[Suggestion] The lack of BFRs makes it not feel like a complete Planetside experience.

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by AntDX316, Nov 9, 2022.

  1. BengalTiger

    I'll spend $$$ if there are some mechs roaming around that are not OP.
  2. JibbaJabba

    Last thing I'll say on the topic then I'm out of this thread.

    They are never going to put BFRs in Planetside 2.

    If they do, then I'll do exactly what I did in Planetside 1. I'll quit and never play the game again until they release a new one.
  3. weska

    If you admit to hacking in planetside 1 you should be banned from planetside 2, which is why i reported you to the staff. Im not even making a joke here, you are monumentally stupid. Nobody needs to "prove" you hacked when you admitted it. Someone who hacks in an online game ruining other peoples' experiences should be banned not just from that game itself but from online gaming in general.

    If they banned you after what you wrote and you complained about it, literally nobody would be on your side.
  4. Demigan

    I think the heavy-duty role is plenty filled with MBT's, collosi and even Lightnings in a way.

    BFR's shouldn't be hulking giants, they should be relatively small, like the one's in your pictures and the suggestion of the size of an ANT/Sunderer.

    • The MAX is more infantry than vehicle, the BFR would be it's opposite. Infantry-like aiming and walking/sprinting/crouching capabilities but turning closer to a Magrider than infantry.
    • Harasser armor. Without the Nitro they can't just escape so they need some tools to properly defend themselves.
    • Modified A2A ESF noseguns as standard weapons. Gives them a role as Anti-air support tool running alongside tanks. It's (slightly weakened) AI capabilities would still make it excellent at engaging infantry when the BFR moves between buildings.
    • Ability to swap weapons like infantry, letting it swap to an AV weapon. Swapping would take more time than for regular infantry though.
    • AV weapons could include grenade launchers, rocketlaunchers, laser-guided missiles (the agility of the missiles could be low), flame/energy/plasma weapons etc.
    The idea would be to let it fill a niche. It's base function out of the box would be a skillful G2A weapon (which new players don't have access too right now). It wouldn't be able to win a slugfest with any tank, but would rely on it's infantry characteristics to try and overcome them. It could run along with infantry and boost their capabilities, or it could hunt them down to protect a tank column (and especially C4 fairies would be easy kills for such BFR's). It's size is small enough to fit underneath vehicle gates, it's thin enough to move between buildings and it has the agility to move there as well, it can even be self-repaired by the owner who can hop out! However at the cost of it's relative vulnerability to concentrated small-arms, rockets and other AV weapons.
  5. OneShadowWarrior

    Ugh, no thanks!

    I quit PS when they added BFR’s.
  6. BengalTiger

    *Note: there are different modifiers for different projectiles hitting different targets, so HP pool is not necessarily a 1 for 1 in terms of actual survivability*

    Vanguard - 6000 hitpoints
    Prowler/Magrider and Sundy - 5000
    Lightning - 4000
    Harasser - 2500
    MAX - 2000

    Honestly with Harasser like armor it would be barely more than a regular MAX.
    I get it we don't want something OP, but c'mon man!
    The Harasser's combat effectiveness is severely dependent on its speed and size.
    These BFR's are to be 4-5 meters tall, and due to having to walk around, they won't reach high top speeds.

    They could just use the HP pool and special traits of the MBT of their faction.
    Having more/less Lightning HP would make it twice a MAX. I guess it would still work, but might be underwhelming.
    You never tried using the 75 mm Viper autocannon against low and slow airplanes?
    It one-clips a figher, and 2 clips a Liberator, and doing so requires lots of skill.
    Lightnings already can keep up with tanks with ease, tanks would need to wait for BFR's though.

    Back to topic:
    I'd also personally prefer having 2 "arms" like the MAX, rather than holding one and swapping for a different one.
    Kind of like a fighter has. Gun and secondaries.

    Fighter guns would be easy to aim from a platform on the ground, so this could be an issue of too many bullets too fast on target.
    I'd suggest using Liberator nose guns instead.

    So in summary, a Liberator based gun in one hand, ESF based secondary in the other.
    Can use one at a time, like an ESF.

