I am deeply saddened the Lancer will no longer be with us.

[VanuMAXGuy]

After nearly a decade of having my trusty Lancer by my side, destroying many a Tank/MAX/Biffer unlucky enough to get caught in my line of sight..... he will not be joining me with my Day 1 arsenal.

What am I given in return? An auto-lock-on poser that dares try to take the Lancer's place atop my shoulder.

I am so sad, I don't feel like living anymore. I just want to crawl into a hole and hug the corpse of my Lancer until I join him.

Whoever is responsible for this.... I just want you to know that you have killed my soul, my heart, and my hope for PlanetSide 2 to revolutionize the FPS genre. You are dead to me, all of you.

Good day.

[Timey]

Fear not, for come beta SOE will surely listen!

[Xaine]

Read the caption with the picture and rejoice, my brethren.

[VanuMAXGuy]

Read the caption with the picture and rejoice, my brethren.

https://twitter.com/#!/PS_TRay/status/173232936940875776

[Biohazard]

The lancer is still with us! Each empire will get 2 TWO, not one but TWO AV weapons. One that is traditional (Lancer) , and one that is lock on (Fission).

**EDIT** twitter above, :cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:

[Vash02]

@MirrorDT didn't make the cut... Maybe post launchWoah there Mr TRay I'm going to have to question your VS credentials.

[Erendil]

Woah there Mr TRay I'm going to have to question your VS credentials.

They stated in tonight's webcast that the Lancer works just like it did in PS1. That leads me to believe TRay was just messin' w/ Mirror when he tweeted that.

[Johari]

The lancer is still with us! Each empire will get 2 TWO, not one but TWO AV weapons. One that is traditional (Lancer) , and one that is lock on (Fission).

**EDIT** twitter above, :cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:

Actually I think the 2 AV's weapons may be correct.

There's a lot of fuss about the Lancer and whether or not it will be in. While TRay's twitter post is pretty damning, they do talk about that Lancer in the webcast.

http://www.twitch.tv/sonyonlinetv/b/309653892
skip to ~36:35

"We're bringing back all the Planetside 1 mechanics but we took the lock on mechanic is nowgiven to everybody. So everybody can have, hold it, point at an aircraft and just lock on over time. And then we're bringing back the Lancer still works like it did it Planetside 1..."
This is coming from Joshua Sanchez, the Combat Lead in PS2. While I don't like saying this maybe TRay is a little mixed up on what is and is not going to be in the game come launch. I can't imagine the Combat Lead talking about the old AV if it won't be ingame while the Senior Art Director may get that mixed up.

Take all of this with a grain of salt and DL the video for yourself before it gets taken down. Who knows when they'll rehost it on YouTube.

[Firefly]

"We're bringing back all the Planetside 1 mechanics but we took the lock on mechanic is nowgiven to everybody. So everybody can have, hold it, point at an aircraft and just lock on over time.
Good.

[Bravix]

Why would I waste time locking onto a reaver when I can just shoot it with my lancer???

[Zulthus]

Go to 37:21 in the webcast, that's most likely our Lancer.

[VanuMAXGuy]

Go to 37:21 in the webcast, that's most likely our Lancer.

Nope, that's the Fission. Sounds basically like an energy-based Striker.

[Death2All]

Wait wait wait wait wait....They took out the Lancer? And instead gave all empires the lock on mechanic? ARE YOU FUCKING HIGH?:mad::mad::mad:



I didn't watch the webcast yet, but what the actual fuck is going on, SOE :huh:?

[Hermes]

Actually I think the 2 AV's weapons may be correct.

There's a lot of fuss about the Lancer and whether or not it will be in. While TRay's twitter post is pretty damning, they do talk about that Lancer in the webcast.


This. It's mentioned in the webcast so it's still kicking around.

Relax :D

[RedKnights]

Yea at 36:50 twothreesix states "The Lancer works on the same mechanic as Planetside 2"

[Figment]

They stated in tonight's webcast that the Lancer works just like it did in PS1. That leads me to believe TRay was just messin' w/ Mirror when he tweeted that.

