Worst update ever?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by UberNoob1337101, Sep 1, 2019.

  1. UberNoob1337101

    First, the servers. F for Briggs, now Australians will have to connect to overseas servers. While ping from Brisbane-Soltech seems OK and Melbourne-Connery also seems alright, no local servers kinda sucks. A new server in Singapore would be very nice.


    The new aerial anomalies are bad. The new changes made mass repair ball Galaxies even more powerful and the alert boils down to "Who spams Galaxies more wins". The Tempest drop-off points are also quite close, so don't even bother trying to bring Galaxy swarms down.


    Auto-bounty is neat, it gives incentive to hunt for high-value targets and farmers, so I do get rewarded for fighting better opponents. Pretty good.


    Death Camera : Terrible. It completely destroys the point of trying to get to the hardest points and locations, because after killing even 1 guy, your location is instantly revealed.
    Sneaky drop-off on the top of the Crown, waiting for just the right time to evade AA? LOL meaningless after 2-3 kills.
    Dropping off on top of mountains or Hossin trees? LOL instantly reveals your location after a kill.
    Dying to mines or spitfires pans to the location of the killer, which is... WHY?
    It's jarring, completely breaks trying to get to sneaky spots, gives either no or too much information, and maybe causes stuttering. Some players will enjoy this, but this killed 2 of my favorite play-styles. At least give players the option to disable it, but I'm 100% in favor of removing it entirely. Discovering from where the sneaky bastard killed you and taking his spot was part of the fun.


    Cosmos nerf : It's a worse Blueshift now, and we still have Blueshifts lol. Guess I'll never stop using them then. And maybe the problem isn't that the bullets are too big, but that Stormtroopers are more accurate than MAX AI arms. Maybe toning down the awful CoF and CoF bloom would give me a reason not to use the most accurate MAX AI weapon.

    NSX-A Kappa bugfix : didn't even know this thing existed honestly.


    Magrider changes : Integrated Magburner is great, Recharge is a mildly better IR Smoke, Multi-Directional Exaust is weak. I'd like to go into the specifics, but while using all of the mobility-boosting equipment was really fun and turns you into a Harasser Tank, Magriders still can't come close to pulling off the insane maneuvers Harassers can and can't roadkill as well, and the mobility is usually not enough to beat experienced tankers, where peak-a-boo and trading shots is essential to win, but at least Magburner + Fire suppression is amazing.

    Prowler changes : Rampart Shield Generator is too situational. If you're surrounded by Engineers/Rep Sundies willing to repair you, are in a nice choke point and if there aren't too many enemies capable of damaging you, it's pretty useful. But outside of that, it massively increases your hitbox and it glows. It's just not good at all on it's own.

    Vanguard changes : Nimitz Reactor does nothing, and if you're surrounded by repair sundies, it nerfs your tank. It quite literally does nothing. If you tank as a non-engineer, NAR is just better, as it recharges really slowly. If the shield was say, constantly recharging until disabled or maybe regenerating non-stop until your tank gets destroyed, then it'd be worth using. At least the NumbNutz meme is good.


    New player experience : 100 certs per BR till 100 is neat.


    And of course, the server performance. While surprisingly on patch day my ping was smooth and the game ran flawlessly, the server performance a day after was dreadful. Borderline unplayable.
    Getting shot through entire buildings
    unresponsive abilities
    people firing their weapons 2 seconds after they died (and possibly kill you with said shots)
    ppl clipping through buildings because of lag
    bullets passing by me but somehow receiving damage from them
    faction specific jump pads just not working
    mines detonating instantly
    explosives floating mid-air when tossed

    and apparently all that with "40ms" ping, and it wasn't only me either (most peeps on Cobalt and Miller I talked to reported the same lag). The update was mostly meh, but the lag killed it for me.


    I guess you can say, that the Dead or Alive update was dead on arrival :p
    • Up x 1
  2. Liewec123

    Absolutely not the worst update, it sucks yes, but it's not even on the radar for top 10 worst,
    It says a lot about a game though when we can compare how terrible each patch was,
    While with other companies everyone looks forward to patch day,
    with DBG I dread logging on to the forum and seeing a new update...