    Nanites, this would give it like an M3 Bradley or BMPT Terminator vibe.

    Other than concentrated small arms, which it should be immune to, I agree with this vision.
  7. BengalTiger

    Sorry for double post, just got this idea...

    So concentrated small arms as a counter were suggested.
    A weak spot like on a Bastion was suggested.

    How about combine the two, so if the BFR gets surrounded by infantry it gets rather easily destroyed, when it can't point its rear side away from fire.
    Let's say there's a vent or exhaust or something, and it can take damage from small arms, and has increased damage from infantry rockets.
    Then it totally could be as tanky as a tank, and navigate close quarters, but still not be OP against infantry.

    It would require friendly infantry support to keep its flanks cleared. It would not be able to advance through built up areas on its own, but with support on the flanks it would be very effective.
  8. Demigan

    The difference is where, how and with what the BFR fights compared to a Harasser. A Harasser is best used in open fields where it can use its speed and ability to drive in rough terrain to avoid damage and attack from all angles. A BFR as I proposed on the other hand would be able to use cover, infantry mobility and the powerful A2A noseguns to stave off attackers or kill them outright before repairing up and repeating the process. Its higher relative speed compared to MAX's would also be significant when moving around.
    Making it small-arms resistant would be too powerful when it gets between buildings and starts wrecking infantry.

    Unless you make the two arms similar to the MAX with lacking DPS and accuracy it would be incredibly powerful. I specifically used Harasser resiliance and health as a counter to its power so players cant absolutely wreck infantry or tanks by simply using cover.

    You mean the not very accurate slow velocity not very high elevation gun? Yeah I used it and found it not just inadequate but a complete farce. The MBT's are better off using their regular guns to stave off aircraft than the Viper.

    The point is to have a dedicated and actually capable G2A gun available by default so the BFR actually fulfills a role that isnt fulfilled yet.

    I think it looks a bit dumb on such a large vehicle but that is just aestetics.

    I'm not sure of the Liberator guns have enough power to rip aircraft to shreds as they should. Some guns would also not be balanced, like the TankBuster. Thats also why I thought the ESF noseguns would be useful, they dont deal too much damage to vehicles, are balanced against aircraft for the most part and with a small tone-down against infantry shouldnt absolutely wreck entire squads at a time.

    Also ESF secondaries are ludicrously powerful. Rocketpods would be powerful against vehicles and infantry simultaneously, I would think it powerful for an MBT primary. Same with Hornets, incredibly powerful weapon to mount on a BFR, or any vehicle in the game really. Not something I would give them access too unless they are nerfed versions.
  9. AntDX316

    nah, that is how it should look like scale wise.

    I think the top gun was optional too like on MBTs for the top gunner. It could be too OP like this but if air starts attacking it along with ground and it's somewhat alone, there is no hope for it, Zero.

    If you guys have seen how fast HP can disappear off a Colossus and a Bastion with multiple platoons and outfits attacking at the same time from the inside of them..
  10. AntDX316

    They have to do everything they did in Planetside 1 and more.
  11. AntDX316

    but if they are easily killable like pulling up an MBT on 2 heavies over the mountain, would you still quit? The high-profile and size of the BFR would make it easy to kill even from 800m away. If they will cost as much as a Bastion to spawn it would be good but even that would be too much. I think it should cost half or 2/3 of a Bastion and a global icon on the Map then it would be balanced. Only 2-3 can be spawned per faction and adjust from there.

    People shouldn't have an inferiority complex from it's size. Basically being the biggest infantry character to play in the game. It would be super sweet to see and would fill a void from kind of boring same old same old. It can be a game changer to kill and to push with depending on the situation. Alerts would be way better as /command and platoon/squads could be going nuts trying to destroy it though that already happens with Bastions usually. I just think it would be way better on BFRs. The issue is a lot of people hardly communicate to people outside their squad/platoon circle. People hardly communicate to people in the same /region. People hardly every use proximity chat to collaborate. If more emphasis can happen with communication, BFRs wouldn't be too much of an issue to kill and also awesome to work with.

    It would just be too OP if they had some kind of aura that made people run/heal faster. The ground should shake every time they walk. I think that happened in Planetside 2. It throws off the aim of the people defending/pushing with it making it more balanced.

