The state of PS2 and what I feel must change.

You had me all the way up till the point you say that 10 seconds is agonizingly long. Prior to that you make some really good points and Indar does need to be completely redesigned and we need a front line of battle (or a FLOT). Just a suggestion though, your thread is huge and would be easier if you maybe made a couple of threads so we could discuss the points you were making.

This really just demolishes anything else you have to say. This expands into every other customizable part of the game. There isn't any choice when 1 of 5 choices is far and away the better or more universal choice. This is like IR smoke and Composite Armor.

This is also along the lines are "But you're wrong!" like its an actual argument. You might as well be bland copies when you can switch to anything else on demand, its already lobotomized by that.

Flak makes a vast amount of weaponry not instant death anymore. Not limited to vehicle sources.
Nano gives you an extra bullet or 2 at best. Everything else you are still boned.
Shield Cap rarely does anything. You need to have escaped danger in the first place.

Every other option is incredibly situational or entirely class dependent. They might actually see more use with the others being adjusted.

People that don't play on Miller also really don't care what happens on Miller. Having a 2 hour window of the game being enjoyable is not a fun game and will die off.

BATTLE FLOW - WHERE IS IT?

Yes the SCU should kick out the defenders or turn off the shield system most of the time if the SCU falls the fight is over anyway.
Spawning in adjacent hexes is better and was in the beta when I first started playing back in August it seemed to work better in the long run but at that time you could back hack a base anywhere so it made it useless.

THE INFLUENCE SYSTEM - IT HAS TO GO

I kind of like the influence system as it is but I think all points should be 6/6 if you have 5/6 on that point it does not count toward the capture. I think a point should have 6/6 to even take that point making the game more of a team effort instead of one guy taking every point in the base and watching it turn to their favor. Plus taking out a shield system should be the same taking 6/6 people hacking it at the same time to overload a system instead of one guy again doing everything. This would make defending a base a little easier in the long run not that one LA coming over a wall and hacking a shield system in 5 sec.

INSTANT ACTION, GETTING INTO THE FIGHT - JOE CASUAL IS THE FRONT LINE
The instant action system should be to defenders only it seems kind of stupid that a attacking force can hot drop on a defense and it should not be a drop it should be a spawn into the facility. Instant action for attackers should be in adjacent hexes that the attacker owns or a set distance away from the defending base. If you remember in PS1 a hot drop had certain spots you could drop on and it was always outside of the base maybe going back to this system would be better.

INDARSIDE - BEING STUCK ON THE WORST CONTINENT SUCKS

Yes the Crown should have a SCU and maybe a SCU gen also making it a little more defensible. All bases at one time in beta had an SCU gen and the crown was a lot easier to take when it did have it but was still a great hard fight. The crown takes people away from fighting on the rest of the map and whoever has the crown usually loses most of their map.

MERGERS NOT TRANSFERS - THIS IS ESSENTIAL TO THE SURVIVAL OF PLANETSIDE

Yes one reason why everyone is on Indar is because the population of the servers are too low. If you had a full server people would have no choice but to fight on other continents. On the other hand continents need to have a set pop cap per world pop. Lets say TR has 36% world pop well 33% of that world pop can only be on one continent at a time it would actually balance out continent pops more then now. Lets say you had 1000 TR, 900 NC, and 800 VS in the world pop. 333 TR can be on one continent at a time, 300 NC, and 266 VS not much of a pop difference per continent it would make more even and better fights everywhere on that continent.

Mergers are great but there are some people out there that want to be on a lower pop server I know it sounds strange but they are out there. I think a one time free transfer ticket should be given to everyone but after that it should cost 2500 SC. SOE is here to make money and I think one time free transfer is a gift you do not want people switching servers all the time.

