PS2 is a broken game... and why.

Lol, 20m? Are you really saying that magrider is 10+ planetmans heights wide? Are you serious here?

Another factor making it easier for the magrider is the shape of its cross-section. It's not [ prowler ] nor [ vanguard ] aka "the brick" it's < mag >. Getting the shot within its horizontal and vertical spans doesn't guarantee a hit because whole corners of the bounding box don't belong to the profile. Also the fact that it hovers above the ground makes it a bit harder to estimate the distance than the threads always touching the ground, clearly anchoring the target to some fixed point in space.

And then nobody ever mentions that even when the hits manage to land, the magrider tanks it with its strongest armor, which is not the case for brick tanks trying to move to evade, making the magrider stronger in controlled fire exchanges than what spreadsheet numbers say.

The bulk of your argument that the Apehlion and Mjolnir don't compare to the Gatekeeper is invalid. They aren't designed to fill the same role! Compare them to the Saron or Enforcer before you start making claims about OP.

Secondly, a single gatekeeper CANNOT kill a tank in less than 10 seconds, least of all a Vanguard. You are probably outgunned in 90% of your scenarios. I get it, TR gets a new toy that they didn't have and suddenly everyone cries OP. Nerfbat has been dealt, Gatekeeper seems fine now, and now you get a decent CQC weapon for your vehicles.

Its not broken. If anything, the game is just stale. I think the worst part about this game is the loss of framerate in the heat of combat. Even with a decent computer, the minute you start firing your gun it becomes much harder to kill your target. They need to seriously address hit detection.

I guess I'll join vanu I mean the devs only seem to pay attention once you abuse the living jesus out of something so maybe we can speed this along by just having everyone leave NC.

I'm tried of this too I'll just play VS since I agree with most on this forum the devs probably aren't going to do squat.

Don't care about gate keepers, watching NC, lowest pop, no option short of 2:1 pop on EVERY latice.

-1 NC soldier for the evening, not worth standing in front of the zerg. Its just not fun.

....this is why the game is losing pop.

Isn't it really easy to find yourself outgunned when every enemy in a vehicle can shoot your *** from anywhere in the 500m radius? Do you ever get outgunned by let's say enforcers?

If new toy = automatic OP cries, then please explain why nobody cries OP in case of lets say Mjolnir.
What's straight OP is GK's unmatched ease of use, unmatched effective range, unmatched muzzle velocity, unmatched real sustained DPS at ranges everybody else can dream of. It's ******* insane that a supposedly different but equal weapon can sport a straight 50% bonus to a crucial stat compared to its opposition while not paying out the *** for it with some hardcore drawback.
GK is not fine, just because spoiled TR harasser users overreacted and jumped ship, back on the OP-vulcan bandwagon doesn't mean all is good in the world. Prowler GK is still the same bottom-of-the-barrel-in-skill OP stick shutting down mech in whole hexes from insane ranges it ever was.

The TR were never outgunned in long range to justify the ridiculousness called the GK. Yeah, they could whine about their secondary but halberd is as good as it can get and it's not like the NC had it (and still have) any better either.

Blah blah blah.

I get that you hate solo play. But it's silly to say soloers and zergs don't impact the game.

True, soloers don't have access to all the broken perks that hardcore grouped players have. But hardcore groups make up a tiny fragment of pop during high pop times, and it's invariably zergs and raw faction pops that have the most impact in the Standard Game.

Hardcore group players (and the Devs that cater to them) are a pox on PS2. Their special treatment ties up communication/lfg/coordination tools from being implemented for the masses. And they lobby to keep stunted tactics in the game. Tactics that shortchange combined-arms, shortchange use of the Map, and short-change pan-Faction play in the Standard game.

I really with they'd try implementing the 4th Factoin NS Mercs. The playable Mercs that can only be used to join under-Pop factions. Really would be a blast if they did it "right" with cool uniforms, cool Merc-Only directives, etc.

I would comment differently. I would point to Dark Age of Camelot and the up coming Camelot Unchained as models that should be followed but are not. The basic premise of PS2 is realm vs realm conflict. Realm pride is essential. IF that is not the foundation of the game then all you have in another super shooter.
-this needs to be a real war.....not a series of ongoing team vs team matches where the arena is regularly reset
-cross realming should not exist.(you should play only 1 faction on a server).

