Possible sunderer buffs from Higbys stream

I think deploying AMS should apply some significant resistance. It's way too easy to flounder an entire assault as a single suicide bomber, both from the perspective of someone who goes to great length to mine active enemy sunderers and someone who deploys and protects sunderers very often. As easy it is to say, just defend your sunderer, it doesn't always work that way. Even very skilled and defense oriented players can miss a random enemy solo engi wandering up to your sunderer. Right now it only takes about a second or two to chuck 3 mines and a frag. Would be a lot nicer if the enemy had to make a fairly serious push to take out a defended enemy spawn in their territory instead of just having a bunch of solo engis suicide run from 6 directions til one gets through. Would add better game play overall.

Engineers have access to mines.
The Infiltrator has the motion sensor (and recon darts).
Asides from the cloak bubble, which may be incoming anyway, the Spitfire-type turret is the only missing aspect. Are you suggesting that something that could give people less incentive to defend the AMS themselves - lay it and forget - will make all the difference in as far as helping people defend the AMS?

so you assume there are 12 people defending a sunderer, leaving no one to actually attack the base? if you spawn a sundy, you guard it and no one else gives a **** about it. not 1337 and tacticool enough? well, that's what people do. it's the same principle as the vehicle zerg problem - the defenders could spawn a counter zerg and fight for their base on open field. but no one does that, so we got walls everywhere. no one defends a sundy with 12 people, so don't make them so vulnerable that you need 12 people to keep them secure.
the attackers can overwhelm the defenders, push them back to their spawn and camp it - they won. the defenders can push the attackers back to their sundy, bombard it with rockets and they win. but they can also just have someone walk up to the sundy and blow it up, bypassing the whole fighting thing. that's like having an scu at every base that can be destroyed in 3 seconds.

I don't mind deployed Sunderers getting buffs. But when mobile they're powerful enough as it is. With the resource changes on PTS they will also become very cheap (too cheap in my opinion). The Sunderer is also supposed to have the ANT functionality added once the next part of the resource revamp gets implemented which creates another issue as ANTs are supposed to be fragile vehicles that need to be protected by others.

I think a big part of the issue is trying to fold too many roles into one vehicles while its base stats and the cost don't necessarily fit them all. If the dev team don't want to create more vehicles then the cost and stats need to change depending on what modules the Sunderer has equipped.

So a MASSIVE zerg is dependant in a single Sunderer? I feel something wrong in that tactics.

I was only directly engaging his example, which was twelve people. There can be more, there can be less. In practice all you need is one guy to shoot the other guy dead in his tracks. So, if there was just one person defending the Sunderer, and he keeps respawning, but the Heavy kills him each time and lands another rocket on the Vehicle (3811 damage with default launcher and Munitions Pouch if my math is correct), then finishes the whole thing off with an AV Grenade, does that make the situation better or worse? Alternately, nine Heavies can attack the Sunderer with rockets at once and it's just as instagib'd; and, that one defender, though he may have his dignity this time, is just as screwed.

Do completely unrelated and uncoordinated people shooting at an equally unrelated and uncoordinated horde advancing towards them because an S-AMS is behind the former group make that said former group count as "people defending the S-AMS?" I'm sure, in the field, it may look like that; in their heads, none of them may even be considering that as they spawn and resist. Is it always an uncoordinated horde attacking, or is it an unspoken distraction created by the contributed advance by a number of people, so those quality attacks against the Sunderer to destroy it can connect? Does it really matter how many make those attacks if no one repairs or properly defends the Sunderer? How sturdy must it be before random players start caring about its defense or state of repair?

These sound sensationalist but they are important questions for understanding the answer. If the problem is "no one ever defends the Sundy," or if the problem is "C4 is too powerful," then the solution shouldn't involve making the Sunderer more resilient because that doesn't address the problem. SOE already tries to solve problems by doing things other than actually solving the problems; we shouldn't encourage them.

I have an unsettling feeling that we'll have come back to this statement in a few months.

and a people spawning sunderer can be spawned from any base and it doesn't cost that much, considering the state of the current resource system.

