Planetside 2 Thread v2 - Beta floodgates open GOOD LUCK EVERYBODY

[KorJax]

I can't be the only one who thinks the vanu bolt action sniper really fucking sucks, at least compaired to the power you had with the bolt action rifles in BF3. In my prime it was easy as pie for me to consistantly make kills with BF3 bolt action snipers, even when not using the straight-pull bolt attachment (that makes it so you don't zoom out after every shot). But its almost impossible for me to be effective as a sniper while using it in PS2 (and I'm talking about actually doing *good* sniper stuff, like not sitting in one place 2000m out from your targets).

Why BF3 bolt actions are way easier to use and be effective with -

1. The scopes don't suck, first of all. The only good scope is the X8 one, which is a little to much maginifaction to have for anything closer than 200m. In BF3 I can switch to a low powered scope for close range engagements. I can't even get below 6X magnification on PS2.

2. Shields and certain high-health enemies (HA with overshild and max units) mean you -must- land a headshot in order to be effective with it at all. It takes 3+ shots to take down an HA at full health with the VS bolt-action unless you hit the head. That means your time-to-kill is roughly 4-5 seconds. Meanwhile, that same HA, if he's within 200-400m, [B]will[/B] kill you within 2-3 seconds unless you immediately cloak and run away if you don't headshot your first shot.

Meanwhile, in BF3, 2-3 shots was enough for almost all the bolt action rifles, 3 if you are a very bad shot and hit stuff like feet, or if there is healing involved with your target. The addition of no shields meant that you didn't have the worry about your target suddenly recharging half thier health after 3 seconds, and because sniper rifles did a lot of damage from the first shot meant that it was much easier to take down wounded targets.

3. This biggest issue is probably this third one: terribad headshot and netcode hit detection. Even IF your targets aren't warping around, there is serious obvious delay between the visual target and the target's hitbox detection, especially for headshots, which have a much smaller hitbox than in BF3 despite the heads generally being bigger for a lot of models.

If I'm going against a target running perpendicular to me in BF3, I can generally land a hit within the first 2 shots I fire and if I am lucky, I headshot. This is because their hitbox models stay perfectly in sync with the world model, and the player never teleports everywhere either. In PS2 however, this isn't nearly as easy, for no reason at all except for the fact that the world models are laggy and the hitbox models don't really line up unless your target is standing still.

The worst part about this is, you can almost always defeat ANY and EVERY bolt action sniper within 200m of you by constantly doing the "quake shake" where you strafe back and forth while firing at the sniper targeting you - this is because the hitbox is so delayed and laggy compaired to the world model that it'll be impossible to land a precise hit up close against a target doing this against you. In other words, the sniper can't land any hits.

Now, it's not a terrible sniper at landing body shots, but it's just really hard to get a proper headshot off in this game compaired to BF3 because of lag, small hitboxes, shitty scopes, etc. And because the bolt action is so slow to you know... chamber the gun after every shot, you -must- land a headshot for it to be any good.

This is why I think the default vanu sniper is way better. It [B]will[/B] kill targets quicker and more effectively than the bolt action version within 500m, because your time-to-kill on that gun is about 2 seconds assuming you hit every shot (takes about 3-4 hits on the body, or 2 headshots). The bolt action isn't much better (1 headshot, or 2-3 hits), yet EVERY shot you make has almost a full second delay and you lose your target. The default VS sniper excells in ranges of 70-200m, and does good up to 500m or so. Sure it "sucks" at long range sniping but lets be honest here - all sniping sucks at long range sniping. You are most effective kill-wise and team-wise if you get into medium/long range, since you can more accurately actually land all your hits.

The fact of the matter is, because it's much easier to actually land a body shot than a headshot compaired to a game like BF3, especailly if you NEED headshots to be effective at all, the default sniper really is better for Vanu. Because the default sniper kills in 3-4 body shots garunteed all within 2 or so seconds at all effective ranges, while the bolt action for Vanu takes 4-5 seconds to kill, and is only effective at ranges beyond 200-300m, and is -only- good at doing headshots. But the thing is, why do headshots even matter, when every enemy in the game is going to take at least 3-4 seconds to kill you at any range beyond 50-100m assuming they land all their hits? You are garunteed to kill the guy before he kills you if both of you land every hit and you are using the default sniper. It's lag-proof and fool-proof.