Maybe MirrorDT didn't make the cut? :huh:

[Shogun]

I can't imagine the Combat Lead talking about the old AV if it won't be ingame while the Senior Art Director may get that mixed up.


that´s surely the case... t-ray is getting old, after all he is SENIOR art director :D
and he loves VS and purple - that´s another sure sign of dementia.:D

so the vs will get lockon as addition to the system they love. not to replace it.

but nc seems to be losing their favorite missile and get a less useful replacement (and the lockon addition as well).

our camera guided missile will be replaced by a laser guided if i understood it right.
so to lead the missile to the target nc will have to leave their cover now.
but it was mentioned that they are still playing around with camera guiding so there´s still hope

[Vancha]

Wait wait wait wait wait....They took out the Lancer? And instead gave all empires the lock on mechanic? ARE YOU FUCKING HIGH?:mad::mad::mad:



I didn't watch the webcast yet, but what the actual fuck is going on, SOE :huh:?
"I don't know anything about the situation, but I'm going to jump to conclusions and yell about them anyway".

[DOUBLEXBAUGH]

"I don't know anything about the situation, but I'm going to jump to conclusions and yell about them anyway".

This is how PSU works

Step 1 - Speculate

Step 2 - Believe your speculation to be FACT!

Step 3 - Make a thread to complain about "facts"

[texico]

As a hard core NC, I have to admit that the Lancer was hands down the best VS AV weapon.

[basti]

I am now confused. Weapon lead talks about the old stuff is still in, T-Ray says no? Wha?

[Mirror]

Maybe MirrorDT didn't make the cut? :huh:

well I am completely op :groovy:

[basti]

well I am completely op :groovy:

HEy, stop posting! Your clearly not in the game anymore! :D

[RedKnights]

As a hard core NC, I have to admit that the Lancer was hands down the best VS AV weapon.

It was the only handheld VS AV Weapon <.<

Maybe this is why you're NC =P

And idk, i'm pretty sure the lasher fiasco was just to balance out DT in the long run.

But I really will being able to snap right to a target and have it take damage with no prior warning. Was even viable indoors.

[texico]

^ lol.

Seriously though, it was the best AV weapon, and I'd loot them if I had the chance. Could even snipe infantry with them, the charge before each projectile felt great, and imo it was the most useful for destroying aircraft for any body with reasonable aim, given its ROF and projectile speed.

[DaddyTickles]

Tbh, I'm sadder about the pheonix which was way more fun, and I say that as a VS player.

[Duddy]

Indeed sad to hear the Lancer isn't in, out of the AV it was certainly the most fun to use IMO. Whilst I agree with giving everyone the striker equivalent it is a boring weapon TBH. :P

[SniperSteve]

Pretty sure it is in. >.> Watch the webcast.

[basti]

Someone needs to play the higby card of truth, or we just keep spinning around, as there are no clear information.
I would but i got +10 annoyance right now. Damn NC debuffs!

[ThGlump]

Looks like lancer is gone and we get another AV beside that lockon fishstick.

@PS_TRay @MarthKoopa Lol! I do agree to some extent - lock-on = no skill. =P But..You'll have some dumb-fire weapons as well. Do not fret!

[Aurmanite]

That sucks.

I'm sure it will make a come back eventually. The Lancer was the best outdoor AV in the game.

[Johari]

Calm down I think we've just had a mix up.

http://www.twitch.tv/sonyonlinetv/b/309653892
skip to ~36:35

"We're bringing back all the Planetside 1 mechanics but we took the lock on mechanic is nowgiven to everybody. So everybody can have, hold it, point at an aircraft and just lock on over time. And then we're bringing back the Lancer still works like it did it Planetside 1..."

[ThGlump]

All those tweets was made after that webcast. And i trust them more as u easily can say something wrong in a hurry than to write it when you have time to think about it.

