Is the resource system ever going to be made not-awful or is this pretty much it?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Frostiken, Oct 18, 2014.

  1. Alarox

    That is a strawman because you're arguing against an idea in your head rather than what I've actually said.

    I'm not sure what compelled you to do so, but rather than looking at the content of my post and talking about that you've gotten all upset and are rambling on about how I think X, Y, and Z, and how that makes me a terrible human being or something.

    You just need to calm down. I'm not going to hold it against you, so just relax.
    • Up x 3
  2. ColonelChingles

    When the new super-heavy tank comes in, I hope that it can be multicrewed and only rely on teamwork to be effective. In that way Alarox can still play with his driver-gunner MBTs, but there will be a multicrewed vehicle that if used properly will be able to blow up 1/2 MBTs with ease.

    That is a strawman. A strawman is a rhetorical technique where instead of attacking the opponent's argument directly you set up a much weaker/ridiculous argument of your own and attack that instead.

    As Alarox never mentioned anything about soccer, the argument must have been yours and not his. And since you put that argument up for attack, it fits the requirements of a strawman.
    • Up x 2
  3. Frostiken

    Soccer was an analogy. In soccer, you can't pick up the ball and run with it. Them's the rules. The point of the rule isn't for any scientific reason, it just is, and the goal of the game becomes to move the ball with your feet. The rule imposes a major challenge because picking it up would be too easy, while moving it with your feet changes the game considerably.

    He's complaining that it wouldn't be any fun. Well I'm sure when soccer was being invented there were a few guys who said that just kicking with the feet wasn't any fun either.

    Putting obstacles in games gives you challenge. It also adds depth. Why can't a Medic carry a rocket launcher and a jetpack? He seems to think one person crewing an MBT is fine, so why doesn't he have a problem with other restrictions put in the game, like the class restrictions?

    Let's take other games. In Natural Selection 2, Heavy Armor cannot heal itself. This is an obstacle to add some depth and dynamic to the class, forcing other players to repair it. In Planetside 1, heavy armors cannot pilot aircraft. This is an obstacle so that you can't use your aircraft as a transport, leap out of the sky like Ironman and begin blowing everyone up when you land. In Counter-Strike, you can't just buy any gun you want anytime you want. You have currency to deal with based on your team's performance. This is an obstacle that's critical to the game.

    If you removed all obstacles from a game, there would be no challenge, and it would have exactly zero depth. Even the requirement to reload guns is a sort of challenge. Why not remove that? Is that too hard?

    Complaining that two-man MBTs would somehow ruin the game for you is pretty much just like complaining that not being able to pick up the ball in soccer is no fun too, because it makes it too hard for YOU to win. Meanwhile, everyone else who actually understands the point of the game are going to do fine with just their feet.

    I'm sorry you two don't seem to understand enough about game theory to understand this. Of course, the irony of someone playing Planetside 2 having the ******* audacity to complain about a feature that was in Planetside 1, a game they obviously never played, about a mechanic they have never experienced, is like someone who has never even heard of soccer being told about it and then immediately start complaining that they can't pick up the ball and run with it.

    Of course the fact that he has a Vanguard avatar should've told us enough. I'm sure he's dying to regale us with tales about how driving a tank in Planetside 2 is more difficult than rocket surgery.
  4. Rentago

    i can feel the lack of experience in planetside you have through this text, look at the harasser, think of the devastation a tank would bring if it had a dedicated driver.

    The idea is, the tank would have the mobility to move and dodge and navigate terrain while having the accuracy to shoot and hit targets in the process. You know what you find every tank besides the magrider doing? Sitting still to take shots, they are also getting pummeled in the process and getting C4'd.

    MBTs arent suppose to be slightly better lightnings, they are supposed to be a pretty big deal much like a liberator. Its no laughing matter when a 3/3 prowler showed up to the party in planetside 1, got one guy firing off the cannon murdering vehicles and infantry and the gatling gun up top shredding aircraft, tanks, and infantry.

    you may not be aware of this, because i know a lot of you scrubs arent, but were playing a game with 3 different factions, and get this.... they are suppose to function differently! They arent currenfly, but they are supposed to!

