So far, the Proximity Radar equipment for Sunderer is just a placeholder, so yeah, and it has been for a decade. It literally has no use when you read the description. It's just sitting there for some possible purpose in the future. I believe it was designed the way it is to not counter or punish flanking maneuvers, because normally scout radar would share location of enemies to all allies but not this version. It could be remade into a utility item with a cooldown. Or it simply could be a standard Proximity Radar countering flanking maneuvers without a need of operator, cause in this state of the game, Its whatever. Actually, this is off topic, I just feel like mentioning this. I know of a game called Star Wars Empire at War from 2006... On steam it actually has higher population than Planetside 2 (steam). And something I don't understand is, ok lets celebrate how long PS2 survived, but look at that game, it's 6 years older than Planetside 2... It continues up until this day thanks to mods, after mods, after mods. And my point is, you know, if you can't modify Planetside 2. Planetside 3 dreams aren't in reach IMO. Because you can pretty much make Planetside 3 by simply updating the most basic elements of Planetside 2 like gunplay, combat, rules, maps, forming it into a whole new game. And if this cannot be accomplished then what makes people think that an entire new game can be formed with performance comparable to planetside 2 if nobody knows how to improve Planetside 2 or work around its limitations?
I concur, yet significant alterations to Sunderers are on the horizon, which could render this discussion moot. Depending on how these changes unfold, the current concerns might either dissipate or exacerbate, becoming a more glaring example of imbalance and questionable game development decisions. Time will tell.
I am reviewing the supposed Sunderer announcements right now. According to this video the reason for a Sunderer rework is because of a pressing complaint "the Sunderer is too easy to destroy, preventing the development of attacks which would have led to satisfying battles". I cannot imagine what they have in mind when stating satisfying battles. Because a buildup of forces leads to the most hideous, disgusting battles ever, and it's best to clear spawns ASAP to prevent this type of buildup because it then moves in a straight line over the lattice. Satisfying battles are 20 vs 20 in a large area. For example, AMP station 20v20 fights are very refreshing. So, I don't know. Oh! I think I get it. They want to test adding separate hit points to vehicles! On 3:45 reactive armor. But I don't know, that's a pretty weird way of testing vehicle separate hit points, when this would be preferable on tanks, to add more color to tank v tank combat with invisible hit point layers to mimic their components, well I guess the devs want to visibly see the hit points in action first. Also how will this all, impact performance? That's another concerning topic, the devs don't have any interest in maintaining stable performance. You could see that with newest designs. For example, TRs newest small arms like the SMG/LMG/Carbine with rotating barrels.... Sure, it's fancy and all but I am quite certain the rotating barrel animation impact performance, why is it necessary, and the higher amount of detail as opposed to base model designs? And the weapons in general, like the LMG is a direct upgrade to MSW... Why? So, a weapon that lowers performance and is a direct upgrade of another weapon. Also new models for weapon's customizations, most are completely unnecessary... 100% impacting performance just to give you an illusion of choice. All very questionable and gives me same feeling about the Sunderer rework.
If the proximity radar becomes a deployable in the "cargo" slot it already will contribute a huge amount to battles. Of course, if it shows enemy movement to all allies regardless of maning a vehicle or being on foot.
