[Suggestion] Ten simple features that made Planetside great.

That is.... a hilarious example. Havn't seen that mess in 3 years.

BF3s suppression was a little bit much when it originally came out. I remember bullets striking 5 to 10 meters away from your position and STILL causing suppression. The AoE was too much.

I wasn't a Metro player. I played BF3 for the larger maps, not the wannabe CoD fix that maps like Metro tried to emulate. So, yeah, one hell of an irrelevent scenario.

I see your point, and I have from many others over the many years I've played. However your arguments, just like theirs, always fails for us on both sides because while you and everyone else staunchly against CC mechanics claim its a Noob Crutch; you fail to grasp that EVERYONE HAS ACCESS TO IT, and so there for either you had a bad experiance on BF3 or another game with suppression (like ArmA, though judging by your bias I doubt you were an ArmA player) and just sucked at tactical shooters OR, tactical shooters are simply not your thing and you prefer twitch combat. Which is fine and dandy. We've had Arena shooters refined to the point of beating a dead horse over the last 15 years and I still wouldn't recommend PS2 as your fix for that, but hey; each to his own.

And, no in PS2, we don't have suppression.
You're referring to screen shake and that's all it is. PS2 has "flinch" which only happens if you're hitbox is struck. Screen shake is when I'm programming the effect, it's simply a Player related event using Magnitude and Frequency on the "Cam Jitter" (or whatever value the dev tools for PS2 call it. Each game's toolset is different depending on the development team and company). It doesn't actually effect your Player Character.

Suppression, like in BF3, effected hard stats of a player entity (your character). An in-game entity or object is one that has statistical values to reprosent itself in the engine such as HP, speed, decel, accel, resistance/armor ect ect.
Suppression is an actual debuff that effects the entity, so in some games it halves player speed, decel and accel, or half the turn speed from like 520 degrees a second to 360 degrees a second. It forces the CoF to stay wide. These are just some examples.
Crap like that.

That's a CC debuff as players would call it.

It can be balanced. For example, in PS2 the average TTK is around .4 seconds. The suppression reset timer should not refresh longer and last no longer than that time frame. That would be a good starting point.
The AoE for the suppression also should NOT be that large; which was what was so god damned annoying about the early months of BF3 (aside from those Nvidea beta driver bugs... wtf Nvidea...black triangles everywhere!!!)
You would still have to "aim".

All i can say is, I've seen suppression work in other games, I've seen it work in other games that were more arcade than simulator (Sorry ArmA, we don't need that much realism) and I see where it can STILL be improved upon to be an influential design staple for Tactical Combat.

Planet Side 2 BENEFITS from Team play.
It benefits from this because its huge (scale factor)
It benefits from this because it massively multiplayer
It benefits from this because that builds depth that you don't need to replace every fiscal year because the game is shallow
Hell it benefits from this because that what the Devs advertise with the "Can your FPS do this?" videos which right now seem so horribly wrong because everyone already knows that PS2 is just trying to attract the CoD kiddies with it's imitiation Twitch Combat; had these high hopes of even trying to be an MLG platform AND FAILED AT IT.

Might as well embrace the initial design philosophy and give it some tactical mechanics.

And if you die because some Nub suppressed your position and you whine about it?

That's because you weren't that great after all.

You did not:
Recon the area first by utilizing assisting spotter options
Stay with a squad that could've had enough members to return fire and break the enemy's vice
Utilize the Terrain to offer a better position of approach
Tactically assumed it was safe to just run mindlessly into an a hot zone clearly locked down
Ignored the potentials of flanking
Ignored that some weapons are better for suppression and others are better for damage (knowledge of tools)
Ignored the fact that suppression means Ranged Combat is now viable and not everything revolves around CQC.

This is just like we have right now.

If you're losing a base after 15 minutes; look around you. What going on?

Getting bombarded by tanks?
Why?
Oh, no allied armor running Anti-Armor. That's a problem
Look up to the sky; no friendly Air?
You have no air superiority. Rule 1 in strategic combat - ALWAYS SECURE YOUR AIRSPACE FIRST

Those are just the basics.

*sighs*
If you don't want tactical combat; that's cool. I respect it.
Hell in due time if PS2 doesn't offer more tactical options then you can have it sorry attempt to be "big" and I'll just unsub in the future.