AMS NO DEPLOY ZONES AS WELL AS CLOAKING FIELDS - THEY'RE ESSENTIAL

Yes the only time you should see an AMS in a base should be a defenders AMS. Attacking AMS should have a distance restriction to the base and of course the AMS should have a cloaking system but it should be certed and take up a slot just like everything else. If you want a cloaking system then it should be in the defense ability slot making it easier when found to be taken out or you can have a blockade armor which at full certification should be almost as hard to kill as a Gal. Either cloak system or a reinforce defense system. Of course mines would be more of a problem to a cloaking system AMS so squads would maybe pull both a cloak AMS and a more denfensible Sundy making that squad use up resources.

RANDOM ANNOYANCES - THESE PROBLEMS ARE SIMPLE FIXES THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY

Yes the screen shake is one of the stupidest things you can put in a game I am trying to defend a base and Libs and tanks are hitting the base I can not even shoot someone 20m in front of me because of the screen shake. So defending a base something the Devs want you to do is now gone because I can not shoot the attackers.

I like the recharge timers on the shield system but I think the certs to lower the timer should lower it by percent like 75% lower timer fully certed it would make that suit ability a lot more enticing instead of 2.5 sec, I did have it fully certed in beta and it was just not worth it. But I think the shield system needs to be a little long making you use cover more instead of blindly running around without worry of getting shot as much. If you fully certed into it then yes you can blindly run around but at a cost of flak armor.

Ordinance should outright kill players easy it is a massive projectile and should kill I think the zepher nerf should have been a little more but it is more balanced now. It comes back to defense if you want to go up against the big dogs you need to have the right equipment and this being Flak Armor I think it is a good balance it I go up against a tank I should be ready to die.

AUTOMATED TURRETS & BASE BENEFITS - HINDER GHOST HACKING, MAKE ME CARE ABOUT A BASE

Yes I thought it was weird when I first started playing because the turrets were not automated like in PS1. This would make flying a little more of a challenge since you can not just fly around empty bases anymore or hover a lib over a point without the threat of the flak guns opening up. I think unmanned turrets should do 50% less damage then manned though or not be as accurate.

RESTRICTION IS GOOD - YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE UNTIL IT'S GONE

This is a good idea but the problem is you can just pull air anytime from the WG. The facilities should have a recourse against the WP also if you do not have a tech plant then you can not pull tanks even from the WG. Or make the cost of pulling that vehicle 750 resources unless you have that facility. Tech plants should lower the cost of air vehicles down to what they are now if you do not own the tech plant then a plane should cost full resources to pull or at least double the amount of what it is now. This would make owning that base a lot more important. You already see this with tech plants now if you want to pull a MBT outside of the WG then you have to have it. Each facility if you do not own it should do something more if you do not own a Bio Lab then spawn timers should be doubled.

Tech plant = Without this Air can only be pulled at WG at double resource cost.

Amp Station = Without this MBT's can only be pulled at WG at double resource cost.

Bio Lab = Without this spawn timers are doubled. Sundies cost double resources but can still be pulled from locations since they are a spawn point they should be linked to Bio Labs.

THE LATTICE SYSTEM - PLANETSIDE 2 NEEDS IT

Yes this needs to be put in place it worked great in PS1 why change a good thing? One other thing I think after taking a base it needs a timer on it before it can be retaken this would also help move the front line. Nothing much maybe 10 min it would help move the attack and defense at the next hex. They did have timers in game in beta and I think it helped the game more then hurt it I thought the timers should have been longer then 5 min but then they took them out.

Overall a good post Buzz I really think things in the game need to change and soon.

It only makes no sense if it's 4-5 vs. a zerg.
4-5 against similar numbers or slightly more, deserve a chance. Defence should always be twice as easy as capture.

I'm a little worried that so many people are desperate for change, that they'll agree with the first intelligent, well written and well thought-out post that asks for change - regardless of whether they are the right choices or not.

I sense a bullish stubborness from the devs, particularly if it means reverting to PS1 gameplay features done away with for this "sequel", which are probably huge game changers, resource hogs and operations when they want to focus on other things.

They've got kind of a good cop/bad cop thing going on.

Higby's all "We're listening.", telling people what they want to hear.
TRay's all "Nope. Not happening. Not ever. You heard wrong." at least being 100% honest because he's got his hands in the pastry mix and knows how much sugar and flour is in that *****.

