[Malorn]

This is amusing to see someone actually defend BFRs not by providing good reason for their existence but by using them as a Darwinistic example of why he is a better player and to rage at those that consistently schooled him.

I would have responded to more of your drivel but its just whining about and harping on "elitists" and doesn't have a meaningful argument anywhere within so I'll just stick to the lies and the denial.

I particularly enjoyed watching some of Malnorn's beloved Liberty members throw themselves at a pair of TR two-seat BFRs with AV load outs in a column of Vanguards, only to be completely obliterated because they kept charging in two or three at a time and shooting at different BFRs like knights galloping at a formation of riflemen.

Please, you may not like me or my outfit, but don't make shit up. We were not incompetent noobs and we were quite quick to adapt to BFRs as much as was possible in that early insanity in late 2004. This little story you describe never happened. When we rolled vanguards we always focus-fired BFRs (and every other vehicle for that matter) for the simple ridiculous reality that a single vanguard's damage could be out-healed by the shield of a BFR. You had to focus fire to kill them and everyone in Liberty who drove and gunned a tank was painfully aware of that fact. We understand the basic and fundamental concept of focus-fire in games and have for about two decades, thanks.

Yet that was exactly the point of BFRs - instead of being an all-or-nothing prospect like other vehicles, it was possible to drive them off for prolonged periods of time, and to destroy them through the concerted efforts of multiple people. Something that so many "vets" professed to encourage, yet when the need for that sort of cooperation appeared, all they did was become a mob of crying toddlers who spent more time arguing about who hated BFRs more than coming up with counters or even directing battles.

Ever think that maybe the reason we all hate BFRs is because they fundamentally changed the gameplay of Planetside in a terrible way for no good reason?

Of course not! Clearly we're all thick-skulled tards that can't figure out how to counter new things! That must be it!

If they had been normal vehicles with normal ground-vehicle behavior they would have just been a role overlap. Instead they were given regenerative shields and jumpjets, two things which fundamentally changed vehicle combat and broke vehicle balance in the game. Really those are the two things that made them terrible. Had they just been 2-seater "heavy tanks" with more armor and no shields so any damage they took was permanent like any other vehicle then they probably would have been fine and we could have weathered the storm.

But no, they introduced giant jumping robots that had massive firepower and absurd survivability that completely ruined the vehicle balance of planetside. GG.

But even had they been properly balanced vehicles they'd still have role overlap with tanks. In PS2 tanks with upgradable weapons seems like a rough equivalent of any role a BFR could provide. Vanguard + AA or AI weaponry, etc. Same idea but implemented in a more balanced way with the vehicle that occupies the same functional role.

And that takes us full circle back to the underlying point that mechs have no functional role in Planetside, which the author of this thread plainly admitted to when he said it was almost 100% because "mechs are cool!"