I could continue on and on but my point is....the foundation of this game needs to be re-examined. Perhaps a new server with new rule-set.

You're right.

I wouldn't incidentally get 200-500 certs a day without them.

Which perks are those? If you want a squad beacon, just dual box like EQ players do.

It must grind your gears to know that 3-6 people can take out dozens of you and your friends.. oh wait.. you don't even know the names of the people you're running with. Don't know their hobbies, their occupation, or anything else except for the color of their character's armor... maybe.

VS dominates in most servers, although they have low population. I can't imagine what would happen if they had high population. TR is generally the worst, when it comes to alerts and continent locks. NC is in the middleground.

I also need to say, anti-vehicle weapons' impact is really much. NC has the worst secondary ground vehicle guns compared to the other two. Enforcer is not at Saron HRB and Gatekeeper's effectiveness level.

I still run GK on my jeep for situational ranged engagements. I've always preferred the Vulcan though, because I find it more exciting to do the killing within hugging distance.

The GK is easy to use on the Prowler, no doubt. But that was hardly the biggest complaint about it. The difference between GK and Saron is that Saron gets stupidly more powerful at point blank, while the GK becomes weak compared to other options.

I've never run NC so I can't really speak to your ranged ability but I can say you've got a ridiculous shield on a short cooldown. Not that things like that should be accounted for when looking at overall vehicle and weapon balance.

As a full time Emerald NC I sadly have to agree. Today I watched the only platoon we had smash into a bio lab camped by the VS for over an hour while the rest of our territories got ravaged. Man I wish there was a leader ranking system so I knew if the PL actually knew the game flow or liked to suicidly committed to fights that they cannot win.

Most games have ranked match making to combat this. Despite being large numbers there are really only 100 or so people fighting in most battles. This is easily swayed by coordination or skill level and not enough to get a perfect slice of gaming skill level on both sides.

You mock, but you are touching on a very important issue in itself: Active players populating the world for you to play in/with is a cornerstone of the F2P system.

Players can advance with $ of time. If they pay $, the company profits. If they pay time, the paying customers benefit because it's players for them to interact with. Without either, the game dies.

Now if F2P customers are spending time to advance, but it is not time that provides F2P/paying customers with someone to interact with, then that is bad. And that is the fault of the Designers, for not setting the gameplay behavior modifiers correctly.

In-Game Voice Channel Communication
Beacons (own and using others)
Spawn in Vehicle
HUD ally status/location icons
Dev Time/Budget/Resources
Dev Ideology stunting and bottleneck
Compromised game system and Revenue Model
Failure to deliver to actual demographic

I really don't want Standard PS2 Players having access to things like Beacons and Spawn In Vehicle. Giving the Standard Player such access would worsen the game, making the Standard Game as stunted/terrible as the Hardcore Organized game: tactics that shortchange combined-arms, shortchange use of the Map, etc.

Faction Coordination is powerful. And I think that's great. I actually 'WANT* better Faction Coordination and Teamwork play. I just want it through Pan-Faction play, and not through Fragmented Faction play through Outfit or Squad.

I got a better Pan-Faction team play in smaller FPS games like Battlefront 2.

PS2 team play is anchored in some cool-kids-club mentality where people only team up with their gang/clique/whatever, and not with their whole Faction. That attitude was rampant with (many of) the senior Designers I worked with at Vanguard: I want to make a massive coop game, and they want to have pissing contests between gangs.

None of my friends play PS2. None of the hundreds of people I know play PS2. And on that one, I am not blaming my friends. PS2 is a train wreck, it just happens to be a train wreck that I enjoy.

Why do I need to know the hobbies, occupation, etc. of my fellow players? This isn't eHarmony. I just want to play a game. When I fly ESF in a combined-arm-Squad, I often have to quit the Squad because some guy is babbling nonstop and I can't hear the important sounds Air needs to hear to stay alive (this doesn't happen in Air Squads, where they know better).

I have socialized and met and made great real world (and online) friends from online Street Fighter 2. But that game has had playable versions with great ways for players in the same area/game to talk to each other on the Mic. I don't have to be in their Squad or Outfit, I can just be in the same Quarter Room/area and we can chat. PS2 is abysmal in this area.

