Voice your opinion! What do you think SOE did wrong?

Punishing players isn't a solution, and the other half of your "idea's" is on Amerish.

more than half of those were reward or helpful neutral changes man.

They implemented MAX units, instead of firing them into the sun and never giving them a second glance.

Maxes ruin good fights.

The massive catering to the fickle masses. The results are:

A shallow game that even the people catered to can't enjoy for long periods of time.
The skill ceilings are too low so that bad players can still feel strong.
The game lacks inter outfit politics and any competitive scene.
These things rob the game of any perceived meaning, leaving it as just a shallow bf pub server with a higher pop cap.

1.) Made characters classes.
2.) Over use of the nerf button.
3.) Trying to make killing both fun for the killer AND the victim.

Mines with light on them..... LIGHTS on a mine designed to kill by remaining unseen.

Is the current gamer so opposed to dying that they do not see the lights on the mines as a bad thing?

I couldn't agree less with this. If you're on a lattice line that's getting steam rolled you simply move to a different lane. If these issues affect the entire continent you're on, then move to a different continent. That's why there's three of them. I feel like a lot of people don't realize that you don't actually have to participate in an alert to get the exp at the end. Granted, if more players thought like this then their empire would gradually start to perform worse and worse in alerts. However, I find that the majority of players who complain about population balances are lone wolves who don't bother joining squads/platoons in the first place, so it's not really their place to complain.

But Indar's the best
When it's the only place you may be able to scrap a decent battle, why go anywhere else, no one else seems to migrate to the others in the numbers I'd like to see for a decent fight.

Also, your opinion on maxes?

Infantry 2.0, they need a vast reduction in their turn speed.

Agreed.

Lack of needing to specialize,

I'm at a point in the game now with one year and four months playtime and an avg. of 2.4 hrs of daily play time that I can pretty much do anything I want in the game. I can do any strategy or any type of play style I want because I have all the equipment needed to do so. Of course I'm no where near having everything certed, but getting a .5% reload reduction on my walker or whatever other micro cert isn't really going to open up any new strategies for me or my team. The actual gun, equipment, vehicle, etc..... is what does that. After 7 years playing Planetside 1 I can honestly say I wasn't even close to the type of super soldier I can be in this game, and that was 7 years of playing! Vehicles should have had major requirements to be certified in, nothing should come standard. There needs to be BR limits and requirements to unlock certain elements of the game, there needs to be perquisites to cert lines that force you to choose either one play style or the other, not both. I can go on and on but yeah TLDR, didn't take enough from PS1.

seriously, you don't know what you are talking about. If you think laggy servers suck now, when they are not burdened with hit detection, imagine all that plus being rubberbanded, teleported, with every single action you make being delayed due to the roundtrip even with perfect pings. It can fly to a degree in tpp mmorpg games where all you do is mashing buttons on cooldowns, but in a big scale FPS the client side detection is pretty much impossible to do right.

You have no idea how right you are.

The majority of the complaints in these forums are from lone wolves. Just look at this thread for example:

Already we have people wanting MAXes removed entirely. Two of any class can take out a MAX with primaries. TWO is all that is needed. Meaning all that is needed to counter a MAX is one... ONE other person. Lonewolf getting farmed and crying about it.

Most big fights are no more than a single platoon and some zerglings. One could have a good fight in those areas if they were only in a Platoon. Again.. Lonewolf getting farmed and crying about it.

Bases aren't defensible enough. Please... I want to know the strategy to taking a Tech Plant with a FULL 48 man platoon guarding the control point. With two squads guarding the entrance from the Balcony. The Other two guarding the back door (area with the large gun). How do you get in past that? You can't Max crash it since you can't easily deploy MAXes. You have to literally attack with 100+ people to get in there. Again.. its a lonewolf complaining that they can't defend a base solo against platoons. No sh--.

I'm willing to wager that 90% of problems could be solved or vastly mitigated by players sticking to static outfit-squads/platoons. Players have the power themselves to fix all these little issues that irk them and have the opportunity to play a great game. But no, they're all little lone wolf drones that want SOE to code out their own little ignorance and stupidity.

If SOE is to change anything, I say go full liberal with it. Disband all outfits. When you login you get assigned a squad. You only gain exp and certs when in the same hex as the mission assigned to the squad by the server. Now all the little pubbies and zerglings have to work together to get anything out of it (give it a 10x modifier so they don't whine). Thats what the people want, give it to them. If the people want changes but don't want to do it themselve, go ahead and code in their decisions for them.

Personally I'd rather everyone got smart and stopped zerging, and actually give me a reason to join a regular outfit. Right now I just run a small static squad and its all I need. But if the population as a whole would actually work in static squads and platoons (Think Recursion and HaVoC on Connery NC), then I'd think about being apart of a larger outfit. And I'd have a heck of alot more fun since there'd be more of a challenge and more often. And players would have less to complain about.

