[Suggestion] New Tools and Rearranging Class Roles

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by SlugSniper, Sep 4, 2016.

  1. SlugSniper

    Okay, hear me out. It seems to me that certain classes in the game don't have very defined roles, so I'm going to be suggesting some rearrangements to particular classes, the addition of new classes, and a few new tools for certain roles.

    Weapon - Carbine or Battle Rifle
    Tool - Repair Tool or Nanite Dart Launcher (ranged repairs)
    Ability - Stationary Turrets
    Utility - AT Mines, Bouncing Betties, or C4
    Role - Vehicle Operations and Base Defense

    Support (new)
    Weapon - LMG, Battle Rifle, or Archer Anti-Material Rifle
    Tool - Ammo Pack
    Ability - AoE Shield Boost or Direct Protective Shield (like MAX shield, but covers more area)
    Utility - Bouncing Betties or C4
    Role - Resupplies, Fire Support, and Assault Support

    Heavy Assault
    Weapon - Assault Rifle or Battle Rifle
    Tool - Grenade Launcher, Archer Anti-Material Rifle, or Flamethrower (Plasma Thrower for VS)
    Ability - Same as current
    Utility - Same as current
    Role - Brute Force

    Anti-Vehicle (new)
    Weapon - Carbine
    Tool - Rocket / Missile Launcher
    Ability - Hyperkinetic Punch (melee attack that can damage vehicles)
    Utility - AT Mines, C4, or AA Mines (automatically fire missiles at aircraft at close range)
    Role - Anti-Tank or Anti-Air
  2. FateJH

    Where are the Medics? is this suggestion to eschew utilities that provide healing?

    Even if you said "particular classes" you could be more specific about the existing list of classes, which one specifically your changes target, and what if anything happens to the unchanged ones. Most glaringly, why a list of "classes who don't have a well-defined role" excludes Light Assaults, the only class whose only specialization begins and ends with what is on their back?
  3. ColonelChingles

    I think the old Battlefield classes are a pretty good start:


    LA- The flanker and C4 faerie. Pretty much the same as it is now, just with weaker armour than the standard infantryman. Will lose in a face-to-face fight, but is expected to ambush to win.

    Infiltrator- Your typical sniper/scout plus AI mines. As usual, harmless to vehicles.

    Heavy Assault- Loses all AV potential, armed with carbines or assault rifles. Heavily armoured but slower moving. Meant to go up against all infantry classes, but helpless against vehicles. No more rocket launchers, C4, or AV grenades.

    Support- Both spits out bullets and hands them to allies. Heavily armoured but slower moving. LMGs overall are changed so that they are fairly inaccurate unless deployed. Also helpless against vehicles.

    Engineer- Armed with short-ranged SMGs or shotguns, meaning that they are vulnerable to most other infantry. Gains the HA's AV grenades. Loses the AV MANA turret, so is only effective against vehicles at close range using mines or grenades. Ammunition resupply is given to the Support class.

    Medic- Pretty much the same except loses C4.

    Anti-Tank- New class meant for ranged AV work. Gains the Engineer's AV MANA turret (now requires resupply) and the HA's rocket launchers. Only lightly armed with a SMG, meaning that it loses to other infantry classes while being strong against vehicles.

    In that way infantry need to pick whether they are going to be good against infantry or vehicles. Infantry that are strong against other infantry are very weak to vehicles, while infantry that are strong against vehicles are weak against infantry. This essentially mirrors the AP/HE dynamic for tanks.
  4. SlugSniper

    Yeah, I should've been more specific... What I did was mix and match the Engineer and HA classes, splitting them into more defined roles and better variety.

    I did sort of like the BF2 class system, and I'm taking some inspiration from it while trying to maintain the kind of balancing that PS2 features.

    The other classes in PS2 have pretty well-defined roles, and the only suggestions I would have would be new tools and the like. Maybe a climbing cable that Light Assaults could drop after scaling walls and cliffs, and perhaps a ranged healing tool for the Medic.
  5. Eternaloptimist

    Hmm................it would be over-specialising in my personal view. I main engie and medic and I like the ability to hold my own to some degree in ranged infantry combat as well as doing the support bits. In fact I play as a fighter/shooter, doing the resupply, repairing and healing along the way rather than as the primary focus. I also like the engies ability to confront armour as well as infantry.

    HAs with ARs sound pretty overpowering to me, apart from anything else. And speaking from experience, I don't think an AV planetman with RL and AV turret is any more likely to be effective/survive going up against tanks and snipers than the HA and Engie are now.

