Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: Now introducing new Diet PSU. And Lemon Twist PSU
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 2012-09-20, 01:37 AM   [Ignore Me] #1
Lucifarus
Private
 
Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Threads currently being eaten alive by all the other suggestions on the main planetside 2 forum, so thought I would put it here for longer discussion (or any discussion at all). Not sure if this is would be better for the ideas section or not, feel free to move it.

Original Thread: http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/i...e-cover.21450/

I've noticed that currently the infantry combat is a little...erratic, would be the word. Infantry moves at a very fast speed in close quarters/range. There is not enough use of cover. In fact, it's more of twitch shooter at the moment. This doesn't apply to any other aspect of the game, vehicle combat is very tactical and requires proper positioning. Infantry combat? Not so much.

While it is completely possible to have those epic moments where you're defending a position with a machine gun emplacement and one mans guarding a doorway or assaulting a large base with a squad of five from a long distance to take out the bases main guns, this is often ruined by the sprint function.

It often feels like you're penalized for attempting to guard doorways or hold down positions. I've more often than not had a man literally sprint up the stairs at mach 10 to extremely close range while I'm blasting his armor off, then fire off a few shots with ends up with either one of us dying due to the gamble. Hiding around a corner and shooting upstairs while someone else flanks isn't the most viable strategy at the moment.

The sprint is also abused to avoid death. Weapons in the game do not insta kill, there is a armor layer than needs to be punched through. Heavy assault abuse this especially, flicking on their overshield then running into a building despite getting jumped by another player. If you're twitchy enough, you can run and cower to avoid several levels of ambush. This benefits players with quicker reaction times rather than players who think "tactically" in a fight. While skill is something we want in this game, it can't be that kind of skill. There are far too many players. With the current system, zerging is an inevitability rather than a viable strategy. As it stands,100 players holding off 200 isn't even slightly possible, it ends as quickly as the horde super sprints in, which is the opposite the developers said they wanted.

There needs to be a larger penalty for being caught with your pants down in an open field without proper positioning. Or for rushing a entrenched position that's aiming right at you. There's a few ways to fix the speed issue, though they all have their weaknesses.

Build up speed for infantry: This is probably the worse of all of the ideas, as this exact thing is currently supposed to be one of the weakness of the max suit.

Damage causes slowdown: Being shot reducing movement speed is honestly what I think would be best, though I'm letting you be the judge of that. It would keep the full sprinting speed for flanking/running from cover to cover but disallow rushing into guarded rooms and having complete ability to escape from suppression fire.

Sprint meter: A sprint meter wouldn't do much, but it might dissuade long distance running.

Decreasing speed as you run: Another possibly good one, the longer you run, the slower you move. This wouldn't exactly stop rushes, but it would do enough to prevent super sprinting from danger.

What do you guys think? This seems to be part of the reason bases are hard to defend (players getting really close without anyone noticing, then just running and gunning everyone like we're playing Doom, as much as I love Doom).
Lucifarus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 02:02 AM   [Ignore Me] #2
zzzornbringer
Private
 
zzzornbringer's Avatar
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


i havn't played the game yet, so i can't really comment.

i just saw videos and actually felt that the infantry combat feels rather slow. low TTK but relatively slow movement.

i'm a quake fan, so you might figure what i would prefer in a shooter.

however, i think the suggestion about getting slowed down when hit, should get looked into at least. may improve the game.
__________________
do you know why they test atomic bombs?
to see if they work.

-bill hicks
zzzornbringer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 02:17 AM   [Ignore Me] #3
Lucifarus
Private
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Originally Posted by zzzornbringer View Post
i havn't played the game yet, so i can't really comment.

i just saw videos and actually felt that the infantry combat feels rather slow. low TTK but relatively slow movement.

i'm a quake fan, so you might figure what i would prefer in a shooter.

however, i think the suggestion about getting slowed down when hit, should get looked into at least. may improve the game.
Arena shooters and battlefield-esque games are two different genres, so I'm not sure what you mean. Counterstrike? At any rate, the best players/arguably most of the outfits in this game utilize the same zerging that most seem to look down upon. And it's actually a incredibly fast time to kill, especially when you get anywhere close. I'd account this to the current crazy sprinting allowing optimum killing distance far too quickly.