I appreciate both the enthusiasm and energy of Matt, and the frankness of Mr.Ray.

1) No, make the defenders actually defenders. Right now an AMS spews attackers onto the objective, and the actual defenders end up being the attackers, not the other way around.

2) There is no choice. Flak Armour is the only viable armour in this game. Shields also recharge far too slowly for the amount of scattered, random damage you take, and the extremely low TTK. Players need to be able to survive long enough so that they don't spend more time looking at the spawn screen than actually running out there and killing the enemy.

3) See point above. Infantrymen create the core combat of this game, you shouldn't be forcing repeated instant death on them through no ability of their own to at least avoid it. It's also hard to avoid those "suppressed" areas when in every battle in this game it's a mess of explosions and "suppressed" areas.

4) Because that's a nonsense way to win the game. One person shouldn't be able to end the battle just like that. It should take co-ordination, team work and effort to cut off an entire faction. Right now it's "Whoever keeps the most AMSs alive the longest wins", and that links into point 1 that I refuted. The OP is trying to make this game more favorable towards to average solo player, but ultimately PlanetSide 2 is a team game and critical objectives such as destruction of the AMS should require a team to do it.

Well reasoned with lots of good points and very little on balance (besides that bit on explosions).

Good job overall.

Though a brief explanation of the lattice system would have been nice.

Because what Buzz suggest will put PS2 in line with PS1. Which is what the PS1 community was expecting. Not this glorified generic FPS. Most if not all of the suggestions that Buzz make have already been tested and proven in PS1. SCU, painfields, cloaked AMS etc.. If you look at the roadmap the Devs are instituting elements of PS1 into PS2, OS, buggies etc..Why? Because they are starting to figure out the hard way that PS1 did it right. Why nerf buff nerf buff. When all the balance issues, meta game and all relevant elements have already been hashed out in PS1. SOE is a bunch of idiots in my opinion for trying to re-invent the wheel when they did not need to. SOE should have kept the core of PS1 in PS2 and added new elements to draw in new players while keeping their return customers happy. But they didn't and thats why we are here now. So you ask why anyone/everyone would agree with Buzz's post. The answer is simple, PS1 works! As in it is still alive, 10 years later. Not many games can say that, even less FPS can. Or we can have this unbalanced no meta game generic FPS that will most likely be dead in less than two years. I personally want a game that will last longer than that. And PS1 has proven that. If I want something that has to add new content every six months to stay relevant I would go play BF3.

Ok, you say it would be more involving.
Please expand as to why being the 20% side against two sides with double the population would be more intresting.
I mean you have experienced being in a base under attack by a zerg right? Great fun going up against the unstoppable tide of humanity right?
Thats what happens nearly every time in this game, when your up against vastly superior numbers at a single site, without VASTLY superior organisation or ridiculously good defensive ground.

What your suggesting is that as opposed to being able to roam free across the map and have some strategic impact, these hypothetical 20% VS are going to be forced into a corridor, to get wailed on, again and again, and again, and again.
Generally, a lot of people are saying 'this would be more fun' without at least asking themselves - WHY?

First off, just no. Thats ********. Points stand alone unless their linked together. Even I was capable of recognizing buzz's concerns about server populations and requests for mergers can stand Independently from his other points (several of which, I contend are badly thought out, others just biased)

I never said the situation was perfect, but just attaching it to

The situtational choice between HE-HEAT-AP works, very well I think. Proving it can be done.

As does the choice between Nano-weave and Flak currently.

So it can be done right, its just an area that needs a lot of work (what doesn't).

Its also quite frankly, more than a little bit of Buzz' pro-infantry combat bias seeping in. Given the problems that exist with lock ons, infantry really don't need to be even stronger against vehicles and aircraft. Sorry thats arguing to make the game imbalanced if its not already.

