Bring back the old resource system, or FIX this one

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by MisterBond, Aug 5, 2014.

  1. patricio_z

    This guy gets it...
  2. NinjaTurtle

    They fixed the resource system

    The old system was the broken version
    • Up x 5
  3. Iridar51

    I did, and I didn't notice any particular differences. Just as I always had resources for whatever I needed, I do now. That's why I keep saying resources are meaningless.
    • Up x 1
  4. Revanmug

    Infantry wise.
    -Is a a HA with AV nade and medical kit more powerful than a guy without them? Yes.
    -Can a normal guy pull those at the same rate as a sub player? no.
    -Do I have a mean, throught skill of gameplay, to overcome this lack of ressource compare to a sub user? No, ressource per XP was remove and the possibility to stack material was remove.

    With the removal of the last point, PS2 is entering the P2W territory since there is no gameplay mechanic to help you overcome the possible lack of ressource through gameplay. That you like it or not, the sub/heroic boost is plainly giving you more power that cannot be attain in any other way other than by paying.

    Thus, P2W.
    • Up x 1
  5. Rift23

    Yep, PS2's gone the way of EVE where PvP has no in-game purpose beyond dick-slapping people because everything you need can be acquired AFKing in the kiddie pool. Expect to see even more warpgate idling now with scores of alts passively collecting Nanites so tankers/skygods/mechwarrios can circumvent the system and never leave their vehicles.
    • Up x 3
  6. Phyr

    If you can't keep a vehicle alive long enough to pull another one immediately after, you don't deserve the vehicle. Use that time waiting to reflect on your poor decisions that resulted in the immediate loss of said vehicle.
  7. FateJH

    To all your mental exercises, but adopting the sentiments of the last one, I expect the team composed of good leadership, knowledgeable players, and individually more responsible resource management to be able to accumulate better performance metrics.

    (Also, I shall leave all 'X' that "destroy the game" in the capable hands of ForumSide, come back in a patch or two, and 'X' will actually be a balanced element of gameplay. Or useless.)
    • Up x 2
  8. Aegie

    Let me make it clearer- thought experiments employ the same logic as actual experiments, we are only allowing 1 variable between the two teams and that variable is subscriptions.

    To the extent resources are meaningful, if the only difference between 2 teams is the speed of resource accumulation then do you believe the team with the faster resource accumulation has an advantage?
  9. Phyr

    You can't make any meaningful argument with this based on a single variable. What size is the teams? Are they organized teams or all pubs? What base are they fighting over? Did one side start the fight with a significant amount of tanks/aircraft/MAXs?
  10. Bape

    I like the new resource changes I can afford med kits and grenades now without worrying about every running out of resource.

    • Up x 2
  11. zaspacer

    Fixed your sentence for you.

    Look, we all know SOE is GREAT at outside the box concepts, and generally VERY BAD at balance and tuning them... especially when they do it without really bouncing ideas off the community.

    Most parties agreed the Resources needed "fixing", but what everyone failed to recognize was that SOE and the community had wildly different ideas with regards to what specifically needed "fixing"and what "fixing" meant. Now we all get to enjoy the fallout that happens when a group (up til then) in harmony realizes they were only in harmony because everyone was completely ignorant of what radically opposing things the rest of the people in the group actually specifically wanted.
    • Up x 1
  12. DrButtes

    How do you propose SOE monetize this game so that they may continue to make a profit off of it as well as continue to generate new content?
    • Up x 1
  13. libbmaster

    But that's not player driven!

    If one side has more people, they pull more stuff, and they run out of NTUs faster.

    If the little guy wants to get a leg up, they can take out NTU transports before they get to the base.

    In PS1 (and hopefully the last stages of this implementation) you could take an NTU transport to any base in the lattice, drain the NTU silo, and then capture the base!

    And nothing beats the intensity of running an armored convoy through a siege to safely deliver NTUs!

    Your code might fix population disparity, but the NTU system does that and adds a whole new way to play the game.
    • Up x 1
  14. BxRuce

    Z - you hit the nail directly on the head.
  15. libbmaster

    If you can keep your lib in the air for two minutes (120 seconds) you should have enough resources left over to get your self a tank.