[RedKnights]

The V.S.’s standard anti-vehicle weapon uses the same battery-powered ammunition system as the Pulsar and Beamer. Unlike the faster firing and unguided Lancer, the Fission features a slower plasma projectile guided by lock-on technology.[RadarX]

From Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/PlanetSide2


I think this means 2 AV weapons per side?

[SurgeonX]

It's all a bit confusing, as there's conflicting info between the webcast and twitter, and from different sources too.

[Lonehunter]

I'm pretty sure during the weapon podcast they specifically mentioned the Lancer, and that it's coming back, original mechanics and all. Hope the video comes up on youtube soon

[The Desert Fox]

You'l be fine, I promise.

God all these threads are starting to annoy me.

[Talek Krell]

Something just occurred to me. They've given us very specific details for how the new phoenix works (laser guided so you can guide it in flight) and they made no mention of it being a lock on weapon or having a lock on mode. So maybe the Lancer is in there somewhere after all.

Just when I was starting to make progress in the mourning process. >_>

[Firefly]

There's this thing... I dunno if some of you have heard about it... it's called Reading Comprehension.

The Vanu's standard anti-vehicle weapon uses the same battery-powered ammunition system as the Pulsar and Beamer. Unlike the faster firing and unguided Lancer, the Fission features a slower plasma projectile guided by lock-on technology.
Bold emphasis is mine. It's mentioned in the product fluff. The bold-text part implies inclusion at some point, even if notional or conceptual. So the Fission would be guided, the Lancer would be unguided. Whether it will be in-game at launch is up for debate, given T-Ray's tweet (I doubt it's a lie or misinformation or a joke). But the fact that it's mentioned at all means it's in some sort of stage, even if a notional post-launch stage. If they're stating that each empire gets two AV, one guided/lock-on and one unguided/no-lock, kinda makes it a strong possibility that for the VS it's Fission and Lancer, respectively.

[Neurotoxin]

If only the Fission is provided... Just use fast-firing dumbfire energy rounds in the Fission. I'm fairly sure it'll be provided as an option that can be earned / unlocked.

I really hope that the Lancer has substantial charge-up features, holding a charge to increase damage, preserving a fully-charged shot instead of having it discharge automatically, etc. That would be a good way to differentiate the two weapons.

[Shotokanguy]

Removing the Lancer and only having the Fission seems like changing things for the sake of changing things.

There should be as many PS1 weapons in this game as possible.

[DayOne]

-Statement of pure rage retracted-

[Vash02]

You're missing the point DayOne, its not in the game at the start. Its like giving the Magrider wheels, just plain wrong.

[DayOne]

Wow, really? I loved that thing :cry:

[PrISM]

Lancer FTW

[Warborn]

Removing the Lancer and only having the Fission seems like changing things for the sake of changing things.

There should be as many PS1 weapons in this game as possible.

It's changing things for the sake of having an easier time balancing the game. It's not like they just randomly took out weapons and added new ones.

[GTGD]

The lancer and magrider were the only reasons to ever play VS in PS1 (except people who flocked to the lasher 2.0).

[Shotokanguy]

It's changing things for the sake of having an easier time balancing the game. It's not like they just randomly took out weapons and added new ones.

I'm getting kind of tired of seeing the word "balance" in PlanetSide 2 discussions at this point.

If the Lancer was never in PS2, then it's not for the sake of balance that they made the Fission, because something that didn't exist in the game obviously can't be unbalanced.

[VanuMAXGuy]

This also makes me fearful of homogenization. Giving each empire equal things is going to destroy any uniqueness, and it will all just end up being one of three flavors:

1) Belt fed
2) Magazines
3) Energy

Beyond that everything will be identical, and that's boring

[Warborn]

I'm getting kind of tired of seeing the word "balance" in PlanetSide 2 discussions at this point.

