Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: Play Planetside you will
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2013-07-21, 04:49 PM   [Ignore Me] #1
NewSith
Contributor
Brigadier General
 
NewSith's Avatar
 
Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


So as it stands here's what Sunderer is:


Weapons:
Kobalt
Basilisk
Ranger
Walker
Bulldog
Fury

Utilities:
Gate Shield Diffuser
Smoke Screen
Proximity Radar
Fire Suppression System
S-AMS

Defense:
Blockade Armor
Proximity Repair
Proximity Ammo Dispenser
Auto-Repair
Stealth
Mine Guard

Naked Sunderer dies to 2 C4s + burnout or 2 AT mines.

As it stands right now, you can't really spec into anything. There are basically 2 sensible Sunderer configs - AMS+Mineguard and AMS+Ammo Dispenser.

I propose doing some changes that would increase the amount of the Sunderer loadouts:


First and foremost, a Sunderer should NEVER die to 2 AT mines, even without a mineguard. I'm saying that as both Sunderer babysitter AND an AT-mines wielding engineer. By this Mineguard is made a mustahve cert for a Sunderer. So make it just like with C4 - 2 mines take the sunderer to very low health (a bit less than C4 does if you are very eager for mines to be OP) so if there's an engi, he can save the sundy, but if not - bye bye Sundy.

Weapons:
Kobalt
Basilisk
Ranger
Halberd
Bulldog

Utilities:
Gate Shield Diffuser
S-AMS
Proximity Repair
Proximity Ammo Dispenser

Defense:
Blockade Armor
Auto-Repair
Fire Suppression System
Stealth
Mine Guard
Smoke Screen
Proximity Radar


And buff for the Proximity radar, for Christ's sake.
...but the point is - it's barely a roadmap-worthy feature.

Thoughts?

Sidenote: I'm not sure about the Auto-Repair, because if we keep it in Defense, it becomes a good AMS cert. If we move it to Utilities, there's gonna be a nice mix from Fire Suppression and Auto-Reps.
__________________

Originally Posted by CutterJohn View Post
Shields.. these are a decent compromise between the console jockeys that want recharging health, and the glorious pc gaming master race that generally doesn't.

Last edited by NewSith; 2013-07-21 at 04:50 PM.
NewSith is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-21, 05:02 PM   [Ignore Me] #2
bpostal
Contributor
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


A restructuring of the abilities to streamline their utility/defensive slots would be nice.
I do agree that auto-repair should be a utility slot. Using it with the AMS would just lead to more lazy bus drivers.
__________________

Smoke me a Kipper, I'll be back for breakfast
bpostal is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-21, 05:02 PM   [Ignore Me] #3
Neurotoxin
First Lieutenant
 
Neurotoxin's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


That is cool, but.... I want a Sunderer, not an AMS with seats and guns.

In fact, give me a Sunderer variant. Built-in shield diffuser, driver has a radial EMP, two Lightning class guns, two MBT secondary class guns, two AI Kobalts on the sides, and a built-in default horn. Yes, it can even have a maximum occupancy of 2 MAXs, and even require an Engineer to drive it. It isn't deadlier than 3 MBTs and 1 Lightning, but it provides the functionality of a tough APC that can actually defend itself between destinations.
Neurotoxin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-21, 05:53 PM   [Ignore Me] #4
Sirisian
Colonel
 
Sirisian's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


Not to derail the thread but I think you figured out why exclusive certification slots are a poor design choice for specialization. You end up with players that have a use for a vehicle but there's no feasible mechanism currently to allow it. There should be a different mechanism in the game for restricting a player's choices. You might read this if you have a chance. It would allow deep customization on the Sunderer.

Last edited by Sirisian; 2013-07-21 at 05:55 PM.
Sirisian is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-21, 06:33 PM   [Ignore Me] #5
NewSith
Contributor
Brigadier General
 
NewSith's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


Originally Posted by Neurotoxin View Post
That is cool, but.... I want a Sunderer, not an AMS with seats and guns.
Question:
Wouldn't a Sunderer with shield diffuser benefit better from smoke screen rather than other than blockade armor?
Wouldn't an AMS be better if you had choice what to bring along with you - Proxy Radar, Blockade Armor, Stealth or Mineguard?
And so forth...

The castling I offer forces more choice, by removing the "ultimate" configurations, like say Blockade+Smoke for a combat Sundy...
__________________

Originally Posted by CutterJohn View Post
Shields.. these are a decent compromise between the console jockeys that want recharging health, and the glorious pc gaming master race that generally doesn't.

Last edited by NewSith; 2013-07-21 at 06:34 PM.
NewSith is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-22, 09:21 PM   [Ignore Me] #6
Dougnifico
First Lieutenant
 
Dougnifico's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


I think the reason the ammo dispenser and the AMS are separate is to encourage ammo use. It can already be tough to find an ammo sundy and even less people would have them if they couldn't also have AMS.
Dougnifico is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-22, 10:12 PM   [Ignore Me] #7
typhaon
Sergeant Major
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


I think as times goes on, we'll get more and more interesting skill slots for infantry and vehicles.
typhaon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-23, 03:29 AM   [Ignore Me] #8
Plaqueis
Staff Sergeant
 
Plaqueis's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


I'd settle for option to get Halberd (or Saron ) on the roof...
Plaqueis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-23, 05:39 AM   [Ignore Me] #9
Baneblade
Contributor
Lieutenant General
 
Baneblade's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


I'e never understood why they insist on putting obvious utility things in the defense slot.
__________________
Post at me bro.

Baneblade is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-24, 04:17 PM   [Ignore Me] #10
OmegaPREDATOR
Corporal
 
OmegaPREDATOR's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


It will be worse after.
As I eard shield and invisibility (if they come) will be at the place of SMA ... Quite pointless !
OmegaPREDATOR is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-25, 11:59 AM   [Ignore Me] #11
Ertwin
Staff Sergeant
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


I would gladly give up AMS in order to be able to provide ammo and repair allies at the same time.
Ertwin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-25, 12:57 PM   [Ignore Me] #12
maradine
Contributor
Lieutenant Colonel
 
maradine's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


Dual halberds on a bus resist/HP pool is probably not something you want to have be a thing.
maradine is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2013-07-25, 05:52 PM   [Ignore Me] #13
SternLX
Sergeant
 
SternLX's Avatar
 
Re: Wouldn't a Sunderer Make More Sense If It Was Like This


If you ask me they need to bring the Deliverer back and move the AMS ability to it. Maybe even adapt it for use with an ANT Module. Let the Sunderer do everything else that an APC can be.
SternLX is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply
  PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Bookmarks

Discord


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 PM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.