Entire platoon rage quit from Phoenix spam

But here's the point... There should be diversity in the fight as well as the whole 'paper/scissors/rock' motiff. Otherwise, we might as well just have it only be ESFs or only be Tanks. Why bother with infantry? The thing about this game is suppose to be Combined arms and already we have proven the point of the whining about the Phoenix, a weapon that when it wasn't tuned down, to what I considered to be more balanced (And I called it before it went in and made the recommendation, looking forward to play with it on my NC character) cause I knew from past experience in Planetside 1 and seeing how they have launchers right now, people would complain too much about how it overpowers the NC.

Same thing with the Lancer doing the same thing where it could be used as a sniping weapon which it was back in Planetside 1 and how the Bolt Driver was the only sniping weapon and it didn't kill in one shot either.

Also looking from the TR view, it is unfair that the VS and the NC have a weapon they can hit infantry with almost literal impunity at range and their ESRL can't do that.

Balance is all about where the other side has little reason to pitch a fit about... You don't want this weapon to do what YOU want because you have to look at how it is used against you as well as you using it. If you think it is 'great' but never played the other side, then you failed to see the frustration of it. The TR, in this case, don't get anything of that nature, and that is not balanced if the VS and NC can do it with their ESRLs but they can't even shoot infantry with theirs because the ESRL is locked down to lockon only.

As for earlier, I am well aware that the launcher is easily available, and that tanks and air is limited to certain areas, however you also ignore the sailent facts about tanks and air that directly affect infantry as well. Unless infantry were engineers or HA, their ability to affect tanks is limited to basically relying on HA or Engineers to deal with tanks. Same with Air, where only HA and AA equipped MAX armors are the only ones who can effectively deal with Air.

As much as people want to harp that mass infantry can take down an ESF with small arms fire, the thing is, small arms fire is reduced by composite armor and a strafing ESF does not stay on station long enough for a group of people firing small arms to be a threat. The 'low cost' in resource for infantry has always been the weakest argument for any tanker or air jockey to justify the argument. At the same time, vehicles have something infantry do not have in an engagement that also makes the use of HE/HEAT/RocketPod spamming more effective, the ability to back out and repair or pull away.

The ones who get burned by infantry are the ones committed too deeply into a territory that they will get picked off by infantry spamming heavy ordinance, but on the flipside, if there is LOTS of tanks, LOTS of Air, the mass infantry becomes moot because in order for infantry to be a serious threat to vehicles, it has to be a bad tanker/pilot trying to get at groups or getting too greedy. At the same time, for infantry to go after infantry, there is always pros and cons... But having RLs be OHKs, the rule of thumb is that there is a drawback to it. The Lancer's drawback is that you have to charge it for a good damaging hit, but like all weapons, it should have the serious 'drawback' that it won't be nearly as effective in hitting a target, just like the dumbfire rockets are not going to be a guaranteed kill unless you hit fairly accurately. Given the lancer is 'accurate' the drawback is, you can't have the OHK.

The same with the Phoenix... It can be guided with fair precision to infantry. It isn't fair to have it be an OHK launcher in that means because of the fact it can be reasonably guided to pick off people, even from cover, which that means there is very little drawback.

Balance is about drawbacks. You want this, you also have to deal with this. You can't have all the nummies. Even the fact that BACK in Planetside 1, the Gauss Cannon was EXACTLY what the VS wanted on the Magrider's Railgun, a hard hitting, main gun. But the problem was, the VS never listened to the DRAWBACKS of the Gauss Cannon. Yes, it hit hard, but it wasn't near instantaneous hitting, so hitting moving targets weren't always as nice as the Magrider's Railgun. I even cited a situation where I was driving a Lightning engaging a Thunderer, 2 man versus 1... I died, but doing 50-60% damage to their vehicle, when by spreadsheet mechanics, I should have been dead before I even did 30% damage. I proved, at that point in time, in the field, the ability to use the Magrider's Railgun would have been much more effective than having a hard hitting gauss cannon which refired 3x slower and a round going much slower and less accurate than a Magrider's Railgun which is more accurate, fires faster but does less damage over all.