If the Lancer was never in PS2, then it's not for the sake of balance that they made the Fission, because something that didn't exist in the game obviously can't be unbalanced.

"For the sake of balance" doesn't mean that it was imbalanced, it means that it would be harder and more time consuming to balance three totally different weapons that one weapon which is identical aside from visual fluff. The problem here isn't people talking about balance, it's your interpretation of what talking about balance means.

[robocpf1]

Let's remember that flight mechanics in PS2 are moving away from VTOL "flying cameras" - most likely aircraft will be doing strafing runs and dogfights at high speeds with pretty good physics maneuvers. You're not going to hit one of those with a dumbfire, you NEED something that locks on. At least that's what I'm gathering.

Now, for the larger targets or just ground targets in general, that only move in two dimensions, (Galaxies, and tanks, and buses) a dumbfire Lancer would have obvious advantages, and I think that's the role we're going to see it in.

AV Role 1 - Handheld AA with lock-on mechanism
AV Role 2 - Handheld AV for anti-tank and anti-ground

This is all speculation on my part, but it makes sense.

[Zulthus]

I don't think ground troops should get a weapon against aircraft. Jammers to defend themselves would be fine, but the amount of players that would be carrying AA would make flight extremely hard or impossible. That's what vehicles and MAXes are for... it's going to be like the first few days of BF3 where you literally could not take off because everyone and their mother was using every form of AA in the game.

[Talek Krell]

a weapon against aircraft. Jammers to defend themselvesYou think that jammers should be the ground troop defense against aircraft? There's a lot we don't know about how aircraft will work and how common AA will be, but the suggestion that ground troops should be restricted to what amounts to throwing rocks at farming mosquitoes seems ridiculous to me.

[Warborn]

You think that jammers should be the ground troop defense against aircraft? There's a lot we don't know about how aircraft will work and how common AA will be, but the suggestion that ground troops should be restricted to what amounts to throwing rocks at farming mosquitoes seems ridiculous to me.

It's not ridiculous if you pair it with fighters being mostly ineffective against ground targets, or at least against infantry. If fighters are at best mediocre against ground vehicles, the need for infantry to have strong AA is greatly diminished. Personally, I've always thought that liberators being the real threat for land targets is much more appealing than folding that function into fighters on top of their ability to function as air-to-air fighters, and scouts, and just fast-moving personal transport vehicles.

[Erendil]

It's not ridiculous if you pair it with fighters being mostly ineffective against ground targets, or at least against infantry. If fighters are at best mediocre against ground vehicles, the need for infantry to have strong AA is greatly diminished. Personally, I've always thought that liberators being the real threat for land targets is much more appealing than folding that function into fighters on top of their ability to function as air-to-air fighters, and scouts, and just fast-moving personal transport vehicles.

But making fighter planes ineffective against ground targets is itself ridiculous. Creating artificial constructs that don't make logical sense to try to force people to use only certain types of armament against particular targets not only artificially limits players' choices of action on the battlefield, but it confuses and frustrates new players when weapons don't behave at all like they'd expect them to. IMO it should generally be avoided when possible (with a few exceptions like n00btubes :cool: ).

A much better option would be to make ground units a real threat in turn to aircraft if they get too close. Planes should be able to decimate troops with a rocket barrage if they so choose. Likewise, troops should be able to shoot planes out of the sky if they set their sights on air targets.

That puts the choice into the hands of the players as to whom they want to attack and how, as opposed to arbitrary rules that try to force players to fight the way that the rule makers think they should fight. That also allows player skill to be the deciding factor in determining who comes out on top in a fight instead of artificial rule sets.

:rant:

More on topic, I don't know much about PS2 gameplay, but I can see no reason why they would need to remove the Lancer in the name of balance. Balancing the VS AV while keeping the Lancer in game is actually pretty simple:

VS Fish-on: 2 Firing modes
AA lockon orbs a la mini-Starfire (or more like a Striker that only locks on Air)
"Lancer" mode


TR Striker: 2 firing modes, just like PS1

lockon mode
dumb-fire mode, with rockets sped up compared to PS1 to make them semi-useful against moving targets


NC Phoenix: 2 firing modes, much like PS1

Laser-guided
Dumb-fire, with rockets sped up compared to PS1 to make them semi-useful against moving targets



I think that'd be pretty balanced.

