The reason the server smash was so good ...

... because there was something to fight for.

Since beta we have been crying for some reason to actually be fighting beyond grinding certs. I think the server smash was the first time the fighting has ever really had a tangible purpose to it and it was glorious.

I know there have been efforts, alerts, the global points thing etc. but if server smash showed us anything its that the game needs to give players a real reason to want to win each base we fight for.

Obviously the server smash conditions can hardly be replicated but this really needs to be the number one development priority going forward.

If only that was true, and the outcome of the server name wasn't already decided ahead of the event by a select few people in secret.

VS is not underpowered, server smash proves it.

The last time I was this upset about something that happened in a video game lisa garland died

VS also tend to be a tad better at using brain power.

This was Mattherson vs Waterson server smash, where players of any faction from Waterson were playing for TR, and likewise it was players of any faction from Mattherson playing for VS.

Brain power does not come in the equation when you're only using the equipment, unless VS equipment gives you more brain-power.

This proves that VS does not have inferior equipment compared to TR. (in the larger picture)

You can point out specific weapons of the VS that suck, especially when used solo, but that does not make the VS an UP faction on the whole.

Since you have a variety of about 10 guns for each class to choose from, so what if 1 or 2 of them sucks? Yes they can use a buff but that does not make the VS underpowered on the whole.

TR was dominating for the entirety of the match; VS made a huge comback in the last 30 minutes. If not for overtime rules, TR would've won. Either way, it was a good match.

Also, it was server vs. server, not faction vs. faction. It only happened that Mattherson was VS and Waterson was TR.

Isn't it the primary reason why people choose VS?

It may, but it also makes it impossible to gun a Saron HRB on any Magrider ever unless the driver is screaming in orders chat, and sometimes not even then.

It also highlights why ONE FACTION PER SERVER is a good idea.

When you have players called Justicia, JusticiaTR, JusticiaNC etc.. people who can swap without any timer penalty and with no incentive for faction loyalty/"pride" - it dilutes the game. The US vs THEM part of the game which this server smash PROVED only makes the game more fun and exciting.

Please insert 12 hour faction block penalty, similar to PS1, since you cannot very well force players to play one faction per server now.

I'm having trouble understanding your logic on this. Server smash didn't prove any of those things.

You mean we have a variety of 10 weapons for each class and only 2-3 are worth using right?

But frankly, that's true for every faction.

It's true for the VS, somewhat true for the TR, and false for the NC.

I can say, playing all three factions, that the NC armament has the fewest dud infantry weapons. Even the EM1 is decent.

You're mad. The EM1 is a CARV that is worse in every possible way.

I thought it was more controllable than the Carv?

I'm furious. Fuming even.

But thanks for explaining why the VS weapon selection is so lackluster for me :3

It has a worse first shot recoil multiplier. Admittedly the recoil per shot is slightly lower, but the majority of what makes it seem more controllable is the low RoF and hence terrible DPS. When compared to other weapons in its Damage/RoF bracket it is the least controllable.

Most people on both sides supported the Emerald idea both before and after the match. What it proved is that enough **** talking and personal pride will turn any fight in PS2 into a good one- we all need to stop being so nice to each other. In fact I'm going to start sending random hate tells on a daily basis to stoke this.