This is the point of drawbacks... It sounds 'GREAT' in words, but in actual play, and again pointing out I have to go against this as well as use it... I rather have those to weapons NOT OHK than be 'harsher', otherwise, you make the game seem ridiculous on certain things.

Oh I know about balance. I pride myself at being good at balancing stuff. It's just sometimes my idea of balance is a little too harsh for modern gamers. I am very much still stuck in the old ways of gamers, where they really didn't mind challenges, teamwork, or dying as much. But I'm also able to understand the modern gamer mentality, which is why I'd hardly fight for ESRL to OHK infantry. Both methods can be balanced. Balance isn't a strict "do this or it's wrong". It's dynamic. You can make the ESRL all OHK infantry while still being balanced. Or you could make them not kill infantry at all and still be balanced. To me, it doesn't really matter which route they take. I neither use them nor die to them (except when in a vehicle)

Really, Infantry have it good in PS2. TOO good. I'm sure a lot of us remember the PS2 E3 stream. With Total Biscuit. I'm sure we remember his "you will die a LOT in this game". It seems the players in here now either didn't see that or forgot about it. If you're infantry you are going to die, and you are going to die a lot. That is why respawn timers are practically non-existent. That is why you never respawn more than 500 meters away from the fight. Because you're going to be dying a lot. But that has been being removed ever since beta. It seems every patch nerfs something lethal to infantry. Sometimes it's warranted, sometimes it's not, but it's always the same. Nerf libs. Nerf rocketpods. Buff AA. Nerf tanks. Nerf HE. Nerf splash radius on all explosives. Every patch introduces something that makes dying as infantry just a little bit harder.

I just don't like or agree with that. And I feel I have the right to say that because I'm very much a predominantly infantry player. It's not like some rocketpodding farmer saying "hurr infantry shuld die ez". I'm one of those infantry getting farmed and I don't like just how weak everything is compared to infantry. That's why I usually rail against any change that nerfs lethality against infantry. While the ESRL, on their own, could do without OHK infantry. When you look at the big picture and see -EVERYTHING- getting nerfed, slowly, over time, you start to get mad. By the end of the year we're all going to be shooting paintballs and nobody's going to die ever, except vehicles, those will instantly explode if infantry so much as look at them. That is not the kind of game I want. I want a combined arms game, not CoD with some useless vehicles buzzing around for me to slaughter.

Threw sand in this guys vag. My misson? Complete

Thing is... It isn't about the 'dying' I have issues with, but having it set up too easily to make it 'farmable' because someone went with the big guns and having an environment that is not 'practical'.

People forget, that in real warfare, besides the fact it is easy to die... The Vehicles and weapons of war are NOT that easy to come by with. That multi-million dollar plane, helicopter or tank, actually requires maintenance... Some of the infantry weapons do significant damage to vehicles as well, which is why there are things such as Reactive Armor, Anti-missile Systems and EOD teams... People forget that tanks can still be ambushed, disabled or easily destroyed by means besides just mines or C4 from people. Yet the biggest complaint among the tankers and air jocks is being put on a timer or wasting resources, ignoring the fact in RL, we don't field a crapton of tanks, we field mostly infantry to take infantry positions because the COST to run one of those tanks or to get it to that location is more expensive than the infantry... And Infantry is much more resilient and much more agile in battlefields and can be extremely nasty to vehicles as much as vehicles can be to infantry.

Game wise, infantry lack things they are able to do in RL, digging in, making defendable positions and the ability to slow down or deter vehicle strike forces. At the same time, so much complaining of wanting skill, I see the Phoenix and the Lancer being the most likely weapons to be complained about with regards to being 'too easy' to abuse, and honestly, I agree. You don't want those two weapons to be easy to use against infantry in comparison to the default DF launcher or the Decimator or even the other ES RLs with the DF option. Certain weapons should be focused for certain things and the OHK option with the RLs should be one that takes more luck or skill to accomplish, and to be honest, the guided round for the Phoenix and the click-release of the lancer is way too easy.