This simply isn't the case with the bolt action - you are garunteed to lose all engagements unless you happen to land a headshot, which makes you only "effective" at ranges where no other class is ever effective (and at those ranges lets face it - you'll miss almost all your shots).

[turing]

holylongtextbatman

[DrasarSalman]

[QUOTE=Turing;38127748]holylongtextbatman[/QUOTE]

It's quite common on Facepunch if you didn't know. They usually prove good points, but this one is mostly just comparisons.

[butre]

[QUOTE=KorJax;38127035]I can't be the only one who thinks the vanu bolt action sniper really fucking sucks, at least compaired to the power you had with the bolt action rifles in BF3. In my prime it was easy as pie for me to consistantly make kills with BF3 bolt action snipers, even when not using the straight-pull bolt attachment (that makes it so you don't zoom out after every shot). But its almost impossible for me to be effective as a sniper while using it in PS2 (and I'm talking about actually doing *good* sniper stuff, like not sitting in one place 2000m out from your targets).

Why BF3 bolt actions are way easier to use and be effective with -

1. The scopes don't suck, first of all. The only good scope is the X8 one, which is a little to much maginifaction to have for anything closer than 200m. In BF3 I can switch to a low powered scope for close range engagements. I can't even get below 6X magnification on PS2.

2. Shields and certain high-health enemies (HA with overshild and max units) mean you -must- land a headshot in order to be effective with it at all. It takes 3+ shots to take down an HA at full health with the VS bolt-action unless you hit the head. That means your time-to-kill is roughly 4-5 seconds. Meanwhile, that same HA, if he's within 200-400m, [B]will[/B] kill you within 2-3 seconds unless you immediately cloak and run away if you don't headshot your first shot.

Meanwhile, in BF3, 2-3 shots was enough for almost all the bolt action rifles, 3 if you are a very bad shot and hit stuff like feet, or if there is healing involved with your target. The addition of no shields meant that you didn't have the worry about your target suddenly recharging half thier health after 3 seconds, and because sniper rifles did a lot of damage from the first shot meant that it was much easier to take down wounded targets.

3. This biggest issue is probably this third one: terribad headshot and netcode hit detection. Even IF your targets aren't warping around, there is serious obvious delay between the visual target and the target's hitbox detection, especially for headshots, which have a much smaller hitbox than in BF3 despite the heads generally being bigger for a lot of models.

If I'm going against a target running perpendicular to me in BF3, I can generally land a hit within the first 2 shots I fire and if I am lucky, I headshot. This is because their hitbox models stay perfectly in sync with the world model, and the player never teleports everywhere either. In PS2 however, this isn't nearly as easy, for no reason at all except for the fact that the world models are laggy and the hitbox models don't really line up unless your target is standing still.

The worst part about this is, you can almost always defeat ANY and EVERY bolt action sniper within 200m of you by constantly doing the "quake shake" where you strafe back and forth while firing at the sniper targeting you - this is because the hitbox is so delayed and laggy compaired to the world model that it'll be impossible to land a precise hit up close against a target doing this against you. In other words, the sniper can't land any hits.

Now, it's not a terrible sniper at landing body shots, but it's just really hard to get a proper headshot off in this game compaired to BF3 because of lag, small hitboxes, shitty scopes, etc. And because the bolt action is so slow to you know... chamber the gun after every shot, you -must- land a headshot for it to be any good.

This is why I think the default vanu sniper is way better. It [B]will[/B] kill targets quicker and more effectively than the bolt action version within 500m, because your time-to-kill on that gun is about 2 seconds assuming you hit every shot (takes about 3-4 hits on the body, or 2 headshots). The bolt action isn't much better (1 headshot, or 2-3 hits), yet EVERY shot you make has almost a full second delay and you lose your target. The default VS sniper excells in ranges of 70-200m, and does good up to 500m or so. Sure it "sucks" at long range sniping but lets be honest here - all sniping sucks at long range sniping. You are most effective kill-wise and team-wise if you get into medium/long range, since you can more accurately actually land all your hits.

The fact of the matter is, because it's much easier to actually land a body shot than a headshot compaired to a game like BF3, especailly if you NEED headshots to be effective at all, the default sniper really is better for Vanu. Because the default sniper kills in 3-4 body shots garunteed all within 2 or so seconds at all effective ranges, while the bolt action for Vanu takes 4-5 seconds to kill, and is only effective at ranges beyond 200-300m, and is -only- good at doing headshots. But the thing is, why do headshots even matter, when every enemy in the game is going to take at least 3-4 seconds to kill you at any range beyond 50-100m assuming they land all their hits? You are garunteed to kill the guy before he kills you if both of you land every hit and you are using the default sniper. It's lag-proof and fool-proof.

