I forgot why I stopped playing this game 5 years ago...Medics.

I'm going to point out something real quick that needs to be considered about medics. If revives are limited between resupplies, that directly nerfs offensive gameplay do to the no deployment zone for sundies. Yes, medics do force stalemates in facilities, but if their ability to pick up teammates is limited in number, that either forces more people to play medic to secure an objective, or makes bases easier to defend at even pop then they already are, meaning battles are now more dependent on over popping the opposition.

Medics are critical to capping bases, because otherwise, you need a massive over pop to be able to reliably get enough people onto the objective.

Can't believe this drivel is still alive.


Incel, cat-molesting, super pros (and the bootlickers who defend them)? Hey, no problem.
Invisible, diaper-wearing snipers? Hey, no problem.
C-4 chuckin', auto-shotty tinker-bells? Hey, no problem.
Claymores, bouncing bettys? Hey, no problem.
"No, I'm gonna whine about medics!" Just .... smh

C4, LA, rocklets, Infiltrators in general, snipers, and shotguns are brought up almost every month or more... right up there with Maxes and A2G... some are even on the front page, right below this thread.

Idk where you're going with the 'super pros' line.

But good job continuing this 'drivel', I guess?

Another dull tool in the shed, I guess.

k

Res is never a brainless thing to begin with, and I have no idea how you come up with such a statement coming from someone who claims to play a medic. Do you play with organized squads? Do you point-hold? Do you play for True K/D and know how that records in recursion by various forms of death?

Leave medics alone. They have more than enough of a workload and plenty of frustration to deal with in being clutch for their squad. Solo medics are in the worst spot ever, as you're forced to ignore all the uncoordinated other solo players who die in completely exposed or compromised positions and who rarely care for a res in the first place or can make use of it or a heal in some meaningful way.

I reject plenty of revives myself, knowing the situation is bad, so having that 10 sec revive timer gives a bit of choice other than 'reject' to avoid instant death. No, shortening that timer or worse making the hopeless position completely compromised is a nerf that I do not think is needed, does not improve on the gameplay, and reduces strategy and reward.

Leave medics alone.

I'm confused why you think it is so hard. I can PM you my characters if you wanna see.

And yes, I know how DA and recursion look at true k/d vs. rez k/d. That's why I said to not count it as a kill or death if you've been rezzed but not accepted.

I mean, okay? The first part of the rez mechanics would be literally the same, so I don't know what you're trying to get at here. You can still compromise yourself as solo or team player if you really wanted to?

For the player who died, sure. But it increases strategy and depth and actually rewards the players who don't play like mongs.

"That's why I said to not count it as a kill or death if you've been rezzed but not accepted."

This makes zero sense. So I kill a player, player gets res but refuses res, I now lose my kill and they lose their death too? Explain since this is complete nonsense. Also, any toying with tK/D is really a whole new level.

Playing like "Mongs"? I don't know what that is, but I already explained how the current system has gameplay depth, and your proposition does the opposite.

It does make sense; it is the system we currently have - the downed player doesn't add or remove a death if they are rezzed but don't accept, and (in the proposed mechanic) the player shooting the downed player wouldn't get a kill.

Your 'explanation' is simply you repeating the current system and claiming depth, and that changing it would remove that depth. Yes, it would force a change. And once again, yes, it would remove some choice from the downed player. Once again, yes, it would put more burden on the medic to not waste the rez by being braindead and rezzing a player in a terrible situation. You have even agreed that you would rather brainlessly throw out rezzes and -then- warn the player if they should accept it or not:

and then you went onto say:

If you really can't see why this is both ironic and hypocritical, then honestly do me a favour and just don't read further.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, I do agree that the downed player should have some choice, so yes, they should keep the choice to rez or not as well as the ten second accept timer. But let me be very clear in this, the dead player failed; they died and their compromised position is a very justified game mechanic. If their team secures the position and they are revived, then their mistake is essentially erased. Or, a medic may choose to put themselves in danger to revive that dead player - this is good gameplay, risk vs. reward. Rez nades have a few issues, as you can't stop them, but overall this system is fine.

Everything is good so far.

Then you have the downed state (revived but hasn't accepted). This throws the balance complete on it's head, and while it does allow choice for the downed player, it forces reactionary gameplay on the players who killed that downed player. This isn't healthy gameplay. Yes, if the player chooses to accept the revive, they are possibly in a compromised position, as they should be. However, until the time that they accept that revive (or not), they are a threat that holds all the cards. The closest I can put this into game terms is that they are an infiltrator you know is in front of you that you can't find - they are a constant threat that can choose when to engage and force you to react. Yes, by definition it is gameplay depth, but that realistically doesn't mean jack all - it's bad gameplay.

What is even more confusing is that you act like reviving a player in this game is some insane burden that requires the toughest of decisions in the most compromising situations, when this game is by far the easiest and safest game to revive players in an FPS that I have ever played:

Return to Castle Wolfenstein - a player killed is put in a downed state (unless their body exploded) and can be finished off, or had to be revived by a medic with a melee revive tool (instantly stands up).

Rainbow 6 - downed players can crawl, can be killed, forces a person reviving to be in melee range and stay their for a few seconds.

BattleField - Nearly identical to this game except the medic has to be in melee range, and the dead player is put in a downed state where they can be killed (this time their body disappears, so no more revives) or choose to revive or re-spawn.

Hell, even fortnite, apex, etc. force the people reviving into incredibly compromising positions and allow them to be killed in their downed state.