    Just a reminder to all, you get resources in blocks of 50 every minute now.

    • Up x 1
  16. FateJH

    If I say "No," then argument is that resources are meaningless, which negates the very point of the resource revamp.
    If I say "Yes," then I am lying about my position.

    In fact, if being subscribed is the only variable, then the answer must definitely be "no," as being a paid subscribing player does not make you advantaged against a non-paying player automagically. At the end of the game we don't compare the resources of both people and the person with the greater net resource gain gets a leg-up before anything else is calculated (round-based logic, I know, but you'll pardon me for that). If that were the case, I might as well win, as I have have sat on 750 Aerospace for short of two years while still earning it, never spending any of it.

    However, in such a position where I am faced with two incorrect answers, I am forced to point out that my position is that accumulation of resources is not a meaningful advantage to begin with. Utilization of resources is what matters. On one hand, it doesn't matter how many times you throw it, or how often you get to throw it: C4 that kcauses no damage to anyone or anything is a waste of C4. On the other hand, having 750 resources all the time is useless unless you gamble and throw that C4 in the first place.
    • Up x 1
  17. WTSherman

    It sounds like basically they didn't realize that if they were going to put everything in the same resource pool, they'd have to raise how many resources you have available to make up for more things pulling from it.

    That said, last time I checked they did raise the income rate so it's not all that bad. So you don't have much in the way of reserves, but if you pace yourself then your reserves probably won't run out. Under the old system you'd get ~20-100 resources of each type (so ~60-300 total, depending on how much territory you have) every 15 minutes, so at most you're getting 20/min if you're pulling from all three pools.

    So income now is 3x higher (60/min, 900 per 15) than the maximum possible income under the old system, unless you were farming with membership and maxed out EXP+resource boosts. If you were in the habit of only using one resource type before (say, you were an infantry-only player) then your income is now effectively 9x higher. You can buy C4 or MAX suits 9x faster than you could under the old system.

    Speaking of which, technically I'm pretty sure this *reduces* the power of said boosts because your EXP booster no longer stacks with the resource booster. Under the old system, if you were farming with max membership+boosts you'd have roughly a 5x EXP multiplier (seriously, people who've paid up can get 500-ish EXP from an infantry kill) and 1.5x resource multiplier. So first the amount of EXP is increased 5x, then the resources derived from that is multiplied by a further 1.5x for a total of 7.5x resource income rate.

    Now that they no longer stack, paying players will just get the 1.5x.

    It still needs improvements though, now that everything is running on the same price basis they need to start adjusting relative prices to more accurately reflect value.

    Edit: That said, raising the total pool would give them more wiggle room to finely tune prices (since obviously nothing can cost less than 0, and nothing can cost more than your maximum resource pool). However, that will only become a problem if they want to attach resources to something that needs to be worth more than 2x the value of a tank, or less than 1/75th the value of a mine.
  18. Yuki10

    It was not uncommon to see 125+ resource gain per catergory for the old 5 minutes deposit period. Meaning that in 5 minutes , you would restock all resources and can pull MBT, harasser, lib, ESF, max within seconds of each other if you wanted to. You cant now...

    Also, all the best players rely on med kits heaviliy - it's not uncommon to use up all medkits in 20 seconds in a good fight. Doing this a few times over means that now those who are good at at staying alive during infantry play via medkits dont have resources for air/ground.

    There are also dedicated heavy-hitters - engies and heavies who go out of their way to destroy vehicles with C4s, AV grenades, mines, etc. All of them cost resources from the common pool now.

    They are taking FUN out of the game with this change.
    • Up x 1
  19. WTSherman

    Was it 5? I thought it was 15. Huh.

    Well if it was 5, then your income rate is now basically exactly what your maximum income rate used to be. Which goes back to my earlier point about them not realizing they'd have to make resources cheaper/more available to make up for the fact that you have more things pulling from the same pool.
  20. DrButtes

    The only time a free player would see 125+ resource gain per category was when there faction was roflstomping a continent with double the population of everyone else. Sorry you don't bonuses for doing that anymore I guess?
    • Up x 2