What happened to Planetside 2 ?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by ElGordo95, Nov 14, 2014.

  1. ElGordo95

    Dear SOE staff,

    I finally played some PS2 more active again after 8 months or so and I was impressed. Not in the positive way though, due to the fact that I saw quite some things which made me wondering why these gameplay-design decisions were made. First what I don't understand:

    1. Why we're full european servers like Miller and Woodman merged ( Don't judge me I'm a NC player on Woodman since March 2013 ) ? I can understand that low pop servers have been merged, to provide players there good all around PS2 gameplay. But why are things back like lag spikes ( which occurred already some time ago, before the merge, and have been successfully patched) which make fights sometimes temporarily impossible ? Shouldn't already, if you merge servers, your server infrastructure be prepared for that ?

    2. Why is Hossin dead ? I mean the last time I played there have been around 50 players total ?

    3. Why was a continent lock necessary ? You already merged servers so why can't the players have a little bit of freedom in deciding on which continent and type of fight ( sizewise g. ex. 12-24 up to 96+ players) they play on ?

    3.1 Also why do you even implement a continent lock in a game which has currently 4 maps ? I mean 4 flippin'
    maps aren't not too many, right ?

    4. Tactics are mostly gone for infantry ( As far as I can see it in my case as I played most of the time infantry ). I always enjoyed flanking people with my Light Assault and my trusty Bruiser pumpaction ( or any other infantry unit ) but why should I flank now when g.ex. there are ten people around every corner just waiting for spawnkilling me ? The increased player number in medium-sized or small sized bases makes it impossible for anykind of tactics infantrywise.

    4.1 Some of my friends played more vehicles and aircrafts than me like the Lightning, Vanguard, Harasser, or
    Reaver (and other factions too). And they also say it's gone unplayable due to completely senseless
    Ultra-Zergs searching for single targets. I can understand that PS2 was always zerg-oriented, but in former
    times you we're freely able choose your fights. Yeah new players to the game that was really possible,
    freedom of choosing of what you do in a former great game.

    5. Lower skill and unbalanced guns are getting always more popular. No wonder due to the fact the whole game gets less attractive for players who we're up to invest a lot of time for skill based combat with tactics and gun/vehicle/aircraft control. I mean choosing a CQC weapon like the Torque-9 or the Orion for CQC is alright, but playing a little bit more higher skill/high reward - weapons with slower RoF and higher bulletdamage (g.ex. the TMG-50, or the EM6) or instead of damage higher accuracy ( example here: nearly all Nanite Systems guns like the 11-A, 11-C or the NS-15M or all other weapons which had similar stats ), is now more redundant than ever due to the fact it doesn't matter if I make headshots and can control that gun ( so possibly outdamage a worse CQC weapon player ), because most of the time there are to many enemys who kill me anyways.

    6. Why was it necessary to change proven good maps and their layout, to a way more campy one ? The complete Amerish revamp makes me thinking that ( Where are all those genius map designers from OMFG who made old bases just technically better not changing gameplay and keeping it good ? ). Also why have tower bases been removed in many places ? They needed movement skill and good reaction time, which made it possible to be incredible mobile ( due to all the jumping pads ) even for ground-bound units, not just light assaults.

    Well that completes my little comparison of changes, from which I think made the game worse. Don't get me wrong PS2 is still not too bad of a game but IMO it was nearly perfect before the Zealot nerf ( except Zealot which was really a bit too strong ). The game reminds me in its current state now more than ever on my starting days in PS2 when I was a new unskilled player. Just acknowledging that now I know a good amount of the game ( my lvl. 84 NC char has nearly 1160 hours of playtime, mostly in infantry spent ), and feeling this same helpless-feel of my starting time is not too great ( don't get me wrong I played a good amount of shooters in that pause so I'm not getting rusty ).

    Last but not least, I still love Planetside 2 and I really want to play it, but all those points I mentioned before made me feel that this game changed, in a bad way ( I don't want to see Buzzcutpsycho's opinion, what he mentioned in a older video, that PS2 will change to the worse, be proven right) . I hope it once returns to its IMHO older and better shape. If you read until here, thanks for your patience and time. It would be great if posted comments would be kept constructive, thanks again.