And i'm sure there are more, just i've really put more effort into this than I ever thought I would so i'm done. To further punctuate the fact that I know what i'm talking about, at least in this game, i'm sending you my chars in PM so you can see for yourself.

No it does not make sense. A player kill is an event registered whether by infantry or vehicle.

Let me spell it out in a scenario, including your propositions, based on my understaning of it:
A. Infantry player gets killed.
B. Gets revived by medic.
C. 10 Sec window to accept/reject revive. <- Here you want the dead useless body to be killable before they even choose to accept or reject.
D. Enemy player shoots revived body pending accept/reject.
E. Dead player can no longer be revived by a medic, and can no longer choose to accept, and a new state must be introduced to the game that makes it a 'non-kill kill event' to be exempted from all trackers.

The gameplay depth now is higher than your proposition. How? The medic can inform you (via voice) whether it's a safe res, hot res, or to reject the res.

In your vague scenario, you do not get that choice to reject/accept if revived dead player is killed in the period of time between them selecting to reject/accept. The dead player has now less chance to do anything meaningful since the choice can now be withdrawn from them.

Alternately, if you want the revived who accepts the revive to be put on a fixed timer where they lay there killable, that also reduces choice, depth, strategy since it's far safer to just reject or even avoid trying to revive anyone in compromised positions since they will likely die anyways.

Did I spell it out clearly enough to you how this removes depth, strategy, choice?


No irony or hypocricy to my statements: Squad coordination (voice chat) announcing hot revives or to reject revives is strategy, alongside choosing who to revive.

There is nothing "Brainless" about throwing out res nades when a situation calls for it, and then warning your squad/platoon what choice you would suggest from your point of view, and then from their point of view. Res nades are not unlimited, and can only be resupplied by a terminal or respawn, so using them on point with often limited access to terminals and respawn points is always strategic. It also takes coordination with all other medics in the squad/platoon/randoms to not waste them by doubling up on them. This is strategy, depth, it doesn't need to become more cumbersome than it already is. This game isn't just 2vs2 on point all organized, it also becomes very chaotic and events happen very fast.

You say you understand tK/D but this proves you do not. A kill is a kill, and counts as one. A death does not count if it originates from a vehicle source. No mistake is erased by a revive other than in-game K/D which is not true K/D. Revived tK/D is also tracked independently from tK/D.

So infiltrators and revived players waiting to accept/reject is gameplay depth but to you is bad gameplay, yet it is revived players that according to you should receive this nerf to gameplay depth while infiltrators can do this very thing no problem.

This is exactly why I opposte zeroing in on Medics as nerfs and realism fixes while leaving every other class untouched. Infiltrators are part of the game and serve their purpose, and should medics, as they are.

I already explained there are more than one gameplay style, specifically if you play in an outfit or squad that values tK/D, not as an absolute, but as a measure of improvement, medics' role is keeping the squad functional and preventing unnecessary deaths (bad revives or lack of warning) or feeding the enemy.

I'm not familiar with those games, but I do know Planetside2 has the biggest battles in a persistent open world with combined arms. If that doesn't lead to the toughest decisions in the most compromising situations then I don't know what ever will, unless all one does is zerg empty lanes off hours.

You really don't know what you're talking about, and it is actually getting incredibly frustrating when you lack the basic understanding of even the current mechanics.

The kill is registered for the killer and the death is registered for the dead player. A medic rez only removes the death count for the dead player if they accept the revive (not counting any other API that ignores this). If they don't, literally nothing changes. Yes, the downed state would need additional functionalities, and part of that could be a count/exp for stopping a revive, but you are making this far, far, far more complicated than it ever even remotely needs to be.

lol? Wow bro, you rezzed a guy and then told him whether it's safe to rez or not. Some deep, deep mechanics going on here.

This circular arguing is grating, read the above for my response to the rest of this section (though I did read it all).

bro, what?

k? Ignoring the fact that the outfit I play with has a playstyle almost identical to yours, this has no affect on what i'm saying.

Maybe you should try some of them out to expand your horizons (and enjoy them, they are good games for the most part), if this is what you truly believe. Yes, the massive population battles are far more chaotic than most games, but the majority fights boil down to isolated smaller fights, even within the same hex. Especially for infantry outfits.

Unbelievable. Never had a "discussion" with anyone on any forum that had zero substance and only hollow jabs.

I propose the actual sequence of events to a res, including the parts you failed to spell out, you call it "complicated."

I outline what K/D is and how it varies, you come up with basic in-game K/D yet again and brush aside tK/D.'

Keep throwing punches if that's your only tactic.

My arguments stand thus.

Now that's just either ignorant or incredibly disingenuous, and only you will ever truly know.

So, Somentine's point makes sense, but as he said first off, I dont think its a big deal.

It also doesnt take into account things like TTK and how thats different in PS2 than other games, server and hitreg mechanics, or this game's incredibly long weapon swap speed. I could list pretty much everything in the game actually as being involved in Rez, because its literally a matter of life and death, but long story short, PS2 is a pretty crazy game and if Rez -were- strictly a problem that needed to be solved, I'm not sure that solving it in ways that other games do would be best.

I'd be fine if healing and reviving was tied to a heat buildup mechanic similar to the Engineer's repair tool. That would give a reason to run an implant like Cold Heart on Medic, since heat buildup could be counteracted with proper offensive play. I'd also like to see Resurrection Grenades get nerfed; I feel like they're a bit too cheap of a way to get a whole room back up after a push.

How about no.