    Magrider has been and should always be the 2 person MBT that the driver can shoot as well, just he was suppose to have the machine gun, while the gunner had tbe main cannon.

    Vanguard was the real heavy tank, slow, but real meaty, had a big cannon that packed a wallop and the cannon gunner had access to machine guns also, ever look at the vanguard model in game and wonder what those two metal slots next to the cannon are for? Twin 20mm machine guns. It was also a two person tank, but the gunner had to switch between machine gun and cannon.

    the TR beast known as the prowler was suppose to also be very good at throwing more lead your way than you could return, the twin barrel cannon allowed it to lay down suppresion fire consistently, it had a dedicated cannon gunner, and a dedicated machine gunner who has access to twin gatling guns mounted on top. It had a freightening ability to fight off attackers from multiple directions at once.

    If drivers could just drive, the handicap most complain about when fighting a magrider is that they have to sit perfectly still while superior alien technology slides and dodges and circles around you while shooting you. That wasnt an issue in planetside 1, people were always moving, and no it wasnt hard to shoot people while doing so.

    Is it hard to hit people with a liberator while it flies around? No.
    • Up x 1
  5. Alarox

    You could clear up all of these misconceptions by asking me for my opinion rather than coming up with whatever you want.

    That's the point I'm trying to get across to you. You automatically assumed that my opinion falls in line with what you want to rant about.

    I have my experience in my signature for this.

    That way you'll be inclined to have a discussion with me and figure out why we disagree rather than do what you just did.
  6. Cest7

    Stage 2 needs to come sooner than later or people will start playing other games :(
    • Up x 1
  7. OldMaster80

    Yeah but letting months between the different stages was a stupid idea :(
    current situation is an abhomination.
    • Up x 1
  8. Ixidron

    The rules here are MBTs can be crewed by one man, so the analogy was wrong, and you used it as an argument, same as you are doing it now, games are completely different, rules are completely different, you can't compare both like that, which makes your argument an strawman.

    Ad populum, the popularity of something doesn't make it right or wrong.

    Non sequitur (medics being unable to carry rocket launchers does not prove tanks should be 2 man vehicles) and ad hominems (his opinion about infantry doesn't necessarily correlate to his opinion about tanks).

    How is that exactly related to planetside 2? different games, different classes, different amount of players, different game balance.

    Nobody is removing any obstacle, the game is what it is.

    To follow that "analogy" you do not change the rules of the game in the middle of a match, but what I said has no logical truth by itself, so lets get back to your argument.

    3 man MBTs would ruin the game for him (and for me) and that's our opinion, same as yours is the opposite, it doesn't make it too hard (it makes it harder) but my main complain is it makes it boring and not fun at all.

    If we follow your socer analogy again, current rules are 2 man MBTs, and changing that would be like telling soccers players they can't kick the ball with their left foot, because you are adding restrictions, not removing them, so your analogy is wrong.
    BTW, last sentence is an ad populum.

    Ad hominen (first sentence), why do we have experience that mechanic if we don't want to? I'm playing american football, (2 man MBTs), then you tell me that I have to play soccer (3 man MBTs), and that I cannot play american football any more.

    I play planetside 2, then if I play planetside 1 I would complain about not being able to drive and gun at the same time, not the opposite.

    Ad hominem.

    BTW: naming fallacies don't make my arguments wrong or right, I'm just doing it because you started, to make you realize you also use them (with or without realizing, I can't know).
    • Up x 1
  9. Pootisman

    Wat. I dont understand how you can not run out of resources. How do you play? Do you only use infantry small arms? Thats just boring. You need to use your whole arensal! Just look at the prices ... 50 for a simple grenade, 100 for C4, 450 for a MAX ... 750 nanites are used up in no time.

