Planetside 2 Thread v2 - Beta floodgates open GOOD LUCK EVERYBODY - Games

[QUOTE=zombojoe;38225021]Why would they ban my account? They are going to reset all accounts any time now lol.[/QUOTE] They were already banning accounts for exploiting the repair bug a month ago which caused people to have basically invincible tanks. Higby even said in a server announcement "Even though this is beta, we will still ban people for exploiting bugs" or something along those lines.

[QUOTE=LittleDogX;38225196]They were already banning accounts for exploiting the repair bug a month ago which caused people to have basically invincible tanks. Higby even said in a server announcement "Even though this is beta, we will still ban people for exploiting bugs" or something along those lines.[/QUOTE] I used the fuck out of both of those bugs (I have almost every weapon), still no ban. I don't think they're doing anything.

Is the c4 broken? Because everytime i trow one on an enemy tank and blow it up, it wont hurt it at all, and throwing it is a pain because it just wont happen when i try.

Is the sound breaking something normal for everyone?

[QUOTE=alx12345;38225303]Is the c4 broken? Because everytime i trow one on an enemy tank and blow it up, it wont hurt it at all, and throwing it is a pain because it just wont happen when i try.[/QUOTE] It got nerfed. [QUOTE=zombojoe;38225486]Is the sound breaking something normal for everyone?[/QUOTE] Yeah

[QUOTE=Swineflu;38225516]It got nerfed. Yeah[/QUOTE] Nerfed? You mean it cant damage tank anymore?

[QUOTE=alx12345;38225615]Nerfed? You mean it cant damage tank anymore?[/QUOTE] Doesn't do as much damage. If it didn't damage you probably didn't place them on the tank, or at least the game thought so.

[QUOTE=Swineflu;38225638]Doesn't do as much damage. If it didn't damage you probably didn't place them on the tank, or at least the game thought so.[/QUOTE] It just wont hurt at all, i can see the c4 landing on the tanks, even 2 wont do damage.

[QUOTE=The golden;38225701]They pretty much nerfed C4 to the point where it is now totally useless. Not even worth trying to use it anymore.[/QUOTE] Yeah it sucks when theres a massive firefight and you reach the enemy sunderer, actually manage to throw a c4 and detonate only to find it did little to no damage.

New Performance patch made the game run worse for me. Thanks SOE

[QUOTE=LittleDogX;38224807]I spent the 480 certs to get it[/QUOTE] What? Did they increase the price? When I got the shotgun for my NC and TR characters it was half that. Also, as a note; for the TR shotgun the 'extended mags' only give you a 66% mag increase, going from 6 shots to 10, which overall I found to be a bad move in my opinion because of how horribly inaccurate the TR shotgun is meaning you're spending more ammo . Haven't gotten extended mags for the NC shotgun, so I don't know if it is doubled, or just given the same 66% increase. I have noticed that the NC shotgun is more powerful than the TR one. I have consistently killed in two shots, whereas I need like 3-4 for the TR one. The tradeoff is that the TR one is full auto, but the recoil is so bad you won't be able to take advantage of it anyways. Anyways, does [B][I]ANYONE[/I][/B] know what happened to scout rifles? The category WAS in the game before they got rid of the larger weapon list they had a couple weeks ago, now they aren't there at all. I figured they would have been in the 'semi auto battle rifle' niche, but I haven't seen anything about them since. [editline]28th October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Swineflu;38225516]It got [B][I]broken[/I][/B]. [/QUOTE] This is a more apt description for it. I seriously doubt it will stay this way for release. It's not that they do little damage. They do [B][I]NO[/I][/B] damage. I've placed them on the back of a tank, literally walked up to it and went through the stupidly slow placing animation and detonated it. No damage whatsoever.

After installing that hotfix today, I have noticed that I crash every few minutes (I haven't crashed at all until today).

Hooray, air vehicles are still completely useless. You're fucking flying BLIND, getting shot at by craft a lot better than the vanu scythe who's bonus is... what? I know for a fact the bloody laser cannon is useless and it's weak as shit, can't turn for fuck, and you have to BUY the radar? In fact, to make playing air viable at all you have to pay to upgrade the entire vehicle before you even have a chance. I mean, it's pretty obvious why the nerfed the liberator - so they could make a fuckload of money from poor scrubs paying to get back the weapon it should START with to make it more than just a flying target that can't scratch ground vehicles. [editline]28th October 2012[/editline] I mean, the liberator cannon doesn't even track with the mouse any more, what the fuck. [editline]28th October 2012[/editline] It is honestly not worth the investment to buy an aircraft because they die far too easily, and it's impossible to evade enemy fire.

They should just remove the MAX Burster and nerf the Skyguard, and improve static AA turrets since they kinda can't dodge tank shells. Doesn't make sense for an infantry unit to have powerful AA weapons comparable to a base's defences, and even less sense for a single light tank to lock down a whole zone worth of airspace alone.