I don't think it's possible to have a strategic game with fast infantry movement. We likely need to slow it down for the ground troops, who are as it stands the main bases capture-ers. When they are able to advance up a hill into a base in seconds rather than minutes, that's when bases stop mattering.

The videos show that it is possible for slow combat, it's just not as common as people running into the crown and gunning everyone down due to either faulty game mechanics or ease of base access due to movement speed. If anything, vehicles should be what allows quick base rushes, not the infantries natural speed. The size of the continent/lack of distance between bases certainly isn't helping.

Last edited by Lucifarus; 2012-09-20 at 02:19 AM.
Lucifarus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 03:06 AM   [Ignore Me] #4
CutterJohn
Colonel
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Heavy assault use their skill exactly as intended, flicking on their overshield then running into a building despite getting jumped by another player.
Fixed that. Who would imagine the heavy assault has an ability that makes him a hitpoint tank to assault positions with? And to use it?Bordering on an exploit, really.

This benefits players with quicker reaction times rather than players who think "tactically" in a fight.
Yes. Reacting to and running from an ambush is totally not tactical. Staying and dying, now thats tactics!
CutterJohn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 03:14 AM   [Ignore Me] #5
Mox
Contributor
Second Lieutenant
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


We need more walls, less entrances to buildings and a time limit for the sprint.
Mox is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 03:32 AM   [Ignore Me] #6
Lucifarus
Private
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Originally Posted by CutterJohn View Post
Fixed that. Who would imagine the heavy assault has an ability that makes him a hitpoint tank to assault positions with? And to use it?Bordering on an exploit, really.
That's fair, though if you want to use his name against the idea, shouldn't a heavy assault also be moving much slower? The class also isn't nearly as armored as the suit would imply. He's not really tanky as it stands. I'd also ask you to imagine what would happen if a 100 group outfit decided to use that to its full extent. No one would survive. It's going to be the new Max Rush.

Originally Posted by CutterJohn View Post
Yes. Reacting to and running from an ambush is totally not tactical. Staying and dying, now thats tactics!
I think you misunderstood that one. He runs into the building, jumps out of a window, then appears on the other side of the building, then quick knifes the poor bastard who managed to fail killing him (gun accuracy might need to be improved in the game, spreads a little crazy, more based on luck at the moment than it is on a steady hand). What I'd rather see is jumping behind the closest thing resembling a "wall" then shooting around the corner at the guy that shot him/throwing a grenade. Running away from combat is too common. I want to see fighting, not pussyfooting for power shields unless there's at the very least a firing line going on.

Last edited by Lucifarus; 2012-09-20 at 03:34 AM.
Lucifarus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 06:00 AM   [Ignore Me] #7
Ghost Runner
Staff Sergeant
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Actually all we need is a more accurate rifles then those zergers wont be so annoying. Just my thoughts on this.
Ghost Runner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 06:04 AM   [Ignore Me] #8
Lucifarus
Private
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Originally Posted by Ghost Runner View Post
Actually all we need is a more accurate rifles then those zergers wont be so annoying. Just my thoughts on this.
I was thinking that as well. I never really had trouble in games without these features as long as any target foolish enough to bum rush me got vaporized by high damage, high accuracy rifles. Not sure if that's how the current gun play is going though.


That's the kind of stuff I'm used to (that guy actually doesn't play nearly as well as I do in that game). Maybe I'll change my tune when the game stops being frame rate laggy.
Lucifarus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 06:48 AM   [Ignore Me] #9
Gugabalog
Major
 
Gugabalog's Avatar
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Originally Posted by Lucifarus View Post
That's fair, though if you want to use his name against the idea, shouldn't a heavy assault also be moving much slower? The class also isn't nearly as armored as the suit would imply. He's not really tanky as it stands. I'd also ask you to imagine what would happen if a 100 group outfit decided to use that to its full extent. No one would survive. It's going to be the new Max Rush.