    I often run out of resources. 50 nanites per minutes is too little in my opinion, it should be 100 per minute at least.
  10. Utrooperx

    Jjust imagine the tears of angst when the current crop of players suddenly just can't keep pulling their force multiplier of choice...over and over and over...because they lack resources...

    SoE is setting themselves up for many rage quits when/if they implement Resource Revamp Phase #2...that's why I don't believe they ever will do more then just "talk" about it.

    If they really intended to implement what they have suggested, why initially provide access to limitless resources...then take that away? All it will do is "train" players to chain pull MAX's, armor, planes, grenades, etc...and then they can't.

    Next step...players get pissed, population falls even quicker as the uber force-multiplier pullers have to resort to basic infantry play due to no resources...and expierence the other side of the equation.

    They won't be happy. Unhappy players find other games to play.

    Somebody at SoE just isn't thinking this through.
    • Up x 1
  11. OldMaster80

    The idea of resources should be that you have to use your stuff wisely, not just spam mindlessly. A faction spamming tanks, grenades and aircraft at will should soon or later pay the consequences, unless they sustain the military effort with logistics supply lines (ANT).
    At the moment I neither run out of nanites and I can tell you I pull Lightning Valkyries grenades and landmines all day. And I don't even have a subscription.
    The point is simple: if players never run out of resources then the system is not working, they could remoce nanites completely and some users wouldn't see a difference.
  12. Pootisman

    Resources arent limitless. If you use your whole arsenal, you will be low on resources quite often.

    I agree that many players will be pissed when SOE reduces resource income. Especially when you consider that SOE likes to overnerf things (harasser, striker, ZOE, etc).

    If they make any nerfs to resource income, they need to fix all the serious bugs with vehicles first. I loose most of my tanks because of stupid bugs, like vehicle ejection seat, wonky reverse steering, not working hit detection, hitching or crash to desktop (PS2 likes to crash when you are in a vehicle).

    Just imagine how annoying it would be if you continously loose tanks because of bugs and then you have to wait 20min to pull new one.
  13. Sghignifiss

    People have already started playing other games...
  14. Ixidron

    I'm really afraid of phase 2, a common resource pool, does that mean noobs will be able to spam so many grenades and chainpull so many stock vehicles that professional drivers/pilots won't be able to spawn a vehicle?

    I think a certification revamp is needed before that resource revamp, PS1 style, just call it masteries/perks/whatever.
  15. OldMaster80

    They point is they are NOT going to nerf the resources income. Resource income will remain exactly the same. The only difference will be that players won't be able to spam forever if they do not refill the nanite pool of a base. If the spam of tanks / aircraft / Max / explosive won't produce any effect, then soon or later someone will have to start a nanite run to keep the army well supplied.

    - Will open the way to new strategies: tracking down ANT runners and cutting off enemy's supply will be an effective way to weaken the enemy.
    - Will create new metagame objectives for professional ANT runners (which sounds a good way for noobs to get XP).
    - Will put a limit to endless zerg, but only as long a faction runs out of Auraxium.
    - Will give a new meaning to the whole idea of resources in this game.
    - Will give an advantage to overpopulated factions as they will have to share a given amount of nanites over a smaller population (aka they will be allowed to spam stuff more than the enemy).

    This is why we need them to complete the resources revamp ASAP. We are currently in a sort of limbo where resources mean nothing and stuff can be spammed forever. I'm sick and tired of destroying MBT and watching the enemy pulling them out again again and again over and over until someone manages to camp the vehicle bay.
  16. ColonelChingles

    You know, I was actually wondering whether the resource revamp actually did create a "tanks everywhere" environment. I mean that's what people say they feel... but is it really supported by the data?

    So might as well take a look at the actual data, as provided by the Oracle of Death. For some reason there is a data gap around the time of the resource update (August 5), but there is data before July 30 and after August 19.