[QUOTE=blazingfly;38226299] It is honestly not worth the investment to buy an aircraft because they die far too easily, and it's impossible to evade enemy fire.[/QUOTE] How about spending some time flying (a lot if you suck at it) and get good at, instead of whining due to your skill with air vehicles being horrible. Might not be super easy, but fuck, you can easily survive for a long time in the air if you play correctly, know where to fly and what to engage.

[QUOTE=Daniellynet;38226868]How about spending some time flying (a lot if you suck at it) and get good at, instead of whining due to your skill with air vehicles being horrible. Might not be super easy, but fuck, you can easily survive for a long time in the air if you play correctly, know where to fly and what to engage.[/QUOTE] You mean flying low, not getting anywhere near combat (since there's always a few Burster MAXes defending outposts) and in general killing lone troops/distracted tanks in abandoned bases? That doesn't sound very useful. Honestly, AA was fine before they introduced the Skyguard. You could counter air with air and bases could keep aircraft away as long as the turrets were kept up, and AA MAX units were uncommon. Now anywhere there's two/three factions fighting over a base/outpost, the air space is completely locked down by two lightnings and a few MAXes, it's absurd how effective they are against anything that flies.

"waaa I'm being hard countered by my hard counter" I'll remember that next time my lightning comes across a AV loaded magrider.

[QUOTE=kukiric;38226860]They should just remove the MAX Burster and nerf the Skyguard, and improve static AA turrets since they kinda can't dodge tank shells. Doesn't make sense for an infantry unit to have powerful AA weapons comparable to a base's defences, and even less sense for a single light tank to lock down a whole zone worth of airspace alone.[/QUOTE] the burster is like half the turret's firepower so it's mobile, but also it costs money, and the turret is free while I think overall AA is too strong, but there's nothing wrong with having an AA for max (but 2x burster should not be allowed) [editline]29th October 2012[/editline] also skyguards get pummeled by anything that isn't the air for obvious reasons, maybe your side should look at a more balanced assault if there's enough air people around to feed the AA but no ground units to take them out [editline]29th October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=kukiric;38226929]You mean flying low, not getting anywhere near combat (since there's always a few Burster MAXes defending outposts) and in general killing lone troops/distracted tanks in abandoned bases? That doesn't sound very useful. Honestly, AA was fine before they introduced the Skyguard. You could counter air with air and bases could keep aircraft away as long as the turrets were kept up, and AA MAX units were uncommon. Now anywhere there's two/three factions fighting over a base/outpost, the air space is completely locked down by two lightnings and a few MAXes, it's absurd how effective they are against anything that flies.[/QUOTE] no he means actually using evasive manouvers and being smart Even with this supposedly impossible AA I've gotten tonnes of air and ground kills in my reaver (no secondary weapons) - there's plenty of opportunity to be useful outside of simply flying directly over a main base and getting pummeled, like killing galaxies on-route, assaulting minor bases, dogfighting, etc

they really should limit the number of vehicles each faction can spawn these are both all sorts of wrong [img]http://i.imgur.com/KEuuV.jpg[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/UXFIx.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38227038]they really should limit the number of vehicles each faction can spawn[/QUOTE] Yeah it's called Lock on missiles. Seriously though, when the tank horde finally stops rolling near empty outposts and actually comes across real resistance they soon get whittled down to next to nothing.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;38227081]Yeah it's called Lock on missiles. Seriously though, when the tank horde finally stops rolling near empty outposts and actually comes across real resistance they soon get whittled down to next to nothing.[/QUOTE] yeah but the problem is that the most resistance a tank zerg will ever see is the people getting annihilated right as they come out of the spawn room

everyone has realised that vehicles are easy to get and make you win even if you suck at the game (when versing infantry ofc) in my opinion, vehicles should cost absolute shitloads, heavy vehicles like mbt, galaxy etc should cost the majority of your resources ( ~700 out of 800), so you really feel the sting of not having certain resources and that

They should make the mbt crew served. require a driver and a gunner like in the first game

The skyguard just wipes out aircraft though, and aircraft have no real viable way of taking it down. A one-two second burst of skyguard wipes out my scythe before I really have time to react. Better: Nerf skyguard range to say, 600m, letting you evade by gaining altitude, at the moment it's range is 1000m High altitude AA could be done by base turrets and by enemy ESFs.

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38227184]They should make the mbt crew served. require a driver and a gunner like in the first game[/QUOTE] Would be a welcomed change honestly.

[QUOTE=blazingfly;38227233]The skyguard just wipes out aircraft though, and aircraft have no real viable way of taking it down. A one-two second burst of skyguard wipes out my scythe before I really have time to react. Better: Nerf skyguard range to say, 600m, letting you evade by gaining altitude, at the moment it's range is 1000m High altitude AA could be done by base turrets and by enemy ESFs.[/QUOTE] It's a combined arms game though. Most tanks have no viable way of taking out pesky aircraft. But I wouldn't object to making all parts of the combined experience have more synergy.

