[Suggestion] Ten simple features that made Planetside great.

What are you talking about? The REK is far more "stand here to win" then what we got here in PS2. In PS1 if you don't "stand here to win" someone else will hack it and you have to start over again, all 15 minutes of the hack. So yeah you better "stand here to win".

You missed my point not once, but twice. Technically three times if you didn't read the response others gave to my post as well. Reread those first please

You know how impossible it is to get someone in PS1 to "stand here to win" next to the control console for 15 minutes so it doesn't get hacked back? Oh how much raging took place in the game cause, "OMG NOBODY WAS GUARDING THE CC?!" "OMG OMG OMG! WHY DIDNT YOU GUYS GUARD THE CC?"

If you guys think it's hard for 800 players on Indar who can't spare 2 guys to guard 2 lattice lines against ghost caps is bad. Try finding 1 volunteer in PS1 to guard the CC for 15 straight minutes against counter-hacking by a cloaker, for the only battle on the entire server.

It wasnt very hard at all, especially if you were in an organized outfit. We always had 1 guy with darklight stand on CC. 1 guy stands on CC, the others are out in the room before the CC guarding the doorways. Anyone who was listening could also hear doors open and close, could see some cloakers on Radar with Audio Amp, and even hear them hacking the CC. it just took a bit of situational awareness and knowlege of how to counter cloakers.

It was certainly more involved than just crowding around the CC in PS2, since in PS1 someone had to physically resecure the CC with a REK, leaving them totally helpless if anyone responded, instead of just standing near it.

Even in Zerg fights, 90% of the time you had at least 1 MAX with Darklight squatting on the CC to swat any would-be resecuring cloakers.

If that's the case, then not much has changed.
Attackers need to kill all the defenders between their AMSes and the cc/cp to start the capture, sruvive loitering around the cc/cp until the capture in proper starts, and then keep defenders away from the cc/cp until the capture is complete. Defenders need to kill all attackers and AMSes before the latter can make their way to the cc/cp; and, failing that, kill all the attackers between the spawn room and the cc/cp before the capture in proper completes, then loiter around the cc/cp until the capture is reversed or averted.
The REK tool would just be an excuse to make oneself look busy without actually adding anything to the scenario.

If you wanted to give everyone a "REK certification" passive line that varied their contribution to the capture flip and we go back to the 0/x system used during the Hex system, where only the first x people on the point accumulate a REK-value that influences how fast the point flips (for Infiltrators, REK is hacking) while keeping the current model that all people in the capture point radius get experience for the point conversion, something like that might be feasible. As the system currently stands, however, there is nothing to gain by creating a REK tool for the sake of creating a REK tool.

I personally see everything in PS2 as an upgrade and an improvement to what PS1 had, although it's not quite finished yet. Like current resource system is a placeholder, it will eventually include energy resupply system similar to PS1. Continent lattice is also in the works, so are facility benefits.

Game has a lot of placeholders right now to make it functional, and functional as well as fun it is, future improvements will add to strategic depth that some elements of PS1 had. Overall this game has already gone further than PS1, and still has ways to improve, including SOME of the things that PS1 had. All of features of PS1 simply copied over would not work for this game.

...which is different from PS2 how.

PS1 version more obnoxious, that's the difference.

A common theme amongst replies is that scaling respawn timers would make new players disinterested. If the game in its current form is SO UNBELIEVABLY SHALLOW that a simple PROVEN mechanic such as this could turn away new players, I say good riddance. Good riddance to them, good riddance to my monthly subscription, and good riddance to you when the game ceases to be profitable in 1-2 years. I responded inline to a couple of these but this is my general stance. None of these TRIED AND TRUE 10 YEAR OLD Planetside 1 fundamental basics should cause a drastic decline in player population or the game is seriously ****** anyway. I welcome your thoughts on this.

Anywho, this is becoming quite a long thread and I've got replies to make, so let's get to it:

Thanks for your support

Again, thanks.

As always I welcome all input as long as it doesn't involve my mother being fat.

