Infantryside 2

Yeah, that confuses me a bit. Honestly, I don't find Hossin much good for... well anything. Sucks for air, sucks to defend against air, sucks for tanks, sucks to defend against tanks, sucks for seeing anyone in purple spandex, sucks for seeing the other side of your base, sucks for not getting lost in the infinite cluster maze that is your own base...

Hossin has some great flavor to it, but I fight there more for the challenge of fighting. To fight in a place designed to make you hate fighting. In a very pretty atmosphere. Honestly, I think SOE should embrace this concept and throw in some sink holes, quick sand, giant deadly beasts that roam the swamps and tentacles that reach up out of the water and eviscerate lone wanderers.

OP, are you one of those dudes who tries to fix everything with a hammer? SOE gave us a whole tool box ya know.

You must do what needs to be done. There isn't any specialization in this game nor are there real world concerns to force people into fixed roles. Don't complain about combined arms, which is used to deal with war being dynamic when you yourself are only static.

Translation: "You should have to change your playstyle. After certain parts of the game are nerfed into the floor you should "adapt" by not actually using them. My infantry zerging should remain unchanged."

Right, you will never see me zerging. The point is that picking the right tool for the job should be a common practice instead of picking the tool you want to use for every job. Though the only tool that will always be needed IS infantry if that makes you happy?

You don't have a clue about how I feel or play from that short post. I've argued about how tanks shouldn't be excluded from combat many times and actually started the game tanking and still love it. I just realized awhile ago that I'm playing a team game which requires personal sacrifice at times, which might mean that what I want to do might not be what needs to be done to contribute to the overall effort.

For the record, I think Esamir is stupid with all of it's walls. The walls serve to exclude tanks and hold infantry as hostages in the base, which is like a buffet for pilots. I also hate how SOE lowered the cost of lock on launchers to deal with vehicles and how they even introduced the mana A/V turret. I also didn't like the idea of negating the skill of experienced pilots by introducing more lock on weapons for air and lastly, I absolutely can't understand why every class but the infiltrator can carry C4.

Since I didn't actually mention infantry, should I use a tank picture for my avatar so that you won't misinterpret what I say next time?

Ooh a long pointless post. Fantastic. Lets focus on your bull and get down to it shall we?

Yeah, lets not complain about the combined arms situation being a joke after 2 years of the Devs nerfing everything and ignoring key issues in a balance fight they can never win. The OP is complaining about the deplorable state of the combined arms part of the game and you basically just say "Too bad roll something else. You aren't supposed to be able to use one tool all the time"

Fun fact.... He's complaining about the state of Vehicles in their own roles. These vehicles which have been shut out of entire bases and had entire continents designed to be inhospitable or unusable on them. Just because you have some issue with the changes the devs have made does not mean you can simply state 'well switch to a different tool'. You are basically arguing against someone that is taking issue with Aircraft and Vehicles taking the back seat in their own roles that they are supposed to be good at. That infantry have been catered too at every turn. You are saying that instead of using those items in their roles that he should instead 'use some other tool in the toolbox'. And by that I can only assume you mean infantry since as the OP stated Vehicles are largely irrelevant.


You can try to dress up your comment however you like. But actually try to pay attention to the OP's post and actually stay relevant to what was said.

Perhaps I don't sympathize? I never ask for nerfs, NEVER. I don't care about what they change. I might not like some of the decisions but I won't make a thread complaining about them. I got absolutely owned for a long long time as infantry on indar, not once did I ever complain about dying, I got r*ped on Esamir as well before all the changes. I started tanking but did about 1/2 tank, 1/2 infantry by choice and it was pretty horrible back then but I dealt with it. I know that nothing lasts forever and I'm not the type to try to hold onto something, I simply move on or """""ADAPT"""". I simply don't agree with the OP and you don't agree with me, it happens dude. Your post is how you feel, irrelevant to how I feel so equally as pointless, yes?

After all of the changes this game has been through I find it difficult for you guys to think that PS2 will remain this way, especially since everyone pretty much knew that it was released too early and unbalanced. Did you expect them not to make changes? I don't think anyone is happy with all of the continents, personally I only really enjoy one but meh, the game is fun. I too have issues with vehicles. I think they're too watered down and too accessible which is why they are nerfed into the ground.

https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2...r-at-least-seem-to.191865/page-3#post-2782466

That is pretty much how I feel about the subject but does it really matter? Each time a new combined arms thread pops up I say less and less. I can probably find a more in-depth post of mines but too much effort. None of this matters so forgive me if I no longer share your enthusiasm to further discuss how it can be better on a forum that is only read by people who don't influence the game's development.

That's the funniest part really and the only part I care to respond to. Anyone who has tried to use a vehicle as anything other than a disposable taxi has been told to "adapt" for two years now as everything they have is nerfed into the ground and the counters that work against them made cheaper, more powerful and more varied.

Meanwhile infantry are getting entire safe zones in bases, entire continents designed to make it easy to kill armor, faster respawn times etc etc. And all you can respond with is "I don't sympathize, we have a difference of opinion". Yeah that's nice and fine and all. We agree on the prevalence of vehicles and that they should have been restricted. The difference being. Some of us have been trying to fix the core issue's for two years. Meanwhile you just say "Ah well. Just use something else"

And that's how we come to Infantryside2. A mere shadow of it predecessor.


So you think basically many of the same things dedicated vehicle players think and somehow you come to the conclusion that NOT trying to fix the problem is the best option? That remaining silent is the best option and others should also remain silent? Really?