At times yes, a massive zerg is in fact dependent on one sunderer. Lets use this as an example

You are defending a tower, a massive zerg is pouring out of a well defended sunderer on the backside of a hill, you do not have Line of Sight to the sundy but you know it's there. You rely this information to your platoon lead whom gathers intel on the sundy's location. After platoon lead pinpoints the location he/she rallies the platoon on a coordinated strike against the sundy. After a well thought out two stage attack on the sundy the attacking zerg is overcome by good strategy and teamwork. The tower is now secure, kudo's all around and onto the next base.

This is what PS2 NEEDS

The system currently
"OI, there is a sundy over there! Lemme switch class to light assault with C4 *KABOOM* boy was that easy!"

The system currently
"OI, I own this sunderer placed in a good position that a massive zerg is pouring out of! Let me place proximity mines at the most common approach angles and make sure to switch to infiltrator and keep darts up in a 100m radius around the sunderer. Once these static defenses are in place, I'll pick the class of my choice and dakka down any fools I see trying to run or gently float up to it."

Except for some reason morons think that one more body with the other 48 on the point is more important than their defending their own assets and spawn logistics, so they leave it alone and unprotected and then cry when the inevitable consequence occurs.

Insert infantryside complaining about "bus simulator 2014."

• Flak armor. Boom! sundee is still down.
• Flies an ESF, bails ontop of sundee. Boom! sundee is still down

The inevitability of a sundee being destroyed is clear, so why should it be in an instant by a single person?

BTW: You said that they are going to be cheap, I am not aware they posted costs yet

"Morons" being people who don't want to babysit a sundy for a 2 hour fight?

Zerg this, zerg that. Instagibbing sundies isn't a big deal when you're in a zerg, what it does is hurt small scale fights, because you can't defend the capture points and your sundie against kamikaze attacks.

Maintaining the Status Quo only encourages zerging, in them you get enough players for defend and replace the destroyed sunderers, in small scale fights you just can't and they always end abruptly.

I would be fine with this if it was like Planetside 1. All the AMS could do was deploy and act as a spawn, it had no defensive capabilities and could not take hits. (it could also be hijacked by the enemy aka hacked, allowing the enemy team to use it)

Idk, if your in a small fight and cant defend your sundy and take point, then don't.

You cant secure and area and move that secured area forward to main objective?

Parking a sundy and then running 150 meteres to point is not ideal is it?
especially if there is no one watching the area for rouge sundy killers.

Use that secured area to lure the enemy away from point.
Something.

For the love of god, the Emerald VS do it to us all the time, why cant we learn from that?...

On a side note* I seen a VS zerg coming and all the NC defended outside of spawn and were nowhere near point, I was like wtf lol! smh

/endhumorousrant

The stronger you make sunderers, and the more you make them easier to pull in mass numbers, the more zerg-centric Planetside 2 becomes.

Which is no surprise, every change Sony has made to Planetside 2 has catered to unorganized zergs and the lowest common denominator player over the dedicated long-term player. They (SoE) would rather have a high churn rate than a loyal fanbase. Or at least that's the only conclusion I can make from the changes they've made to the game over the past 1.5 years.

Well said sir.

LA bailing from ESF can't oneshot the sunderer. Engineer or HA bailing from ESF needs to be on the ground for a few seconds and can be killed before they get their explosives off. A defender with good situational awareness will watch for aircraft whose flight path travels directly above the sunderer.

Sunderer cost is going down to 240 resources, which means any player can pull one every 4 minutes, or a resource boosted member can pull one every 2 minutes.

Morons being people who believe that having spawns is a privilege, not a responsibility.

If one player cannot protect his sundie vs any other single infantryman then he have some serious LTP issues.
Get full blockade full fire supression get motion spotter under the sundie and just sit on basilisk. If you still can't do just take thermal or even cobalt with thermal. I am reality amused how anyone can allow random guy to reach the sundie on foot when you see him coming from 50m. LAs can be excluded because none can carry 6 C4s .
If you still lose vs single infantryman with this build your reflexes are too slow and you. should pick another game.