It's very refreshing to see someone at least attempting to track Planetsides roots. There were several factors in PS1 that made people perceive a much longer TTK. Some of the biggest influences, in my opinion, were indeed the lack of headshots, lack of (real)snipers, and forced engagement distance (cone of fire). I shuttered when PS2 decided to go with damage falloff instead of cone of fire. I dare you to try sniping in PS1; it was reserved for only the most patient.

This is a very positive and constructive way of viewing the progress the game has made so far. However, playing the game since beta I can honestly tell you that there's no such thing as a placeholder. Planetside 2 is a true testament to SOEs detachment and indifference toward its vet population. The creative director stated from the get-go that he wanted a Battlefield type game and that's what we got; a Planetside-themed session shooter.

Excellent perspective. A+. Would read again.

Very diplomatic. Spot on.

In what way does arbitrarily raising the time it takes to kill "giving the game depth with a ruler"? All it does is turn each and every infantryman into a tank, increases the disparity between the haves and have-nots to a degree that was totally fine in a subscription game. In a free-to-play game where the best weapons can be bought and used from BR1 - it's ******* ridiculous.

But hey, want a list of reasons I love PS2?

1 - Massive and varied maps
2 - Massive fast paced battles
3 - Fewer loading screens
4 - Less ***** than on other FPS games
5 - Vehicles
6 - Much more varied roles - one day I'm an invisible sniper, next day I'm a shotgun heavy, next a C4 fairy.
7 - Interesting lore (not that that's a deciding factor, but hey, I find it interesting)
8 - Free


None of this would be improved any great deal by adding 2-3 seconds onto the time it takes to kill anyone past a BR1 scrub with no armour upgrades.

I'm dead against elitism, and right now we have a situation where I - a lowly BR53 can repeatedly, and with great relish, kill much higher ranked people. That's fun to me. Being killed then realising "oh, I had no chance, he's got the Übermensch armour" is not fun. Hell, that's the reason I dump a lot of games - when it becomes apparent that time sinking into the game gets more rewards than being good at it? Yeah, not the game for me sorry.

Just out of curiousity: Where did he request better armor for higher Rank players? Hm? Nowhere right?
And increasing TTK gives new players actually more of a chance to realise what is attacking them and to shoot back. In PS2 there are far too many "wtf-did-I-die-from" moments, making it harder for new players to get into the game.

Being instagibbed or killed in less than half a second, coupled with latency and lag issues, is very frustrating to new players and most of the time they dont even know what hit them.
Increasing TTK would actually DECREASE the "disparity between the haves and have nots" (namely those that have experience with the game and shooting mechanics and those that have not), by giving them more time to react, more time to understand what they did wrong etc etc.


And what you are referring to as "Übermensch armour" (nanoweave/flak or whatever upgrades) is IMHO a design flaw in PS2 that adds to the imbalance between new players and older players in the game _as it is_. Increasing TTK should not really increase this imbalance. But I am aware that in increasing TTK, however, one would have to take these things into consideration.

Remember, no one is requesting Tribes II or UT like TTKs, but IMHO some of the "excessive lethality" (Dev-quote) should be reduced.

That's your opinion - and one I don't share.

Isn't it wonderful that free minds can have differing opinions?

So you would argue that shorter TTKs would give new players better chances against older players?
And that shorter TTKs would enable new players to understand what hits them, to understand what they do/did wrong?




Think about it. Sometimes less than half a second to react (most often too late by then anyway), coupled with lag&latency this leads to death within 0.2-0.3 seconds which is less than most humans need to process and react to a given situation.

Where did I ask for a shorter TTK?

I think what we have now is fine thank you

You did not ask for it but you are defending the short TTK in comparison to other players' proposal of longer TTKs.

And again I ask you:

What is better for newer players in order to understand/learn/get into the game:
- Short TTKs that often lead to instant death or death before the new player can process and react to the situation
OR
- Longer TTKs enabling time to react, time to see where they were being attacked from, time to fight back, time to adapt to a situation (etc etc) ?


Maybe you dont understand the significance but most normal non-OHK weapons kill within roughly half to three quarters of a second. Coupled with Latency of 100-200ms this often leads to less than half a second to react. With the average human reaction time this is a bit too short.

Short. Long TTK is a crutch

What the game needs is a decent tutorial. I mean, all it needs to say is "played Battlefield?, well this is a larger more buggy version of that" lol

That wouldn't work.

