Originally Posted by Figment
I'm against the concept of snipefils and shotfils for good reason.
|
I also preferred the way infil worked in ps1. Playing infil as an actual infil was probably my favorite part of that game. But since they no longer work that way in ps2 we have to consider them as they are.
Originally Posted by Figment
Think you misinterpreted what I was saying. The point I'm making is that you can create an "obvious obstruction" along a certain line and, pretending the line ends somewhere, create a weakspot: a semi-obvious opening which initially seems to avoid the entire CE line. They don't have to bother with it, they don't have to take it out, but it is an obstruction in their path, so they go around it because that's the route of least resistance. Fun hasn't gotten anything to do with it, they don't avoid it because it "isn't fun", they avoid it because it's a potential threat. Players stance towards CE in PS1 are completely neutral, they take it as a given obstruction, not as a fun quelcher.
|
I understood the concept just fine your making a hassle obstruction while trying to give people the impression that they have a means of bypassing said hassle. However your intentionally directing them to that point. It's hard not to understand it considering it is one of the most obvious ways of doing CE. The thing is it really doesn't add to the game. Maybe it kills a few of the worst players. It probably even slows down everyone else which is a good thing. However they can put in much better mechanics for slowing people down. This whole stopping to blow up a whole lot of nothing feels like a waste of time. Probably because it is and like I said things should be slowed down but it doesn't need to feel like such a drag.
Originally Posted by Figment
Stop here. The remainder of this alinea is non-relevant and well-known and actually an argument in favour of using turrets, because it doesn't provide an unfair challenge.
|
I don't think anyone ever thought that they provided an unfair challenge just the opposite even. They are pathetically easy to overcome to the point that doing so is nothing but an annoyance. The thing is that's how they need to be for balance reasons. If they were a challenge it would be a major balance issue. It's easy to drop a turret if it was hard to kill a turret you get a net loss of effort from the offense.
Originally Posted by Figment
The point isn't that the TURRET outsmarts people. The player who PLACES the turret outsmarts people by either creating a(n avoidable) death trap for careless players, but beyond that a warning sign, a stalling tool, a force multiplier or as described above, by using the turret as a (psychological) tool to influence the behaviour of another player into a position that is advantageous to the placer of said turret. IF the placer is actually good at it. Think of it like a carrot and stick, where the turret is a stick.
|
Catching a careless player in your turret trap isn't outsmarting them. Steep cliffs and deep ditches catch careless players all day but it's not because the map designer outsmarted them. Sensor type CE can replace turrets when it comes to giving people a warning sign and they can do so without all the problems turrets bring to the table. As for using them to position other players most people will just shoot the turrets. Sure this gives you a chance to pinpoint their location but that's just another thing sensors can take care of.
Originally Posted by Figment
Who says you aren't? Can you imagine this concept of someone being alone working in relation to the rest of the empire? An example. I've seen comments like this when naieve and unimaginative people accuse infils of being skilless noobs who should be going in in teams. If infils go in together and stay close to one another, they hinder their allies by creating a bigger risk of detection and thus triggering a dark light sweep of the area. The best example of teamwork as a loner in PS1 I can give you is when I prepare the gen and spawn tubes at an enemy base, on my own, with boomers, grab a CUD, go to the backdoor, hack the door open again and wait for the Gal drop that's coming in, 7 seconds before they hit the ground, I let the CE explode, run inside and while the enemy starts to respond to the incoming troops at the BD, I drop the gen, kill the spawns and hack the CE creating chaos in the enemy defenses and paralysing the enemy in a way that I could not have done if all attention had been on me due to my group.
|
As a loner myself most of the time I understand how you can still be working towards your empires goals while remaining alone. But this example just emphasizes my point when it comes to CE actually reducing risk. If your out there alone without any CE down your just going to be run over. With the CE your still going to be run over but it takes a little longer.
Originally Posted by Figment
In the above example, a loner setting up CE somewhere, does this in the interest of the empire: they blockade routes from small teams, they prevent tactical flanking maneuvres, they obstruct enemies, delay and provide early warning systems for their empire.
|
CE shouldn't replace players. Without CE players can still accomplish all those things they just need to work together for a lot of it.
Originally Posted by Figment
You don't want to know how often, as a loner, my CE destroyed AMSes, Skyguards, tanks and BFRs that were supporting the enemy advance. The mere presence of CE can stall an enemy for half a minute to 3 minutes, which is a HUGE deal in terms of base captures. If they kill something, great extra. You really underestimate the strategic, logistic and psychological benefits of having CE. I can't but say that you really missed out on some massive creative options if you never realised their potential. :/
|
A loner can still have a huge impact even without the use of turrets.
Originally Posted by Figment
Sunderers have no cloaking field in PS2 YET (they might or the future actual AMS might). There's also no CE now (YET). Thinking in the now doesn't make the point invalid. It just seems you're interested in dismissing the point even though you do not deny that under different circumstances it can be a tool. Please be willing to think outside the box and consider the fact that anything can be a handy tool in psychological warfare and that where PS2 may provides very few such tools right now, that doesn't mean we'll never get such tools in the future.
|
There's no doubt that spitfires are some kind of tool. The problem is that its a tool that tries to fill a niche that should be handled by players.
Originally Posted by Figment
Somehow I doubt you considered or see detonating C4 randomly within earshot as the metaphorical stone to distract a guard though. Did you ever consider using an OS as an EMP grenade in PlanetSide 1? I've often OSed towers with the goal of getting inside undetected, rather than throw an EMP in a dense CE field. The OS has to have the appearance of taking out whatever is on top of the tower though. Why the OS and not the EMP blast or grenade? Because I chose the OS JUST to not trigger the Engineer who placed the mines that there's a cloaker sneaking in. It is such an obvious and blunt instrument, that nobody sees it as a subtle scalpel to take out automated proximity defenses. In fact, I know the engineer who placed the CE will come out to place new mines within 10 seconds, so I didn't even need to use a REK: I popped in while the new mine was being deployed without anyone ever knowing: new mine in place: tower is considered safe: no dark light sweeps.
|
Its funny how turrets didn't even popup in that example. Funnier still is that you want to believe I can't be creative just because I don't want turrets in the game. I'm for a game where you need to think harder to get the job done rather than just having tools handed to you to do the job.
Originally Posted by Figment
Psychology. Deception is a powerful weapon.
|
It is and it doesn't require turrets to use it. Just get a little creative.
Originally Posted by Figment
Clearly? Highly disagree with your statement that "he'd be letting his faction down". Either you never played PS1, or you just don't get that CE is just a tool that you use it when you have time for it. When mines disappear after you DIE and change class because you have another type of enemy to fight, THEN you're letting your team down, because you stopped passively denying easy access to an area, opening them up for getting flanked where they thought they had some sort of early warning (explosion or gunfire required to enter through a certain area for instance - or some people THOUGHT they had defenses against a tank located somewhere).
|
If you can have CE down regardless of what class your playing then failing to have it down is equivalent to dropping the ball. You only get the benefits of the class your playing as things stand now. That's what allows them to balance classes. Now I'm not saying that's a perfect system (in fact I hate how rigid the whole thing is) but it's whats currently in place and most likely what will remain in place.
Originally Posted by Figment
Besides, you spent resources on it. If you change tanks, your tank doesn't just disappear immediately. In fact, others can enter it and take over. Is that too letting your side down? Should you never be outside of a vehicle or purchase one for others if you have resources for it? Should your tank disappear because you went from medic to LA? No!
|
They should remove the resource cost on CE as it is a class based ability. If everyone could deploy CE then the cost makes sense but clearly allowing everyone to place CE just leads to a whole mess of CE.