot of people who will want to know.

We the players and payers have our time and entertainment invested in this game. If it is meant to be a collaboration, then give us reasons for change and keep including us in the process. It isn't the change so much that upsets us, but the not knowing why.

You deserve a medal for this....I agree 100% ....

Ever since GU4 was announced i have had the worst case of bad gas ever. The farting simply wont stop and the smell is so grotesque that its actually making me nauseous.

Coincidence or conspiracy?

Any chance to remove the need to login EVERY Day to get the full passive Cert gain ?

Good that no Stats are tracked in VR, now you just need to disable death tracking in the rest of the game and make "Score" the prominent factor.

Chef

Flank them with c4 I do it all the bloody time. If it looks like you have a chance too defend don't give them the opportunity to close that window. ATV out the back of the door or close to another base get behind them and mess them up.

Mr. Higby,

Can you guys fix the horns and and make them a wee bit louder? That nerf from a few patches ago makes them quieter than the engine on the Sunderer. I actually use the horn in a constructive manner and it's a bummer to drop SC on something that doesn't work as intended.

Thanks, DOOD!

map changes to indar

goodbye crownside2?

You seem to be of the belief that tanks > all others. And that nothing can or should be able to touch your precious tank. This may sound appealing to someone like you who clearly favours tank zerg only gameplay where infantry should run away and cower in fear of your chariot of steel and death. You are wrong. This is a fact, accept it and move on.

You will notice that nowhere did i ever say that tanks should "cower behind infantry", they should infact be mixed into or just behind the front line providing heavy direct fire and combating other MBTs. But by having friendly infantry nearby they wouldn't have to worry so much about becoming the C4/mine target as the infantry will be busy fighting the other infantry force and keeping the explosives at a distance.

IF MBTs are the worthless metal coffins you claim on your server its likely because of players like you that will happily cruise around smashing any form of infantry with your High Explosive Anti-Tank or HE and so they have needed to cert into and come up with ways of take tanks out as quickly as possible.

Not sure where you're getting your info but MBTs do still combat MBTs (although in recent conflicts their use has been minimal due to the nature of the enemy). And yes while the abrams does have a "shotgun" round, that doesn't mean that's what the tank was designed for. It's likely that they will only carry a very limited number of them if at all unless call upon to. (Why you would want to put a tank in an urban environment where infantry can get around/above it and it will have limited manoeuvrability and turret traverse is beyond me).

I think they are likely to be the moving of the bases that are behind 2 of the warpgates so that they aren't tucked away. But we can all dream.

I have a ton of NC weapons I bought with SC (because I have been playing almost since the beginning of closed beta), but I want to switch to TR. From what I understand of this post, I won't get the TR counterpart of the weapons. Is that true?


The server I'm on, NC always have maybe 10% of the map, have horrible teamwork and overall skill, and a bad attitude. It's just no fun to play as NC any more. I want to switch to TR, but then I would have to leave behind my 4000+ SC spent.

What's the point of even having HE in the game right now?
-Slowest reload
-Slowest projectile velocity
-Lowest damage against vehicles
-Highest splash damage radius, which is now getting nerfed.

The only reason why HE was worthwhile over HEAT was on the off chance that you will engage a tightly packed group of infantry at close to medium range. At long range if your target was moving erratically you virtually had no chance of killing him/her due to the slow projectile velocity. I could maybe understand nerfing the HEAT radius to make HE shine more at what it's supposed to be best at, but this shortly after the HE increased reload speed makes HE look pointless.

SOE is making it seem as if balancing a game of Rock-paper-scissors would be out of their league.

Yet again optimization is mentioned but not in a way youd think it had priority ... sorry but thats annoying

All post WW2 wars have had almost no tanks killing other tanks. The tank wasn't even originally designed to kill other tanks. In fact for the longest time there was a belief that self propelled guns would eclipse the role of a tank. That should be common sense. Why would they develop an entire classification of vehicle solely designed to combat itself? The only reason the enemy has MBTs in such a scenario was because YOU have mbts.

Which is why you don't do military planning. Tanks are often at the edge of a an urban environment (this is a game so obviously balancing it like this is stupid and you should be ashamed of yourself) of course the difference is a tank can fire accurate at 1k+ meters because of the wonder of a FCS.

Tanks in urban environments usually get equipped for such an excursion (because in not video games you only need to accomplish the mission you are assigned to) and they become EVEN MORE of an infantry murder machine. Yes tanks get screened by friendly infantry in such a case but that's to protect the multi ton nigh unkillable box that is firing a cover leveling gun in one direction and a fifty caliber machine gun at that poor bastard who tried to flank it..

This should have been in before launch

If tanks was only designed to kill other tanks they would be useless. Tanks only fight other tanks to stop them from killing infantry. Its not like tank battles are separate from infantry battles.

Tanks should be powerful against infantry. The real problem of the game is the same it had at launch. The base design is terrible and we desperately need the super high tech stuff from ps1 like doors. Tanks are already easy to kill if you dont have a large swarm of them. This patch only increases the need to zerg zerg zerg.