    I think the class system is pretty well balanced as it is and the only changes I'd welcome are:
    • an AA mana turret option for my engie (although I think burster Maxes have pretty well covered that angle atm)
    • AI mines instead of C4 for my medic (I like AI mines, what can I say?)
    • A more versatile and effective shotgun for LA (I'm just starting to play LA - would not mind sacrificing a bit of damage at close range in exchange for a bit more at longer range and maybe the chance to select between slugs and pellets on the move)
    I play infil from time to time and I like them just as they are.
    I also played HA a lot when I started but only for when I want to use an AA rocket launcher now. The only thing I find mildly tiresome about fighting against HA is their ability to pop an overshield as soon as I start shooting at them and use medkits at the same time.
  6. SlugSniper

    Yeah, versatility can be fun. I'm just OCD and like more specified roles. :D

    Me personally, I'd play any of the rearranged classes I've mentioned. The Engineer class would be my "base-ace" class, Support would be my Archer epicness class, HA my brute-pyromaniac class (I want that flamethrower :p ), and AV my ultimate revenge against air swarms.

    How about this:

    Weapon - Carbine
    Tool - Light Repairs (not as good as Engineer) or Rocklet Rifle (planned for LA, delayed or possibly cancelled)
    Ability - Ammo Pouch (given to individual soldiers or self for resupply) or Medpack (like Ammo Pouch, but heals)
    Utility - C4 or Time Bomb
    Role - A bit of everything

    A kind of jack-of-all-trades class with lighter variants of the various team-oriented tools and stuff.
  7. GoTDirt fromMAG

    Whenever I see ranged repair suggestions,"no thanks."
  8. SlugSniper

    Why's that? :/
  9. GoTDirt fromMAG

    Because I hate the idea. The Medics revive grenades are completely terrible in the same way.
  10. SlugSniper

    And... Why's that?
  11. GoTDirt fromMAG

    I apologize for wasting your time, as you've wasted mine.
  12. Demigan

    So basically you create a class that has half of the Engineer's role. You also give this new Support class some abilities that would be perfect in making the Medic a better defined role on the battlefield, mainly shields.
    The flamethrower doesn't work in PS2, it eats framerate and doesn't help in any way.

    Creating a separate class for AV is terrible. It means that anyone who isn't that class is instantly screwed when they encounter a vehicle. You need to make sure that the roles are less defined when it comes to AV work. Also, where's the Infiltrator, Medic and LA? If there's any class that needs some better roles it's the Medic and LA, not some rehash of 2 already existing classes and splitting those classes into 4 separate one's.

    Here's how you change roles:
    HA is currently the mainstay class, better or almost as good as any other class in almost every situation. The rest might be specialized, but rarely is that specialization really what sets them apart. This is because the game doesn't offer enough variation to make other classes useful. Infiltration and mobility are useful, but when it comes down to it and you start fighting for those points you are immediately hamstringed in how useful your abilities are unless you are a Heavy, Medic or Engineer.
    So you change the game.
    For example, if the Medic can buy an AMS spawn utility for 200 resources, it has no terminal and you can only spawn there if you died within the same region, then the Medic can place it anywhere on the battlefield to push the frontlines. This instantly offers the defenders of a base the ability to use alternative spawns without needing an almost impossible to place Sunderer. It also allows the attackers to push forwards and hide their Sunderer placement for longer.
    Once placed this AMS spawn utility is an incredibly useful tool, and it gives the LA and infiltrator a solid role in seeking it out and destroying it.
    Bam, one utility added to only one class, but it gives the Medic, LA and Infiltrator all solid roles to fulfill during a battle.
    You can also add new secondary and primary objectives to bases that help solidify the roles. How about we add a CTF capture mechanic in some bases? Go to the point, grab a flag (computer core?), bring it to a deployed Sunderer within the region. Capture enough of them on the same Sunderer and you've captured the base. This again switches the roles around. Heavy is all great fun and wonderful for both the attackers and defenders to gain ground and make it easier for themselves, but the LA and Infiltrator get a lot more bang for their buck both in finding and killing the flag carrier and in getting the flag and making a run for it.

    That's how you change roles. And I would rather have less classes with more options than more classes with far more defined roles.
  13. Eternaloptimist

    Not sure what you mean by terrible. Being able to rezz several people in one og and without exposing yourself to near certain death is a pretty major benefit for me when I play Medic. A few of them also some over to get the rest of their health back from my healing gun too (you know, because rezz 'nades don't give full health).