This simply isn't the case with the bolt action - you are garunteed to lose all engagements unless you happen to land a headshot, which makes you only "effective" at ranges where no other class is ever effective (and at those ranges lets face it - you'll miss almost all your shots).[/QUOTE]

news flash all the semi auto sniper rifles are better

[woidoi]

Is the Eurydome server still down?

[DrasarSalman]

[QUOTE=scratch (nl);38128678]Is the Eurydome server still down?[/QUOTE]

I just tried connecting to it. It said I was in some kind of queue and had to actually pay real money in order to sneak in front of everyone else.

[Twistshock]

Does anyone know if those 12 unlocks for alpha squad are some that people who don't buy it can get?

I also wish my PC could run this properly..

[Naofa]

[QUOTE=Twistshock;38129012]Does anyone know if those 12 unlocks for alpha squad are some that people who don't buy it can get?

I also wish my PC could run this properly..[/QUOTE]
from the alpha squad page itself
[quote]12 weapon unlocks! One additional weapon for each combat class (per Empire!).
Assault Rifle - Fast rate or fire allows it to output a large of amount of damage in a short period of time, making it very effective at short to medium ranges.
NCGR-22
TRCycler TRV
VSH-V45
Carbine - Balanced weight and controllable recoil allows the operator to maintain accuracy over automatic fire.
NCAC-X11
TRT5
VSPulsar C
LMG - Features three fire modes, allowing it to easily adapt to most situations on the battlefield.
NCEM6 LMG
TRTMG-50 B
VSSVA-88
Sniper - Highly accurate and damaging at long range.
NCLA80
TRSR-7
VSV10[/quote]

[Twistshock]

Another quick one, how can my position in non-member queue hop from 1 to 105?

[jonoPorter]

VS is spamming tanks? Activate NC counter-measures.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/fodQe.jpg[/IMG]

Ti Alloys last night on the EU server...

[evilweazel]

Is it worth it to gear the reaver to an antitank kind of role or should I just use the liberator for that?

[Catdaemon]

[QUOTE=LoLWaT?;38130615]Oh boy...
So, going back to this thread-
[URL]http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/lattice-indar-re-imagined.34509/[/URL]

It seems that SOE doesn't give a shit about what the community and players think would be best for the game.

(RG = Random person / JS = Smedley)

Basically they don't give a shit about what anyone thinks we can just go play the other Planetside.
(Which is good considering that Planetside 1 is going free to play)[/QUOTE]

Not everyone wants the lattice system back. I prefer how it works now, it's a lot better when you're playing platoon ops etc.

[Raidyr]

He's got a point and I sympathize with his argument that being against something doesn't mean they are ignoring it. They like the hex system so they are going with that, and it's simple, if you don't like it play PS1 or something else. Personally? I think the hexes could use some work but ultimately I prefer it to the lattice for the exact reason he outlined: It makes fights a ton more predictable and by the numbers. You know exactly who is going where and with what forces. It felt arbitrary where as the hex system feels natural. You have a clear frontline. I think it works better on Esamir though.

[Raidyr]

Also not giving into every individual players demands != not giving a shit about anyone.

[butre]

I like the current system better than lattice

[Raidyr]

[QUOTE=LoLWaT?;38130677]Care to elaborate how?
I don't think i'm (or all of those other people) are seeing it the same way you are.[/QUOTE]

"all of those other people"

You realize the people asking for lattice are in the vast minority, right?

[krail]

[QUOTE=LittleDogX;38124559]If you're avoiding playing just because of character wipes, then what's the point of even being in the beta?

As Raidyr said, you actually have an advantage even after wipes if you play in the beta. You know whats good, bad, effective, etc. You'll know things like to never get the Reaver M30 Air Hammer for the NC (unless they completely change it) since it's absolutely useless.[/QUOTE]

but I already did all this before the last wipe

[maqzek]

[QUOTE=LoLWaT?;38130615]Oh boy...
So, going back to this thread-
[URL]http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/lattice-indar-re-imagined.34509/[/URL]

(RG = random person / JS = Smedley)

Basically they don't give a shit about ̶w̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶a̶n̶y̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶k̶s̶ (people who question SOE's current hex system) we can just go play the other Planetside if we don't like the current system they're using which obviously doesn't work.
(Which is good considering that Planetside 1 is going free to play)[/QUOTE]

Entitled much?

