I take you aren't inclined to believe the claim that the cloak is unfit for infiltrating other players besides me have made because their stats are as bad as mine then? What if my stats weren't so convenient to find?, I suppose you would have to actually think a real argument instead of resorting to Ad Hominem. Your "I'm not trying to insult you" is lacking because you're measuring my worth with a metric that is so skewed in planetside that has become meaningless long ago, of course I'm going to feel pretty insulted. But is ok, I'm not going to argue with you.
I am with m44v, Dr. Euthanasia, LazerusQAI, and the others that point out that doing well with the class isn't a matter of the class being good but of that of the player being good - in spite of the weakness of the class. Displaying a video of you doing well has no meaning in this - you are not seperating the player from the class. I could post a video of playing the class and ******* up every two seconds - does this mean the class is now **** again? No, it just displays how good (or bad in this case) the player is - not the class. Official statistics have shown that the class is poor at, well everything. The specifics have been covered enough times, but suffice to say, infiltrators are simply not desirable. The one thing they do give (radar coverage) can be done without the class anyway, and if it is being done by the class it only requires one (one!) infiltrator to do it all. Again, they are not babies - they can kill things. But where as infiltrators may be say, a lynx, the rest of the classes are lions and tigers and jaguars and leopards - the playing field is not level, not by far.
Look at it this way. You're looking to become a carpenter, and have two people that tell you they know how to build a house. Man #1 says you build a house using levels, tape measures, and other measuring tools so you know everything is even and nice. It takes a while to learn how to build them that way but it is very effective. Man #2 says that you can do just as well, better even, if you go by your gut feeling and 'eyeball' it. He states that he already knows how to use man #1's tools, and they don't help you build a home - if anything using those tools makes the house worse. You take a look at a couple of different houses both men have made. The houses you've seen of man #2's are misshapen, uneven, and don't look like they would pass a proper inspection. The houses you've seen of man #1's are proper, level, even, and look like they would pass code with no issues. Man #2 swears his way is the best, and says that the results of his method should be exempt from examination when debating its validity. Man #1 invites you to look closer at his results, he knows they speak for themselves. Further, in arguing his point man #1 shows you several videos of other carpenters building homes using his method who do just as well after learning how to use the tools readily available. Man #2 has no such videos, only one of himself quickly nailing two boards together with a rock. At that point the men ask you to decide who you would rather have teach you to be a carpenter. Who do you choose? Man #1, whose method may be harder to learn but whose results are undeniably impeccable? Or man #2, who asks you to ignore his results and instead focus simply on the content of his opinion, his video of him nailing two boards together, and a story of a perfect house he built that he has no pictures of. Again, who do you choose? Only a fool would choose man #2 as a teacher. He has no evidence that supports his method, indeed all the evidence readily available shows that he does not really know how to build a house and that his method is faulty. Even without looking at the homes resulting from their respective methods, the fact that man #1 has numerous videos showing his method is the best one and man #2 has zero lend credence to man #1's position. I don't think I need to explain this any further. If you take offense to someone looking at your results when debating your method then I think that alone speaks volumes about your method. I myself on the other hand encourage you & others to check out my results and those of others like me - like man #1's, they speak for themselves. https://players.planetside2.com/#!/5428102290015100929 - My character, Astraca https://players.planetside2.com/#!/5428082725699812081 - Edynz, another good Infiltrator https://players.planetside2.com/#!/5428059164951847633/ - VS21314, another good Infiltrator https://players.planetside2.com/#!/5428059527811818481 - ItZMuRdAx, another good Infiltrator https://players.planetside2.com/#!/5428052273454910225 - Shockington, another good Infiltrator I could go on with plenty more great players that subscribe to my theory. Can you name one that subscribes to yours? If you don't think that videos of Infiltrators succeeding and doing far and above what you three claim possible is more valid than watching a video of an infiltrator blundering up then I am at a loss. I suppose you would take a video of me constantly getting shot out of the sky in my TR's mossy by AA as proof that ESFs need significant buffs? Or would you put more stock in the video of a real pilot, one who knows what he is doing and can actually stay in the air for more then 2 minutes? Be honest now. Come on. The class looks like it is poor at everything because the majority of the people who play the class are useless snipers and because our class requires more skill (and a hefty cert investment!) then the rest of them to do well. It isn't because our class is weak or inferior, though you could argue that it is right out of the gate. What this class needs is a default (or cheap) CQC weapon, more reasonable cert costs, and a few more things to do on the attack & defense. Nothing is wrong with the class aside from those things. We do not need an invisible cloak, shotguns, a means to blow up vehicles, or any of the hundred other drastic changes some of you have suggested that would make this class incredibly overpowered... I mean for God's sake they call us overpowered now!