[VanuMAXGuy]

Making a "Lancer" fire-mode on the Fission doesn't fix the fact that the Lancer would still not actually exist.

Keep the Fission as-is, don't waste time by scrapping/changing it. Simply build an actual Lancer, because it shouldn't be that hard because it is such a simple gun. The original model is already there, just take its basic shape and give it a new shell.

[Talek Krell]

I agree with Erendil on air/ground interaction. I think it would be best to avoid arbitrary barriers whenever possible.

NC Phoenix: 2 firing modes, much like PS1

Laser-guided
Dumb-fire, with rockets sped up compared to PS1 to make them semi-useful against moving targets

I'd say the modes should be Lock on and Laser Guided for the phoenix so that they get precisely the benefits the other factions do. I'd also combine the Fission and the Lancer if you're going to make the other weapons just have alternate fire modes. It would be odd if the VS are the only faction that has to go back to the Gal to get AA weapons.

[Vash02]

Let's remember that flight mechanics in PS2 are moving away from VTOL "flying cameras" - most likely aircraft will be doing strafing runs and dogfights at high speeds with pretty good physics maneuvers. You're not going to hit one of those with a dumbfire, you NEED something that locks on. At least that's what I'm gathering.

Now, for the larger targets or just ground targets in general, that only move in two dimensions, (Galaxies, and tanks, and buses) a dumbfire Lancer would have obvious advantages, and I think that's the role we're going to see it in.

AV Role 1 - Handheld AA with lock-on mechanism
AV Role 2 - Handheld AV for anti-tank and anti-ground

This is all speculation on my part, but it makes sense.
It wasnt that hard to hit aircraft with the lancer, the only delay was the charge up while the travel time to target was practically instant.

[Erendil]

I agree with Erendil on air/ground interaction. I think it would be best to avoid arbitrary barriers whenever possible.

I'd say the modes should be Lock on and Laser Guided for the phoenix so that they get precisely the benefits the other factions do. I'd also combine the Fission and the Lancer if you're going to make the other weapons just have alternate fire modes. It would be odd if the VS are the only faction that has to go back to the Gal to get AA weapons.

Actually I did suggest combining the Fishun' and Lancer into 1 weapon. I guess my initial wording was a little unclear. I also gave each empire one straight-firing "dumb" mode and one "homing" mode (lockon for VS/TR, Laser guidance for NC). That to me seems balanced, but each empires weapon still behaves differently enough that they each have their own unique flavor.

Oh and NC shouldn't be the only one to get 2 homing modes, so giving them lockon and laser guided would be a no-no.

[Talek Krell]

Laser guided isn't a homing mode though. It's much more subject to user error and perception and has completely different countermeasures. I'd set it up so that each emipre gets the ability to lock on and a weapon that requires more skill but is unique and fun.

Everybody gets lock on missiles so they have a noob friendly weapon to ward off aircraft and tanks.

VS get the Lancer. High accuracy and decent damage. Projectiles have to be lead but an expert user can hit even aircraft with little warning.

NC get the Phoenix. Great damage and a guidable warhead. Difficult to use but an expert can manipulate the rocket to hit targets in weak armor or even without line of sight.

TR have got me a bit stumped. Some sort of multiple launch rocket pod would fit their theme, but it seems like they'd have the most trouble engaging fast targets. On the other hand maybe volume of fire would make up for that. . .

[That one noob]

Maybe it was just due to time constraints that it wasn't done.
T-Ray did say it might be in for post launch or post beta, right?

[Talek Krell]

He said it got cut for launch. Which to me just says that they intend to finish it afterwards.