Battlefield has a Suppression Mechanic.

Planet Side 2 does not.

Planet Side 2 doesn't need statistically longer TTKs, it just needs a suppression mechanic so that Weapons can be varied in roles from Pure Killing Power to Pure Supressive Power, giving even the most stalwart DPS classes a "Support" Mechanic by reach they artificially "slow combat" for their team mates by using Crow Control.
Suppression would slow "TTK" but only when players use it accomplish this in a Strategic - (I.E., WITH DEPTH) manner. 2 HAs in a Squad could be outfitted with LMGs that primarily perform as Suppressors while the rest of the squad is made up of medics, engies, LAs and what ever else. Engaging the enemy TACTICALLY with those HAs providing TRUE COVER FIRE will hold the advance and slow combat just enough that even newer players will be able to use HAs with ease with the added benefits of learning the depth of the game's scale.

It will teach them tactics, team work and that support matters.

Something that, sadly, even BATTLE FIELD does a tiny bit better on - for DPS classes that is. (For all other roles like recon, medic and engineering, PS2 performs better)
You know how many times in a pro-match you see supressive fire related kills. Most pro-team will recognize which one of them needs to provide suppression so that the others can readily flank and kill the controlled targets.

That's the only mechanic in BF I gave credit too. Surely helped a lot in giving the game something else other than "RUN AROUND ON COCAINE LIKE COD WITH VEHICLES!!!"

I support this endeavor. However I feel like it will be a while until they can move PS2 this direction because they would rather make a new vehicles/guns then expand the core game play. IMO when we get two new conts, then sanctuarys, giving each empire a home cont. Then we can have true cont locking, get rid of the constant 3 way on each cont (remember those nice 1 emp vs 1emp fights?) and actually have something to move/defend for...

The current TTK is actually pretty long. Even UT, Quake and Tribe had instagib combo and much shorter TTK. The only reason the TTK seemed longer in those game is because you could increase it by mean of avoidance.

No. Just no. The game does not need another mechanic that reward missing and punish player that can aim.

Stop asking for crutch.

you are clearly not grasping the depth of this at all.

Missing will happen at range, thanks to CoF. Your first point in almost invalid. Missing is only truly punished in CQC.

Suppression would be a second stat to DPS
Suppression would be balanced with DPS
Some weapons would be more Suppression than DPS, thus have lower DPS to compensate for the added utility.
You get a similar situation to your quote above. Some Load Outs would turn pure DPS classes like the HA into a Combat Support role that provides fire support as their role. They'd increase "Avoidance", as you put it, by withholding bum rushing yolo360noscopes for their team whom are equipped with "No Crutch" weapon to actually score the kills.
It's called promoting team work. Holy crap man.
I guess you don't play BF? Much less watch the Pro-level games?

People in these forums complain so much about crutches and yet have apparently never seen or practiced disciplines used in Pro-level game play... It's like that permanently want to suck balls at playing Planet Side and yet want things so hard for everyone else that they remain slightly better than the worst players (namely noobs) by default.

Look, I understand that you need to feel rewarded for your Experience. Maybe you even know where I'm coming from here. Perhaps you were in MLG for all I know. However, even when I was attempting pro for WCG in Starcraft, I didn't complain at the noobs having access to what many felt as Crutch tools like Spider Mines, Siege Tanks, Archons, HTs with Psi Storm and Cracklings + Defilers w/ plague. Instead, I respected the fact that every player was a possible threat, and I played as smart as I could, every time.

Come on guys, can you look a little farther than the first 12 inches to your screen before you start making assumptions? Jeebus. I'm just saying.

For those of you saying that the REK tool is the same as "pressing E to win" and "stand here to win" the point that we are all trying to make is that the REK tool added immeersion and class speciality. It may players feel important in their role in capping bases/hacking terminals

E does the same thing you say?

Well if you think like this why do we even have vehicle terminals? How come i just can't spawn a tank if i am standing next to a tank pad? How come i have to go to an air terminal to spawn an ESF? How come i can't just do it through the menu or hold "B" to spawn an ESF near a pad.

You see what I mean now?