    Or is that the thing you think is terrible? making it too easy to rezz people.

    Having said that, I agree that a long distance repair dart seems a bit pointless unless it gives an insane amount of repairing, which would probably be OP. I main engie (medic is my other preferred class) and I think engie is already the most versatile class in the game. No need for more toys (although if Santa is thinking of bringing me an AA turret this Christmas I wouldn't complain).
  14. AxiomInsanity87

    I guess we need horses too ;)
  15. FateJH

    I don't think it would (or should) be a good idea to throw a class that has no AV potential into a situation where you would encounter vehicles. (Also: "stop trying to do everything yourself" generic comment number four.) That's a similar sentiment to "stop driving into places where you could easily be C4'd," it feels like.
    He clarified (apologized?) later on for that, indicating that any class not touched upon by this list was to be considered unaffected in the scope of the changes. The Medic, Infiltrator, Light Assault, and MAX are still there in the game.
    Not to smack on the idea but nothing is stopping the latter two classes from accepting a role of hunting down enemy AMSes in the game right now. We wouldn't even need to add your Medic insta-AMS idea. The AMS-dancing Infiltrator already exists, to be fair, but he tends to have more interest in killstreaks while inspecting the vehicle's transmission.
  16. Demigan

    There's a massive difference between not being designed against a certain enemy type and not being able to do anything against them.

    AV loadouts aren't useless against infantry, far from it actually. An AV loadout tank can still blow up enemy infantry and defend himself against it. Even if the player has too little skill to kill infantry without dedicated AI weapons on his vehicle, he can still outrun any infantry or remain out of their effective range.

    Infantry, however, can't do anything like it. If you aren't a Heavy and a tank is looking for you? Well too bad! Only the LA might stand a chance of dumping C4 on the tank, but any other class is simply a sitting duck. There's not even anything you can do to make it harder! There's no debuffs you can throw at them, there's no real threatening stuff you can do to them unless said tank remains in place and misses everything while you run at it with C4. Well ok, the infiltrator has a chance to avoid detection, but that's it.

    But here's some genius who's asking for all infantry except one to be completely useless in the face of vehicles, and that's bad. There's no versatility and there's no way to adjust to a situation where vehicles are involved. So you used your Medics, Heavies, LA's and Infiltrators to push back the enemy advance and are ready to assault the Sunderer? Well too ******* bad, you don't have enough Support characters to pull it off!
    So you have fought your enemies off that AMP wall? Well now you have to content with some vehicles pounding you to dust because you didn't need Support classes until that point! Either die now or redeploy to switch classes!

    What we need is to give all classes something to deal with vehicles. This doesn't have to be something that every loadout has, but it has to be there to pick if you want it. As I've proposed before, most of these weapons should be non-lethal. Weapons that debuff enemy tanks and help you survive a vehicle encounter. That doesn't mean that most classes shouldn't have a (ranged) lethal option available, preferably in the Utility slot to make infantry pay for it and have some competition to fight medkits and C4. How about a Rocklet rifle where you pay for every shot? How about an AV-oriented Grenade launcher? How about a LAW? What about a range of AA utilities to further increase versatility and choice? And how about adding a few more specialist AI utilities to it as well to complete the picture? That way it's completely up to the player how well prepared they are, but you can be prepared, instead of "well I either have to return to the nearest infantry terminal or sit here and get killed by an enemy I can't possibly defeat" scenario's.

    I understood from the first post they would still be in the game, I understood he 'just' wanted to split the Heavy and Engineer in two to get 4 different classes. But my point is that if we need to change anything about the roles it's increasing versatility and decreasing disabilities like "Can't do anything to enemy vehicles". Also the roles need a rebalancing, such as the Heavy currently being good in almost every common situation infantry can find themselves in because the game's mechanics and objectives all favor the Heavy.
    Just as an example, how much would it hurt to give the Infiltrator access to a utility tracking device. You fire a tracker against a vehicle and the vehicle is tracked (and since it's a utility you pay some resources to get tracker darts), has his health visible without the need for implants, is visible through terrain for nearby friendlies to engage and receives additional damage for hits. It's non-lethal itself, but is a real asset and useful to have with you when engaging vehicles. Best of all, it's not just useful for infantry, it's useful for any friendlies that attack your target. The tracked person either destroys the tracker by shooting it with small-arms or waits for 30 seconds until the thing runs out of energy.