Right, of course, all the other classes are played by better players. You simply do not understand the meaning of anecdotal do you? Here: (from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/anecdotal) "an·ec·dot·al(nk-dtl) adj. 1. also an·ec·dot·ic (-dtk) or an·ec·dot·i·cal (--kl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes. 2. Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: "There are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander]stems" (C. Claiborne Ray)." The video amounts to anecdotal evidence. It is completely pointless other than to suggest something is possible - which is not be argued against! No one here is arguing that the class is not capable of performing if put in the hands of a good player. What is being argued is that the class in general does not fare as well as other classes, and the only evidence that matters concerning this is large-sample statistics, like the official statistics; and boy, do these not fare well for the infiltrator class. Under a theoretical examination the class also fares badly - infiltrators are out-gunned, out-armoured, and out-tooled. Again, I shall not argue the specifics because we have done this dance before and no one gets anywhere and I am simply tired of trying to convince you of something you refuse to see - instead, you can take a look at the actual evidence, the official statistics, and try to remain blind to that. We don't need a game at all, but we have one. Do you understand what I am saying here? Probably not. Let me explain: variety of action is rarely needed, but often enjoyed and desired. So, some people would like a cloak that plays differently, some people would like to have some interaction with vehicles that is not completely dependent on location, etc. You are saying that if these things were added they would be overpowered. This is pre-judged and thus a rude way of bahaving. I shouldn't need to explain this any further, but I shall. This is pre-judged because you have not explicitly explained how these things are impossible to balance, which would be the only qualifying point to allow you to make these judgements. You have ignored, without directly combating, many of the points that many infiltrators have made before you regarding features like these. For example, Dr. Euthanasia has made several extensive reviews into how invisible cloaks have been balanced in other games and how they could be balanced in this game. By you saying that an invisible cloak would be overpowered having read such posts (you contributed to them yourself, so I know you have), and not providing any reasons for why have came to this conclusion... I have lost respect for you.
@Aimeryan I am not disagreeing with the weakness , bugs and overall ( minus ) of the class. Im simply saying that the results you can achieve it with it can be more than adequate. And this class NEEDS fixing amd certain tweeks,like f*cking removing this colored cloak to friendlies.... on times of play I die more to VS than tr/nc.... And the title of this thread I guess is a bit miss leading, it was made to push peoples buttons and start a good discussion, and it worked didn't it? I already learned a lot from people; that's why I put the line at the start of the thread "if played right". @m44v My original post for the L2P as you say, were mainly for people who are new to the class, and even then , those were simple tips that most know about ( but s lot don't practice). Now first of all, I have in an earlier post have admitted that the cloak isn't as good as I believed, because I don't read forums prior to this at all, I never really got to the problem at the core, as I like "just farming certs" and playing with small same group, capturing points specifically isn't my game, and to be honest, if I did, the cloak part of the thread would be slightly different. . So I took into account everything that you and people like Dr. Euth has said; and I agree with you, but not fully. yes, I know actually started to adapt my play to ideas of people like you while keeping my own experience about the cloak and I'm having double digit k/d in game (not that k/d matters much imo, simply stating im dying less and killing more). Inside empty bases I already rarely used cloak due to sound. I love to use cloak for ky own amusement like bait. Place a mine near a door and I just place a dart and spam cloak. I always laugh when 2-3 people start looking for me and walk into the mines. That's simply how I like to play. Now cloak against really good players, using it, you WONT run past them, if you just run like bolt towards them or near them.. I know from my own experience when I play LA or max. A running infi