I think you misunderstood that one. He runs into the building, jumps out of a window, then appears on the other side of the building, then quick knifes the poor bastard who managed to fail killing him (gun accuracy might need to be improved in the game, spreads a little crazy, more based on luck at the moment than it is on a steady hand). What I'd rather see is jumping behind the closest thing resembling a "wall" then shooting around the corner at the guy that shot him/throwing a grenade. Running away from combat is too common. I want to see fighting, not pussyfooting for power shields unless there's at the very least a firing line going on.
Ah, fire lines, good old days of musketry. So tactical and efficient. /sarcasm
__________________
DEATH TO THE FALSE REPUBLIC!FREEDOM FROM THE CORPORATE MERCENARIES!TECHNOLOGY IS MIGHT!
Gugabalog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 06:55 AM   [Ignore Me] #10
Lucifarus
Private
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Originally Posted by Gugabalog View Post
Ah, fire lines, good old days of musketry. So tactical and efficient. /sarcasm
I didn't mean literal firing lines. Please don't assume that I said something completely stupid.

I meant lines between two teams. You know, where both teams stand extremely far away because the area in between them is a no mans land. In bases like the crown, I've actually seen people hide on the hills near the left (facing the crown before crossing the left bridge), standing directly next to each other and popping out to shoot. When you're attacking a place while constantly being bombarded with mortars, tanks, and bullets, you're inevitably going to end up hiding in the same place ala WWI trenches with some several other people who thought the same thing. Only so many places for cover. Assuming you also picked a spot a tank round can't hit you of course.
Lucifarus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 07:37 AM   [Ignore Me] #11
Blue Sam
Corporal
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Good. Fast combat is fun. Yet another boring, slow snoozefest is not fun.
Blue Sam is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 08:12 AM   [Ignore Me] #12
Lucifarus
Private
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Originally Posted by Blue Sam View Post
Good. Fast combat is fun. Yet another boring, slow snoozefest is not fun.
I love twitch shooting as much as the next guy, none of these suggestions decrease the pace. Prolonged combat is awesome when there's constant movement. The current weapon mechanics do not well accompany how the games actually plays. Weapons overall need to be deadlier or at least scary enough that people feel a greater need to hide behind something to avoid them. There's a high possibility the lack of lethality in weapons might be the problem. This isn't exactly a problem when one guys being shot at by a group, but balancing needs to start at the 1 v 1 for each type of unit set up if we want the overall game to be skill based rather than swarm based. A twenty vs twenty group of infantry should be on a somewhat level playing field due to individual skill, basically.

Fast paced isn't fun when fast paced turns into you being completely obliterated by three guys because currently it's difficult (I said difficult, not impossible) to hold off groups even slightly larger than yours. A 3 to 1 advantage is far too advantageous for a fun video game.

Whens the last time you even played a slower shooter? Exactly. These simply don't sell and have never sold. That's a myth (I'm ignoring mount and blade warband napoleon wars and any indie thing ever).

Last edited by Lucifarus; 2012-09-20 at 08:16 AM.
Lucifarus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 08:53 AM   [Ignore Me] #13
Sledgecrushr
Colonel
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


More accurate rifles are definitely the answer. When I play HA now the LMG at 30 yards plus it leaves me wishing the bullets would go to where Im aiming. As it stands now its really hard to kill someone at range with a rifle.
Edit - As more certs open up Im sure the accuracy of these weapons will tighten up.

Last edited by Sledgecrushr; 2012-09-20 at 08:55 AM.
Sledgecrushr is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 09:41 AM   [Ignore Me] #14
Ghoest9
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Ghoest9's Avatar
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


The answer is to make rifles more accurate when using semi-auto. Like they were before.

If you want combat to have a real life feel then you have to make weapons that at least as accurrate has real gun from 100 years ago.
__________________
Wherever you went - Here you are.
Ghoest9 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-20, 09:44 AM   [Ignore Me] #15
ringring
Contributor
General
 
Re: Infantry Combat: Less twitch, more cover


Slower ttk, more survivability, if you want more tactical play ... it's too fast atm.
__________________
ringring is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply
  PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Bookmarks

Discord

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 09:47 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 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.