[Suggestion] Add shields to buildings

Im still waiting on you to actually attempt to point out ANY ignorance or bias.

Okay let me just reply quickly to this POS post.

I don't CARE that there are "dozens of infantry only games out there"(There aren't), I'm playing Planetside.

I'm not asking for tanks to not have any influence. If you actually ******* READ my post and reasoning, you'd ******* know that. I'm asking for vehicles not to DOMINATE EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF THIS GAME.

"Every medium to large base requires infantry to accomplish anything,"
Yes, the requirement is that I stand around a point for 20 minutes. One exception, Bio Labs which is still ****** up the *** by vehicles because landing pads are just Liberators spamming the **** out of them and the ground battle is tanks camping around waiting for you to come outside.

Actually, no, I'm going to stop replying here. The stupidity in your post is simply too much to comprehend. It is PAINFULLY OBVIOUS that you are a tank whorre through and through, that you spend your time farming infantry, and if you're not, you're an incredibly stupid player who is ignoring the facts and claiming there is no problem when there is a VERY LARGE PROBLEM, NOT a L2P issue.
The Enclave, my outfit, does not fear tanks for ****. We eat them for breakfast and **** them out the other end. THAT IS BECAUSE THERE ARE OVER 200 OF US AND TANKERS ARE GENERALLY *******.

And if you had any ******* sense you'd know I was not trying to make this into a BF3/COD game.
1) Those games are ****
2) If I was a BF3/COD player I'd have quit by now and stopped giving a ****
3) My idea is in NO WAY pushing towards that ****** genre and is in fact enhancing the game. Tanks in PlanetSide 1 SUPPORTED THE INFANTRY. Almost ALL IMPORTANT GAMEPLAY WAS DICTATED BY INFANTRY. There was NEVER a point where you could roll out a tank zerg and win everything. In PlanetSide 2, it is the polar opposite.

LOL!!!! pinch a nerve there sweet cheeks? Also, im sorry for having a different opinion than yours.

ok lets do this

I don't CARE that there are "dozens of infantry only games out there"(There aren't), I'm playing Planetside. whoop! lost validity right there. first off, you dont care that we combined arms lovers only have one game to play, and that you are trying to change it to match all the other games? all of the COD series, BF series since BF2 and on, BFBC series, homefront, crysis, far cry, boder lands, counter strike, americas army, resistance, ghost recon seires, halo, mass effect...whoops thats 13 FPS's which are dominantly inf only.

I'm not asking for tanks to not have any influence. If you actually ******* READ my post and reasoning, you'd ******* know that. I'm asking for vehicles not to DOMINATE EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF THIS GAME.

My claim may have been an exaggeration to a degree, but I was closer with that than with what you are saying. now despite your anger issues, i did read through the post and I found that you were wanting to pretty much get rid of vehicle play as we know it. from your post I gathered that you were pretty annoyed by how many times vehicles got in the way of your game.

Yes, the requirement is that I stand around a point for 20 minutes. One exception, Bio Labs which is still ****** up the *** by vehicles because landing pads are just Liberators spamming the **** out of them and the ground battle is tanks camping around waiting for you to come outside.

Or fight inside buildings in classic infantry FPS style. that works to. bio labs arnt an issue with vehicles and you know it. the launch pad is an inconsequential part of the map. if your getting killed repeatedly by libs while attacking a bio dome, your doing something REALLY wrong. tech plants, amp stations and every tower is pretty much all in doors. amp station not so much but it has a ton of avenues you can take to avoid vehicles if you play smart. sorry, but most bases allow a pretty good seperation of vehicles and infantry.


Actually, no, I'm going to stop replying here. The stupidity in your post is simply too much to comprehend. It is PAINFULLY OBVIOUS that you are a tank whorre through and through, that you spend your time farming infantry, and if you're not, you're an incredibly stupid player who is ignoring the facts and claiming there is no problem when there is a VERY LARGE PROBLEM, NOT a L2P issue.
The Enclave, my outfit, does not fear tanks for ****. We eat them for breakfast and **** them out the other end. THAT IS BECAUSE THERE ARE OVER 200 OF US AND TANKERS ARE GENERALLY *******.

Actually no. I spend very little time in tanks. in fact most of my time is spent as an engi without a vehicle. I fly a lib quite a bit, but i am not the one farming as i am the pilot and i get very little XP. Most of the time I play as engi or medic assaulting bases on foot, and not being ***** by tanks.

Im glad that you and your outfit can kill tanks en mass with superior numbers. I prefer to kill tanks and planes with superior tactics, and gameplay. I do quit well at it and often kill many more vehicles than vehicles kill me. My biggest problem is other infantry. but then again i play to my situation and environmental and use the brain God gave me, so I dont need numbers to accomplish my goals.