    "Oh crap, what have they ruined this time..."

    This time it was stealth play that got ruined, and the MBTs recieved the usual VS bias from Wrel.
    • Up x 2
  3. adamts01

    Similar to my thoughts. The pick up and drop off points need to be just a little more spread out in order to thing out zergs. I'm not sure if rep gals are more powerful now than before, but they're still terribly OP as far as the even is concerned. Wrel did drop their tempest carrying capacity from 1,000 to its current 500, so he does at least acknowledge they were too powerful. I'd honestly change it so all aircraft carry 100. It might even be the case that we need to inverse things and actually let ESF carry more than gals.

    Overall I think this new alert is a step in the right direction. It's to be expected that things will need to be tweeked. Wouldn't call the patch bad by any means.

    OH. One more think. Kill cams suck. This isn't, and shouldn't be CoD. Not to mention, these kill cams don't show a new Ayer at all that they were simply out skilled. They serve zero purpose other than to annoy vets and make dead noobs watch getting t-bagged.
  4. InexoraVC


    If you are surrouded by repair sundies you are safe and you barely need any repair/shields :) So no nerf here.

    If you tank Vanguard as non-engineer you have 2 options to repair: NAR and Fire suppression. Do you want third optioin ? Then find repair sundie. Do you need more options ? Ok, but for every faction's MBTs, right ?

    "Constantly regenerating shield" is equal to constantly working fire suppression. Ok with that if other faction's MBTs will have this option.

    So I see a lot of wails about how bad is Vanguard now. But all of them are due to unrealized need to have absolutely OP MBT.
  5. Trigga

    He is explaining why the 'replace health with shield' is bad, forget the actual example, think about the mechanic.
    Ill give you another example, youre in a Van and there is an ESF constantly shooting its nosegun at you, with 2 engineers this can be out-repped back to full health, with the new reactor it cannot as youll always be missing that 1000 health.
    Or, take some shells from a prowler 500m away, fall back into cover to repair, im now sitting in my tank behind cover waiting for it to repair itself after me and my gunner have jumped back in.

    Who tanks as a non-engi :confused: but ignoring that, as you mentioned we already have ways of repairing the tank when not an engi, the new reactor is the worst option you could take for this scenario, NAR is better in every way. The 'constantly regenerating' was a hypothetical situation in which the reactor would actualy have a use, i dont think he was actually suggesting that this be made reality.
    When he said 'if it had, say' before the suggestion this indicated to me that he was not suggesting an improvement, rather stating how bad it is as a concept, and the only way to improve it would be to make it OP.

    There is no 'unrealized need' because vanguards have never been OP, certainly not when you look at the statistics.
    • Up x 3
  6. Demigan

    On the NumbNutz reactor, I think it should work on a Capacitor basis. So when the shield is damaged but not broken it'll instantly jump back to 1000 health after 6 seconds of no damage. If the shield is broken it'll instantly jump back to 1000 health after 10 seconds of no damage. This prevents the shield becoming a direct combat advantage but a solid chassis advantage for getting some health back after a fight.

    The extra shield/health for the Vanguard is a basic Chassis trait. Compare it to the basic Chassis traits of the Magrider and Prowler:
    Magrider: superior maneuverability, strafing, always faces opponent with front armor
    Prowler: superior speed combined with high mobility, DPS.

    All of these advantages are useful for direct combat to outmaneuver, deal more damage and avoid damage. The extra health is only useful when getting hit, making it less useful overall. So adding some direct combat regeneration might not be a bad thing, if carefully considered. Example:
    The shield will always non-stop regenerate 25 hp/s up to 1000 health. If undamaged for 10 seconds after the shield breaks the regeneration jumps to 100hp/s. This adds a small amount of health during combat and also means you've regenerated 25% of your shield when the full regen starts, filling your shield 2,5 seconds faster.
    • Up x 1
  7. UberNoob1337101

    #Tinfoil hat moment, but do you think they might go the WoW route and release something like Planetside 2 Classic? Reverting certain changes on special servers, I'd actually get premium for that lol.
    Looking back at it, that was a bad example, but even in simple scenarios like having multiple engineers repair your tank, Nimitz Reactor eats up repairable health and replaces it with a shield that can have it's regeneration halted, so sometimes you end up with less health if you repair right after a fight. NAR does that better.