[/quote]
I keep citing Miller, because it proves how many of the issues supposedly 'with the game' and by which game mechanics are being suggested to overcome, are in fact problems to do with population distribution.
What I'd suggset here, far too many servers in north america, also probably too many in europe.
Need to at least reduce them to 2/3rd even 1/2th.
Also, I think SOE should look at unbinding characters to servers.
So you don't care about what happens on Miller, all your doing is trucating the amount of evidence to bring to bear on this debate. How things go down on the most popular server, irrelevant? Pfft whatever man., if your just denying we are an interesting and almost certainly salient to what we are talking about case study.. whats the point.

I think you have very rosy tinted glasses of how PS1 was.

For one, it was always very nieche and comerically its done little more than tread water as a cult product due to a dedictaded (indeed, fanatical) fan base.

A lot of the designs people seem to so love, e.g. the lattice system, were borne out of the engine limitations. PS1 would not work without the lattice system, as the player cap is what 133 per side per map? the lattice system was borne out of necesity

Now how applicable this is to the modern game, where potentially we are talking about forcing the entire population of a map into 3+ mega zergs and throwing them at each other, is highly questionable.

And Ps1's combat was/is glorified online laser tag, largely revolving around grinding around 90 degree corners or bridges over and over. Again explaining its lack of mass appeal a little.

I'm not saying its a terrible game, I for one didn't like it as I thought it was too linear. But thats the thing, suggesting it was a perfect model that ps2 fails in all respect by not emulating, is ********.

Also there was no Atlantis.



I also want to add this, I'm if you'll remember arguing that at the heart of this, this is a population distribution issue. I've not seen anyone really engage with the positive points (that is what im proposing is whats going on and how to engage with it) of my argument yet.

Because you're stupid and shouldn't be given command of anyone, preferably not even of yourself.

You don't retreat to your nearest choke point. You use your choke points with just (barely!) enough forces to hold up the enemy while your main force goes and hits their flanks, logistic lines or some other territory they can't afford to lose.

So if PS1 is/was so bad why is it still around? What should SOE model PS2 after? Or should they just continue half assing their way through this?

Buzz,

i agree with almost everything you've said here. You're pretty much saying what most of us have been saying since the idea of PS2 started... PS2 should be a microtransaction* based reskinning of PS2.

It is, however, driving me nuts that you're using apostrophes for plural words. Apostrophes are for marking contractions and possession and nothing else.

* Microtransaction is usually called Free to Play, which junior high school kids write as F2P instead of FtP. Microtransaction is more accurate. Calling it free to play is an insult to all the money i've spent on it....

had a great time reading all the major posts, I agree with all, if not most of everything, Change is always good. Hell, even if it doesnt work out they can just take it out. All i want to see is that they try different things. Change is a fun thing to experience as a player, If it was always static then whats the point of playing when it just turn into RPS (rock,paper,scissors)

+1

Sorry for the double post, it said it failed to connect.... i can't delete this post.

All these meta related points are spot on, but I don't play this game anymore because the movement sucks. Good, interesting, fun, and technical movement is 33 percent of what makes a good shooter. In 2013 it is unacceptable for the movement to be so awful. If the core mechanics of the shooter are not as well done as competitors games then all this meta talk doesn't really matter. Core mechanics get people to play a game, and then over time they are dragged into the meta. PS2's core mechanics are too weak and they need to completely overhaul this shooter's movement.

Why are cigarettes still around? Some people are addicted to it and people can make money off selling it.

(Not actually making a statement of equivalence here, just pointing out the 'something still being around = it is good' doesn't really work)

They own the IP?

I'd actually imagine thats one of he major reasons, that are trying to expand said IP to a larger audience.

eh?

So has BuzzCut's recommendations been implemented in PS2 yet?

If not, what's taking so long?

Just not true at all. I use nanoweave on all my characters (k/d of 2.5 roughly as infantry on all factions - I never fly and don't tank much).

A grenade should kill instantly if you are near it. A dalton should kill instantly as should rocketpods on a direct hit. I've not had any need for flak armour and this is on a busy server (Miller). If I see aircraft I hide in a building. If I see a tank I take cover. If I see a grenade I run away.

Why are people so obsessed with flak armour?

because of anything that blows up

Eh?