It's not my fault that I am stuck running around as a Mime in PS2. It's your lobby group and PS2 Devs that have screwed up communication tools and locked up Communication to pissing contest Outfits and Faction-fragmented tiny Squads. As I said, I had better Pan-Team/Pan-Faction Communication Tools in Battlefront 2. PS2 is fun for me cause it's scale is big, but its strategic depth for group play is bankrupt.

This is irrelevant because I will say team oriented players pay more, and you will disagree. Neither one of us has any sort of evidence to back it up except by personal experience. I will say this though, majority of players I squad with do have the arrow next to their name meaning they are either members, running squad boosts, or both. One thing my outfit leader does is run squad boosts when newer members are in the squad.

This is where players need to have Personal Responsibility. If they put aside their differences, merge outfits and talk to one another. They will win. Simple as that. There's nothing Daybreak can do to fix that. The players on their own have to.

If some Roleplayers in 1999 can get together with nearly a dozen six-man groups to take down a dragon in Everquest without a raid interface. What the hell is stopping PS2 players from having the same coordination. They didn't have VOIP back then for everyone, in fact landline phones were used to get everyone on.

Just like any other team outside video games (Special Forces, First Responders, Medical, and so forth) when you know each other, you care about each other, you work extremely well together. One of the guys I play PS2 with we have been friends for nearly 30 years. Most times we don't even speak, we just do. We know instinctively when and what the other is going to do in a given situation.

You don't get that sort of synergy with a random PUG. You know what I get with a random PUG? A MAX spamming 'repair me' over and over and when I pull out the repair tool, he sprints off. I don't have that issue with my friends' MAXes or vehicles, nor my Outfit. That's just one example. Just about every other support element in the game is an issue trying to get a random to do something predictable or even just to sit still to get what they need.

No one lobbied anything. Planetside and Planetside 2 are MMOs. Its always been about being the better Clan, Guild, Unit, Outfit, Fleet, Tribe, or whatever they want to call it. PS2 is no different. But like I said before, if outfits want to have their pissing contests, then they lose. Its their choice. If you want to solo, then you have no chance in hell in winning unless carried. That's your choice.

I like the MMO atmosphere, I've liked it since Everquest. Many of you don't. That's fine. There's tons of games that fulfill your needs. You just have to make a choice whether you want to tolerate the group nature of PS2 or not.

Well, you don't list population numbers. That can have a huge impact on alert victories.

As far as the new Harasser/MBT weapons, I would throw Vulcans on that chart because they are still as deadly as they ever where - the GateKeeper is just more OP.

It isn't so much that the new Vanu top weapon is a threat - I haven't head anyone screaming "what the hell is hitting me...I'm dead already ...there was nothing I could do" when getting hit by the Aphelon.

The Mjolnir is only good up close [75 meters or so] (which puts you face to face with infantry) and is only good against ground vehicles [it doesn't have the range to be an aircraft deterrent] (so you can't defend yourself against infantry or aircraft). Really the fix for this weapon is giving it Anti-personnel splash damage up close (20 m range would do it most of the time, honestly - farther away than that infantry isn't as much of a threat) and possibly a Ranger like (explode near aircraft) function for the rockets that get near enemy air.
And this really isn't any kind of buff compared to the Gatekeeper that still can be fired from so far away that the enemy can't be seen, the tracers are non-existent so you have no idea where the rounds are coming from until you are down, it is devastating against ALL TARGET TYPES, and still is upper accurate <---- even after the nerf.

I will say that the Mjolnir can take on a Vulcan, but wasn't that what it was created to do?
The TR shouldn't have been given the Gatekeeper at all. Seriously, the only role that it has is to make a weapon more powerful than the Vulcan that is still devastating on the battlefield.

I know plenty of people that have issue with the Vanu, but, in an even numbers fight, the NC can pretty much hold their own against Vanu that aren't hacking. (Legends say that there are more Vanu hackers than any other faction in Planetside 2)

really? Saron stupidly powerful and GK weak?

http://gfycat.com/TerrificRawBream

and the few percent of dps the GK supposedly lacks is more than offset by the DPS advantage of the main cannon, while buying unmatched DPS at range. Somehow that blob of prowlers that farmed us at Crossroads and Xeno was all GK.
And even if we assume the saron is indeed stupidly powerful, where is the problem in keeping distance?

45s maxed out is not a short cooldown when you get blasted by GKs from 500m away from 3 directions non stop, making you cower in a mighty vanguard in that one safe corner of your own goddamned base.

