SOE, do not listen to INFANTRY telling you how to balance the game

How is combined arms if all you are doing is sitting in a tank shooting HE at infantry all day? Because you have 2 guys who sit in the cap point for 10 seconds then go back to farming infantry?

But in RL vehicles are not spammable ... Destroy a plane / MBT they are not back within 2mins in a new one .. So any real life comparisons are moot

You can two shot them on the ground repairing but there is no way you are hitting them with an unguided missile when they are way up high...that would be video worthy for sure.

Yeah this is just ********, everybody should decide by himself how he wants to play this game. There is not even a reason for this

Infantry ARE SUPPOSED TO DO EVERYTHING. This is how the game works, this is how PS1 worked, it's not a game based on vehicle combat, it's an infantry combat game with vehicles as support roles. Any territory captured is done so by infantry, any gens flipped, are done by infantry. Basically ANYTHING useful besides killing enemies is only done by infantry, ARMOR supports INFANTRY, not the other way around. You think that infantry kills you too easily? How about you roll in with your own? If a MBT in real life goes into an area without friendly infantry, he is doomed. Please, go play Hawken or World of Tanks if you want a game centered around vehicles, because your place is not here.

I'm confused, I've always assumed combined arms meant armor, infantry and air-craft operating to complete a mission. Am I missing something? I've never actually seen what you describe. Sure I've seen tanks surround a base, and a few drivers get out to cap a point, but invariably that fails thanks to the never ending stream of light assaults with C4 and heavy assaults with lock on rocket launchers. I play on a pretty active server tho, so perhaps on the low pop ones things are different?

I guess I just don't see where you are coming from? Perhaps YOU should try another game? You seem to think this game should be Counter Strike or something that it is not. :\

Maybe you should stop living in the past? Clearly PL2 is NOTHING like the first game, and besides a name, they have very little in common. This is CLEARLY a combined arms game, NOT an infantry centered game. Even in Beta it was never like that.

:\

The US has lost, I think, one tank in the entire Iraq war to an RPG. Every other tank was merely damaged and torched by americans rather than taken back and fixed. Tanks are not easily taken out by infantry, not by a long shot. They can be damaged by infantry, sure. But actually destroyed? Not likely. You can maybe blow off it's tread, but it's turret will still function, it can still be used, it'll need repairs to get a new track but other than that it's fine.

Also, hand-held AT weapons are quite uncommon in war. As I stated, a full squad in the military will likely carry a single-shot AT launcher. ONE launcher. ONE shot. For the entire squad. And it wont even kill a tank. The truly good hand-held AT weapons are rare and only issued for special operations, your standard soldiers do not get them.

But the same holds true for infantry. Kill a soldier and he's NEVER coming back. Kill a plane and you can build another one. If the pilot lives you essentially didn't lose anything. As well, hand-held AT weapons are less spammable than vehicles. As I said above, a full squad will likely have one single-shot AT launcher. Y'know the ones, those tubes. They wont even be able to destroy a modern MBT. They likely wont even cause enough damage to render the tank inoperable. Basically, infantry squads in real life are defenseless against armor. That's why they call in air strikes or artillery strikes on enemy armor. Or they let their own tanks deal with it. Hence, combined arms, because all types of weapons are getting used.

In PS2 infantry are WAY more spammable, and every single HA has an AT weapon and tons of ammo, unlimited ammo with an engineer. If it was more like real life where hand-held AT was rather weak and uncommon, it would be good.

After your 60 killstreak, you come down to the field on men. Die once, and return to your air. W/e nerf they do to air units = worthwhile.

Lol, the guy you quoted spewing out BS. Rpg's taking out USA tanks. Those **** weapons are unreliable.

You lost me at "SOE, do not listen".

You got it wrong man the proper use of vehicles, all vehicles is to support infantry, you can kill infantry all day long with a vehicle, but you NEED infantry to cap the point.

My outfit has dedicated tankers and flyers, along with dedicated infantry squads, we also use a squad to do AA work from the ground. The thing that gets me is you come here and try and tell people how its done and you wrong. You can do it many ways in this game, I guess the biggest problem with this game is all the ******* players who don't have a clue to use what they have.

