Re-balance Phoenix Rockets or Forbit them at spawn

I agree completely. The joke here is that air constantly damages and kills players who can't fight back. Besides, as Monny said Burster MAXes don't stand a chance against their dedicated counter if they can't fire from total safety. Air-to-ground is not balanced around fair fights.

I don't, but that changes nothing. Bursters (and really all flak in general) have low velocities, low accuracy, and low damage per hit. At 1000+ meters I honestly doubt any aircraft would be even aware of the hits if not for the explosions.

YES.

The problem is that people can duck back inside spawn. And sniper rifles fire through shields.

Since the attackers cannot shut the spawn down, they're forced to camp it. Back in PS1, the spawn tubes WERE KILLABLE. So you could break through, tank the pain field by spamming medkits, and kill the tubes.

Then, the enemy either snuck in and repaired it, deployed sunderers, or took the tower.

But SOE had this grand vision of battlefield games, so they want a massive fight raging every second, even when one side is completely outmatched. One the lines this "vision" landed against was spawn room shields, and the magic pain field.

If the defenders can push out, they don't need to go back inside. Hell, have spawn room shields block ALL shots and be one-way for defenders. Problem solved- no more ducking, no more spawn room flak. Pull at the next base and fight in the field if you can't push out of the spawn and a teleport room.

So... you want someone to be able to shutdown a spawn, that needs less people to seal it off than to break out..
So we can lose bases in the first seconds of battle, or ahead of time.. or from the enemy just sacking spawn & then capping the points, as the Spawn point can not be held worth a damn..
Is this the logic? Kill the ability to actually hold the single chokepoint that is needed to have a fight?

Without the ability to fire out of spawn, You basically set-up the easiest choke-point on every base , and plat the defenders into a corridor filled with Guns to mow them down.
A single AI tank will hold off the entire team at the spawn, from a distance, till infantry can walk in, murdering the literal enclosed Defenders, a minute into every fight with a tank, or ESF, or a galaxy dropping onto it.

Problem solved; Defending is impossible, as Spawn can not be held, can't be defended, and is the first target.

I don't think we agree completely. Looking back, I wasn't so clear. Invincibility shields go against the spirit of PvP. Though I do agree that Burster Maxes need a rework if we get spawnroom changes.

On Flak..... I've played more Burster Maxes than I'd like to have, and the only time I use HA is for AA, so I really do understand the pain from the ground, but Flak has been the bane of air's existence since that first CAI adjustment. You're completely disconnected if you think it's ineffective. 1 spawnroom burster means you need to land and repair after ever pass, and two spawnroom bursters means you find another fight. 1 Ranger Harasser is enough to keep half a squad of ESF or a single Lib out of the hex. I really do want lethal AA, but area effect weapons and lock-ons aren't the solution. I love Walkers, and think they should be the premier AA top gun, and I love the Striker mechanic for infantry. Though the current Striker does need to be slightly tuned down. I hear that they can't adjust its 15m tracking ability for engine reasons, and I think its damage is just right, so I think a big nerf to its hip fire and a slight nerf to velocity would put it in a good place, even considering Valks.

1 dual Burster MAX should not just send you repairing, it should kill you right there on spot. What exactly do you expect from expensive, dedicated, slow AA? I mean, if even they can not take you out 1on1 why don't we take AA out of the game right away?
I'm not a fan of spawnroom bursters but let's be real about it: If they leave the spawnroom then even the air they should counter can kill them easily in a 1on1.

Harassers are a different story. They deserve a general nerf cause they can just take too many hits from all sources for being that fast and deadly against any target out there. Not sure whether they ranger is really too strong overall...maybe a bit for not having to actually hit the target.
A walker is way too weak with it's current punch. You need like 2 walkers to effectively fight 1 ESF(and that one can still run and repair).

That's what they did in PlanetSide Classic. A properly coordinated fight had people coming and going from the connected base so someone was typically in range to attend to the matter, on top of people going to check out fires in other bases such as base spawns and base generators going down or even dramatic changes to NTU level, all indications of base sabotage. If all of the defenders were routed after the spawns went down, the attackers have to become the then-defenders of the base as they would have to contend with the counterattacking force pushing in from the other base down the way. Not only would the defenders be dealing with this problem, but so would the attackers, as sabotage to spawn tubes and other base amenities was independent of base capture mechanics and disrupting base operation resulted in practical battlefield value.

A lot is lost when PlanetSide 2 slackens player responsibility or allows abusive mechanics that give the impression that putting effort into responsible actions seem worthless.

There are no other PvP games like this one. Others either have a similar spawn camping prevention mechanic OR they have spawn camping problems.

Were you playing Planetside 2 when it first released and did not have this mechanic? There is a very good reason for it.