    It's relatively simple, improves the infiltrator role exactly where you want it (spotting+scouting in a meaningful way) and offers the infiltrator a way to support friendlies better, using his stealth to avoid vehicle fire.

    Why should the Engineer and Heavy not be capable of doing this job? Like you say they can, but they are much less suited to dealing with it. Fighting your way to that spawn takes a lot more effort than an infiltrator (especially a stalker one) or an LA using his jetpacks to avoid enemies and attack the AMS from a different position.
    And what's this about AMS-dancing infiltrators? You mean infiltrators that hang around Sunderers and spawnkill people? What's that got to do with this new AMS idea? "They can do it to this AMS tool as well"? So what? "Omg, you can shoot people who spawned at the spawnbunker and they die just as fast as people who spawned at the Sunderer! That means the Sunderer is... obsolete...?" What kind of reasoning is that? If that's really such a big problem you could always add a 3 second spawnprotection or something, nothing kills an infiltrator faster than wasting bullets on an invulnerable target of which you don't know when he's vulnerable. This gives them all the more reason to just destroy the AMS instead of trying to farm off of it.
  17. SlugSniper

    Um... Teamwork.
    Yes, it's a bad idea to go up against a tank without a dedicated AV class... ALONE, that is.

    The new HA in my suggestions would still have decent AV capabilities with that heavy grenade launcher. While not as good as a rocket launcher against vehicles, it can still put some nice big dents in them. Two HAs with GLs could probably destroy a tank fairly easily.
    Having more specified roles like this would really increase the teamwork aspect of the game.

    Also, if you're a Medic, you could team up with a Support player for those beastly shields.
  18. FateJH

    I'm not sure what you were reading; but, the OP's list is very clearly breaking up Heavy Assault and Engineer into an infantry-fighting specialization class and an anti-vehicle specialization class. The Engineer split is quirky, I'll give it that, but it appears to be divided around "vehicle-user" and "close squad support" in a similar way. The important takeaway from his list is in the list itemization itself. All the classes he created in ths split are afforded some form of anti-vehicular capability. All of them have C4. Three of them have Archers. Two of them have AT mines. One of them has a rocket launcher (just like in the game right now). Your complaint against his list is sensationally misrepresenting it by saying AV-capacity goes down.

    If I may return to my question. Why would you charge a hypothetical class that has no anti-vehicular potential intentionally head to head against vehicles? (My answer: you feel confident you could dodge around them and their weapons fire.)
    That depends how much the developers are still beholden to their implant energy system. I have no complaints with the idea.
    What? It feels like you didn't even read what I said ...
    ... or tried to exhume a boatload of context that was never in the original text and interpret it in the most bitter way possible.

    Since I seem incapable of speaking to you normally without evoking provocation, I will dispense with conversation points and stick with brevity, especially in all future posts. "What stops the Infiltrator and the Light Assault from being effective enemy spawn point hunters in the current game?"
  19. SlugSniper

    That escalated quickly. o_O

    Is there any possible way to implement flamethrowers without the lag?
  20. WTSherman

    What, give everyone rocket launchers in a dedicated slot? :p

    Part of the problem tanks have right now is that there are too many weapons on the field at any one time that can actually damage them. At a minimum, splitting the HA into dedicated anti-infantry and anti-tank classes would vastly improve this situation by reducing the number of rocket launchers on the field, and making an infantry push viable if the enemy *does* go heavy on rocket launchers (where as right now, lots of rocket launchers means lots of HAs, have fun pushing your infantry up against the top anti-infantry class!).

    Creating more categories of armor would help this situation too. Right now we only have "light" and "heavy", with "light" being reserved for the Flash, Valkyrie, Harasser, and ESF, and "heavy" being everything else. The current "heavy" should be re-classed as "medium", and apply to the Sunderer, the ANT, the Galaxy, and the Liberator.

    The new "Heavy" would apply to Lightnings and MBTs. It would be immune to the following damage types: all that Medium is immune to, in addition to HMG, AA MG, Aircraft Noseguns, Light Ordinance, and the Archer. This would reduce the total number of threats to the tank, allowing it to act more like a metal box and less like a sponge.

    The way it currently is, we basically have sponge-style tanks, which behave more like a tank class in an RPG than actual tanks. A sponge-style tank draws aggro and then constantly takes damage, relying on a constant source of healing to stay alive.

    A metal box tank on the other hand, is durable because most things simply can't damage it at all.