However with the Resource revamps coming, I doubt the game is going to stay "MASS MOSH PIT OF A CLUSTER F__K" for much longer...
And to that I say "Thank the Gods!"

I thought Kerrigan killed you back on Shakuras? I was standing next to Zeratul when it happened back in '99! Did you ressurect as a Vanu or something?

Well if you reread I kinda implied that they should be immobile and not allowed to shoot while hacking, only then they'd have to rely on teamwork Another option would be only letting the player use their pistol one-handedly while interacting with the CC, they'd have to face the CC, immobile, using the Interface or using a REK tool to hack into it (as I said there are already models for such things in the game files!) but could have limited area that they could defend themselves though at the disadvantage of only being able to use the pistol onehandedly (huge COF). This would be a compromise for those who couldn't live with being fully focussed on hacking the consoles

And yes, we'd have to rethink the roles. People have been asking for LA to get a buff, maybe they could also equip that REK tool? I dont know, just proposing.
And as for REK or TREK: Yes one at a time, I was just saying that introducing something like the above could offer more options to increase the depth.

All of THIS is what I am trying to explain!

Maybe younglings reading this thread will understand why there are so many of us bittervets doing our bittervet thing.

In 2003 we got a fully realized strategic game -- an online war in a virtual battlespace -- fully realized and out of the box. Here we are eleven years on and they're still trying to staple elements of the 'old' game onto the sequel.

BF3 release on october 25 2012.

Video: Published on Mar 31, 2012

That was from an update at the very end of March (march 29 2012?) where they increased the amount of suppression most gun woud do. Not only that, they increased the bluring effect AND the COF effect.

I'm going to quote myself.

So instead of standing on "A" for 4 minutes, you point your little gun at "A" and then stand there for 4 minutes. Yes quite the game changer there. Quite a paradigm shift.

Ok, you win, your knowledge of borderline irrelevant **** about a 2 year old game I didn't play much past 6 months is superior to mine.

So what relevance does the video have, or did you just want to post it? Because it seems to me like you're just trying to be a ******** and don't actually have much to add to the discussion about PS2 maybe needing something like a suppression XP mechanic. I never once mentioned any effect to the player being hit beyond what we already have now - more that XP is divvied up accordingly rather than one guy get most of the health down, another dude plops one bullet into someone and bing he gets the kill.

Explain to me why that's a bad idea?

*opens popcorn*

Good, maybe you'll learn to shut up when you have no ******* clue what you are talking about.

I never actually quote you for anything, YOU enter an arguement I had with someone that was asking for BF3 suppression and showed how little knowledge you have on the subject. Look, I'm going to be nice and even link your post about my reply to someone else.

Your post about the video was wrong and I was right. That's all that matter since that's the only thing you argue me with. You can return to the hole you came from now.

Its not a major paradigm shift. That is true, but it's part of how this game feels "shallower" than its predecessor and it is also part of why the current capture mechanics are so lacking.
We only have a "king of the hill" style capturing, no secondary options, its always "run around point & shoot everyone coming while the point flips, then stand there for four minutes". Flipping points does not even require teamwork because one guy can do it all magically on is own. Appearantly we are to believe that simply standing close to the point will make it flip. How is this immersive? It's a goddamn control console and initiating the capture process should at least require interacting with it, hacking it.
Granted, we have 3-4 Point bases now, with generators and shields which is good. I'd just like it to be more than that.

IMHO small issues like this take away a lot of the immersion and depth in this game. Why is "hacking" simply standing next to a terminal and pressing E (while also being able to shoot and move)? Why can we not have enter and exit animations for vehicles? That would look way better and from a gameplay perspective would also solve issues such as when you attack a vehicle and suddenly players appear out of thin air behind your back. Getting in and out of vehicles should be VISIBLE, so that those attacking the vehicle have a chance to fight the pilot once he pops out. It would also look far cooler in videos/machinima-style projects.

To me it sounds like one of the best things in Planetside 1 was the limited number of certifications. So you might be able to specialise in being roughly the equivalent of heavy assault infantry or a heavy tanker at once but at the expense of being unable to pull Galaxies or have a really good decked out Sunderer.