3 Manned full blokade full fire full racer sundie melt lightnings , esfs, stock Mbts and even scrub AV tanks.
If one cares to invest in full ammo extension of basilisks and zoom and have good gunners I prefer this over MBT.

The new ribbons give enough XP combined with the spawn XP AV assists and random Rambo wannabeskills to justify sitting and protecting your sundie.
If one does not protect his sundie and go to earn XP in the fight then loading the sundie is working as intended.

You're almost suggesting that the issue isn't the Engineer single handedly nuking a fortification or logistics point, but the fact that one man can't seem to stop him. The TTK is already low as hell. Still slower than other games but the average 6-7 bullet kill is enough to get the job done very quickly. What it sounds like to me is that even if you sit on your Sunderer, you can't stop a charging target.

This is provocative of TWO MAIN ISSUES with the game.

1 - The lack of proper design to promote diversity of roles distinctive to a Macro Scale Co-Op PVP.

2 - The lack of engine optimizations to promote acceptable network performance.

I shall elaberate.

POINT 1 means that the game is missing the mark in it's design philosophy and doesn't promote an environment where player Roles and Support tasks take precedence over achieve solo-victories refered to in KDR. Farming is so excessive because it's far more rewarding (if we want to call it that, the progression system in this game is pretty bad) than achieving the actual objectives. Sunderers are awesome to kill because you get a beefy reward for sniping it. It just so happens that a side effect occures where the enemy can no longer spawn there either; which isn't recognized. If you were to make this game more -Co-op- and tactically diverse, you'd need to add class specialization similiar to skill trees; something that causes investment where the player choose to activate a build that truly excells at a particular job. The second is by adding a NEW support option to the game so that pure DPS classes can STILL SUPPORT (or rather that their is a mechanic developed that tracks their support); Suppression.
Yes, Suppression like in ArmA or BF3-4 where any shots near you "stun" you. Not just flinch. It can be up to debate how effective the suppression mechanic is, but having this will open up a new role for tactical game play. You can now use an LMG or HMG for what their really meant for; suppression. Not assault. A standard basilisk on a sundy would be a perfect weapon for this as this is the type of weapon included on most IFV or APCs. It suppresses the enemy so that troops can deploy under the cover of friendly fire keeping the enemy's heads down.
If you were to have a lone Demolitions Specialized Engy charge you, you could stop him by slow his advance through the suppression effect. Keep you sundy weak; easy to nuke. But it's all down to skill on how you save it and if you provide the suppressive fire enough to slow the advancing suicide bomber enough for a friendly to snipe him/her.

POINT 2 means that is game engine is broken and just needs to be redone. If we had an effecient engine like ArmAs that rendered large scale battle at at least 30FPS without choking on a weiner every ten minutes, the bandwidth required would be freed up to allow the servers and clients both to send a tick rate of 30hz (this means 30 updates a second). You'll find that your hit registrations, glitches and sudden nukings where it seemed the guy through only 1 mine when it was really 2? Go away. Suddenly, you might have an easier change and stopping those ***** Engineers and Infils from suisicide bombing your ice cream truck.

REALITY CHECK
However lets go back to reality.
The Game design Overhaul, is impossible. Too many of you guys would be pissed and after two years of pissing of the guys that have quit that would have otherwise supported this overhaul? Are too fed up with the game design currently to even come back. So overhauling the game to actually promote the roles and diversity you need to make things tactically sound? Not going to happen any time soon.
The Engine overhaul is just as bad, if not worse. That requires scrapping this one and making a new game. Since it took them 2 years to produce Hossin? We all should be smart enough to know that SOEs investment strategy doesn't include PS2 in it's books aside from the Play Station port. Without any serious interest from the upper echelon in SOE? PS2 will never see the investment it needs to truly be great. The Team will remain small, over their heads and clueless. There will be no funds to offer help, hire helping hands or bring on truly experianced designers like those who did the ArmA series; for example - to act as a consult.

Lets just hope the resource revamp will provide enough tactical and meta game life to PS2 that they may see the relevance to investing properly into it and letting the game become the Niche game it's meant to be.