And it still one shots infantry!!

So, in half an hour, with hundreds of phoenixes raining down on you from above, not ONE person in your platoon thought "hey! They're all using the PHOENIX!!, they can't hit air for sheet right now! Everyone go pull air!"

Not one person said "hey! They're all using the PHOENIX!!, they are stuck flying their rockets for like 5 seconds at a time, perfectly motionless! Everyone go pull infiltrator and we'll drop in from galaxies!"

Not one person said "hey! Let's do something besides pulling sunderers and trying to force our way across this with brute force! This isn't working, let's try something else, ANYTHING else!"

I'll be honest with you here, your story doesn't sound like the phoneix needs a nerf, it sounds like that platoon needs an intelligence buff.

Going off real life, in real life tanks, helicopters, planes may be hard to come by. They are expensive, limited. But they are also EXCEPTIONALLY powerful. A single tank could decimate an entire infantry squad with ease. A single plane can kill literally thousands of people in a single pass.

Just as how vehicles are limited, so too are the weapons capable of destroying them. The common AT weapons can't really kill a modern MBT. RPGs, even the newer ones, disposable launchers like the AT-4, mines. The weapons that your average soldier would have access to can not destroy a tank, depending on where they hit they often wont even disable it. All you'd end up doing is pissing off the tank crew and getting killed. The weapons that can deal with these vehicles, like say a Javelin launcher, are exceptionally expensive and only given to specific units on specific missions. Your average infantry squad do not have access to such weapons.

In PS2 it's like the devs went out and handed every single heavy a Javelin launcher, every class twenty pounds of explosives. They removed the scarcity of handheld AT weapons and, to a much lesser degree, the limitations of vehicles.

Vehicles should be harder to come by. ESF's shouldn't be these amazing jack of all trades, master of all vehicles. MBTs should require multiple players like the lib and be very restricted so you only get a few. But they should also be exceptionally powerful, far more so than any random HA with a Phoenix. On the infantry side I'd see these three changes.

The default rocket is made into a single-use disposable launcher, like the AT-4. It does weak damage and is really quite useless on it's own, however a squad with them can bring down an MBT. They can only be resupplied at terms. The AT launcher is large and bulky as such as the HA can not equip larger guns like LMGs or shotguns, he specializes in anti-tank, and is thus weak to infantry and air. Same with the AA launcher. HA's hould NOT have ANY launcher that can reliably hit both ground and air. They should have to choose which type of vehicle they counter. Individual rockets cost resources and can only be resupplied at terms, like grenades.

Mines would have their individual damage weakened significantly. It should take a good 5-6 mines to kill an MBT. They can only be triggered by moving vehicles and only disarmed by engineers. Shooting them does nothing. So tanks can't just shoot them, infantry can't shoot them, you can't toss a grenade. They will only be removed from the world by detonating under a moving vehicle or being disarmed by an engineer. They can not be stacked. Engineers would be able to carry and deploy 15 mines fir level 1, 30 for lvl 2. This allows engineers to make large and robust minefields, the way mines are suppose to be used. Their resource cost would be lowered to allow them to be more spammable and they would have a 2 or so second arming time. Laying down a minefield shouldn't be something that can be done in seconds.

C4 is the most widespread AT weapon, available on every class sans Infiltrator. As such it should not be able to kill an MBT. A single soldier placing all their C4 on an MBT should, at most, reduce it to 30% hp or something. A lone soldier should not have the ability to kill an MBT with C4. They can work together with one other player to kill it, but by themselves they can not kill it. At best they can scare it off.

These changes to the three infantry weapons, coupled with changes to vehicles, would allow ALL vehicles (even the spammable ones) to be powerful, but not overpowered. Infantry would still be the most dynamic, the most fluid, the most adaptable. But they are jack of all trades, masters of none. Vehicles will always be better in situations that favor them. But infantry will have the ability to change the situation so that it no longer favors the vehicles. Infantry should be weak, vulnerable to vehicles. But they shouldn't be something to be farmed.

"I'm not saying It's OP, but It's OP."

