[Suggestion] A letter to Matthew Higby and Planetside 2

I wrote this letter as a message today 9/16/14 in the Twitch channel of Planetside 2
Dear Creative Director Matthew Higby:
I would like to say that you guys have done an amazing job creating Planetside 2 and making it the game it is today. I played DC Universe Online for 3 years before finding out about Planetside 2 and I have to say PS2 became a favorite in less amount of time than DCUO did. I really enjoy playing this game and wish I had a good PC to play it everyday. I have even invested a decent amount of money in the game because I like it so much. The game is made so perfectly and I like the mechanics and how things work in the game. So keep up the good work because you guys make more people happy then you make them mad.
There is only one issue I have with the game and that is the lack of updates that the Light Assault class has been receiving. All the classes have their own tools and have had their updates to make them better, for example: Heavy Assault has 3 shields, Engineer has awesome sticky grenades and so many explosives, Infiltrator has detection devices, Combat Medic has their precious Medical Applicator and they have the new Regeneration Field and Maxes are just powerful as hell. Meanwhile we Light Assaults have a Jetpack that turns off and gets us killed, grenades that are bugged and weak, and no tool and no "F" button while all the other classes do. I would like to know when will you guys will start working on the Light Assaults because the class needs revamps. There are so many suggestions that can be found online that can help you guys, for example, there was an idea that when LAs pressed F it would release a smoke screen that would help them escape, another idea was that LAs should get hipfire boost while jetting, another said to return ADSing while jetting, buff the Adrenaline Pump or make it passive, etc. I believe you guys can do it if you dedicate your time to improve the Light Assault class.
Yours Truly,
Specterr

I wrote this letter to the Devs of PS2 as a reminder that the Light Assault class exist and that we are waiting for a long time to receive what we deserve. I think that if we can all send a short letter or essay and yell, scream and cry in the forums we can get their attention toward us and something will be done to improve the Light Assault class.

HA! The HA shall rule Auraxis
I would like a few more interesting concepts for my LA, though. After all, it is the class I shall focus on after accomplishing my HA directives. I say, why not?

OMG. You do realize that you're lobbing a squishy Nerf softball that is just aching the be bashed with a frying pan, right?

UNTIL Light Assault can no longer SOLO A FRIGGIN' TANK, you guys don't need a damn thing. You got one of the most game breaking superpowers that exists. You have cake, quit trying to eat it too. You are a mystical C4 fairy. Quit whining.

Any class, barring infiltrators, can solo a tank. In many cases even more effectively than we can.

Deviating on your smoke screen idea, what if LAs release a cloud of smoke, similar to smoke grenade when F is pressed?
for balance, it could drain jetpack energy or something

LA's, the kings of sometimes killing a tank before dying and absolutely nothing else.

(not exactly true, flanking is a powerful thing but seriously, we need something! I won't say we're not powerful but we have no options!)

I read a suggestion somewhere that the tool could be a stim pack, a lot like the medpack needle things, and once used it would boost weapon equip speed, strafe speed, running speed, etc, for a period of time. I think this is a very good idea!

I'd say that, along with this tool, there should be some assault tools like the Heavy Assault, but not as powerful and more mobility based. Grenade launchers or something are an idea that I like, personally. A stock AI option with low damage but large blast radius, probably with only 1 or 2 shot per clip, an AV option with high damage but low blast radius, and an AA version that locks on or something. (then maybe a 'special' version that's faction-specific? NC could get a grenade that is set on a detonator, like the Halo Reach GL, TR get a drum-mag Grenade Launcher, and VS could get some very powerful timed explosives or something!)

Why infantry combat should be balanced around tanks?

You HAs are very troublesome and have been steeling all the attention, but all comes to an end.

I agree with this statement because a Heavy Assault can drop 1 stick of C4 and use their rocket launchers, I have noticed that more and more LAs stopped using C4, they're just using Medkits and Resto kits.

Good idea, because balance is everything that would be the weakness of the ability, I like it.

Yes we I think if we don't get at least one more grenade, then a fix to both our grenades would suffice, but yes we have NO options, either drifters or jetpacks and people don't even like drifters that much; I like them it's just that I use them when they need to be used.

This idea has been said a few times but not you gave more than 1 idea, I like it but it is the people who may complain that a grenade launcher is too OP.

I would like to ask, What class do you play the most?

