Half Price Sundies + 7 Sec Respawn + AMS Shield

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by RHINO_Mk.II, Jul 31, 2014.

  1. Dinapuff


    This really is hilarious. You appear to think words make you smart when in reality all you have written here is a bunch of gibberish with nothing to back it up with.

    I on the other hand cite the irrefutable evidence of defenders advantage.
    I cite the plight of the attacking force relying on this flimsy vehicle to sustain the base fight (especially hard on large outposts with three capture points and large capture timer).
    I cite my tangible experience with the redeploy meta (my outfit and faction alliance employ its use everyday, and I have attended several smashes).

    The sunderer shield is good for the game.

    SOE supports me in this by showing off the new sunderer shield to the public. They most likely have statistics supporting this move to make sunderers slightly more durable against explosives when deployed. They can't directly touch mines and C4 because these tools are used elsewhere. So they target this spesific instance of imbalance and see what they can do to make things more fair.

    This sunderer buff is good for the game.

    If you want to refute this argument, then you must cite actual proof that it is bad for the game. Not a theory you have. Not some gibberish that you pulled out of your **** - or hyperbole about game turning into ghostcapping zergs. Actual proof that this is bad for the game.
  2. RHINO_Mk.II

    Sorry buddy, but just because SOE is adding something to the game does not make it balanced. Remember release harassers? Remember ZOE? Remember day 1 Phoenix instant killing infantry? SOE have added many things that were way too strong on launch and took months to tone down.
    • Up x 1
  3. Antich

    First of all while attackers are predictible so are the defenders, spawnrooms and teleporters have a finite amount of exits that can be easilly focused on by the attacking force. Secondly, when the attackers reach the point they become the defenders which gives them the defenders advantage in the fight. If you give them an very sustainable spawn point, you might as well just give them the control of the base right there. Also, while attacking you can(and will even more if the changes go through have multiple spawns also not just one make you even less predictable then the defender that has most likely 1 and a teleporter room), for a defender to get the same advantage they either have to spawn a sundy at the terminal in the base which is most likely watched and mined, or bring one from an adiacent base that takes one minute or more. If the attackers are doing a coordinated push(like in all those smashes you talk about) they already have a sundy zerg moving with them removing that waiting time.
    With the redeploy meta, if the defenders bring more ppl than you at a base they kinda deserve to keep it and you need to work to prevent that.
    Now my problems with the shield are as following:
    Takes infantry away as possible threaths for sunderers, that means the defenders will have to put more ppl into actually hunting down and killing sunderers while the attackers wont have any reason to and can just push all ppl on the point(expecially as for every sunderer the defenders will destroy there will be most likely 2 more).
    It has a little impact in zergs while in small fights will make it very hard to take down an AMS. At this point you might as well give up defending unless you have 2 platoons.
    It mitigates all damage from an infantry player(except engineers that invested a lot of certs, resources and even time to look for the sundy). All the damage from c4 or tank mines that someone brought with resources. And 10 second later the shield just magically pops back up. It needs no other action, the sundy doesnt need repairs, its like nothing happened. The owner can just be somewhere else(and most likely will be on the point, holding it). If a guy comes 11 second later and tries to c4 it again, same deal, more resources used for nothing. All other defence slots till now reduced the damage, basically it made an infantry charging with c4 or mines matter even if they didnt manage to destroy the sundy. The guys had to repair it(and defend it against other AV measures that could just chip at that hp even more). With the shield they dont have to do anything.
    In the end, all this does is make the defenders advantage mean nothing and i really think the attackers should have to work for capping bases not just get them for free. And while i agree that hunting sunderers is a good way of trying to break an assault(it makes logistics harder for attackers), the defenders still need to break the defence on the points which will outnumber them because many of the defenders will be forced to go after the attackers spawn points. Not to say that the attackers still will be able to do that with gals and spawnbeacons. Do you want to take down the gals sieging your base? Great, take more ppl off taking the point back.
    Soo, where exactly is that defenders advantage again?
  4. patrykK1028