    Greatest Regards

    a proud planetside 2 and Woodman NC player
  2. Hosp

    What happened to PS2? It wasn't an updated version of PS1.

    Still not a bad game. Great actually. But so much needs fixing and/or completing.
    • Up x 5
  3. ElGordo95

    Mate I assume you haven't played the game a year ago or so, then you would see the complete difference between that time and what it is now gameplay-wise.
  4. RykerStruvian

    Pretty sure Hosp has.
    • Up x 1
  5. Runegrace

    I like how point 2 and 3 answer each other. The number of continent locks is dynamic, so at peak hours you'll see just 1 lock while later at night you can have 2, for example.

    The rest of your complaints seems to be based on running into zergs or being unfamiliar with fighting larger forces. Reading the map has always been important in PS2, with server merges it just pronounces that fact. You're still completely free to choose where you fight, there is never a zerg on every base and every continent that you own, so move around to find a good fight.
  6. ElGordo95

    That's not the question here.
  7. cykael

    I find it funny when you complain about lower skill guns while using shotgun LA yourself.

    Continent locking is there so when there's less people playing people focus on fighting on single continent instead of ghostcapping around all the continents. Also so less played continents get played instead of Indarside 2 I imagine. Hossin does also have population, at least on Cobalt. It's the most fun continent because there's rarely 96+v96+ zergs. At the moment it's definitely the best continent for quality infantry gameplay.
  8. RykerStruvian

    :rolleyes:
    • Up x 1
  9. ElGordo95

    I think you're missing my point here. As I said, Hossin is most of the time empty even if it is one of the unlocked continents. Also why is it bad to have 4 freely playable maps ?
    And to that you think I'm unfamiliar with fighting larger forces, I used to play a lot of PS2 in zergs. The only aspect now in comparison to a year ago is that there are mostly 2 types of fights: ghostcaps with around 6 players fighting each others or just huge zergs 48+ often 96+ on each side [ fights like 24+ vs 24+ on each side or 12+ vs 12+ are very rare]. The point is there is less fight variety than a year ago, which annoys me because switching between different war scenarios was always fun.
  10. current1y

    What happened? Phase 1 happened.
  11. ElGordo95

    Well playing pumpaction shotgun requires good reaction time and the ability to close the gap between you and your enemy, which often forces you to use cover and a somewhat OK situational awareness. Remember a Pumpaction shotgun can't gaze enemys down due to its low RoF, its small magazine with max. 6 bullets, and an effective range of 10m.

    To your second point, good to see that your server still has quality infantry gameplay. As I wrote in my first thread I'm a former Woodman player, now after the merge Miller. I noticed the unlocked Hossin map often as pretty empty on my server : /
  12. cykael

    Pump action is incredibly easy in this game because the TTK is actually quite high compared to some other more popular shooters. You have long enough time to adjust your aim and the cone is huge. Couple it with LA that allows you to easily flank people it gets pretty cheesy.

    You're welcome to come over to Cobalt, I've heard from players playing on both servers that the quality of infantry combat is higher on here than on Miller but I personally don't have any experience on that since I play only on Emerald and Cobalt.
    • Up x 1
  13. ElGordo95

    Hmm I guess we share different opinions on which weapons are easier and which not, nothing wrong with that ^^

    And thanks for the invite! I might really switch to Cobalt in the near future and try the infantry combat there, sounds really promising : )
  14. Hosp

    4 Freely playable maps leads to ghosting. Which is why we got lattice and Cont Locks to begin with.

    Ghosting is not 6v6. ghosting is #v0.