The LA should definitely get something else INSTEAD of C4.

Why should tank combat be balanced around infantry?
Why should air combat be balanced around infantry?
Why should ...

These are not the questions we should be asking.
A better question would be, "How can we make Infantry, Air, and Tank balanced around each other?

The answer to this is complex. To start - every unit type should have a primary counter it cannot defeat. Skyguards should trump ANY air unit (in 1v1 situations, exceptions / ambush tactics can still apply)

Tanks with Anti infantry oriented secondaries should trump (non prepared) infantry easily, just as infantry can already trump tanks with C4. Stuff that takes resources is potent vs other stuff that takes resources, this is fair enough for me.

Infantry should also trump tanks in close quarters. If 5 people have tanks, and are ruining your day from render, you should not be able to ignore this and go about your business, not without going elsewhere. Pull your own tank, or go find a base turret. Maxes work too, or engineer turrets, or flanking with tank mines / C4, or rocket launchers... the list goes on.

*rant over*

As for light assault options - I quite like the smoke generator idea, although i'd prefer the option to take along radio controlled smoke grenades / mines, perhaps with a remote warning tone when it detects enemy movement near the unit. When someone gets close, hit the button, IR/NV ADS and blast em during the confusion.

I also like the idea of being able to bring along a 'spare fuel cell', replacing medkits / C4 ... The unit would add a given percentage to your jetpack's fuel capacity, with cert options to buff regen speed / capacity, etc. For greater versatility, I'm also fond of the idea of it regenerating ammo if the jetpack has not been used in, say... 15 seconds - finding a hiding spot and staying put for ~60 seconds would be as good as a full resupply.

An idea I posted a while back still seems viable. I like the idea of giving the LA more support options. How about a laser-painter that spots vehicles silently (without instant audio / visual warnings, for once) Holding the laser on an enemy armor unit for 2-3 seconds would spot it for all allies within a given radius, hasten lock-ons, and slightly increase rocket damage vs the target. If the target is held for 8-12 seconds or so, the tanker is alerted by an audio warning... if held for 20+ seconds, the LA is auto spotted on the minimap.

Another idea would be a Remote Mortar (Perhaps tie this to the laser painter idea): If you see tanks ducking in and out of cover in a specific area - flank, set up a mortar, specifying the target area (with a maximum target radius of 100 meters or so) ... Continue flanking, perhaps find a high perch, then pull the laser. When painted, the mortar would autolock the tank and fire up to 4-6 rounds, with a medium / long reload.

How is this fun for anybody? The day equipment choice starts trumping skill is the day competitive spirit dies. It's already often the case, though.

Gear should affect how you engage targets, not what types of targets you can engage.

Take Titanfall as an example. With all the shortcomings that game has, it got one thing right.

There are infantry - Pilots , and there are Titans, big-*** robots, piloted by infantry. Each infantry unit has an anti-titan weapon, like a multi-rocket launcher, but there are additional ways infantry can engage titan: with satchel charges, mines, rodeo-attacks.
So even though a Titan can easily squash a Pilot, Pilots can still compete in a meaningful, interesting, fun and engaging way with Titans.

You want the opposite of that. Prove to me how that's fun for everybody.

To a degree, I agree with you - this is why I mentioned that exceptions to the rules can still apply. If a liberator dives in below a tank, silently and with engines throttled down.... then unloads both the belly cannon and a tankbuster into an unwary skyguard, that skyguard is going to be a melted puddle of slag - Skill trumped equipment. At the height of it's strength, a liberator could fly straight at a skyguard, tank all the incoming flack, and still obliterate it with over half it's health remaining.

Equipment choice (along with strategy and skill) is the basis of warfare - it determines what environments and target types a unit is capable of engaging. In this context, I define three "Unit types" ... infantry, ground vehicles, and air vehicles. Each unit type can bring along equipment to engage any of the three unit types. I do not think that a Lightning with a Skyguard should have an equal chance against a liberator as a Lightning with a High Explosive cannon. If the lightning with a HE cannon manages to hit an aircraft, then it was an excellent shot, and is rewarded for his skill - but it should not be as easy to make this shot as it is to connect hits with a Skyguard. Equipment choice matters, and it should continue to matter.

Edit for visual aid:
This should almost never happen. The man on the right had an obvious AI weapon, I suspect hit detection issues. Barring those, this is just silly. Again, the right gear should matter, else there is no point in having specialized gear.