I mean there's a difference between "Hey, I think lattice system is better. Will you ever implement it or anything? No? Oh well, maybe some time later, or you might come with something better."

and

"WOW, Y U NOT CHANGE HOW I ASK? SO YOU LIED TO US ABOUT LISTEN ING OMG WHY YOU NOT LISTEN, THIS LATTICE SYSTEM IS MUCH BETTER, I KNOW CUZ OF MY LEARNING ON THE INTERNETS"

Well, I exaggerated there a bit with caps, but you get the point. :v:

[Stus67]

even after reading that's guys post about the lattice system I still don't see how it would improve anything over the hex system. the hex system just makes more sense to me and is more tactically appeasing.

[Tigster]

[QUOTE=LoLWaT?;38130615]Oh boy...
So, going back to this thread-
[URL]http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/lattice-indar-re-imagined.34509/[/URL]

(RG = random person / JS = Smedley)

Basically they don't give a shit about ̶w̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶a̶n̶y̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶k̶s̶ (people who question SOE's current hex system) we can just go play the other Planetside if we don't like the current system they're using which obviously doesn't work.
(Which is good considering that Planetside 1 is going free to play)[/QUOTE]

I have a hard time sympathizing with the people questioning the hex system when they come off as assholes.

[krail]

i think the lattice system could work

basically I think the hex system spreads people out too much, and because it's really unfocused you never achieve anything other than a perfect 3 way split on each continent unless you have a population imbalance

[editline]edit[/editline]

basically compare ps1 and ps2

which is more dynamic, and which one involves sitting around the same bases back and forth in the dead center of the continent?

[Nevermind.]

[QUOTE=Nevermind.;38121832]What does the adrenaline shield do?[/QUOTE]

anyone?

[CmdrSkittles]

[QUOTE=Nevermind.;38132963]anyone?[/QUOTE]

[url]http://wiki.planetside-universe.com/ps/Adrenaline_Shield[/url]

It charges your shield by a bit when you take a kill.

[Morcam]

I'm not really convinced that the lattice system can fix anything the grid system does wrong, and I'd say that's where the author makes his mistake there. The issue lies in the fact that the map design itself is simply atrocious. Have you ever tried to fight in a bio-lab? The entire idea of teleporters simply fucks the map beyond all measure of playability. Let's camp two doors! Hurray! The Crown? What a joke! Tech plants? Gee, that giant area on top sure would be cool - if there were any reason whatsoever to fight up there. And it has teleporters too! The only base design that could be considered to be legitimate is the Amp Station, and it's still terribly flawed. Mancannons... Seriously? Small bases are basically just asking tanks to walk over some infantry, since there's no way for the defenders to spawn tanks of their own.

I mean, the maps are just generally pretty bad. They don't channel players at all, and there's no UI indicator as to some kind of actual map progression, either in the bases or on the continent. The fights in PS2 always end up being 10 vs 100, so either you're crushing them, or you're being crushed.

There are brief moments where you're actually doing something, where you're part of that small group of people defending some objective against another small group of people, but they always seem to come to an end because the zerg arrives, one way or another.

[Jimesu_Evil]

So if you go to buy a weapon through the store menu (doesn't work with the cert menu) with certs and you have the [i]exact[/i] number of required points, those points don't get deducted.

Buy [i]everything[/i] before it gets fixed.

[Squeaken]

I remember somewhere they stated they weren't gonna add BFR's?

[Mike42012]

[QUOTE=Jimesu_Evil;38134724]So if you go to buy a weapon through the store menu (doesn't work with the cert menu) with certs and you have the [i]exact[/i] number of required points, those points don't get deducted.

Buy [i]everything[/i] before it gets fixed.[/QUOTE]

Holy fucking jesus

[Squeaken]

[QUOTE=Crisp;38126008]I wouldn't mind BFRs if done correctly, they'd be a good counter measure against the tank swarms we're getting currently.[/QUOTE]

I'd like to see the BFR done how they were in 2142. Good against infantry, can take on a tank in close quarters but otherwise gets rolled by them.

[Mike42012]

I wanna see a 5-player MASSSSIIIVE BFR that stomps across the field and inevitably gets destroyed by galaxy suicides.

[Chonks]

I'm on the fence about preordering, someone convince me that this game is awesome.