    When they blow up, it should be like the blowing up a full Orbital Uplink. (My Planetside 2 memory is coming back) If AA and AT can lock-on to it then it would definitely be no issue to kill. With actual shield HP that can be seen (unlike Bastion weakpoints), the pilot and their gunner can repair.

    From a distance at night like on Amerish, it would be funny to see the BFRs fly high and forward in the air while getting shot at by everything then it dies.

    Having stalemate armor frontlines with BFRs on each faction front with people repairing would be super cool. I was using mostly Reaver in Planetside 1 so I could see everything nearly all the time.
  12. AntDX316

    I've never hacked in Planetside 2 once nor have I looked up hacks. How long have you played Planetside 2, one week?

    You can still join my Discord if you want, maybe you can learn to play and enjoy the game better than being on here uselessly.

    I went from (Command Rank) CR2.4 to 5 in less than 3 weeks with no hacks on Planetside 1 which is considered remarkable. A lot of people who've played Planetside 1 remember me including the Outfit Leaders.
  13. BengalTiger

    Both the MAX and the original BFR are slow @$$ bullet sponges, so I'll use that as precedence.

    Well it's still moving fast relative to a MAX, the absolute slowest vehicle in the game.
    I think a walker should only top out about at the speed of a Colossus (maybe slower), so relative to even a Vanguard it would still be slow in terms of top speed.

    If it had the armor of an MBT and could hide behind buildings, it could still eat rockets from within the buildings, and eat C4 from the tops of buildings... and tank shells from downrange, and all sorts of goodies from the sky.
    With MBT armor the BFR would be still totally forced to be careful with every move.

    Now a Harasser just does not have staying power, It only needs like 3 rockets or so to be turned into a giant torch and forced back.
    It can get out of trouble really fast and is rather small, so these traits make it viable. BFR's would be limited to not really being able to accelerate to 100 km/h in 2 seconds and disappear.

    Higby, they'd probably only do like 15 or 20 in the tight spaces inside bases.

    Being able to use cover is situational, there are lots of places where there is not enough of it.
    There are places where infantry, being smaller, still has good cover, but the BFR would not.
    If crouched it would be like 3 meters tall anyways.

    I think it would just be underwhelming without heavy-ish armor, like the recently added boat that doesn't do anything but water, and doesn't even do water that good.

    Yes, that one. With a stealth Lightning and being an ambush predator, I find it pretty effective.
    BUT - the role does exist and is waiting to be filled.

    It's a common depiction of these robotic mechs to have weapons on both sides of the cockpit:
    Comparing with the size of the building this one reaches like 1 floor above ground level, so it's about the right size too.
    Oh and rockets on one side and some autocannons on the other.

    Check in VR.
    The nose guns are OK. The twin barrel Vektor has a great balance of high velocity and high accuracy to make it work against planes and light vehicles, even at range.
    This is at the cost of rate of fire.This RoF penalty makes it less of a spammer against infantry, and requires the player to aim well to get results.

    The Tankbuster would require the BFR to pretty much be in C4 fairy range to be effective against infantry.
    Would make for a fun anti-tank build though, for BFR enthusiasts. Sneak around buildings and then surprise!

    Well these weapons are really powerful because they can be aimed at the top or rear, from odd angles, and suddenly without warning.
    If a fighter could only fire from ground level and take a while to walk to the other side of a building, rather than just flying above, these weapons lose a lot of their capability.

    This is why the TR Vulcan cannon is situational at best on the Prowler, but powerful on the Harasser.

    It would sink into the ground knee deep and be stuck forever.

    Ground pressure is not simulated directly, but the Colossus tank sits on no less than 8 (eight) tracks to support its weight.
    Therefore the logic of bigger and heavier = needs more ground contact to spread the weight is still valid logic in game.

    Which is why I insist on MBT like armor, rather than Harasser based.

    I'm sure there will be common situations of these things hiding behind a building only to get shot at from within that building.

    Naaah, make it cost like an MBT. Would be cool to have like squads of these roaming around.
    And getting sniped by tanks in the open, and getting sneak attacked by infantry up close.
    And getting bombed by airplanes wherever they are, but being able to shoot back effectively at least.