IMHO, no, op is just saying that he cant farm infantry effectively on more bases after the nerfs and base design changes. That is it. Every time i see a post complaining how tanks can not participate in base capture i remember the game mechanics and just see another person who wants an easy kills with he spamm.
With the current state of MMOFPS development where you can not have dynamic world with destructible structures you cant have tanks be involved in base capture. The only role for them is to hunt other tanks or light armored vehicles or in case of PS2 deployed ams-s. That is it. The major problem with ps2 and the reason combined arms is suffering so much is overwhelming numbers of small outpost, that makes infantry almost the only tool for the job and takes away a large part of tanks gameplay, cos there is just not enough space for them.
What i mean is just why pull tank if a half a minute later you will be standing near the wall or enemy spawn room doing nothing or mindlessly spamming he. And that the problem that forces people to create threads like this.
IMHO combined arms should be something like this: vehicles should be used to advanced to the next base (no foot zergs, it should be to long and too dangerous to do that) and it shouldn't be a half a minute drive, but inside the base itself it should be infantry and maxes domain.
Also imho, mbts should not have HE main turret their main AI weapons must be their secondarys. Lightning can be AI light tank. This way you can create the chain: MBT > Lightning > Infantry > MBT(at close range only).

Also don't forget tanks could not participate in base capturing in PS1 except for establishing the outer perimeter around it or controlling the courtyard. The fight for base was vehicle free and was left for infantry and maxes.

You must have missed half the post or read only what you wanted to then. As he complains about AV's ability to mindlessly destroy Vehicles with ease. How almost all infantry have some form of AV that is either instant kill or easily spammable. How some AV is literally broken and can deal damage from beyond render range or around cover. How many guns on entire platforms have been nerfed to being nearly useless. How entire continents have been designed to hinder vehicles in their entirety let alone prevent infantry farming.

You might want to take off the blinders next time.

No, I simply gave up. I also know that gameplay today won't be how the game is played next year or even a few months from now. Afterall, they are still making changes to Indar. I did however presume that the OP simply wanted to just stay in a vehicle all day in my first post, so I am guilty of that and being told to "adapt" is the answer to every playstyle concern on this forum, but it wasn't what I meant. I only meant that he needs to sacrifice at times, which is what everyone does though not everyone remembers that we all do it.

And that is exactly what I've been talking about. Base design, weapons nerfs, but in the end it all comes down to this: we want to be able to farm infantry with almost no effort and we will call it combined arms.
There should not be any form of farming in the game in the first place. Plus i dont remember soe nerfing ap guns that must mean something. Also combined arms means that in some situations you need your own infantry to defend your vehicles. Sitting in the tank should not be God Mod ON against infantry.
And as i said before all those nerfs to tanks and bufs to av weapons are just attempts to balance things on the broken continents and base designs.

To many ppl cant handle and appreciate combined arms games!
I remember the old times where i was hiding in the buildings not able to make any progress on the ground becouse liberators were spamming the place. And than 3 full airsquads appeared and assisting us. That was like 1,5 years ago and i still remember it becouse it was EPIC! Damn i felts so glad about the air support.It felt like in the movies if the guys on the ground are cheering if they see their fighters flying over their heads. Thats the moments wich made me fall in love with planetside but now everything is nerfed down for the average fps player .

If you want to farm Infantry in a tank and then call it "combined arms," just go ahead and say that you want to do that already! I find you detestable for it (I misspelled that word in an earlier post) and I am surely not the only person who ever hopes to drive a tank and fight and defend against tanks that does in thread. You will stop trying to put words in my mouth and the mouth of the attempt at actually making tanks mean something.

Just as Infantry don't want to be cert piñatas for tank weaponry, I want tanks to stop being cert piñatas for Infantry. At this point, tanks that actually want to do any functional tanking hide at the finges of each other's combat ranges, save for the brave berserker units, bless their turrets, because around every rock and on top of every cliff is the tank's equivalent to your HE bogeyman.

It's ironic that people are saying tanks shouldn't be used anywhere because "combined arms" and yet if infantryside players couldn't play everywhere they would throw a fit.

Case in point the open field should be where tanks rule. Yet infantry are given the AV Turret and Lancer which completely destroy s open field battles with a single squad of people which don't render since they have ranges of 450-600 meters. Nerf the range of infantry AV all down to 300 meters and then things will be more combined arms. When infantry are more powerful than armor in the open field and inside a base the game is in fact in a state of Infantry side

Amazing how perspectives can be so different regarding the same thing. As of right now I have not experienced this "InfantrySide 2" being spoken of; I can say I've had an enjoyable amount of "Combined Arms" gameplay from myself as well as from the enemy.

The people complaining have a kdr of 1 or 2 as infantry then 10 or 15 as a tank driver......But it's still not enough because they have to spend 225 points on a vehicle 450/2(Gunner and driver).

My issue is with non rendering infantry Av, weapons which have ranges greater than their Max render distance shouldn't exist.

Yeah that is fair. If it can shoot you. You should be able to shoot back.

Unfortunately their is technical limitations as infantry in big battles some times you run into a base and 20 enemies just appear in front of you. It's sucks but the i guess it's scarifices they make to make the game run

Shooting "in" the open field, and shooting "at" the open field are 2 different things. Infantry AV range can't be nerfed if tank range isn't also nerfed. The tank will survive a rocket to the face, infantry will not.

What are you even talking about, I get great farm runs with my magrider. I don't remember the last time I got C4'd, and while most of my runs end up with tank mines it's only my own fault I don't pay attention to the road.

I smell this is a big L2P issue!