    I'm just saying, if I wanted to run in a tank as a non-engineer, Nimitz doesn't do that very well either, as NAR will repair all your HP, while Nimitz only regenerates 1000 (1/6th).


    I'm open to balancing the "NumbNutz" reactor so it isn't broken, it's not my intention to make it broken. If you want to go with that idea, the numbers could be tweaked so it isn't ridiculous nor too weak. But there's already a thread for that.
    Idk, I have no problems with Vanguard, but at the moment the new defense module lacks a purpose.
    That's true, replacing health with a different health pool isn't particularly great in any case.

    Now, an idea for the shield, have it do something when it gets disabled or let us spend the shield HP for certain actions i.e faster projectile velocity, better maneuverability, buffing damage resistance in one direction or slowing down lock-on time. Again not very good, but it really needs to do something.
    • Up x 2
  8. Scatterblak

    Nope. Lvl 1 magburner is less than useless (for serious tankers). Same for fire supression - 9 times out of 10, if your mag is on fire, you're 1 second and 1 round from being dead anyway - it's time to bail. Adding lvl 1 of something that's not useful unless you equip it anyway - and then adjust it so people who already had it have to spend 1,000 certs to get it back to where it was (lvl 5 is where lvl 4 used to be) is awful.

    Dead on accurate.
  9. Demigan

    You could also just activate fire suppression when you've been dealt more than 15% damage to get +/-750hp back you know. For a vehicle that already has the best ability to dodge and has already been proven to be the best performing tank that is a pretty huge deal.


    And for none of the reasons you proclaim. For crying out loud you confused NAR and fire suppression!
    • Up x 1
  10. placeholder22

    Rate my new signature
  11. Liewec123


    [IMG]
    ;)
    • Up x 1
  12. Demigan

    I assume you think I'm lying because I say the Magrider is the best tank right? So let's play a single question quiz:

    What do you call the tank that has the most infantry kills and vehicle kills per pull, and has the best chance of influencing a base capture?
    • Up x 1
  13. BrbImAFK


    a) super-holy-necro-batman!

    b) no set of stats ever give the full picture, unless you understand all the underlying data and assumptions as well.

    I'm not going to argue this point because, frankly, I'm sick to death of it. I'm just going to point out that in comparison to the Vanguard and Prowler, a 1-man Maggie sucks ***. Which is why the vast majority of Maggies that I see (I main VS, so I see a lot of them) are 2-man. Which is why the vast majority of Maggies are friends / outfit mates on voicecomms.

    Which might... just might... have some influence on the stats that Maggies (majority 2-man played) perform better than the Prowlers and Vanguards of the world (majority 1-man vehicles... at least from what I've seen).
    • Up x 1
  14. placeholder22

    A prowler.

    What people don't understand about pathological liars is that first of all, they lie to them selves more than all others. This makes them generally incompetent at all things, because they deny the true reasons. The verbosity just makes matters worse.

    Look, Vanu don't have a tank. When Vanu need a tank, they don't pull a Maggie, they pull a Sunderer or a Lightning, depending on what exact properties of a tank they need, because the Maggie isn't a tank, it's an infiltrator, an assassin. Imagine everyone had access to all three MBTs at all times. You pull the Prowler if you want to blast some infantry, or shoot down air, or you just want a heavier lightning. You pull the vanguard if you want to kill tanks, or you just want a heavier lightning. In that situation, the only reason to pull a maggie is if you want to pull a "heavy harasser" and you absolutely have a gunner.

    The problem is that Vanu don't have a tank. Not your incompetence at taking out 2/2 Maggies driving a 1/2 Vanguard.
  15. Demigan

    A) i didnt necro it
    B) no set of stats gives the full picture, but it can give picture enough.