The IQ test is a binary question: Do you understand you can die and they can't? Some players stupidly challenge this mechanic and try to play "catch the peekaboo" at spawn rooms and they lose. It cracks me up.

I'm not trolling anyone nor insulting anyone. Stupid is as stupid does. It's simple and true. /shrug

It's not just air being able to virtually instagib a max that's the problem.

You also have to content with C4 fairies, roadkill cheese, HESH spam, archer engies, decimator heavies - not to mention the fact that Maxes out in the open are very squishy if you get a couple enemies concentrating LMG, SMG or Carbine fire on you.

Maxes are the slowest unit in the game - and a dedicated AA max can't even defend itself against this multitude of threats. With the loss of Max charge - they can't even evade effectively. I still don't understand why Max charge was removed. It was just about the only defence an AA max had.

I can tell you: Scatmax...range is their only downside and you do not want to give them something to start running at you. They are OP enough already... ;-)

Ah, I see. Yeah, we don't agree. But I prefer them over spawn camping. Better to shoot from inside them than be shout from outside I think.

I just think you're overestimating the effectiveness at range. As I said accuracy isn't going to be great and even with slightly stronger flak one MAX isn't going to be a major influence. If there are two MAXes someone's really been pissing players off for a while! And a harasser with only a Ranger probably won't live very long.

I do agree about Walkers and the Striker mechanic. Flak isn't very fun or engaging for either end of it.

The complaint is "I got killed with a phoenix from a spawnroom, so phoenix are overpowered." Nevermind that in that situation, you're already dealing with a base where the enemy are pinned into their spawn room. It's a complaint of "My easy victory wasn't easy enough because someone was able to hit me."

I run in an outfit with very organized operations, and the consensus is that even a full squad (plus an engineer) of phoenix is less effective than everyone going light assault and rushing the enemy. The phoenix is super-situational and does terrible damage. The complaints of "phoenix killing sunderers" is most likely "I saw a phoenix rocket, then the sunderer blew up, it must have been the phoenix rocket!"

If you’re losing sunderers to Phoenix rockets, 1v1 you can out repair the damage and you pull them away from the actual fight. The only time you actually lose out to a rockets dps is when it’s point blank in which you deserve to lose that sundi or your rep tool is level 1 because you can’t afford the 1-50 certs to put it at a decent level.

If you’re going to suggest the phoenix to be nerfed, offer a rebalance so that it’s actually usable away from spawn, because then you’re not just killing the weapon and ******* people who ever liked it and bought it.

I agree with the people saying nothing should be able to be shot out of the spawn, it just creates campers. If the base is lost they should redeploy to another battle or the next base to set up.

I like the idea of being able to aim and then dumbfire it the rest of the way, so you're not stuck vulnerable the entire time.

In planetside Classic, the map was larger, every base needed cort, You had actual Defenses, and Your spawn rooms were buried inside the bases.

In planetside 2, every Spawn room nearly, is on the surface, has no cover in the pain field for defenders, LOS to the spawn room shield from Elevated Cover outside the base, and every single spawnroom has a chokepoint on the single exit from that Painfield for the defender - with multiple points that branch into it, with Cover around the painfield (outside the damage zone), for any attacker.
Nearly every single lattice base, has no ability to hold the exterior wall even -- the defense turrets are often positioned where they can do nothing against attackers, are taken too damn quickly, or are better suited to attacking the defense (like the AV turrets aimed at where the Defender's vehicles spawn.)
So getting to the Spawn-Room is not a feat; It takes seconds, and is easier to do, than defending the room from anything.
And this isn't counting how, not only can vehicles from outside barrage fire at the spawn room's doors, but also how every single spawn is exposed to every & any aircraft - like galaxies.
Whom drop soldiers right at the spawn-room.

If every defense, is required to be held by the next base over..
Defending the Lattice base, isn't actually defending the lattice base; It's attacking your own base as an enemy would, in order to attack the Enemy whom is invading..
You lose any possible Defender's home territory advantage, the instant the enemy attacks..
Making Defense not actually a thing.


Planetside 2, does not have the bases like PS1.
Nor the capture systems equal to it.
The bases aren't these defensive positions; Every spawn is instead exposed, and most exposed to Tanks outside the walls.
So it doesn't work, that the easiest position to take, is the only position defenders have in that entire base where they have the highest concretion & access to.
Any other location in a lattice Base, is equally available to the Offense; The Spawn room is the most central location of any defense.. or should be, given it has the entire spawn capability, pain-fields, and walls.
In Ps2, however, this is also the Hardest chokepoint to escape to the entire base; Which is only for those defending the base.
This puts attackers with the easiest-to-hold-position on the only position Defenders have in their own base - with as little effort as possible needed to reach this position.