Don't worry, with enough people whining even more will get nerfed. NOTHING will be fun in this game anymore.

Says the NC.

You keep missing the point...

Yes, tanks, helicopters and jets are extremely powerful, extremely expensive... They are also not very subtle, not invulnerable, and not unstoppable.

All those big vehicles... You want to know WHY we don't just roll like crazy with them in any fight?

1. Fuel - Cost of fuel to run one - EXPENSIVE - Short engagement
2. Ammo - Cost of ammo - Expensive, even the cheapest, most effective weapon costs more than the simple use of small rounds.
3. Maintenance - DIFFICULT - Even the best equipment is hard to maintain in certain environments with out extra care, and even then, you can't commit it all the time.
4. Prone to weakness - Tanks have those damn annoying problems like tread disabling, the rear section that is the weakest armored section. Choppers rotor engines can't take hits very well, Jets are not super armored so heavy caliber weapons can mess with their avionics.

You also realize that even the infantry is not always armed with missiles or rocket launchers. Only very specialized squads are fielding them and their focused on ANTI-ARMOR versus anti infantry. Mortar squads also hang back in the back to get relayed coordinates to hit locations, but they need a steady supply of ammo if they are to do it. Again, in the long run, you don't have every trooper running around with ranged explosive short of a few hand grenades and even then you are told to focus more on firing a rifle than to go crazy lobbing grenades.

The whole point of the argument is that in a game where you want people to 'focus on skill', the spamming of HE or RLs should not be the 'first' thing, but 'the last thing'. That was the point back in Planetside 1 and should be the point here, especially with regards to both the Phoenix and the Lancer. You want the infantry to use those weapons in a more effective manner than spamming infantry just for the simple OHK. While it can accomplish the 'OHK' it should still encourage the use of rifles over the explosives simply because resource wise in RL, it isn't practical, and in a game sense, should be the lowest yield of all the effort to get something.

I'd like to point out to you, that you opened up this post saying I was "missing the point" and then proceed to say the exact same thing I've been saying all along. So all I am left with is to believe you and I desire the same thing.

Actually, you were arguing the point of having the harsher balance of having people spam Phoenix and Lancers to do OHKs, I was in complete disagreement and pointed out if we were to do that, might as well have it be purely tanks and vehicles just spamming crap up the whoha. I also pointed out the fact that a lot of the 'powerful' vehicles also have draw backs and at the same time why it seems infantry isn't seen running around, spamming rockets like crazy. The problem is, people want to treat the game like Quake where all it has to do with is finding the rocket launcher and spam the crap out of it versus this being a tactical fight and that the rocket use, even with the ammo pack, is more about effective use, not giving people something to keep spamming to get a 'kill' of one infantry when it should be focused on taking out that tank.

After the latest patch which thickened the armor of all tanks vs inf rockets the Phoenix has sort of receded back into the ashes of hell from whence it came. The matches seem more balanced (well actually the NC is often getting their butts kicked on Connery now ) and I'm happy.

Thanks devs for bringing back the tank - I don't feel like I've wasted a bunch of certs on them!

I don't mean to sound annoying but each team has is thing..
Stop nerfing things please

Apples and oranges. Annihilator is a common pool, and has the same capability as the striker.

Gentlemen, this is yet another in a rash of thread necromancy we've experienced today.

thanks for the necro

shoulda let this one die mate.

R.I.P.

So instead of changing the weapon we change the whole game so the weapon is not OP? Get a clue man.

Meh the weapon is not OP anymore so it doesn't matter, tanks are finally not coffins unless you decide to run into a whole platoon of infantry by yourself. I still get lots of kills with the Phoenix, just not as easily. I also have around 2k certs in my Vanguard now after GU08 and I have to say it is amazing, especially because I cannot be cheesed out by 1 heavy.

You know...if your platoon was any good, they'd just keep engineers on the sunderer, It's like 1:1 between an engineer repairing the thing and a heavy hitting it with a phoenix. Phoenix TTK on sunderers is actually really slow, if you had just as many engineers as they had phoenixes, they wouldn't have been able to destroy your sunderer.