And if you had any ******* sense you'd know I was not trying to make this into a BF3/COD game. I got plenty, but you failed to project your vision.
1) Those games are **** Totally agreed. WAY to much infantry influence and not enough vehicle play.
2) If I was a BF3/COD player I'd have quit by now and stopped giving a **** most do, bt some are stubborn. i just diddnt know
3) My idea is in NO WAY pushing towards that ****** genre and is in fact enhancing the game. Tanks in PlanetSide 1 SUPPORTED THE INFANTRY. Almost ALL IMPORTANT GAMEPLAY WAS DICTATED BY INFANTRY. There was NEVER a point where you could roll out a tank zerg and win everything. In PlanetSide 2, it is the polar opposite PS2, I will agree lacks a TON of depth. your ideas only contribute to that problem. numbers rule to a parge degree in PS2 and thats not a good thing. I will never argue this, but rendering vehicles useless without inf is just ********. infantry are the mortar, vehicles are the bricks. the bricks provide the strength, and the mortar fills in the gaps. neither is very useful without one another. I want to see that happy balance. From your OP i get the impression that you dont.

I look forward to a response, though this time, caps lock will not be a requirement.

OP,
If you are going to start a slapping fight with someone on the internet your post should not be 50% censored. As an impartial observer to your little temper tantrum, I must say that you are only making yourself seem silly.
I understand the concept you are thinking of and while the idea is not a bad one, your reasonings for the idea are counter productive to this game. You claim that you do not want to make this game into a BF3 style game because BF3 is garbage. I agree, but what seperates this game from EVERY other successful FPS on the market currently is its diversity and scale in combat. I.e. vehicle and areal combat mean something. Tanks should absolutly be able to dominate infantry if properly protected. Assaulting the inside of a base should not render armor ineffective. As it stands, all that tanks can do is cover the windows. If you know a tank is camping the window than you probably should not run and stick your head out of the window. Tactics 101.

Infantry are needed in this game no matter what anyone states so trying to blatantly take vehicles out of the equation is a step backwards in the progression of this game, not forward.

I started by thoroughly reading your original post then proceeded to read your tantrum posts and imo you make yourself sound like an individual with no real productive thoughts and someone who takes credit for "your" outfits accomplishments when you do very little to actually contribute. Your true think tank players would not post such angry and silly replies to someone who was just trying to discuss ideas.

ABATTLEDONKEY's brick and mortar comparison works very well to describe the relationship between vehicles and infantry. Please dont build my house (this game) with only mortar (as an infantry only game)

This is true. It's a very good way to achieve the objective of 'not dying to vehicles'. What if you want to achieve the objective of 'defend the base' or 'provide anti-air cover for everyone else' or even 'have fun'?

While you can indeed be protected from vehicles very easily, the buildings in general are tiny (and many buildings are so small and full of doorways/windows that, given the proper angle and HE shells, no indoor location in them is actually safe even when you aren't in line of sight) and the objectives you need to hold for territory control are in separate buildings, with no way of safely traversing the distance between them unless the enemy is stupid and not covering all angles. And by 'safely' I don't mean you should be 100% safe, just have a reasonable success rate instead of the guaranteed failure you have now.

And since vehicle groups also come with the tools to never run out of ammo, taking potshots on the off chance that AOE will hurt someone is more profitable than always waiting for the perfect shots (or even intel of an enemy being there).

--
Combined arms doesn't have to mean that every branch is useful in every phase of a battle, just that each of them is useful in at least one phase in the battle for a larger objective such as the conquest or defense of a tech plant.

The problem is that some parts of the combined arms force are more useful than others in every phase..

Okay, let me try and make my point more concrete.

If you are defending a base, and let's say, 10 Magriders are sitting outside. It's usually more, but for the sake of argument, 10. You stay indoors as a safety mechanism, you would logically think. In real life, infantry garrison buildings to project their strength as a force multiplier. In PlanetSide 2, it's the polar opposite. A building is a coffin. They're simply too small to offer any meaningful protection. Grenade spam, HE spam, Liberators, Rocket Pods, they all wipe out buildings with ease. That's just 1 tank sitting 100m away who can spam right click at a box once he gets the bullet drop right.
Now, 1 tank isn't an issue. Hell, 5 tanks aren't an issue, and if you have enough infantry, you can handle 10 tanks with a bit of effort.

No, the issue is when we're dealing with more. Which is highly regular. The issue is compounded yet again when we add infantry that just lob grenades into buildings constantly and kill a squad no problem. Then the issue is even further compounded when you have a Liberator just endlessly pounding anyone trying to defend the capture point by poking their head out the door or getting the angle right and just getting pot shots in the windows.