So, if attackers could also just literally run in to this spawn room, every base fight, as it's exposed to everything, and is the easiest thing to attack in an entire base, every single notion of 'defending' is a Lie.
As every 'defender' is engaging the allied base from everywhere but the ******* base.

If the spawn room was actually a challenge to reach...
Since, we can literally just fly over with a Galaxy, or drive a tank near, and instantly dominate the spawn room from outside.
Campers are also the people attacking the guys leaving the spawn; Not the guys trying to defend their own spawn location.

So by removing the Defender's ability to kill things near their spawn, You don't remove campers.
You remove any threat to the campers.

So every fight will be as short as possible, given all they need is to hit the most exposed & hardest to defend zone in every base...
Which can be attacked from Outside by near anything.

Well, paper-thin door locks and ineffectual auto-turrets that fire on stealthless vehicles anyway. Carry around a REK with Advanced Hacking and there was nowhere you couldn't go in a realistic amount of playtime.

I used to think the same thing but, over time, I've come to realize that I only believed that to the ends that it allows some footing to get back onto the battlefield. I never liked the Pure Hex System as it was established back in the day but I did recognize what it wanted to accomplish. My complaint was that it was far too lax in its ruleset and offered no ability to focus engagement. The current lattice creates a far too insular environment because the base philosophy remains the same as it is did back then. The spawn room was a firm fixture because there was supposed to be no way to know where one would be attacked next and there always needed to be the ability to rapidly reposition. (This doesn't actually foster a mentality of building front lines, however, because there was never a reason to be anywhere in particular or attack any base in particular, so it was more like a game of janky wack-a-mole than it was chess or checkers.) Base spawning was never really about the guaranteed spawn point but, rather, the ability to get back to the battle you want or need to with only reasonable downtime. A nearby base covers that.

Defensive play is anything you do to keep a base under management against an enemy assault. Controlling enemy troops already encroaching on your capture points, keeping enemy vehicles from getting close to your perimeter, an interest in pushing the battle back to the enemy base; these are all forms of defense but they require an equal measure of offensive posturing. Not having a healthy balance of both results in the problems for which the game is currently derided. Troop movement is what is important. As I said, it was the coming and going of players that defended a base. The common passage of people allowed for the possibility to always be ready to engage or, at least, notice and make warning of the incoming threats so that they could be repelled. That Galaxy that drops troops would have trouble getting close because of allied air and, even when it got to the base, there would be flak and missiles and, even when the enemy tried to drop from it, there'd be people on the ground, in and around the spawn room that would be ready to greet them. Right now, the the main hurdle that keeps people from branching out into these responsible areas is complacency. Being focused onto singular points of interest called "bases" and then being further focus around singular points of interest within those singular points of interest makes those same bases more vulnerable to attack and players more easy to be abused. Everyone always congregates onto those predictable locations and rarely get out and about to actually deal with the threats the will become an issue. The base becomes a coffin in which you bury yourself and making it more enclosed just further blinds you to how deeply you can be buried in it.

I dare to suggest that denying experience while fighting within or killing opponents within some region of being "in a base" might even be enough to push people outside and actually enage the enemy where the enemy needs to be engaged. Basically, base fighting would be wholy about map progression and the field fights about player progression, so something to that effect. That's not the direction this thread has veered, though, so leave the idea be.

All I can summarize of my point is that I think we need to stop treating them as if they were defensible positions; and, instead of lamenting that they are not, we should endeavor to frame our combat around the actual avenues of engagement we encounter and complain about routinely. Tanks shelling a spawn room from up on a hill are to be greeted by tanks and rockets that should be shooting at them from an unexpected direction. That base is too expected of a direction.

I don't see fights as just in the base. I don't think that's a healthy perspective for a game with this level of ambition. We should endeavor to get ourselves out of and away from static bases as much as possible.

That's an easy fix though - only allow Max charge when non-cqc weapons are equipped. Or disable weapons whilst Max charge is in use - with a short cooldown after (to force it to be used defensively rather than offensively).

To remove Max charge because of one type of weapon that only one faction can equip is pretty short sighted. Max charge was the best defensive option available to all factions.

People camping in spawn are a symptom of poor base design (and the attackers desire to farm cheap kills).

As long as attackers can (and do) farm cheap kills by blanketing spawnrooms with HESH, LOLpods etc - people will camp in them.

Redesign the spawn rooms or give more protected options to exit them.

Instead of searching for arbitrary fixes to arbitrary perceptions, one should seek real countermeasures.

Or make one of the defense slot on a vehicle an anti- missile gun. Usually I can shoot the projectile down with three shots.