There was a lot of good things about PS1 (inventory, class, CE, AMS, multicrewed vehicles).
There were a lot of meh things (REK, base design) and lame things (CUD, BFR's, cloaker jerks, ANT) as well.

[quote="MajiinBuu, post: 2897284,] The sunderer is a mobile spawn point. Being able to actually defend itself is better than an easily-visible bubble. There are a lot of lighting effects and refractions in PS2, a giant shimmering cloak bubble would be useless. It worked in PS1 because everybody had low quality.[/quote]

Engineers had cool toys to defend ams better, things like spitties, motion sensor, mines and c4. I know I can sit in that sundie all day for the proxy scan but that's just plain mundane. Ps2 sucks compared to ps1

A single Leviathan would wreck every single "defense" the AMS had around it. Boomers were remote-detonated, so waiting for someone to walk in the exact spot you planted is even more boring. And you can place mines and motion sensors in PS2 as well.
You don't have to sit in the sunderer to protect it, but simply having the option is better than hoping the enemies driving by are blind.
Ps1 pales in comparison to Ps2.

I Logged into the abysmal PS2 forums in order to show my support for this OP. +1

Nice one, a whole 3 mines. Compared to the 20 so in ps1 plus emp mines. Ps1 kept me interested for 10 years. Ps2 has kept me interested for a year. It is bare bones on gadgets and firepower, ps1 even had the rocket rifle, that was my favourite tube in ps1 because you could use it on light vehicles with both rocket and flak for very nearby air or you COUKD use it on maxes etc. ps2 has nothing, it's a fake.

Then go play PS1
Here, I'll even help you. https://launch.soe.com/installer/PS_setup.exe

SOE should double your SC prices. Compensation for you encouraging players to go.

I

I go back to older games regularly because these new ones are so simple they just don't keep me interested. I want ps2 to be an awesome game because ps1 was so good for its time, but people like you just instantly say no to new ideas rather than just taking time to consider it.

Everyone is worried about how it will effect their k/d rather than jus having fun. Take the new sim city for example, everyone wanted one way streets because of the road blockages because they thought it was bugged. I seen that as a challenge rather than a bug and I eventually solved that problem. I enjoy playing against difficult situations and it is lacking in most new games.

You say people like me say no to new ideas, and then you complain about how PS2 is different from PS1

I haven't met a single person who is playing for K/D rather than fun. I haven't played Sim City, but 1-way roads sounds like something that would have been included in the beginning. Doesn't sound harder at all, but just another way to make different stuff.

You list all these things that made the game easier, than you complain about how new games are easy

I never complained about ps2 being different, I had an open mind coming into the game. What I am saying is they can do more with this game with new game mechanics, most of the weapons in this game are in other games. There is nothing apart from size that makes this game different to say bf4 or arma. With a game this size you would expect more depth in types of weapons, command, outfits etc. most maps there is hardly any room to flank because they have to funnel everyone into one area for a fight. That shouldn't be the case, there should be more weapons, intel and command. Going into a base, take a shotgun and tubes etc, fighting out in the open, mortars, UAVs, longer range weapons etc.

Yes the mines made it easier to defend a sundy, that does not mean they where basic. You COUKD use them in many situations, ambushes, protecting flanks and protecting bases. You can't do that now because they cost a butt load of nanites and they are restricted to a handful. They only time they get me now is coming off the vehicle pad.

So what I am complain ting about is the basic nature of this game and the lack of new ideas. Take cod for example, the old devs left and make a kick *** game with new ideas like robots and jet packs with some parkour (although tribes, brink and mech warrior already had these) all in one game, then guess what sledge hammer does, just copies titan falls. What would you prefer to play out of cod ghost or titan falls? I know I would prefer to play TF because it has new and fresh ideas. Ps2 doesn't have these fresh ideas, just re skinned copies of guns from other games.

I don't have cod or titanfalls btw, I prefer tribes. They are just good examples of actual new ideas, for a example of complex game mechanics I would say close combat 5, or arma. Obviously arma is very complex for ps2 but they could make ps2 better.

Everyone plays for k/d, it is apparently the only stat that separates the nubs from the elite. Personally stats are the last thing I look at.