Because THAT is the problem. Buildings are such a confined, vulnerable space that the only use they have is to provide you with kills when you spam it with explosives. This changes when the building is BIG. But we don't have enough big buildings. Most bases don't even have one. And there lies the problem. That instead of buildings being able to project infantry's strength, it's basically a ******-funnel where all the infantry go to get shelled by tanks. This makes it literally IMPOSSIBLE to defend a base because no matter where you go, you're dead. Outside? Liberators, tanks, ESFs. Inside? Tanks, Liberators, ESFs. Try to leave your spawn room? Tanks, ESFs, Liberators. It's not a game of combined arms. It's a game of infantry being stomped over and over and over and over and over again by vehicles. With one or two infantry on the ground to actually get out and capture the point.

My suggestion is not even a hard cancelling of this problem. It gives a very clear and distinct linearity to how to conquer a building - the generators. If tanks want to be able to shoot inside buildings and wipe people out, then they should have to use COMBINED ARMS and get INFANTRY to do the fighting so they can then be more effective than they already are. You have to remember that in many bases the capture point is outside, in the middle, horribly exposed and vulnerable to vehicles. The only way they can be defended is if you secure the area around the point - the buildings - and keep people for capturing it in the first place.

THIS is why I am mad. It's a very obvious issue that does not have an answer of "L2P". I would love to see someone "L2P" to beat 30 Magriders sitting 100m from the base spamming HE shells, as infantry using "tactics and skill". THAT is why I am mad. It was a very ******** (idiotic) answer of someone who does not understand the issue yet feels he can discuss it.
It's a very simple solution to a problem which removes alot of enjoyment from almost everybody, which will provide options and variety for both the attackers and defenders, it has literally no downside because buildings can be reverted to current state very rapidly, and it provides further linearity to base attack and defense other than standing on the capture point by adding more tactics to the game.

To finish, let's look to Planetside 1 as an example of vehicles. I'm not gonna talk about 2 people required to work a vehicle or anything like that, I'm just going to state a very simple fact. In PlanetSide, vehicles supported the infantry in a base capture. Infantry did most of the grunt work. Outside of bases, tanks ruled everything. In PlanetSide 2, infantry support the vehicles and were only used because they are required to capture a base. Vehicles do most of the fighting. Both inside and outside of bases, tanks are the dominant force. This is undeniable.

If I wanted to play a game dominated by vehicles - I would be playing World of Tanks, Wargame, and if you played any maps with vehicles in Battlefield 3 you'd also know that they had a very dominant presence - hence why 90% of the maps played were Operation Métro infantry only. I would NOT play PlanetSide 2, who's predecessor had the right mix of vehicles and infantry. I had more chance of escaping a vehicle in Battlefield 3 with all it's destructible buildings and enviornment than I do in PlanetSide 2.

Its always easy to say you can conquer the 40 tank column that is rolling your bases with superior tactics, the thing is its not true. Armor zergs become nearly impossible to kill when they can strap AA on top of them and have AA hidden among the terrain.

This isn't something that you need to "man up" or "use tactics" its broken game design.

I agree with building shields to a certain degree, bases shouldn't be capture by overwhelming them with lib bombardments and tank spam like they currently are.

This thread is hilarious. So many complaints about how tanks are magically able to zerg anywhere they want without taking any losses and are able to insta kill anyone on the map. As if it is literally impossible to stop a zerg.

For starters, ABATTLEDONKEY is the only one here giving any solutions to the problems that exist or in defense or mechanics that should remain the same. Everyone else seems to just want to be in denial or whine.

Secondly, I have beaten 20+ tank columns with just 5 of my friends using superior tactics so yes "Dasbag"...it literally IS a "learn tactics" discussion. People want to have the ability to stop zergs in their tracks. This is not only an unrealistic notion, but also a complete game killer. Imagine if 10 guys could ALWAYS stop huge numbers of attackers the regardless of their skill level. That would make assaulting almost impossible. Small numbers of defenders stopping large groups will often times take a few bases and a lot of smarts and skill. When I am playing with my friends and we have a zerg roll on us, we TACTICALLY retreat to the base that will be attacked, we all throw down anti tank mines ( 6-7 tanks insta killed right there), we repair all defenses (keep them at a distance and usually kill another 3-4 tanks per turret), start flanking the tanks on the cliffs and defend like champs. This tactic will almost always allow by 5-6 friends to kill a 20+ tank column in a few bases. Once the base is lost we don't sit around and wait to be camped, we move on and get ready...the way skill, tactical players do. The biggest problem with this game is not the balance of infantry to vehicles, its the lack of depth and content (aka the ability for creative players to create new tactics).

Flat out denying tanks the ability to help with a base capture is just silly.