We run as infantry being the main force not some utility role. Try and take a base with vehicles see how well it works when you die and are respawning far away to pull another. Proper combined arms would be tanks and planes killing your infantry while my infantry close with you in the base and destroys all your bases sheilds etc.


I hate to say this but a lot of people that come to the forums really needs to learn to play the game before they make demands for changes they have no ******* clue about.

sorry just so frusterating coming to the forums listening to the crap that gets posted here.

It's also ******** for him to claim that SOE shouldn't listen to infantry, and to try and claim that 40% is a low number of vehicle kills, because neither of those is true.

Your first paragraph confuses me because that's the exact point I've been making in every single one of my posts. Vehicles exist solely to get infantry to bases. Infantry exist solely to capture bases. That's how it is suppose to be. Infantry are not suppose to be terminators that can take on entire armies because you have a squad of HA's with lock-on rockets on a ridge with a single engineer. When away from a base infantry should be vehicle food with little ability to fight back. When inside a base vehicles should have no way of engaging infantry.

Because everything that is necessary to capture territory and help YOU accumulate your armor/air resources is done so by infantry. If there weren't enough infantry for your faction, you wouldn't even be able to pull your beloved vehicles. you'd be sitting in the territory outside your warpgate shooting at the enemy infantry/armor all day while your faction gets steamrolled and eventually becomes unable to spawn vehicles. Vehicles are fine, quit crying and realize that they aren't supposed to be near-invincible.

Well but what kind of argument is this, if people start blaming players because they make a lot of kills in vehicles i could also blame them for getting most of their kills as infantry wich is similar stupid.

Yes it is infantry centered, ANY TERRITORY CAPTURED IS DONE BY INFANTRY. And the focus of PS2 is to capture territory and acquire resources, which CANT be done unless you step out of your vehicle. So yes, it is a infantry centered games with vehicles as support roles, you wouldn't be able to even accumulate the resources necessary to pull one if there wasn't enough infantry to flip points, take gens, and capture territory. Vehicles do asbolutely NOTHING to help capture territory except kill the enemies that are defending it, thats it. Saying that this game is isn't infantry centered is a pretty delusional statement

And infantry may be the "weakest" aspect of combined arms, but as it is in real military doctrine, they are the most necessary. And any armor/aircraft cannot operate effectively without boots on the ground supporting them.

Just quoting this again so people can read it. This is what it's about. It's probably too late to save a thread like this though, some people seem to have zero ability to adapt to the situation.It feels like the equivalent of playing an RTS and complaining that you lose to infestor+banelings because you refuse to do anything else but to build marines because "that's my playstyle". Stuff in this game has situation they are good at, bad at, counters and things they counter, simple.

Why is it that people believe the game should adapt to their gamestyle/what they want to do instead of the other way? Why can't they adapt to the game? THEY choose to play the game, if the game is not for you then move to one that is, there are hundreds of games out there. There are more different playstyles than YOUR playstyle, wherever you be an infantry guy or vehicle guy.

You can not begin to pretend to be fair and balanced, when you are nitpicking only those extreme infantry folks that have posted ridiculous things on the forums. The extreme infantry folks are just as bad as extreme flyboys that have been posting "there's nothing wrong with air v ground balance, everything's fine, learn to play, buy more anti air weapons" since launch. While you may have agreed to that rocket pods needed a nerf and anti air needed a boost (just like about all infantry did), many pilots did not agree to that concept 2-3 months ago. So don't generalize "infantry players do not want balance". Infantry players took a lot of crap from air for such a long time, I think even the extreme infantry folks deserve to get a chance to let frustration out on the forums a bit.

And to prove that this game had whacky air vs ground balance, I point back to November when Higby (creative director) posted his design vision for air vs ground balance. He said ground was not to kill air, ground was only to "deter" air. So from the get go, anti air weapons were purposely nerfed to not cause enough threat to the air, at least not threat of death. Of course now we (and soe) knows they were wrong. In a game where you either kill or be killed, there's very little in between for "deterrence". It's either ground causes enough death threats to air to deter air, or ground gets annihilated by air (pun intended).