Hardcore Organized Players *need* Solo Players to populate their world. Without them, the HO Players would have pops that are too low. On the flip side, Solo Players do not need HO Players, because (1) HO Players are a small % of the total population, and (2) Team Players largely don't add to the Solo Player experience outside of identifying and posting on better tactics.

HO Players may well have a higher % of $ spenders in game. But their overall % of population is much smaller.

I have no interest in joining a gang and then trying to coordinate with other gangs.

I would prefer DBG merged outfits into 1 outfit called the entire Faction. Splitting each faction into Outfits is silly. It just fragments the Faction coop experience. I would rather continue to play alongside my Faction as a Mime, I have no interest in playing in small units that don't interact with my larger Faction.

I think you underestimate what a competent Dev could do to overhaul coop communications in the game. Now if you're saying "there's nothing Daybreak can do" because they are incompetent (in that area), then I concede the point.

I played EQ back then. EQ had better text command communication tools than PS2 has. It also had a more coordinated online community. You're also talking about players taking on a specific PvE objective.

You are also talking about something that is done as a short time thing. PS2 players organize and run Server Smash events, which are also large groups organized to run short time things. I am a big fan of players efforts to run Server Smash, despite what conflicts I have with the format. Notably pan-Factions coop together in SS, and players operating independent of their Faction in Outfits has no role in Server Smash.

That''s a "you" thing. You don't need to see each other naked to work well together (unless that's part of your work).

I've been on sports teams, work teams, game teams, etc. Yes, synergy and practice and many other factors boost performance. So what. I enjoy both pickup games and games where I am working with a trained team.

I enjoy playing alongside randoms. If that's not your thing, that's a "you" issue.

Don't be silly. People lobby all the time. Just read forum posts and you'll see an example of it.

And I worked at Vanguard. I have friends at SOE. There is lots of lobbying internally by Devs to get the things each wants.

Make no mistake about it. PS2 is a game shaped by lobbying.

I wish you knew what you were talking about. You're just too locked into your set-in-stone point of view.

Think about it. What is "winning"? If my goal is to complete a Directive, do I really need to be carried? If my goal is to have coop fun and support my Faction, do I really need to be carried? If my goal is to hack and abuse my advantage to wipe out others, do I really need to be carried?

Winning is an ambiguous target in PS2. PS2 has no long term, in-game consequences. And so "winning" then becomes completely relative.

I don't need you to enjoy PS2. And I don't need HO Players to enjoy PS2. I enjoy having you the forums and I appreciate and value your forum input.

I *liked* the MMO atmosphere in EQ... until PoP when my playstyle got kicked to the curb. After that, I didn't like EQ and quit. I played EQ1 from the beta to shortly after PoP.

There was no reason why EQ1 Devs could not have continued to support my gameplay style. I am an advocate of coop games that cater to multiple gameplay styles, so long as they don't detract from each other.

I play PS2. I have been playing it for a long time. So far, it hasn't kicked my playstyle to the curb.

This may actually be a good thing. Were PS2 to accurately simulate strategic warfare from a consequence standpoint, it would get very tiring, very quickly.

This is one of the more effective arguments I've heard against platoon chat. I'm sure someone has suggested somewhere that platoon squad leader volume boosting would be nice as a separate option, allowing you to effectively mute others without individually muting them (And accidentally muting your SL, who then screams "WHERE ARE MY HORNETS?!!" for five minutes. Fun times

This would be a valid point, if the OP's argument wasn't completely invalid in the first place.

Statistically speaking, without further breakdowns of numbers and some basic math, the OP's argument largely boils down to us pointing at trend-lines and then subjectively reading patterns into them. The trendlines you cited are more distinct,and you are right to question the comparisons, but there are also a huge number of additional factors that could be influencing it, which others have pointed out, such as range, falloff, terrain, etc.

Thus, we're really just having a bias/preference/opinion argument.

WHICH IS FINE. But please, as a community, couldn't we all stand to be a bit be more cautious with statistics before starting flame wars?

Does running around in circles saying "You just don't know how to play NCBRO!" and "TR IS LAME" really fix our core, fundamental problem?

Specifically, that the Lasher is OP and gives the Vanuplestanis too much spam power?!?



But seriously. I'm not sure the game would be very interesting if every gun were equivalent to every other across factions. Even though some of them are.