    Campagne did the math on this one, calculating that on a per-player basis the Magrider is pulled just as much. The Magrider also gets the most infantry and vehicle kills on a per pull basis.

    The Magrider is also the only vehicle that sees an increase in gunners on the VS side. This means that there isnt a greater coordination with drivers getting gunners for their vehicles but that gunning for the Magrider is simply more enjoyable and effective. If it was coordination then we would see significant increases in gunner numbers for other vehicles as well. So the conclusion is that the tank itself offers more power which we see back in the performance numbers and a higher gunner attraction.
    This could in part be a small balance issue that has increased over time. The Magrider is slightly better and attracts more gunners to it, gets better results and attracts more gunners while on the opposite side less people gun for the other MBT's when facing VS because they are less likely to see results. This is possible but unlikely, as besides more gunners we would see more Magriders being pulled as well. Considering that it took years and years of complaining that the Magrider was supposedly the worst before Campagne did the math and blew their complaints out of the water and people still complain that the Magrider is supposedly the worst (see Placeholder22 above) it is unlikely that people would pull more Magriders because of this anyway.
    • Up x 1
  16. Demigan

    You have any proof that it is the Prowler?

    Oh wait, since you are a liar yourself you dont use numbers and try to make sure you cant be nailed down on anything. This way you can always lie to yourself and keep yourself convinced that Magriders arent as good. And you need that dont you? Since you cant use the Magrider properly yourself?

    And I'm good with tanks. Before CAI the Lightning HE was worse against tanks than the HEAT and AP variants, it was considered suicide to use against other tanks. Yet I scored just as well with the HE Lightning against other vehicles as the average player did with the AP Lightning. I doubt you would even come close after CAI. And I am good with the Vanguard as well, having to skirt around the deficiencies of the vanguard to make it work. Its telling that I think the Lightning is more cost effective than the Vanguard.

    Although a secret that few people seem to realize: The Lightning is one of the most genius additions to the game. Esamir only allows one faction to use MBT's for the most part. Yet despite this the owners of the techplant do not instantly win the continent because the Lightning is there to balance out the faction MBT deficiencies.
  17. pnkdth


    There is no need to assume VS are better coordinated, they simply are aware of their MBT being significantly worse without a top gunner. There has never been a secret that the top gun for VS is where its at with the Magrider. It is the very reason we see this unique behaviour on the Magrider.

    I do not know exactly what the statement that VS pull the same amount of MBTs per player is supposed to proves. Especially when you consider the primary/top gun ratio since this only proves the point that VS players do not want to ride alone. Indeed, if driving the MBT 2/2 does nothing for its performance then there would be absolutely ZERO reason for us seeing such an influx of top gunners for the Magrider. We would, in fact, see about twice the amount of MBTs pulled per player than the other factions (or at the very least more similar ratios to TR/NC). The idea that VS just love to sit in turrets all day for marginally better top gun performance than the other factions are just ludicrous. Especially, again, when the primary (viewed in a vacuum) is performing so good.

    Put simply, if the NC can learn how to maximise where and when not use their MAX unit then it shouldn't be much of a leap to understand that VS developed unique habits with their MBT which has (since day one) been built with a weaker primary + stronger top gun balance, as opposed to the other factions.

    Then there are the obvious benefits of being the faction who maximises the potential of their MBT more than the other factions:
    1) Spatial awareness with two heads rather than one.
    2) Easier and more effective time versus infantry because of two guns + points 1.
    3) A concentrated use of firepower is more likely to overkill and win 1v1s.
    4) 2/2 is always stronger than two 1/2 since the latter require more space + cooperation to win.
    5) More 1/2 means more easy kills even if the other factions also bring 2/2s.

    All of these points ignores skill or motivations behind usage. Neither of which we can control or we can divine out of thin air.