    And regarding them being like super amazing, the Colossus already is the end all be all of ground vehicles. Planetside doesn't need PS 1 style BFR's.

    I mean notice that the debate is not about making them into walking castles that eat multiple orbital strikes and keep going, but whether being bulletproof against small arms is too much.

    I honestly want to see some large walking war machines, but looks like the way they were OP in PS 1 left a bad taste for nearly everyone.
  14. AntDX316

    Their very big profile will make them easy targets and not be an issue.

    Making them cost as much as MBTs would destroy the game of course. The idea is to keep the thread serious so ti's doable and balanced in the game but if not it doesn't matter if it gets made or not. I adapt and play regardless like when Hives replaced Alerts which was bad. I was trying to give my outfit away during that time but luckily no one took it when they wanted too before.
  15. weska

    Buddy if you were as good as you're trying to pretend to be you would have never downloaded hacks or made that other thread asking if there are any snipers with no trails because your low skill nooblet butt keeps getting countersniped.

    You also claimed to have an auraxed sniper in that thread - in an effort to appear more knowledgeable and credible - but you seem to not realize anybody can look your character up to see if you do infact have one, which i did, and you dont.

    You are so desperate to have everybody think you are a good player but all evidence points that you are both low skilled and pretentious. Im genuinely getting the impression that you are like 16.
  16. AntDX316

    I'm indeed pretentious compared to the other people who KD 4+:1 as infantry (heavy) without issue.
    I'm a better scythe A2G pilot but of course mostly anyone can be good.
    I focus mainly on placing good spawns, /sitreps, and using command properly this way I can work less and we would win.
    Deep down I don't really like trying too hard but then I just either keep dying or have a 1.5 KD.
    If I'm trying super hard not to die I can grow it to a 6:1 KD but I don't like playing like that.
    Of course there are Max units that can do 100 kills with 0 deaths often but for me my Max KD is barely 3:1.

    The reason why I ask about smoke trails is I want to camp somewhere on a fight with TR vs NC on the other side of the map 4000m from the VS battle and not die but it's just way easier to just do an attack run with an A2G Scythe as most of the time if I'm not already getting targetted by Air already, I'm getting at least One guaranteed kill easy.
  17. Madiadk

    ITS very easy !! implement them and have them cost 30 purple boys!!.... thats 2 collosuses....
  18. BengalTiger

    Then they definitely need to be more beefy than a Harasser.
  19. OSruinedPS1

    It wasn't necessarily the BFR's or the Orbital Strikes itself that killed Planetside 1, just like it isn't necessarily the bastion and pocket OS that's killing Planetside 2. It's how they alter player behavior that is killing the game.

    Just like Planetside 1, players grind for their I-win buttons instead of actually playing the game. In PS1 if you wanted your OS I-win button you grinded base caps; doesn't matter how strategically useless a base is, and doesn't matter if you don't hold it afterwards, and it doesn't matter how boring it is to zerg empty bases, all that matters is you get your leadership XP and that only comes with capping bases. Funny enough that's exactly how you also get your bastion and pocket OS I-win buttons here in PS2, by capping bases; and again like Planetside 1 it doesn't matter if the bases are strategically important, doesn't matter if you hold the bases, and it doesn't matter if it was not fun when you zerged the base in the first place.

    THESE COMMAND TOOLS (I-win buttons) PROMOTE TOXIC AS HELL GAMEPLAY FROM PRIMARILY SQUAD LEADERS. How can you, devs, make the same stupid mistake in both games? You know why? Because you lack imagination.

    I made these same arguments in Planetside 1 forums in 2005 before the game died, and all I got was flamed by these squad leaders. "Hey I grinded for my OS, I deserve it." Yeah, enjoy OS'ing an empty server, moron.

    You know how players got their BFR in Planetside 1? By capping bases in the caves. Everyone hated the caves, but if you wanted your I-win button you had to grind in the caves. What a terrible system. Who came up with it?
  20. Demigan

    "I dont care about KD but I am awesome! I just want to camp fights with a KD ***** build without having to bother with something as simple as my shots being visible".