PC Game Update - 10/19 - Nanite of the Living Dead 4

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by LaughingDead, Oct 18, 2017.

  1. Kerempooh

    Not really, I shred them to bits with my Skyguard (or even Archer nowadays, ironically. Its AA capabilities pointedly haven't been nerfed at all). As I recall air stopped being any kind of danger to grouped armor a couple of years ago. One repair sundi, one or two skyguards and thats it for AG game.
    And its especially so in tank farm configurations. They're usually accompanied by at least one deployed sundi. Effective AA options are plentiful on a moment's notice and air doesn''t really present a threat except to isolated solo vehicles.
  2. adamts01

    You answered your own question. Air is completely void of new players and ground has had too many ways to harass targets that weren't a threat. Flak and lock-ons are just terrible mechanics in a fps when you should be trying to provide a competitive environment. They're ******* it up again with this patch. The no-skill weapons they're pushing are killing the game. This game needs weapons for new players, but flak and lock-ons shouldn't be the solution. I was finally getting optimistic about air again but this might be enough to get me to shelve the game again. Oh well, Arma has a great new flight DLC, ggclose Planetside.
  3. FateJH

    I think you are placing far too much emphasis on the Archer as your only salvation. Besides, the "farm configuration" you're saying makes Air impotent, whether commonplace or not, would make Archers operating at the level you suggest they should no less impotent.
  4. Lamat

    But now you are now talking about a Zerg, were you taking down Zergs single handedly with your Archer pre-nerf?
  5. Kerempooh

    Well it was the only truly effective long range counter-armor available to infantry of all factions. Heavy rockets seriously loose effectiveness at longer ranges (which tank rounds do not... which is silly and stupid and screws up the dynamics of both armor-infantry and armor-armor game.. but i will NOT go into that) and anti-armor turret is extremely vulnerable due to its static nature. At long ranges armor simply has too much of an edge against anything infantry can throw at it. And that seems to me the main problem of the game from day one. Tanks sitting on top of a hill, plinking away at infantry who can do diddly squat to them seems to be the lasting impression of people who try the game and leave it in a hurry. And it's been that way from day one.

    Imo there are two solutions to this problem:
    a) give infantry an effective counter to tanks at longer ranges
    b) make tank damage realistic, in that it is heavily dependent on range, like any other weapon in the game btw. Incidentally, in RL tank anti-armor weapons are the most dependent on range for their effectiveness out of pretty much any other class of weapons. Much more so than infantry weapons for example. A 7.62 round will kill you at 10 or 1000 meters, but tank guns kill effectiveness is so dependent on range that tank canon are usually even officially rated in those terms(100mm of armor at xx meters and so on).
    Obviously, I prefer option 2 because it would also force tanks to move much closer into a more exciting tactical armor-to-armor game but this was soundly rejected by most tankers (heck, they just learned to love sitting on the top of that hill). However, option a) as represented by Archer buff is also viable - it would at least keep tank-infantry farms at bay. But now we're back to square one and... as I said, again I'm loosing the urge to play.
  6. AtckAtck

    Does someone know what you Need to do for the headless horsemen directive?
    Basically it says "kills from a Flash, while wearing a helloween helmet", i wear a helmet, tried several in fact. Tried killing with Flash weapons, nothing, tried killing with running over People, nothing. What do i Need to do to get credit for the directive?!
  7. Kerempooh

    No, but I could make it think again. I could make it uncomfortable. And a bunch of us could make them consider maybe taking a more circuitous route with more cover. Maybe pull some of their number to a flanking position to rout us out. As a tanker I always played that way, seeking cover, always flanking unless I'm in a big soviet-style tank rush... play interesting in other words. Could be I wasn't as "effective" as sit-on-top-of-a-hill guys but I had more fun that way, and I suspect my opponents had more fun as well.
  8. Lamat

    Well, Demigan had a pretty good suggestion on these forums to basically make tank rounds indirect damage higher at close range and a gradual decrease until you only get direct damage at a certain range. This makes tanks at their deadliest to infantry where infantry also have the most opportunity to hurt them back. It also makes tanks not feel silly running away from ADAD jumping infantry charging them. It's not entirely realistic, but it more realistic than direct hits from tanks not killing infantry, they just can't lob shells at buildings from far distances and be effective.
  9. FateJH