We've come a LONG way to get to where we are today. Air had their superiority (as designed) from launch until this past month, that's 3 long months of making ground gameplay absolutely miserable. It's funny you mentioned your 8,000 kills while operating a vehicle. Over christmas holidays when air bombing was at its highest ever in this game, world's first BR 100 guy posted and bragged about killing 7,000 people in less than a week in a liberator. He called it "relaxing". It was sickening, all arguments from there on were moot, pilots could no longer bs their way out by waving their hand doing their jedi mind trick saying "everything's fine air isn't overpowered". Everybody knew their joyride was going to end as soon as devs came back from vacation.

Since you nitpicked some suggestions by infantry folks, let me educate you in full context what the players actually suggested. Lesson #1 to making a point, never try to exaggerate and use hyperboles too much, because it just makes you sound worse and desperate, and shows your own bias.

-With regards to the bio dome anti air shield, people did suggest it. But the full context of it is that players said it would've been a great idea for the amp station, bio labs, and tech plants to have these anti air dome on by default. I mean why not, amp station & tech plants already have anti vehicle shields on the doors, same with the bottom section of bio labs. But then, once infantry have successfully sabotaged the generators, then both the anti air dome and anti vehicle shields would drop. This would give defenders a chance at actually defending the generators from infantry assault, and there could be VERY good infantry battles that occur before the vehicles come into play. Now, this is what was suggested in full context. Infantry did not just want an air dome on all buildings that never drop.

-Infantry would be happy if all vehicles were removed? Not really, most infantry when traveling from point A to point B do hop into a vehicle. Most infantry enjoy hotdropping from a Galaxy, ride in a sunderer bus, and many infantry actually do enjoy riding inside a tank until they get blown up. What infantry does not want, is to have vehicles ALWAYS be in their face. 2 months ago, no matter where infantry went, they were getting shelled by HE. HE from the air, HE from the tanks, it was just HE everywhere. And HE in this game is designed to be farming rounds, they should've just renamed HE to FR, Farming Rounds.

I never had problems with tanks, because tanks have a lot of counters to them. If it wasn't rocket launchers, anti tank mines, and C4, then there's terrain design which can become an issue for large tank columns, like the crown or many places in indar. There's also building design where some places tanks simply have no access to, such as bio labs, or amp station prior to generator being down. Not to mention tanks kill other tanks, air kill tanks, tanks eventually get thinned down over time. But air...now air was something else. Everywhere tanks did not have access to, air has open access to them. Bio labs, no problem, amp station vehicle shields? Who cares, I'm a fly boy and I ignore your shields. Terrain issues? Nope, sky is free and open, no single file needed for air, no trap spots for air. Lock-on? Let me press a button to drop flares, oh lock-on gone. Oh someone's shooting at me from the ground, let me press a button to activate afterburner, boom I'm out of range, enjoy my dust. There's no way for a serious discussion without anybody first admitting that air was overpowered and it was just ridiculous what advantages air had over everybody else.

So I'm sorry to say, pilots and vehicle operators had it coming. Anybody who spammed HE rounds and rocket pods in the past 3 months, you knew the nerfs were coming, it's why you did it anyway. Rule #1 to gaming is to always take advantage over something overpowered because you know it won't last. It's funny you mentioned infantry "farmers" as if those flying in the past 3 months were not farming?! Or that infantry does not want balance, really? The game right now is the most balanced it has EVER been since launch. It sure makes you wonder what your definition of balance is. Give us a break, stop being high and mighty, your bias reeks.

delay to annhilator lockon?

YES! YES YES YES YES YES!!!!

It needs more negatives for being capable of locking onto all vehicles instead of just 1 type.

The situation of this game is appalling, how the developers are taken for a walk to break their own game.... baffling to infinity.

They expect to reward gamers who cannot do other roles, gamers simply stuck on one form of contribution in the field.

I read a thread about the annihilator a few hours back and the sheer ammount of infantry fanatics trolling the post made realize this game is simply doomed to listening to those people, part of the blame, of course, is on the person who presents the developers with the worthwhile topics getting made in the forums, he or she should ignore posts with nothing constructive, whining and just massive hysteria inserted.

I can't believe people want weapons like an annihilator in this game, my hope for gaming in this era, just vanished.