Agreed with the bit on emotional connection to the bases. Did they say how often they would rotate? Or is it a one-time thing?
Agreed with the bit on emotional connection to the bases. Did they say how often they would rotate? Or is it a one-time thing?
Gah! The south east WG on Indar is terrible for VS since the terrain doesn't really lend itself well to our Magriders... Also the big bases are placed a little too close to the enemy for comfort. Amerish should be more fun, though.
Looking forward to this warpgate rotation, I have thought on a couple of occasions in the past fortnight hang on, isn't this exactly the same territory cap / defend sequence as a few days ago.
Even aside from spending more time in areas we don't normally frequent, the change in perspective / direction of focus should be pretty refreshing, e.g. attacking Saero from the north rather than the south should be a pretty different kettle of fish...
Just look at it as taking back Quartz Ridge from the dirty blue people!Originally Posted by Wardancer
I'm also quite excited about seeing the maps from fresh angles. Playing exclusively VS there are some bases I have barely ever seen, let alone fought over.
Last edited by Rizlar; 21-01-2013 at 05:35 PM.
Like the TR with the Crown?
It'll be good to see bases from another side, from a tactical viewpoint we've already seen their strengths and weaknesses, now we get to show the others where they've been going wrong .
I've played exclusively NC so far and was thinking the exact same thing - I've always played with NC having the SE warp gate and it's a nightmare. Organised outfits will just Gal-drop or drive Sunderers up to the cliffs which overlook the warp-gate and blast away at any ESFs and Libs leaving the gate with 2+ Burster MAXs and/or have HAs up there launching rockets at the defence towers at will - the anti-vehicle turrets don't have enough elevation to shell the top of the cliffs. Then you have most of the routes out of the warp gate being canyons and thus potentially hazardous for ground vehicles if there's not enough air support.
I don't know if it's a case of "the grass is greener" but whenever I'm on Indar the NC are always close to being warp-gated or struggling to push out.
I'd welcome a more frequent gate rotation, especially on Indar - I've literally not seen half of the map.
Well, say goodbye to the Vanu Indar lock. I'm convinced we practically always have that because of our favourable warpgate position. But I'm looking forward to it, will be refreshing.
Decided to buy four xp boosts and save them up. I dont think Im gonna play anymore until the big patch.
It's just: vehicle spam, spawn camp, vehicle spam, spam camp, vehicle spam, spawn camp,... cant stand it anymore.
I got 8, and activated one immediately.
- Tom De Roeck.
monochrom & verse publications
"Quantacat's name is still recognised even if he watches on with detached eyes like Peter Molyneux over a cube in 3D space, staring at it with tears in his eyes, softly whispering... Someday they'll get it."
The big patch isn't going to fix any spam, since the vehicle balance was already done.
Vehicle spam isnt that much of a problem, imo. Especially if they put in those new spawn points, its gonna be hard spawn camping anyway.
- Tom De Roeck.
monochrom & verse publications
"Quantacat's name is still recognised even if he watches on with detached eyes like Peter Molyneux over a cube in 3D space, staring at it with tears in his eyes, softly whispering... Someday they'll get it."
I think by "vehicle spam" people mean "There is pretty much no reason at all to not be in a vehicle at all times"
The majority of our fights are infantry vs. infantry and the we spend the majority of our time as infantry. Infantry is adaptable and can fight anything without being cert or cooldownlocked. Infantry is amazing and superior if you use it properly, but yes, most people that don't know how to play probably prefer vehicles.
Except that 30 tanks vs 30 infantry = ~25 tanks. When one side spams vehicles, the other sides don't have a prayer unless they do the same. Which is very boring.
only with a poor team.
- Tom De Roeck.
monochrom & verse publications
"Quantacat's name is still recognised even if he watches on with detached eyes like Peter Molyneux over a cube in 3D space, staring at it with tears in his eyes, softly whispering... Someday they'll get it."
I must agree with QuantaCat here, actually. I have found that we've been able to fend off tank rushes of about that size with one of our 30-man platoons, if only we've been able to keep our Sunderer alive. I've also seen enough WW1-style sprawling infantry fights across open terrain (especially on Esamir for some reason), and gone down in tanks with terrifying speed against enemy infantry, to make me think the balance between the different fighting forces is actually pretty good.
We are the most effective as a group when we've a healthy mix of infantry and air and land vehicles in our force, which is as it should be, in my humble opinion.
If the tanks are defending and you're rushing in to them - sure. If you're defending as infantry those tanks would die. We did this just last night. Also, there's probably at least 50 people in those tanks (if played correctly).
Vehicles are not OP, but sure, they could cost a few more resources.
Yeah, you hear people talking about how game-and-fun-breakingly superior vehicles are to infantry all the time, but it just doesn't seem to be true.
Like this video innociv linked in the crazy ideas thread - the enemy that almost takes his tank down is a single heavy.
Aha not really. He ran out of ammo. And that's because I didn't have a gunner, and have AP shells. I was 2 hits away from dying still.
If I had a gunner I could have easily driven up while the gunner shoots him. In such a situation I know I can just back up and repair through the damage, instead of doing something risky and exposing my rear armor, so that's what I did.
If you have like 9 people with annihilators, you can take out tons of vehicles though. Especially if it's crowded so you don't even render to the vehicles you're killing.
I also frequently kill tank after tank in a zerg with 2 c4, then resupply, repeat.
I don't think I've ever died to a single heavy, even when they hit my rear to start with. I've died to c4, and multiple heavies, though.
Most of my deaths on my main, where I play 90% infantry, are to other Infantry. I don't even die once per 6 hours to rocket pods as infantry, and rarely die to tanks too. I kill far more tanks with C4 than I die to them.
Smedley posted a graph as well that showed that 80%, give or take 1%, of kills have been done by infantry.
Vehicles are good for k:d ratio. I've had lots of 50+ streaks with an ESF or Tank, while I don't often do better than 20+ as infantry, but you'll actually get far more kills per minute with Infantry, usually.
Don't worry about dying as infantry. Play suicidally, go for kills. Deaths cost nothing as infantry.
Last edited by innociv; 22-01-2013 at 07:32 PM.
22nd patch notes.
A number of Server and Client stability optimizations have been made.
The Heavy Assault Shield should no longer fail to work after respawning.
The Deployment screen now features top defensive locations on the continent as respawn points.
Instant Action will now send players to areas with more combat.
New players will now be placed at a spawn point in a battle instead of being drop podded in.
Liberators/Galaxies:
These aircraft are now easier to lock-on to with anti-air missles. By default you can lock on to them 1 second faster. This means it requires 2.5 seconds to lock on to an ESF and 1.5 seconds to lock-on to a Liberator/Galaxy.
Lock on rockets and missiles should now hit more frequently and are harder to dodge.
Lock-on weapons can only be avoided by the following:
- Flares
- Forcing the missile to hit something else
- Outrunning it which requires you to be distant and burn a lot of fuel
- A very near miss which should be very challenging
Source: http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/i...22-2012.82662/
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