    Half Price Sundies + 7 Sec Respawn + AMS Shield = Deploy your tank
  5. Dinapuff



    You really need to solve this issue you have with jumping around and never making an effort to prove a point.
    In short you should agree with me. You admit that attackers are predictable. You admit that they move into base, sit in the best chokepoints they can find, and that they always try to defend the capture point. They are in all aspects, static and predictable for several minutes of the base capture.
    I already told you defenders hold all the cards. They have all the advantage, and can at any point during a base capture cash in their chips and win the base back.

    You say that defenders are predictable as if A = B when in reality the defenders are merely predictable because they choose to be individually. Outfits do not operate on this logic or conform to your rules. Within the last two minutes of a base being captured the faction defending it can bring over an overpowering air zerg over the base, it will destroy all the sunderers and drop a bunch of infantry on the point.

    The shield does nothing to prevent the redeploy meta. It is merely a fix to what is happening on live server. Which is a solo infantry ruining the enemy logistics within 5 seconds. With the shield it will take 8 seconds (full tankbuster and double c4 or a few dalton shots). The shield literally drops near instantly to a single infantryman. It can't be repaired back online, the added resistance vanishes when the shield drops and the sunderer is suddenly weaker than a blockade one.
  6. Antich

    Ok, hows this. Attackers most of the times have more spawn Points then the defenders => attackers less predictable(most outfits bring multiple sundy when attacking).
    With a shield sundy deployed in cover against vehicle they practically have an immune spawn point cause it will take a miracle for more then one infantry to reach it => When the attackers get on the point they basically become defenders, they have same spawn option as the real defenders of the base but better positioning => there is no defenders advantage at all.
    Sunderer shield mitigates all damage an infantry dude could do with no outside help and no repair required after => no need for ppl near the sundy, all can attack while the defenders need to assign multiple ppl to take down spawns. That coupled with sundy cost and no cooldown => defenders have less ppl activelly involved in the fight for the Point => defenders are disadvantaged.
    The smaller the fight is, the bigger the increase in power of the sundy shield, while the shield wont mattter in zergs that much, in small fights it will be op as hell => curent concept sux, ppl shouldnt be penalised for staying away from the zerg, or defending a flanking move from the enemy with 1 or 2 squads.
    Within at least 2 min of the base flp the attackers can reinforce as well, is not only available for the defenders. You can say it is easier maybe for the defenders and it is, but again, outfits dont opperate on this logic and conform to your rules, remember? The attackers are more predictable because they choose to be individually. Yes, i copy pasted that cause its true both ways.
    All in all defenders should have an advantage, that is why they are defenders, defending should be rewarding. This changes are a step in the other direction.
  7. Mergalf

    I believe you're thinking too small. I'm thinking of high-level gameplay like what you see during server smashes or when good outfits get seriously stuck into alerts. At this level of gameplay you think strategically of the whole map and the forces scattered across it. You can do this all the time. Think big!

    In broad strokes attacking a base always has to follow the same pattern: hold the cap points until the timer ticks down. On some bases (more and more with the redesigns, which is a good thing) the situation can change during the cap timer, with shields that can go down, and SCU takedowns, but generally speaking as the attacker you have to babysit those point until the timer goes down.
    During the greater part of the cap timer the defender has the option of pulling out completely to fight somewhere else where they can make more difference, only to redeploy back in later when there's just enough time left to stop the cap (or when they notice on the map that the attacker has reduced forces significantly). Lots of defender spawn options: spawn room, point-hold galdrops (with or without MAXes), ESF ejection seat drops, squad beacon drops, sundie push-ups. This is "redeployside". As a defender you don't have to fight the fight on the attacker's terms.
    The attacker has to remain on guard the whole time. At any given moment they may suddenly be faced with well-fortified point defending squads, or even a total outpop-defensive-zerg, and in the 17-20 seconds minimum it would take them to deploy back in, the SCU and shields are probably going to be back up, defensive teams will be set up around the cap points, and pizza deliveries have taken care of at least some of the sundies.