    Fight variety is dependent on many factors.
    - Are you solo, small squad, or zergfit.
    - What's your objective? Farming, Spearhead, Behind the Lines, Anti-Something, Party Crashing etc
    - Are you Attacking or Defending? How? Spawnroom Warrior, Actively Flanking, Holding a Line, Vehicles etc

    Point is, if you're having a hard time finding something to do, yes, there's really only so much that can be done in any given situation. But to say there's no variety is saying "I lack something that would make this game fun for me. I'll blame the SotG." And no doubt that's an easy thing to blame. But it's your fault you're not having fun if you're going to say that. Not the Dev's fault.
  15. ElGordo95

    Hmm ok so you miss my point again. When you haven't played the game a year ago you can't and wont understand what I wanted to say. I clearly stated that I don't miss the variety in combat options ( so what I can do as my role in combat ) as you implemented right now with your comment, I sayed that I miss the variety of options to choose my fights SIZEWISE (= amount of players). As example If I want to fight and follow a zerg or fight in a medium or smaller sized battle.

    Also the lattice system wont stop people from ghostcapping, it just reduces the amount of it a bit.
    Btw mate 6 players fighting each others is technically a 3v3 if 2 factions are inbound, just saying.
  16. Hosp

    I got your point correctly. You just don't understand my view.

    You broke everything down to 2 sizes of battles. Zerg or Small fight. I described many numerous options which will affect the size of the fight you have.

    - If you're a squad working behind the lines. It's usually a small battle until enough of the opposing zerg realizes something is up and comes to you.
    - If you're a squad spearheading an attack against a zerg for your zerg...you shouldn't face the incoming zerg directly. You focus on something that limits what the opposing zerg may do against you. Which in turn creates a smaller battle.
    - If you're solo, you go and keep an enemy vehicle terminal tied up by keeping it down/mined/camped etc.
    - f you're solo, you mine a highly trafficked enemy road, and be ready to replace those mines.

    All of those scenarios are still part of the larger zerg fight, just a smaller engagement in it.
    But what you do and how you do it can limit the size of the battle for you while still affecting the greater scheme of things. Your ability to think outside the box is not something Devs can code into the game for you. It's on you and you alone.
  17. ElGordo95

    Congratulations. You're trying hard, don't you ? I'll give you that one that you still are convinced in your stuff. Have you even read my comment before? Well I guess not. Because if you would then you would have noticed that I said , for the last time now, want to choose a fight and not go into a zerg and look out if the options to play tactical in a 96+ vs 96+ is given (because it is mostly not except you have a pretty good platoon leader who understand tactics in larger scale which is very rare and by all means never the normal case ). Also playing behind the lines is not too helpful in Planetside, except you can directly hit vital enemy military logistics which is normally the base behind the zerg (and even that depends on how long the tracks between the bases are, and if they are used for resupplying enemy forces with new vehicles etc.). So once again : You we're formerly able to chose your fight size directly not hoping it gets better or worse player count-wise, and exactly this option is what I miss and what is produced by Continent-locks and partially the lattice system.
    It's honorable that you try to emulate certain battles for yourself but that was in PS2 a year ago not the case and wont be my cup of tea anyways. Zergs are Zergs and only big well organised outfits/platoons or players who find a short temporarily nichè (and even those are very limited) can play tactical there.

    PS: Nothing against your playstyle, everyone has its own, but your solo options are pretty boring IMHO. That was once not the case we're a solo player or small squad was able to maintain a tactical playstyle not just in an emulated sub-zerg fight.
  18. Hosp

    All I can say is, if you're so dead set on being able to choose the size of your battles, this isn't the game for you to begin with.
  19. ElGordo95

    Well people like you are the ones who have never played the game before all of that merge stuff, you missed a pretty good game then. May I ask you when you started playing PS2 ?
  20. Akeita

    PS2 is a MMO kind of fps, which mean you have the freedom to choose your fight. WHICH MEAN PEOPLES WILL NOT BE FORCED INTO ONE BLOODY BIOLAB 96+ FOR YOUR ENTERTAINMENT. I'm sorry but if you seriously think everyone have to play the game your way then it's pure idiotic, Hossin is dead because people don't want to play there, AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO :rolleyes:, it's not SOE fault.
    • Up x 1