Absurd Gameplay... Tanks Firing INTO Buildings

Yeah, I largely agree.

Although to be fair to the realism camp:

• Realism isn't binary, it's a spectrum. Obviously PS2 isn't completely unrealistic (It's not like Tetris where you're like "wtf is this game even about? Strange shapes flying through the air and ****...")
• Plenty of game mechanics provide both great gameplay and realism (or at least are modeled loosely based on the real world.)
• But then you have game mechanics where a designer has to choose between realism or gameplay, and that's where gameplay usually wins.
  • But this part also isn't binary. It's never "100 points of realism vs. 100 points of gameplay", and sometimes the decision ends up sacrificing a lot of realism for only a little gameplay improvement, and in those cases sometimes the realism option is best.

So realism isn't necessarily bad, just when it's the focus of a game's design.

Whenever I think of Flails, I have a little giggle over just how hard the Forumside players would rage.

1. Why have infantry? Because they have a clear role in capturing bases, and a minor role defending them.
2. In what world do you live where you consider vehicle gameplay "more arcadey" than infantry gameplay?
3. Chain-pulling vehicles isn't the pinnacle of strategic play, but when you're fighting players who make even worse strategic decisions, it's enough strategy to consistently win.
4. I would agree that more bases should have tank/air terms, it also isn't necessary because you can always spawn somewhere with tank or air access.
5. For that reason, defending Quartz can happen just fine. But you're going to have a dramatically harder time pushing the invaders out by making bad choices (infantry) compared to making good ones (aircraft vs. their sunderer.)

1. There's nothing wrong with avoiding a zerg. When it makes sense to outmaneuver your enemy rather than engage head-on that's what you do -- I'm not sure how you arrived at your conclusion there.
2. The majority of bases are defender-biased right now, largely due to the proximity of the hard spawn to the capture points and partially due to the hard spawn often being right on top of vehicle facilities so you can pull more tanks/air.
3. Again, all the defenders have to do is kill the soft spawn (sunderers) and it's done. The fight is over. Whereas the attackers are forced to be in there the full duration of the attack.

1. Neither of those bases is protected against air. This means that a single ESF or solo Lib can potentially kill their Sunderer, ending their attack. And a bunch of tanks/air can definitely end their attack.
2. Yes, if you and all your teammates are making terrible decisions, you're going to lose. Terrible decisions means trying to dislodge the enemy as infantry when you only need to spawn vehicles and kill their sunderer(s).

1. Backup sunderers happens all the time. It's more XP for the combat vehicles to milk up.
2. If the defenders don't set up sunderers and only make bad decisions (infantry) then yeah they sure are disadvantaged -- gosh, sounds like it's time to pull vehicles! (Notice a pattern?)
3. "Doctor, it hurts when I do this." "Don't DO that!" If it hurts to spawn at a camped base, stop repeating terrible decisions and make good ones instead!

1. Sunderers can be killed. The attackers have a long attack timer.
2. Sunderers can be killed. But not if you make terrible decisions (infantry).
3. Sunderers can be killed. Pull some tanks.
4. Sunderers can be killed. Pull some air.
5. You cite so many wrong opinions about how the game works, when the reality is that if you aggressively pull vehicles and engage the enemy vehicles and kill their sunderers, most bases are easy defensive wins (and extremely profitable XP-wise too, as my ~666 score/hr attests to.) Really the only reason you think these bases are weak is because you're defending them poorly.

+1 to the OP. I say either redesign the bases, or, the easier solution, shield every building against vehicle weapons. It may be an 'artificial' fix, but at this point, there are too many broken aspects of the game after being out for over a year.

Also, please see my idea thread for shaking up the spawn/tele camping situation: https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2...eplacing-the-1-way-spawn-tele-shields.171442/

oooh boy!

I agree with the OP that tanks being able to spam almost everywhere in the buildings is a terrible game design decision. It's not really fun to do (point at window + click repeatedly = fun?) and it does ruin the infantry game play a lot of the time. The problem with the "well get your own tanks" argument is that this game simply isn't working like that for a good majority of the time. Coordinated action to stop a zerg with inferior numbers requires a huge amount of effort from the leadership and a level of discipline from the platoon members that is almost always lacking except on special occasions (outfit/alliance operations etc). The majority of people just want to find a good fight not organise 47 people every time they log in (especially considering there is still no in game recognition for doing so).

Personally I think they should of made maps with fewer bases that are much larger and with more space in between them like in PS1. That would of made vehicles more relevant if they actually had some room to maneuver in and it would give them the task of protecting the forward spawns (aka AMS) which would become much more important from other vehicles.

What kind of maxes were you repairing that they stood in the blast zone of those doors?

You mean 1 dude to flip the points and the rest can sit in skillsuits, tanks and air?

The game is arcady as a whole, i don't see infantry being more arcady than tanks conjured out of thin air, surviving falls from 100m tall cliffs and being repaired with magical pistols in 10 seconds or harassers jumping 50m and playing carmageddon.

people avoided deathblobs and capped easy bases the same, somehow that didn't fly in the hex system and was considered a serious problem.

Hard spawns mean jack and **** if you can't even leave them without heavy losses and in many many bases you can't because to even see anything you have to step outside only to get owned from 10 different directions.
How does one kill spawns in Freyr?
Also do you remember that we got the new spawn mechanics related to squad vehicles? Galaxy is a total ***** to remove, good luck with 'all the defenders have to is to kill the soft spawn'.
No matter how you slice it the game becomes more attacker-biased with time.

is it some kind of appeal to authority? All it tells me is that you are a pro farmer which means nothing to me in the area of theorycrafting about what makes for a good, LONG LASTING gameplay in general, also it tells me that you are so detached that you have no idea what the experience of the average player looks like.