I have not yet played Titanfall, but by your description, you can do the exact same type of thing in Planetside 2. An infantry unit can pull a vehicle, after which he can use that vehicle to engage targets. The infantry unit can, however, operate on it's own, and make use of mines, C4, rocket launchers, etc. How is this different? Infantry units in PS2 can still compete in meaningful (lockons / dumbfire ) or interesting / fun ways. In many cases, an infantry unit is superior to a tank - if an infantry unit manages to sneak up on a tank, C4 can be used to instantly nuke it into a puddle of melted nanites. Infantry can fire on tanks from behind cover with rockets, maxes, etc. For that matter, Maxes (Who don't really fit into any of the above unit types I outlined, but they are closer to infantry then they are to vehicles, due to mobility and physical size.) have a number of extremely effective AV / AI options, and can swap equipment freely to counter approaching armor, who cannot swap equipment to meet the new threat.

Please quote what I said that gave you this impression, that was not my intent. To clarify, I want every unit to have a primary counter. Infantry are destroyed by anti infantry weaponry - this can be mounted on a vehicle, or be man-portable (Small arms, frag grenades, etc)
Tanks can be countered by any AV weapon, the list of these options is larger for infantry then for any vehicle, and are largely more deadly then anything a vehicle can do to another vehicle. This is why we see Sundy / tank drivers get out of their bus, run up to a tank, and plant C4 - infantry solutions are just more effective.

No one will find every element of the game fun, you ask for proof that cannot exist. To counter, I ask you...

What do you think a tank vs infantry encounter should look like? Do you want tanks to be incapable of firing on bases, or attacking infantry, and if so, what should the role of tanks be in PS2? Without posing a threat to infantry, tanks may as well not exist, since only infantry can capture bases.

The problem is infantry is not some universal blob with a rifle up its *** and rocket launcher sticking out of his mouth.
Infantry is broken down in multiple classes, and 3 out of 5 of those classes stand no chance against a tank unless it makes a stupid mistake of driving too close or staying in one spot for too long. Another 2 classes can only operate against tanks in groups and only at certain range, defined by equipment choice. Dumbfires don't work so well at 100m +.

The difference is that anti-titan options are equally avialable to all infantry units, always. In PS2 those pieces of equipment are broken down between classes.

Le lol? Lock ons fun? Trying to score 8 dumbfire hits hoping to not get instagibbed by tank's main cannon is fun? Only if you define fun as "hopelessly beating your head against the wall".

Uh huh. And a tank can insta gib an infantry unit from 300m. C4 distance is 10m. Uh huh. Much superiority.

You don't say. And tanks can fire on infantry from behind cover.

I'd settle for tanks not existing. It's not my task to create a fun game, I'm a doctor player, not a developer. I don't have a cure for cancer that is tanks. I only know fighting them as infantry as not fun. Mostly because tanks don't have anything to do except to sneak up on infantry fights going on inside bases and cheese kills from outside.

Another thing I know for sure, though, is that direct counters are not fun, and shouldn't exist. Seriously, how fun it is to see a guy and think "well, he has a shotgun and he's within 2m to me, he's a direct counter, I can't do anything, I lost".
How fun it is to be an infantry player, shelled by HE inside a base and think "well, they managed to surround the base, and they're direct counter to infantry, I can't do anything".
Or "well, that mossie has A2A loadout, and I have A2G loadout in my Reaver, I can't do anything".

Answer is - it's not fun AT ALL. Titanfall's combat is more fun and fluid because everyone at any time has a fair fighting chance against everyone else.

A possible solution should be that air, tanks and infantry are just different methods to accomplishing the one and same goal, whatever it may be.
So at any time, whatever you happen to be playing as, you can assist your team in reaching the objective - if the objective ever gets established by devs.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - without objective based game there can be no combined arms play, so before vehicles can have any role at all, PS2 must first become objective based.

Currently, being in a vehicle is superior to infantry in any way, no downsides. At any time things get too hot for a vehicle, or vehicle loses its usefulness (when a fight moves into biolab interior, for example) you can abandon the vehicle. Vehicle itself has no cost and holds no value whatsoever. Waiting 2mins for nanites to replenish is not a cost.

Sure, but OP-ness can be nerfed. Even if our tool is almost useless I'd be happy, because we'd have something!