    Data shows that the hours of usage per day for the HEAT cannons generally decreased from July 27 to August 24 (both peak Sundays of their weeks). On July 27 there were 1,939.32 total hours of HEAT usage, whereas on August 24 there were 1,640.01 hours. This represents a 15.4% decrease in hours of usage.

    Could it be that there were less HEAT tanks because the tanks were instead using HE to farm infantry? The data disproves this theory as well. On July 27 there were 315.4 hours of HE usage, and on August 24 there were 309.55 hours of HE usage. Thus there was a 1.9% decrease in HE usage. Not as marked as the decrease in HEAT usage, but still an overall decrease.

    So the MBTs weren't reconfigured to farm infantry... then did they all become AP tanks? The data says yes. After the resource update there were many more AP tanks than before. On July 27 there were 1,457.93 hours of AP usage, and this rose to 2,098.15 hours on August 24. This represents a 43.9% increase in AP usage.

    Total MBT cannon usage on July 27 was 3,712.65 hours. Total MBT cannon usage on August 24 was 4,047.71 hours. Thus there was a net increase of about 9% of tank usage... hardly the tank-pocalypse. Furthermore as there were less HEAT and HE tanks running around, this change simply meant that more tanks were probably fighting other tanks... not infantry.

    Finally total server populations probably account for any increase in tank usage (more people mean more tanks). On July 27 there were 69,882 unique players online... and on August 24 there were 75,752 players online. Thus there were 8.4% more players online on August 24 than July 27... which easily accounts for the 9% increase in tanking hours.

    So there are more tanks in PS2 now... but contrary to popular belief this is not because of the resource revamp. It's simply because there are more players online, and thus the amount of tanks at any given time will rise proportionally. The infantry:tank ratio has essentially remained the same as prior to the resource revamp.

    The real change has been a significant shift away from HEAT and HE towards AP shells. Part of this might have been caused by the HEAT/HE nerfs in the same August 5 patch, but part of it might have been in response to the 9% more tanks (and other vehicles) in the field.

    If you are feeling that there are more HE Prowlers farming infantry than before... you're probably dreaming. :p
    • Up x 1
  17. OldMaster80

    Thank you for the statistics chingles but would you just close this issue as "mass isteria"? Maybe the problem with MBTs is less evident as they cost more resources? If you were online the day before and after the patch well that day it was obvious something had changed: there was more of everything.
    Before the resources revamp we had to deal with resources scarcity but also with a relevant cooldown.

    Take the lightning:
    Before changes if you did not invest in acquisition timer you could pull one every 15 minutes regardless the resources. After the change how many lightning can you pull out in 15 minutes? It cost 350 resources which means you can have one every 6 minutes without decreasing your nanite pool.
  18. ColonelChingles

    At this point I chalk up the unfounded concerns of "tank spam" as due to a combination of factors:
    1) There are slightly more tanks now than before, but there is also slightly more of everything. Tanks are just much more visible than infantry, so they are noticed more.
    2) The erroneous "resource revamp = more tanks" conclusion seems plausible, so people jump on it without actually investigating if it is the case or not.
    3) There is an "echo chamber" effect on the forums, where people will feed off of the observations of others, despite the fact that no one has really done research to back up their position.

    Except now with a common nanite pool if I use any sort of consumable it means I am unable to pull a tank. Before I could pull a MAX or a Galaxy and my ability to pull a tank would be unaffected.

    Now if I throw a Rezz grenade then it will negatively impact my ability to pull a tank. 4-5 Rezz grenades or 2 blocks of C4 is essentially the cost of a Lightning.

    Essentially before we had 2,250 worth of resources... now we're only working with a third of that.
  19. Ixidron

    Not to mention that before that you could stock infantry equipment, I always had 40 grenades, 40 blocks of C4, 40 AP/AT mines, etc.
    • Up x 1
  20. FateJH

    I never run out of resources either. I essentially play exactly the same way I did before the resource revamp started.
    (I also don't have any C4 on any class.)