I can see why they wanted to avoid cont locking from PS1, other than the fact that they won't have 10 conts on launch I mean, if you think about it, some conts on PS1 were ever hardly played on because they were just about impossible to reach unless one faction was particularly underpowered. While other conts (or more like, 1-2 conts) were always played on, because it was the only place where a frontline existed. By making it so each faction has some kind of foothold on each cont, means there is battle going on in each cont, and not only that but 3-way battles which were the most interesting part of PS1 Especially since you have to realize the PS2 conts are much much larger than the PS1 ones. Some conts for PS1 were rather small landmass size. PS2 conts are very different in these reguards, though I wouldn't say they are massive still. So while PS1 had a strong sense of a "metagame", the fact of the matter was that metagame made the moment-to-moment gameplay only happen on a very limited selection of battle regions and faction fights, making half the world totally ignored by the player base at large because all those conts would be continant locked by the faction owning it. Not to mention, owning a continent didn't actually mean anything for the faction - you just *had* that territory. I think its important to bring that metagame back, but it really should be improved instead of directly porting it from PS1. PS2 has poor metagame but the moment-to-moment gameplay is much better and more interesting because each cont is fought on, and can be fought on. But theres very little sens of reward. The moment to moment gameplay of PS1 could get stale after a while because you'd constantly be fighting on the same ground - making the truely fun moments of that game only shine through once in a blue moon when you WERE fighting on a home cont. It would be a good idea to bring back cont locking again I feel, but instead of making it so you faction has to follow a network of paths to reach other conts in a linear manner, why not make it so there is no "hard-line" home cont, making it so each territory is viable to fight on? I.E. all conts have 3 warpgates that go to other conts. So you could have 9 conts, all interconnected, and none of them are "dedicated" home conts - the "home" cont is whatever the faction decides it is for that moment. This means, as an empire expands it'll be much harder to maintain the borders (like in real life!). Because if you only own one continent as a faction, there are only 3 ways to get into there from the 3 different warpgates that lead into it. This means you must maintain 3 fronts, or territory on 3 conts to defend that continent ownership. Those continents also have 3 warpgates leading to other conts... the effect is this: owning 2 conts is going to be difficult because you must effectively defend 5 different fronts from other conts that lead to the 3 warpgates on your cont. The more conts you capture, the more "fronts" you have, making it easier for the enemies to gain access to your home base (because there are more ways to get in and you are more stretched thin), which in turn makes battles on "home territory" much more likely, if still balls-hard. On that note, adding some player-control and faction benefit for owning a cont that differs between conts would make choosing to own certain territory actually matter. I.E. being able to set up a faction homebase of sorts on a cont you totally control, giving you some kind of faction wide bonus. Or the avalablity of certain assets depends directly on cont connnections to whatever you faction's home cont is. Maybe there could be some kind of super-epic CTF mechanic where you have to go to a factions home base, capture their flag and bring it back to your home base spanning several conts? It would be the worlds most epic and largest "CTF game" done in an FPS. I don't know what would happen if you succeeded, maybe temporary capture of that base so it acts as a warpgate for your faction, allowing you to invade their cont? We could also make it so owning a cont has a kind of "kickstarter-esque" stretchgoal mentality to it. Own 1 cont, and you get X benefit. Own two, and you get X+Y benefit. Own 3, etc... this makes it so there is an incentive to having a large empire even though it makes your territory at large harder to defend due to the front line being much larger. Stuff like that. Cont locking was a blessing and a curse in PS1. It meant the metagame had some depth to it, but it also meant that it was rare to fight on more than a small handful of fronts during the whole lifetime of the game, and it was rare to fight more than one faction. Making it so theres cont locking but not restricting the capture of conts in such a linear manner would do wonders to improving that. Making it so there are benefits of holding a cont would make actually territory control meaningful as well beyond "just trying to lock the other faction out."

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38227184]They should make the mbt crew served. require a driver and a gunner like in the first game[/QUOTE] As long as they give them more 'presence'. I can't help but chuckle at the spotting voice "Heavy tank spotted!!!"

I'll take vehicle cost increases if we can also get flares/IR smoke by default.

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;38227104]yeah but the problem is that the most resistance a tank zerg will ever see is the people getting annihilated right as they come out of the spawn room[/QUOTE] If the faction is incompetent enough to mount a proper resistance it's their own fault. They have the same resources, they can make a tank zerg of their own. When I played on Friday with the NC outfit I'm in the VS were abusing the fuck out of their Magriders. Even so we managed to stop their zerg for 3 entire hours with only infantry at Xenotech Labs. We didn't have any tanks. Some time later we mount a tank column of our own and push their weakened forces back.