will die more often than not; that's imo not how to use it, or a more correct phrase, that's not how I use it. I only mainly use cloak whennim moving from place to place (derp I know). What I mean I use added aid of rocks, bushes and other coverts while using cloak, as cloak in the oppen will do very little against a great player really close by. But by using cloak with aid of coverts, and runing a circle around the enemy, youbhave HUGE more chance to flank him than just wity LA or any other infantry. And night time is just where cloak becomes actually USEFULL in the outside environment. With the use of covers and shadows you can almost without effort run away from people. So with all the discussion here I played a bit in a proper squad for a bit and tried go after objectives. Now people say sniping is useless in bio labs? there is a way to get on top of a tree near the SCU. As the squad couldn't push the TR back due to medics holding the reincarnation of jesus in form of a gun, and engineers repairing maxes. By showing several other infi the tree spot. We focused taking out the medics and few engineers, which at one point allowed the squad to push the tr from the biolab. I repeated this at other several bases that evening with few other infis. Though this game play isn't for me, as I enjoy mostly just shooting, knifing people in different and unusual ways, I cannot comment much on objective play of this class, so I'll take yoir word for it when you and others day it needs more. But what I can say is that a small group of several infiltrators with mic and good communication can influence a small fight it a very powerful way TLR 1) I agree now that the cloak isn't as amazing as I made it out to be, that was my own failure to recognise that was the failure of my oponents anddue to me just playing the cert game, tho from my experience it is still very valuable in many situations. It can be the ability that saves your butt. 2) infiltrators should be called snipers; or "the troll class" that is main asset is of farming certs. 3) infiltrators need few more brain cells to play correctly and effectively than other classes. But if you develop those brain cells, you can do much better eith LA (LA is easy mode it's not even funny..) 4) coordinated group of HIDDEN infiltrators can influence a battle by sniping from close range drastically if not spotted long enough. I suppose I just enjoy playing gimped class due to my personality as an individual due to the ingenious ways of killing people. Oh and you asked what that post had anything to do with this, I simply answered your question of why I believe many many players with little bit of thinking and time at the class can becomes uch better on me that they simply could s*it all over me so to speak And people can make chars on servers
In all fairness, Every game that has ever introduced any variation of cloak has had that cloaking class accused of being overpowered no matter how effective the cloaking actually is. Anyone who plays a class that doesn't have it tends to believe it's overpowered by default. With that said, as I've expressed previously, I'm fine with the current two cloaks as they are. I do hope for a balanced variant of a completely invisible Stalker cloaking device, which I believe to be perfectly possible, but I'm confident that I can work with the concept they have in mind too... Granted, I fully believe that the restriction of lacking a primary is completely justified either way. I just want that assassination style knife play incorporated...such fun. That aside, what I believe Aimeryan is trying to say is as follows: You can play a game of chess without your queen and completely dominate your opponent despite their lack of a handicap, so long as you perfect your playing style without the queen and reach a point where you excel beyond the skill of the opposition. This, however, does not mean that you're not playing without a handicap...you took away your queen while the opponent still has theirs. Even though you're skilled enough to excel despite this...you're still at a technical disadvantage and would do much better with your queen in play from the start of the game. What he's saying is that your superb players learned to adapt to their handicap.
As the old idiom goes: A bad workman blames his tools. Every tool can be improved, evey player can improve. Of course, folks are welcome to invest their energy in trying to change the tools and/or complaining about the tools. Structured, rational debate is always welcomed - this is why we have forums (...contrary to some folks beliefs!) Personally, I choose to invest my energy in something I have a direct, immediate effect upon!
