Planetside 2 Myth Busters, Most Common things people say that are wrong.

I am going to do a series on the most common types of mistakes or myths, sort of like myth busters on discovery, yes I still watch that channel. It's going to be a long runny post because I'm that type of person.

Also GREAT THANKS to Van Dux, IamDH, ViXen, Flashtirade, Deggy, CoreCombat, DashRender, and other forumsside warriors that helped me reach this conclusion, you may not agree to most of the post but you'll probably agree to 1 of my points.

#1, Anecdotal evidence, what is it, is it what most people believe is player experience, I'm going to write an example of each; Example 1, The Vulcan-H harassers is hard to counter, I tried everything from AP to Lock-ons to tank mines to C-4, I can't seem to kill them. Example 2, the NC have worse players then the TR/VS I was TKed by an NC just a few minutes ago but when I play TR/VS theres never TK and they always have teamwork.

Now tell me which one is anecdotal and which one is player experience, now I'm guessing most people will say example 2 is anecdotal evidence because #1 there is no evidence of NC having or attracting worse players, and then you got those people saying "but the music the color the lore" thats all BS and you know it, lore has very little effect to no effect on people when game play and having fun is more important. Why is #1 no anecdotal evidence, because it has been proven by video's, player experience, and all the forums all over the internet that supports Vulcan-H harassers are hard to deal with.

#2, What is symmetrical (proper term, asymmetrical means not balanced, google it people.) balance, symmetrical balance is when all the stats balance each other out, like a math equation, heres an example, gauss saw vs orion (sorry vs I'm picking on you guys right now). Using orion as base variables, x = Damage, y = RoF, z = Mag Size,
Symmetrical Balance happens when gauss saw is 1.4x+0.67y+2z=x+y+z without taking in other factors like range player skill, CoF, nano-weave, etc. but currently the game doesn't match that variable x (damage) is weighted to high (ACX, Gauss Saw, Reaper), y is somewhat in the middle depending on the weapon, and z is irrelevant after 50 but when it's in that 20-40 range, it's a factor that should be considered.

#3, Faction OP/UP what is skill floor and skill ceiling, SOE certainly doesn't understand that (looking at you striker) people complain how NC have such a high skill floor and TR/VS have such a low skill floor but they all have decently around the same skill ceiling. Wait Wait Wait, I think I just found out what makes people complain about NC being UP or TR/VS being OP, it's not that weapon suck or players just need to L2P, NC have some great niche weapons, few excel at all. But when one set of players have to put in X amount more of skill then their counter parts, then their at a disadvantage because you need X amount more effort then their counterparts, it's sort of like this, your running a race against yourself, but the other you is stronger and faster then you, you need to try harder to achieve the same thing while your counterpart does normally.

#4, Force Multipliers, what is a force multiplier, FM's are things that give you a advantage in one aspect of the the battlefield, sort of like something that does 1.2 of what you normally do, these are tanks, ESF, maxes, striker (only because it's an outlier, google that if you don't understand), lasher, etc, these resources are a problem when used in mass since it allows you to be version 1.2 of yourself. Here's some math if you can't comprehend my terrible grammar, example Striker, striker allows you to do roughly 1.3 of what you normally can do with regular lock-ons', so if there's 15 heavies using the striker, 16x1.5=24, so 15 strikers can do what 24 annihilator or 24 of regular lock-ons' can do, that gives you a force advantage and is not as good in solo or few numbers.

Except no... take your equation, give a gun 10,000,000 damage, zero rate of fire (it can't shoot) and whatever for z. Somehow that comes out to a very powerful weapon despite being completely useless.

This is the age old "would you rather have a weapon that has 1 damage, 2 speed or 2 damage 1 speed"? It comes down to many more factors than pure mathematics, some hard to measure and some immeasurable, what weapon you take.

A "separate but equal" balance can never be achieved in any large scale game (and life if you took Middle School history) but in the smallest and most limiting circumstances.

Its hard to make out what your talking about because of improper punctuation, and multiple points grouped up into big paragraphs. None of it seems related to the title.

like this

Thats a question ->?

I'm not trying to ignore what your saying. I just can't figure out what your saying, or what your trying to get at.