Oh and btw, every skilled HA in the game knows where you can shoot safety at a tank from inside buildings, if you dont know these spots or how to do that, its not a broken game mechanic, its a broken player mechanic.

Just last night I was involved in a platoon that successfully held off, or I dont know, maybe over 40 tanks, 10 libs, countless ESF's and a metric F ton of infantry at howling pass. We took Mao, and while we were taking peripheral bases the TR came back with one of the largest counter offensives ive seen since the game launched and took back Mao. We diddnt stick around mao and then whine that we got beat. we strapped our brains into our heads, retreated back to howling pass, and got ready. the battle lasted for about an hour, but we eventually beat back what I could only conclude was a majority of the TR playing at the time (the vanu mopped them up on the other side of the map while we were holding down our fort). We were heavily out numbered, and out gunned but we utilized our assets, and played like a team and guess what? we had no reason for complaining and whining because WE WON! granted we almost lost it one time, but we put on our big boy pants and adapted to the situation at hand rather than trying the same thing over and over again hoping for different results.

I have also successfully stopped an air zerg with a squad of 8 ESF pilots working together. We were getting our ***** handed to us at tarawich and we all decided to go to warpgate and try an ESF attack together. we killed about 12 libs and I dont know how many ESF's (i personally got 3) and suddenly our team started to take back the base and you know what happened next? WE KEPT IT! YAY US right? no, poo on us because the lone wolf cant kill us all with his magic weapon of pwnage.

^^ This!

lol...examples of people playing the game the way it was INTENDED to be played.

What I said completely went over your head didn't it?

LOL! i don't think it did. i think you just proved his point though

debate 101 Those who insult without offering any legitimate points are almost always wrong

He addressed your points clearly and precisely, if he responded in a way that did not address what you were attempting to communicate than the discrepancy was on your side because i read your post's the same way he did based on his replies and his replies did address what you were concerned with.

No he is arguing that on a few occasions he has successfully taken out an alleged tank zerg, thats like me saying "well the NC have one shot kill guns? I can still kill them so they arent OP".

He also is under the assumption that I want supreme power on one person when I was saying giving people the ability to man a MBT solo is a flaw.

I tend to forget people on this forum arent the brightest though so I guess its my fault.

The NC are not OP lol...
He was showing examples of how tank zergs can be stopped with superior tactics...examples with directly counter your claim that tank zergs are not an issue of L2P. So not only did he directly address your claims, but he (through example) showed how your point was null and void. you reply with "that ent over your head" and "people on these forums arent the brightest"

You expect to be seen as right or smart by who?!?!?!?! You have said nothing of substance. You are simply insulting and complaining. Than on top of it your point is expressed by an example of how the NC are OP while you fight for the Vanu which are regarded almost universally as the most OP faction by a large margin.

It is pretty clear to anyone with half a brain cell that you are just one of those people who complain when killed, not complain when broken. ABATTLEDONKEY at least takes the time to think through his arguments so that even if he is proven wrong, he still had a point to his arguments though in this case he isnt wrong.

I don't think I need to re iterate what I said earlier for you now.

Prob not, undoutably it would be the same rhetoric that has been disproven again, then when proven wrong again, you will just lay out some blatant insult like "never mind, you just dont get it" as if being dismissive and insulting somehow makes you right.

I know you need to feel good about yourself and all but lieing to yourself just makes reality check harder in the end my friend :/

Good luck living your life constantly angered by imaginary problems

Okay, seeing as you are both such tactical geniuses, I'll place the proof of theory on you. Show me a video of you guys wiping out a large tank zerg. I want to see how it's done. It doesn't have to be on good quality. It's enough to talk I want to see proof of concept. What tactics do you use precisely? I eagerly await the video.

P.S. You're idiots that are talking constant ****. I don't expect a video because there is no way in hell you will show me one squad beating a tank zerg like has been laughably claimed.

Now now, they didn't claim one squad, they claimed one platoon. And losing multiple bases. Which might just mean that the zerg actually dispersed into other targets until it was small enough to be taken.

But it _could_ be true that you can _always_ win against a tank zerg with fewer infantry.

awwww bizzie i thought you were a new face eager to discuss/see workable tactics but instead i just got you

Anyways, I will gladly show you a video if you would be so kind as to let me know how lol. I have never made a video of me playing a game (im not a teacher nor am i narcissistic) . If you detail to me how to record video's and post them here than i will be more than willing to show you a video of my and my friends holding off a zerg, when the next defense happens.

Please dont wait two days and say "SEE?!?!?!?!?!?! no video yet!!!!! I am obviously right!!!!!" as i work a lot and it will take time before i will get the opportunity to defend against a nice size zerg. I will also post a video if MY zerg gets stopped.

Thanks buddy