Of course... You're still going to dig a hole faster with a bulldozer than you are a shovel, no matter how efficient at digging holes you become. There was a homeless man who I watched play chess up in NYC and he played without his queen. He asked me why I thought he was doing this, and I was quick to express that it was to effectively increase his skills so that when he brings the queen back into play he can literally dominate over his adversaries. He seemed rather impressed that I got it so quickly, but to me...it was pretty obvious and I would expect it to be to anyone else as well. If you're at a disadvantage...you do both in my eyes. You work with what you got and seek to excel despite the handicap, then when you then obtain the tools that you should have had from the start...you're going to positively crush your adversaries. I believe that we haven't been a fully refined or fleshed out class from the start, and we're still not yet there either. Once we're polished up, that's when you're going to start seeing those players who surpassed that fact delve into absurd demonstrations of skill. ...because they have been working without their queen, and learned to adapt.
That isn't what I said. I said our class requires more skill & cert investment to do well compared to the other classes. It isn't class you can simply run around & press the left mouse button & do well with. It requires more finesse & thinking then what most people have to offer similarly to piloting ESFs but to a far lesser extent. You can achieve great things with the class but you have to be willing to put in the effort required to do so, which is something you have not done. I suppose it is easier to simply complain about it. Literally everything you people argue about is what can't be done or what isn't possible. You people claim that the class is garbage, that you can't do well with it, that it isn't possible to infiltrate, that you can provide nothing to a team, that we're outmatched in every way, and yet you want to dismiss overwhelming evidence to the contrary as completely pointless. Of course. We've been given access to arguably the best CQC weapon in the game, an ability designed to ignore said weapon's weaknesses in addition to letting us easily get to where we need to go unmolested, and a tool that furthers our objectives by giving us information on enemy troop positions so we never get ambushed. Saying that we are in any way bested by another class's kit really shows how little you know - astonishingly far less than I had given you credit for. There is nothing wrong with this. What is wrong is stating that the class as it stands now is underpowered or worthless. You & your friends are not saying you want an invisible cloak or a way to negatively impact vehicles because you think it'd be fun, you're saying it because you think our current kit is useless without those things. I have no problem with adding fun new ideas that are properly balanced. What I have a problem with is demanding buffs (not side grades) to the class because you can't figure out how to play the kit we have now. People like you have no stance to combat. You're standing on nothing. You point to your own failures and feed off each other's inadequacies, continuously propping up invalidated viewpoints as gospel. Your position has always been what the Infiltrator can't do because you can't figure out how to do it. There is no handicap that they are trying to overcome. What these guys want are extra pieces on an even board because they can't figure out how to win with the pieces they have. What's worse is that they want to convince you that you can't either.
I would add an addendum to this, though, that there are playstyles missing that should be there by logic - you see a hole in a jigsaw puzzle and you don't think "this is complete", you think "something is missing". This is what a lot of players like myself see at the moment - there is a hole in Planetside 2, and that hole is where the playstyles would be that people like me would find very enjoyable. In this case, once (if) implemented they will not necessarily be an upgrade to what already exists, so working with what we have already is not necessarily going to "refine our ability", or if it does, only minorly. Learning to play without your queen in chess isn't going to help you much when you switch to playing shogi. That said, I do agree that some aspects of the infiltrator will probably play out like you described - if what is under-performing is fixed.
You are attacking a strawman; you are trying to put words in our mouths. Stop this. Once again, we are not saying that someone playing the class can not perform well. So stop trying to attack us on this. Where we do ask for direct upgrades we wish to achieve balance. The class is underperforming. Once again, the official statistics show this. We have commented on how theoretical examination highlights why this may be the case, and yes, we know you disagree. However, you refuse to argue directly, so there is no resolution to this. When we ask for alternative playstyles we ask for balance in these. You state that they can not be balanced, even though people have argued how they can. You refuse to argue directly against these points, so there is no resolution to this. You refuse to accept there is a handicap, instead believing that everything is definitely balanced. Even those who support some of your arguments don't agree with you on this. The opening poster doesn't agree with you on this and has stated himself that there are problems. If you refuse combat and only attack illusions of your own making then I will ignore you until you choose to do otherwise.