    None of this is wrong on the micro-scale but like I implied above: if you know you can't defend, then you don't defend. Go push the front somewhere else, leave the attacker to mill around looking at opaque spawn shields. Keep one eye on the map, and if they make the mistake of pulling out / pushing up to the next base then drop back during their transit time. You have to think wider than "this base". You're being zerged and you know you can't prevent the enemy from starting to take your cap points in a minute? Send some people behind their lines to back-cap. They were too quick and you're already being capped? Retreat to the next base along the lattice links, set up a defense there that'll hold them for a while, and as soon as they start pushing that defense bring some commando squads back to the previous base - basically retreat one link to do the back-cap thing after all. Chances are that even when outnumbered you can do this back-and-forth for quite a while before the attacking force leaves some people behind to make sure it doesn't happen again.

    That back-cap squad is going to get hammered, but they are heroes. Every second they get on that back-cap timer is two seconds of reprieve for the base being attacked. And during general play if you manage to slow them down enough then you might make quite a few of the zerglings give up because they were hoping for a few low-risk spawnkills and quick basecap XP, and they aren't getting either of those.

    In addition a shield-sundie is extra vulnerable during travel time, so it's likely that strategies for ambushing them between caps are going to appear (hidden AV lock-on squad with an AV turret engie, doesn't even take resources!).

    This game doesn't really intend to cater to soloing infantry heroes anyway (except for medics, you guys are all my hero when I'm playing Heavy Assault!). If all is not lost already, get a little mini-commando squad together. Even if you're lone-wolfing you can spam proxy chat, get a few engies or light assault C4-fairies, or even heavies (2 C4, a bunch of AV grenades and a rocket = a lot of damage quickly) to go on a sundiesapping run with you. If you succeed then numbers attrition will quickly get the defenders the upper hand. It should be easy, right? Because they don't have anyone near the sundie?
    And if you can't get out of the spawnroom, then do what I described above instead: if you can't defend then don't defend.

    If it's a small fight then a back-cap is even more effective. One good stalker cloaker with motion detector on the previous base can provide for many minutes of hide-and-seek entertainment. If you truly want to be the solo hero, there's another good option for you. If you get enough time on the back-cap then as soon as the attackers have a significant force pulled back to push you out, the sundie is again more open to being soloed. Or they attempt to move the sundie back, and then it's vulnerable again (get some AV mines on its retreat path before you start the back-cap?).

    I have to point out that this sounds like "we should not give XYZ a buff because people play badly". That would be very damaging to the strategic side of this game - which should be its strong point, given the scale of the battles. It's that higher level of gameplay that makes this game so rewarding, so different from the others.
    My personal opinion: just because a bunch of people are doing silly ineffective things shouldn't imply in any way that those ineffective things should be made more effective to cater to them. You can't do much with a bunch of spawn-room heroes ineffectively staring out of a spawncamp hoping for some safe kills anyway - either educate them if they don't know how to be more effective, or just let them do what they want if they do know but don't care. "You can lead a horse to water" and all that.

    Defending *is* rewarding. A lot of players just interpret "defense" too narrowly. Try an active defense like I've described above - it's a lot of fun. This is a very mobile game - use that mobility to your advantage. And since I've used the magic "advantage" word now, here's another thought: neither attacker nor defender should have any "advantages" but those that they leverage through skill and intelligent play. Both should have equal opportunity to outsmart the other without mechanical advantages. I feel it's pretty close to that right now, with good variation:
    some bases are hard to attack because they are easy to defend, and vice versa. Some bases have great sundie spots, with the disadvantage that the defenders also know where they are with plenty of opportunity for ambush. Many bases have very similar building layouts around the cap points that invite very strong defensive setups inside them - and attackers can learn the most effective strategies to break those defenses (someone PLEASE watch that window for Light Assaults dropping C4 through it!). Some places you can put a vehicle in an unexpected spot to support the infantry (fury flashes up the stairs to hold an amp station A point, sundies near the pop-up tunnels at the vehicle spawn for tech plants).