I agree - devs need to design bases with this in mind. That is why the multiple lvled bases on the new amerish continent look so appealing. Can't wait to slug it out underground

I'd ask you what the point of a tower is in the first place then, if not to nullify vehicles and force the attacking force to engage in infantry combat? If, by your argument, a tower can and should be won by surrounding it with tanks, with the optimal defence strategy to abandon it and return with vehicles .. then they aren't defensive/choke points at all, so why have them?

I'm not saying all points are like this. But any point that is like this becomes trivial to capture - i.e. poor design as it doesn't encourage any kind of meaningful/skill based combat.

There are other strange decisions too. Many bases force you to spawn a vehicle out in to the open, and outside your base wall. Given that you are then isolated, and likely without accompanying gunners, you're a sitting duck for the enemy to vehicle spawn-camp you. You've got to agree that's a flaw? Bases where you spawn in to the courtyard; well, I can't think of a time where I've seen the enemy re-gain the courtyard by spawning ground vehicles; generally they roll out after the infantry fight has been won, and I suspect because people don't want their 300 resources going up in smoke in seconds to a couple of heavies, c4 fairies, or the said vehicles that are camping you.

@ OP what is you problem?
If at all the only problem here is tankers shell bases all day long - yet they don't collapse

well said...
however, small changes in base level defenses would stop tanks/air from explosive spamming bases and allow them to do their real job, which is fighting other tanks/air and controlling the countryside so that their sundies could deploy infantry.

small bases could be fitted with dome shields that can be hacked to allow infantry in, but stop tanks from entering the base or shelling the base.

tanks would have the same roll as they have in biolab fights... controlling the roads/countryside and fighting other tanks.

why is it that biolab fights are the best fights, in many cases? imho... because no tanks/air are allowed to interfere with the fight.

tanks should fight tanks, not farm infantry

wow, tanks fighting tanks? so sad...

ok, to be serious, if tanks weren't allowed to spam bases, the primary task of tanks would be to control roads and access to bases. sundies can't deploy and spawn infantry without protection. tanks control the area, killing other tanks and infantry in open areas, allowing sundies to set up near enemy bases and deploy troops. tanks kill any enemy infantry who try to kill sundies.

enemy would be forced to deploy tanks/air to take away the roads and countryside. result? big tank/air battles outside the base for control of roads and access.

so tanks would be busier than ever, and they would be fighting tanks, not farming infantry.

mmmmm... question is, can tankers handle just fighting tanks? as a previous poster asked, what skill is there in lobbing hundreds of shells at a spawn or cap room door?

If they're going to lock vehicles out of base fights completely they better be ready to do some serious work making the fights between bases more fun than they are now, otherwise they're going to drive off everyone who doesn't main infantry.

That's just your \ your team bad.
If u see tanks coming take AV things. Sitting at the base is not good, all enemies will watch ur way and focus there. Go to higher places like a hill, flank, kill them.

"only unskilled players defend their current state" would be closer to reality (though "mostly unskilled..." would be the most accurate statement)

You can use something but still recognize it's OP as sh*t. Ender made videos of how OP the ZOE MAX was. I use the Viper Lightning but I don't have any problem recognizing it's completely overpowered and needs a nerf ASAP.

nope.
- Every tanker knows that infantry is much more dangerous then enemy tank - C4, RL, and engie turrets combined with great numbers of infantry are a hell for tanks.
- Imagine 20 tanks camping the area around the base where nothing happens, they just sitting there doing nothing. Waiting for base capture. And they will even not get the XP because of broken map design.
- Everyone likes to farm infantry. People just find more and more ways to do that while SOE tries to nefhammer everything.

Thanks. ^ ^

Someone already pointed out "huuuuh but NS weapons get nerfed too".
Half true cause NS weapons are used by all factions that means they cannot really get a nerf.
They can be turned into trash but a true nerf only affects 1 empire only.
Cause if the same weapon that your enemys can use is nerfed, you got no real disadvantage.

Cause everyone suffers equally.

I just fight tanks right now.

But if you force tanks out of base fighs, you have GOT to give them another role. Right now, the only way anyone can have an impact on a fight is farming infantry. Because infantry capture points. When some random Vanguard crew and I duel it out in our AV tanks, we're not actually helping our faction at all, because the presence or lack of an AP tank means nothing once a fight moves into a base.

In my AP tank, whether I win or lose a tank-v-tank fight, I'm not going to go farm infantry. Not effectively at least. Have you ever tried to nail infantry at range with an AP cannon? Almost no splash, tiny projectile. It's not exactly fun.

If you want tanks to be strong in the field and weak around bases, you have to force fights into the field. Because the way the game is designed right now, fights don't take place in fields, and when they do, infantry get tired of them and start pulling out lock-ons and MANA Turrets.

Add a between-base game if you want us to fight between bases.

Not necessarily, hipothetical example

Let's assume that the NS-15M is the best LMG (of course it isn't, it's just an example) and the following 3 are Orion > Gauss SAW > CARV

So we have NS-15M > Orion > SAW > CARV

Now, if we nerf the NS-15M making it the worse LMG of the lot, then the VS now have the best LMG, so you'd be buffing VS, nerfing TR, and buffing/nerfing NC depending on who they're facing.