Well, I can't speak for them, but I can speak for myself and tell you what I would like to see. Nanoweave: While several have expressed that they haven't had a problem with nanoweave while long range sniping, it's still a hard counter that's incorporated into the game. There's absolutely no reason for this, long ranged sniping is balanced as is and for a sniper to have mastered the mechanics behind such only to have a "plink" transpire, even once, upon doing everything right is an unjustified slap to the face. There's already an exceedingly easy counter to being taken down by snipers incorporated into the game, and it doesn't require certification points to obtain...just keep moving. With that excluded, I'd consider long ranged sniping to be perfectly fine. There are other things that we could use here...but honestly I believe that long ranged sniping brings more than enough support to your faction to justify playing this facet. People might not understand or realize what you're doing, but if you're playing this style right...you're helping your faction out more than they, and even most of us, realize. I've had to explain what long ranged snipers accomplish many times over...but I think I do a good job at doing so. The only other thing I'd really like to see incorporated into sniping is customizable scopes...but I want to see this for every class. I'll just copy and paste a quote of mine elsewhere. Now, is that needed? No, not really...but I think every class would enjoy these types of customizable scopes more than they do our boring stock and stagnant ones. SMG: Personally, I don't find anything wrong with this playing style at all. While difficult to master, in my personal opinion at least, people have excelled beyond the limitations of our cloaking device to make this an efficient and rewarding playing style. Personally, I never even wanted to see a run and gun oriented facet incorperated into the Infiltrator...but I find it to be a very nice option that even I enjoy despite absolutely loathing run and gun classes. I've been a dedicated sniper throughout my FPS experience...but I can honestly say that I'll probably still bounce back to this every once in a while as an option once the class has been polished up completely. Infiltration: This is where I believe we need the most work...in so many ways. As it stands, this is where we have needed the polishing and revamps since the very start of the game; yet while we complained about this...what we got was the SMG and a playing style that most of us didn't initially even want. Don't get me wrong, like I said it's a great option, but it isn't what the majority of us were asking for...but it's what we got. Here's what I believe we need... Hacking: This is the single most important facet of our entire class, and it's also the least refined and important piece to the actual game itself. When you initially assault a base, if you're the first Infiltrator in how often are you also the first one to hack everything within the entire base? Furthermore, how often do you find yourself incapable of hacking anything because it's already destroyed? The system is horrible and rewards only the quickest Infiltrator to the punch...while leaving the rest out in the cold. We need a complete overhaul of the entire system, which I detail in here. This type of redesign of the hacking system would encourage Infiltrators to actually certify into hacking and also help ensure that we're needed throughout the entire battle. However, due to the two systems we are capable of hacking being destructible in nature...this alone isn't going to cut it. There needs to be more vital systems incorporated into bases that Infiltrators can hack which are not destructible, giving us something exclusive that we can do to help turn the tide of battle. Someone suggested the ability to hack Ammunition Towers, and I believe that would be an excellent first step in a series of new indestructible things that we could potentially hack. Furthermore, it would give us something indirect that we could do to vehicles that better suits our class. Just imagine, actually hearing a rquest for an Infiltrator to go behind enemy lines and secure their tower to thin out the excessive convoy of armor resupplying to bombard your base...being needed. It almost brings a tear to my eye... The incorporation of alternative routs with locked doors into bases would also grant us a way to shift the flow of battle and potentially be yet another non-destructible system that we can hack. If enough of these are added into the game, there will never be a point where Infiltrators aren't needed for a battle...because we will have an excessive amount of things we can do. Sniper: We can Snipe high priority targets. (Hunter Cloaking - Recon Drone) SMG: We can harass and terrorize the enemy. (Nano-Armor Cloaking - Recon Darts) Infiltration: We can cause chaos and terror behind enemy lines. (Stalker Cloak - Scrambler) Three distinctively different playing styles that give us a plethora of options and ensure that we truly have a presence on the battlefield beyond our current SMG play. Now we're needed, we match our description, and we're still balanced. Granted, I rather have my Banshee cloak concept to make the Infiltration style of play also an assassination style of play with the same balance methodology of sniping...but again, I can work with Stalker. Now then, many of you posted while I was ranting...I'll get to everyone who quoted me in a bit here, I still have to read it...