    Final disclosure:
    I'm one of those really annoying C4 fairies that were part of the probable cause for this buff. I've taken down quite a few battle buses with 2 wads of C4 and a couple of explosive bolt crossbow shots. This sundie buff is going to take away part of the game where I had a lot of hero moments. And you know what? I look forward to figuring out new ways to annoy and frustrate the enemy in unexpected ways.
    You can't make things better without change!
  8. maxkeiser

    Defenders should ALWAYS have the advantage. They have the fortifcations, and equipment etc.
  9. Antich

    No, i believe your thinking too big, you cant make changes to gameplay based on server smashed, live servers arent like that.
    Yes you need to defend the point, how you defend the point is up to you as attackers. You as attacker can use gal drops, spawn beacon, sunderers, etc, you as attacker have to outside of the spawnroom under control and force the defenders to push into your position, the better you set up your position, the better you control it, the more ppl the defenders will need to redeploy. Even in server smashes cause you seem to like those(things dont really apply to live though), how many times bases werent lost even with redeploy side and a unified leader? As soon as you take control of a base as an attacker, the base defences and spawns limited to 1-2 options for the enemy act in your favour. Yes they can come in gals(if they survive) and scatter all over the place cause of planetside and be killed in seconds, not, they really cant use spawn beacons cause attackers have control of the base, if they come in drop reavers they scatter again all over and they just cant arrive all at the same time giving again an advantage to those already there.
    The part you are right about is that the attacker has to remain on guard the whole time, which is the way its supposed to be.
    How exactly will the attackers be faced with well-fortified point defending squads, that is exactly what the defenders will be face with everytime they try smth, that is why i said the defenders advantage is lost as soon as the enemy gets on the points/around the spawnroom and digs in. Also, if the defenders move an overwhelming zerg there, you are supposed to loose the base as they will probably loose another base or two in the process. (you know, equal numbers in theory so if they move more in one place, they have less in the others).
    So basically what youre saying that a tool to assist in ghostcaps and make small fights undefendable is ok.
    Soo, as a defender you need 3-4 ppl in an AV squad on every aproach to stop the enemy sunderers?(which take 1 person to drive?). What would stop attackers to reinforce the point with beacons or gals at that point?
    You keep giving suggestions that involve defenders spending manpower on other stuff than attacking the point while attackers can invest all of theirs into defending the point. That cant work out, in real life a well dug in position can take up to 5 times more ppl to capture than to defend. I understand you cant have that in the game, otherwise bases would only be captured during nighttime when there are only 5 ghostcappers playing BUT you cant advertise either for the attackers to need less ppl to cap a base then the defenders need to keep it. That is just silly.
    Again, you take ppl off defending the point, you spend a lot of time hunting a spawn sundy(what if they have 3-4 around, how much time does it take than) while they just can keep all their guys on the point. Ok, you reach that sundy(that the attacker used 1 person to drive to the base) with 3-4 ppl and enough explosives to kill it. How much resources did it take you to kill the sundy vs how much resources did the sunderer cost? And you still dont see a problem there?
    I think giving c4 to LA was a dumb ideea from SOE. I think 2 bricks of c4 shouldnt 1shot vehicles(or ok, they can 1shot harassers but that should be kinda it). I do think however that they should at least damage(sometimes severely) vehicles not just be prevented 100% by a magic shield on 10 seconds cooldown that involves no outside interaction. And i really think that if an engi puts all the effort into certing max pouch, the resources to buy the c4 bricks/tank mines and the time into moving to your sundi should be rewarded with a kill not just hardcountered by a 30 certs upgrade.