World Record Event.. which was invitation only disproves that.

Then you have no intention to win anything.

I've been playing competitive online gaming since the days of MechCommander in late 1998. We didn't need developers to hold our hands to make teams. We did it on our own. The reason you see outfit tags is because we used to make our own in the days of M-Player and MSN Gaming Zone. And that goes back further than that.

Sure, remove outfits. People like me don't really need the interface. We make our own teams through websites, blogs, teamspeak servers, and various instant messangers. Or better yet within RL companies and platoons (had a unit in BF2142 based on people in my RL unit in the Army).

Team players will attract likewise players. We'll find a way to group. And still crush the zerging solo players.

Funny.. both games have similar commands (not surprising, same company made both games). Lets go over the communication commands and tools of Everquest:

/say - text appears to everyone around you. (/say works in PS2 for the same function)
/tell name (or /whisper) - sends private message to the name of recipient. (/tell and /whisper work the same way in PS2)
/shout - works like /say but to further radius, red text. (/shout is /yell in PS2, but otherwise the same).
/g - Sends message to group members. (/squadsay works the same way in PS2)
/gu - Sends messages to guild members. (/outfitsay works the same way)
/ra - Sends message to raid members. (/platoonsay works the same way)
/ooc - sends an out of character message to zone. (/regionsay covers this)

There's a couple of others such as /auction, fellowship, and general chat. But there's nothing to sell or trade in PS2. There's no fellowships (yes it is lord of thing ring'sh). And general chat is open to all factions (when on a PVP server)

So what are these tools you are talking about? EQ lacks a proximity chat, squad chat (group), platoon chat (raid), and outfit chat (guild) for VOIP. So I've got no clue what you're talking about.

A solo playstyle is meant for single player games. Co-op is meant for multiplayer and match based games. Not persistent world MMOs.

They haven't, but I will. Or I should say, we. You and you random 'acquaintances' don't even team up in game. What chance do you have against a group?

You're wasting your time.

Great, another example of a bunch of people who coordinated to get online together for one event. That really doesn't reflect the full time, day-to-day of Standard Play.

Winning is an ambiguous target in PS2. PS2 has no long term, in-game consequences. And so "winning" then becomes completely relative.

People *can* use 3rd party options and elbow grease to tackle all kinds of barriers. But not everyone wants to be MacGyver just to play a game. People used to play long distance Chess by mail. And for some, there is a great joy in the labor of love in doing this. Even in a time when it is no longer necessary. But there is a lot of value in using technology to accentuate an experience.

With regards to Outfits, I have no interest in removing Outfits. People like them and I want to support people having non-destructive things they like. I am simply against exclusive access to tools. Keep outfits in, but keep it a social thing.

/who - Lists all Player characters in your zone.
/who all - Lists all Player characters in the world.
/who all level - Lists all players from <min lvl> to <max lvl> that are online.
/who all <class> - Lists all of <class> that are online.
/who all lfg - Lists all players that are lfg currently. /who all lfg <class> or /who all lfg <min lvl> <max lvl> can narrow this down.
/inspect - used for player item inspects
/lfg - Puts LFG on so players know your "Looking for a Group"

EQ not having VOIP kept the playing field at least level.

Play-Doh was first produced as a wallpaper cleaner in the 1930s.

Water Displacement – 40th Attempt (aka "WD-40") was designed with the intent of displacing and repealing standing water in order to prevent corrosion in nuclear missiles. Consumers, however, had other uses in mind.

Kleenex started out life in 1924 as a disposable towel used to take off make-up. Its unintended use started in 1926 after the manufacturer received tons of customer feedback indicating that most people were using the product to blow their noses.

Text Messaging was originally developed by cell phone carriers to let customers know about problems with their networks, no one anticipated people would discover and then use them to send messages to each other. In fact, the unintended use of texting caught on so quickly that most carriers didn’t have systems in place to charge their customers.

Enjoy what you enjoy, however you enjoy it. Think and live outside the box.

What are you, like 12? What do you care if I enjoy playing as what you consider cannon fodder? It's like you're offended because I enjoy something in a way that you don't want it to be used.

One reason why I hate playing HO Play is that there if often very little challenge. It has too many advantages. The advantages win almost by themselves in simple tactical application before I even need to use non-advantage strategy.