Also sorry for going slightly off topic lol but I had to point this out a bit of imo a hilarious thing. People always complain about certain stuff. For instance the classnis play has handicap? Or has not kuch to do in your opinion? You will give your two cents and demand a fix or what ever. Example. (This a small example so let's not derail off infiltrator topic at hand) Striker - nc/ vs claim its OP. Yet many tr point and laugh while saying its not. Lancer - vs think it sucks yet they compare it to let's say striker,l while in VR. Where as tr/nc say it doesn't. Now if you go to engineer forum secrion. There is a new thread where some want something MORE TO DO THAN JUST repair etc. While people, say infiltrators have not much to do and give example of other classes such as engineer and their role. Which I bet in some sections people do complain about the infiltrator class aswell. My simple point is people will always find an undesirable part in the class they they love and play a lot which is perfectly fine. My main point in these whole posts is for people to DO push for the changes that they would like to see, but ignoring the fact - like AeternA stated - the class in right hands can do things as to make the class SEEM overpowered; while switching to a better class " so to speak " may not make you perform much better. And for the record (again) by saying the class can be a great asset at many situations, by no means am I stating it is without its problems that cause such low statistics for the infiltrator class.
I had a large reply but now feel this short sentence to be sufficient: If I am wrong about this class's balance (which I have been before), I will welcome any buff that allows me excel even further then I do now and will allow even the most mediocre of you to have fun.
It's a partial handicap because the other classes are far more fleshed out than we are, but yea...you're correct for the most part. I'm advocating more for a third playing style than I am a buff to our current two, with the exception of taking the negation of the one hit kill headshot nanoweave can accomplish out of the game. So I guess it's more like taking away the Bishop? Indeed, I guess that saying that "it's like taking your queen out of the game" would be a bit of an embellishment. However, we are at a slight disadvantage in comparison to, for example, the Engineer who has a plethora of playing style to choose from. You don't enter a vehicle unless you're an Engineer, so I include that in their playing styles along with an assault and support trooper. I really just want to see the following: Sniping: (Nanoweave removal.) SMG: (Fine as is.) Melee Infiltration: (Needs loads of work, mainly because of hacking being shoddy.) I've always thought of us as being weakest at medium range while potentially becoming exceptionally adept at long to close range combat. If this new cloaking device comes out and actually grants us the stealth required for more up close and personal infiltration in the lengthy end of the spectrum...I can easily see the melee assassin playing style come into play and bring the terror back into the Infiltrator. I rather my Banshee cloaking device concept as an option over Stalker, but I doubt highly I'll ever see that...but I'll be damned if I don't continue advocating for it based upon my belief that it would be balanced in the same way as sniping! The long ranged Sniper and the Melee Assassin are the two playing styles I wanted most...but the SMG play is quite a lovely addition to the mix. I personally feel it poses the greatest challenge to excel in, but like I said...I always believed we should be weakest at medium range and the majority of my problem adapting focuses around being a dedicated Sniper. I never had an interest in run and gun classes, so I never practiced with them...ever. This is practically my first time run and gunning, it's interesting with the Infiltrator though...so I'm looking forward to getting myself efficient with it.
It's likely that they say this because they don't count piloting vehicles as part of their playing style options. Personally, when I dabbled into Engineer for the easy certification points, I didn't count air because anytime I get into a aircraft...bad...........bad things happen. It's pretty much similar to what happened when I first began driving Sunderers. Terrible... Terrible... Things... With that said, I can understand that if they don't actually run tanks or aircraft, they wouldn't count that as a facet of their class even though everyone knows you don't drive around in a tank or fly an aircraft unless you're an Engineer...there's no need to. Sure, an Infiltrator might use an aircraft as a quick method of travel, or the flash, Sunderer...but for the tanks and aircraft most of the time, you take an Engineer to increase your exp gain by self repair. I still do think they could use some more tweaks and what not to polish out even their class, but I believe it to have the most methods of obtaining exp in the game...there's just so many things to repair, ammo packs, killing, using vehicles, the exp comes fast. I only run Infiltrator and MAX now days.