But it doesn't seem this community is clever enough for it. They just want to drone on. So we have to have the servers make the decisions for them instead.

I think you misread my post, if you read carefully I asked to get rid of client side and bring back server side. Here's why, it's the best explanation I could find.
PS2 has client side hit detection with lag compensation. That allows players with 500ms latency to join the games and forces the server to add latency to players with low latency. It's a way for the company to sell the game to people that normally wouldn't be able to play an FPS game online. It also allows them to have servers in very few locations around the world. Basically budget FPS gaming.

Server side doesn't allow this and is infinitely better although is restricted to people with decent internet.

Client side = players can be up to and over 1 full second apart from each other in what's going on in the game.

Server side = the laggy player freezes on screen or runs in place while the players with decent pings continue to enjoy the game.

Did wrong, or is doing wrong? Too very different questions.

The #1 thing they did wrong for me is make a direct sequel to PS1. By that I mean carrying over the factions and a lot of the same problems, rather than simply redesigning the three factions from the ground up. Considering they redid all the models and art anyway, a bit of time at concept phase would have really paid off.

What's even funnier is they're on the record saying one of the mistakes they made with EQ2 (which whilst not a complete flop, was forever in the shadow of WoW) was making a sequel to EQ1, rather than a new MMORPG. And what are they doing now? Making EQNext!

Many of the things that they couldn't balance in PS1 are now continuing to be problems in PS2, when there was no need to introduce them (e.g. lockdown on a MAX, lolpods). Moreover, the dubious costumes and faction ethos, and weak backstory, don't help the game. I'm not sure if the game designers feel constrained by PS1s heritage, or just aren't creative and bold enough to bring in new concepts. Considering the tech behind the large scale battles is ahead of pretty much any other FPS on the market, it's a shame the visual design (not the graphics engine, which is great, but the actual designed models/textures), and game mechanics lag behind a bit. This isn't just a criticism of the art guys who are working as best they can within the remit of 'make a high poly version of this PS1 thing', rather it's a criticism of the remit itself, which can't be helped by 'yep, make the default helmet look stupid so people buy a better one' F2P model.

The #1 thing they're doing wrong is trying to create a metagame. I know players love the idea of some real large-scale goals, but in reality they only like them when they're winning. It's not a dissimilar problem to the one on release of SWG, where everyone wanted to Jedi to be rare, but everyone also wanted to be a Jedi. In PS2, this means the better the reward for 'winning' the metagame, the more annoyed the 2/3rds of players who'll inevitably be losing are. They will then switch or quit, causing pop balance issues. Neither problem can actually be solved, and because of this, they need to focus the long-term incentives around more depth in individual character and outfit development through specialization. There is not enough of this at the moment; most long term players don't have anything they really want to cert into, and are just treading water hoping for something to spend stockpiled certs on in the next update.

In my view, the major thing being done wrong might not be avoidable but for me at issue are how updates are implemented.

It feels like we're getting small updates that could wait until they belong to a much larger patch.

The piece-meal of updates effects the game, then the next update effects that last update and from my view the game feels incomplete with every patch. I kinda want the "expansion pack" that has all the pieces working together instead of a million little updates that create negative effects.

Currently?

Most glaring boneheaded moves are adding pop up ads in-game. Period. Worse yet, no matter how much you have supported the game financially you will get these pop-ups. Disgusting and perhaps the biggest reason I have not played in a while (keeping up with the forums mostly because I am waiting to see if they realize this and remove them).

Also, all the annoying VO garbage- unnecessary and bothersome at best, distracting and masking actual calls at worst.

They released a game that wasn't optimized. They went ahead and worked to optimize it in the middle of the content development cycle.

New one by me:

almost no customization, you could do simple stuff to get more cash from us, and we'll happily upgrade now if you add it


Add vehicle cosmetics, and actual luxury/offroad/4-seaters/ that need to be bought ,with gunner weapons for the person besides the driver, offroad ones (such as the already existing harrasser) with 1 or 2 seats on the back depending on the size, 4 seaters with the hability to shoot from inside the car and also having an ammo reserve that boosts the folks inside's reserve and can only be replenished in ammo towers, the vehicle cosmetics could be front bumpers, rear bumpers, skirts, colors, camos, stickers that can be edited on an editor and given randomly by a very small chance every time you cap/defend or bought with SC, everything can be bought with SC and some with certs, and the vehicle can be sold on a market allowing player vehicle designers to profit from it, that could add a whole new level of customization on a game that lacks on it and also generate cash revenue for you

Honestly it felt like SOE jizzed in their pants instead of waiting for the real deal. They should have been in beta until they were comfortable releasing both PC and PS4 version at the same time and with good marketing such as tv ads. They didn't , they decided to be greedy and start extracting money ASAP and have shot themselves in the foot doing so. I swear the leadership at soe has never read "ETHICS" of Aristotle or they wouldn't be this blind and ignorant