    Edit: None of this implies or proves if the Maggie is OP/UP. It is just what is. For example, I am not opposed to this unique trait of the Magrider or that MBTs are balanced differently but if there's going to be a difference we can't just do straight up comparisons MBT by MBT. That doesn't make any sense since one faction would be using more players to achieve what the other faction is doing with less.
  18. Demigan

    The moment Campagne proved that the Magrider was performing better all the VS jumped at their last straw: Campagne's numbers were extensive and showed that the VS used more gunners. Their immediate reaction was to say that the VS obviously were better coordinated. This is wrong.

    The statement about the number of Magriders per player shows that there is no significant difference in player behaviour when choosing a Magrider. This implies that there is no extra coordination going on to secure a gunner before pulling one as has been suggested.
    Now the NC and TR do not want to ride alone either. They have just as much to gain from getting a gunner. Yet the VS sees more gunners in their Magriders than there are actual Magriders pulled. Weird isnt it that these players not only join a Magrider but also leave it? It is unfortunate we dont jave rhe acfual time in the gunseat as it would likely reveal a lot of interesting things.
    So you seem to have misinterpreted my words. The VS obviously have a superior platform in thr Magrider. When we look at the Halberd we see that this is the only time the VS have a significant advantage with an NS weapon. Meaning the tank its mounted on is the culprit for its success, not the topguns themselves. The faction-specific topguns could still have extra power, but that only adds to the OPness of the vehicle.
    I mean just think about what you are saying. If the Magriders topguns indeed invite more gunners to join the Magrider compared to the NC and TR, then the Magrider is a superior vehicle simply because of this. Why wouldnt a tank that invites proper use more than its counterparts be more powerful?
    What is also ignored here is the AMOUNT of extra gunners the Magrider has compared to the TR and NC. Both other factions have more than 50% gunners in their tanks, so on average the Magrider will be fighting 2/2 tanks more often (especially considering not all Magriders are 2/2 and you kind of have to empty the gunner seat to have someone else enter and have more gunners than Magriders). Additionally the VS faction has had a lower (but climbing) pop for the longest time, and still manages to win against superior numbers of 2/2 MBT's supported by 1/2 MBT's? The Magrider is simply more powerful, more useful. It scores better than the other two, it is not weaker, and if we want a more proper balance something needs to change. These are the facts, pure and simple.
    • Up x 2
  19. pnkdth


    Only if you are looking at the primary + top gunner in a vacuum can you correlate and do straight up comparisons between these weapons, and we know for a fact the habits differ. And I really do not understand why you got stuck on the 1:2-3 ratio of primary/top gunner when it was also established some of these were actually different kind of weapons (AI/AV/AA, etc) which means which means we're talking the same primary + top gunner only in a new MBT. We can know this because of the primary unique not going up yet somehow the top gunner does, thus same gunner different top gun. We could also see that VS are extremely specialised in AV weaponry and nearly made up 0.9 in that 1:2-3 ratio of primary/top gunners.

    The Devil's in the details and you premise is flawed since thus far you've relied on the idea that VS had too many top gunners per Magrider. Indeed, when we tally up the numbers the VS actually use a lot of players in total for their MBTs but I guess that's not important either...

    Why do you say I ignore points when I addressed them in the post you quoted. It is a very big difference between ignoring a point and detailing that despite both TR/NC does have 2/2s but give out easy kills to VS due to also have A LOT more 1/2. Indeed, when we look at the stats we can see that KPU accounts for, more or less, for the number of 1/2s both NC/TR run. Which is what the last segment (the one edited in) addressed, i.e. if you run more bodies but in fewer vehicles you should expect those to perform better otherwise the devs would have failed spectacularly at balancing the game since it'd just be preferable to never use the top gun but like I said, and every VS player known since launch, you gotta 2/2 with the Maggie to max out its potential.

    I mean it would be easier to simply streamline the game and make even the ES vehicles into near carbon copies, it certainly would be easier for us if all you needed to do was to do flat out comparisons between MBT vs MBT but that's not really how it works today.
  20. placeholder22

    Lmao. You scored as well as the average BR 14 scrub with lobster hands playing on a trackpad, and you seem PROUD of that. This is glorious.