    As far as I am aware, the combined arms initiative did not apply damage degradation to rocket launchers, did it? A 700 DAM rocket out to 100m should be just as potent as the same 700 DAM rocket out to 300m.
    Keep getting off the turret after each shot and replace it, moving somewhat left or right, as need be. After the CAI update, only a few tank weapons should afford the basic accuracy and straight-fire range (operator dependent, of course).
    Making tank damage realistic would be such a buff that it would devastate the rest of the game were other factors not also changed in accommodation. Tanks would be doing tremendously more damage were it realistic. It is (or was, depending on how you view CAI) actually fairly realistic compared to firearms, what with range compression, render distance, and scaled raw damage considered.
  10. JobiWan

    Well The Slasher is supposed to be on sale but it says coming in 11 hours. Never mind I'm on tier 3 for the directive already ;)
  11. Kerempooh

    It's interesting suggestion but I'd rather it was done in a realistic way.
    a) HESH rounds would basically do almost no damage to other tanks.... but they'd loose very little effectiveness over range. As in RL this would allow certain tanks to opt for long range anti-infantry bombardment but they would sacrifice this for being extremely vulnerable to other armor. Also HESH anti infantry damage would have to decrease from present level but be given a wider area of effect. This would make it a good suppression weapon but from which infantry could actually get away without being one shot from a mile off.
    b) AP rounds would have NO area of effect, direct hits only. And they'd be extremely dependent on range for their effectiveness. At long ranges they'd be so-so but at close they would rip through anything. It would be slightly different from classic RL AP rounds (those that I propose would work more like kinetic rounds), but it would make "hunter-killer" sneak up, flank, rush in anti-tank play viable.
    c) HEAT a combo of the two. Some splash, some bonus for anti-armor at close ranges but nowhere near as close to AP at point blank. Good for those who don't wish to specialize.

    Again, imo the biggest flaw in PS2 ecosystem as it stands now is in tank main weapons, primarily the impact of range on their effectiveness. No it wouldn't be realism for realism's sake. The system in force now seriously warps the combined arms dynamics and is, frankly, inconsistent and at odds with the rest of the game where, with all other weapons, effectiveness at range plays a pretty big role.
  12. Liewec123

    i found it odd that the pumpkin grenades don't count as halloween weapon kills for the directive.

    also, did anyone else complete part 2 of the directive and not receive the novice implant box?

    also also, has anyone checked if running vampire AND nightmare makes melee kills count as 2 points for the directive?
  13. Lamat

    Random 100 certs for locking continents seems like a bad idea, just encourages overpop and faction switching for rewards.

    How about bonus certs for fighting it out as the underdog? Base it on measurable contribution:
    Base captures & defense vs alert initiating faction
    Sunderers destroyed (belonging to alert faction)
    AMS provided
    Revives to friendlies killed by alert faction

    Let the victor get their cosmetic and ISO4, give certs to the underdogs
  14. Blam320

    I think 4th factioning will always exist, no matter what measures we take to prevent it. The most serious way we could prevent it would be to add a purchase cost to the game, to prevent endless new accounts for each faction, and to add a timer for when you can play as a different character on the same server.
  15. JobiWan

    I think they do count. Don't forget you need ribbons not just kills. I did part 2 and got the implant box.

    I would very much doubt they stack for both implants, it does say vampire or nightmare.
  16. Lamat

    Well let's not reward it at least, right?
  17. Blam320

    What we could do is grant bonus XP/Cert gain across the board for whoever is fighting the faction that started the alert, calling it "meltdown prevention" or something, and not just to the "underdog." The point of the Meltdown alert is for the underdog to essentially team up with the number two on the continent, and both fight the big bad. Plus normalizing ISO-4 rewards for wins and losses, compensated of course for time spent participating in the alert, would go a long way.

    If a faction triggers and wins the alert, they ISO-4, XP, and the bonus.

    If a faction doesn't trigger the alert, but prevents the other faction from winning, they get the ISO-4 reward and XP.
    • Up x 1
  18. Lamat

    We already had that pre-CAI, and yeah it was pretty cool...
  19. Rydenan

    Super bummed the axed the Archer's AV ability. It really felt like it was in a good spot (it felt useful against vehicles, and I didn't find it unreasonably annoying while in a vehicle myself).

    I was almost ready to forgive the fact that they made it completely useless against MAXes now.
    • Up x 1
  20. Liewec123

    i killed someone with a pumpkin nade and my "kill enemies with halloween weapons" directive was still 0.
    i was hoping to avoid being forced to buy slasher but it seems like either slasher or candygun are required,
    and noway i'm grinding candygun kills! :D

    edit, snap! you're right its ribbons, and they do count ;)