Truxa

Planetside 2 has it's peak (~1250 total players online) at around 9 pm Berlin (3pm US central) every day, with battles ranging from 24v24 to 96v96 nowadays since a couple servers merged into 1. However, it can become very hard to get a grip from whats going on. It is a free game but it does have a micro transaction feature and it does require the 'play x hours to unlock' thing you complain about, but thats the RPG part of the game. I have been playing PS2 for about 50 hours or so now and I do enjoy it. I haven't paid a single dime to the game and I'm no where good at it, but the large scale battles make it fun for me. I'm that 1 guy hanging back sniping everything off, covering the battlefront from flank attacks, or the support unit to heal/repair and resupply ammo. You start out having the basic guns for every class, but most of the times they are better than those you unlock (after playing 30 hours killing the enemy) It's like this: Kill an enemy, receive 125 experience, 250 experience gives a coin. With those coins you buy upgrades for your character. Succesfully attacking and securing a base yield over 1000 experience (=4 coins) succesfully defending an area yields less. Certain key-points increase the experience gain (by 5%, 25%, etc) Kill a person who has been killing a lot, yields more experience than a newb. (experience by threatlevel) Taking over a base can take up to 10 minutes, but without proper defenses, 3 minutes will suffice. It's a BF-like capturing system (stay in the area to cap) These are just a handfull of ways to earn esperience. Medics gain with healing, technicians gain with repairing and resupplying ammo. Certain vehicles function as spawnpoints, they yield experience that way too. In a single hour of playing, you can purchase persistent upgrades to your character, be it a scope for your gun, or increase a class skill etc. Give it a go, it's more fun the longer you play it.

One of the SBH tactics is the following: Infiltration as a team. What they do is, 4 SBHs enter, lets say, Refinery, puts 4 timed C4 on the MCT and run to, lets say, the powerplant. When they enter the powerplant, they start firing at the MCT ALL 4 of them. Most of the time, GDI reacts to the firing and runs towards the powerplant to kill off the SBHs losing the refinery in the end. The amount of damage the SBHs do is enormous. I believe that 4 SBHs will kill a building through firing on the MCT, if GDI does not try to kill them. I'd say this is powerful enough, especially on maps like Walls: Flying where base defenses are limitted to mines. I agree though, SBH laser needs a bit of a damage boost and magazine boost, but not for the reasons you mentioned. SBHs went from a 100-round-mag single fire to a 25?/30?-round-mag burst fire mode. The overall damage you do on an enemy soldier is decreased compared to the original renegade due to this 'nerf' (if you can call it a nerf) because the recoil make you miss the 2nd/3rd bullet per burst. It also it a lot harder to consistently hit headshots with the SBH. A lonely SBH in GDI base should be ineffective, which is great. A team of SBHs on the other hand, should be able to deal significant damage. My best strategy so far: 5 SBH infiltration, 1 SBH holding a nuke, placing it at the WF, while the 4 other SBHs do the ref/pp thing ensuring atleast 1 building goes down.

I'm no programmer and I haven't seen that message before, so I do not know if it applies to you or someone else. What I came here to say is my hypothesis: In a past game I've played, it was possible to speedhack due to the fact that the client made the server believe that the clients internet speed was slow(er) than the other players. The game compensated for this by allowing the slow client to speed up, but as the server was tricked, this speed up was added to the normal game speed, thus speedhacking. The reason for me saying this is, maybe you had lag (and so did others) because someone else 'initiated' the lag for everyone else, for him to be 'faster' than others in that sense and thus speedhacking, resulting in your EVA message. I think I'm wrong because I'm no programmer and internet speed issues are not resolved this way afaik.

IF or when the game gets released on steam greenlight, a steam account is needed. The penalty for cheating could be a steam account ban + a steam-wide cheat notification linking that account to cheat/hack activity thus creating repercussions in other games, such as being unable to play other games due to the fact the player cheated or used hacks in another game. Yes, it's one hell of a repercussion, but cheating or hacking in online gameplay should be punnishable by death (online gameplay-death) Cheating should be quantified, qualified and validated though. What is cheating? When is a player cheating? Does abusing bugs equals as cheating? Who decides this?

When I played the original Ren, if I remember correctly, there were 2 separate limits. I specifically remembered it because a common tactic was mining the main base entrance on walls. (the non-flying version) there were only 2 points of entry, tunnels and main gate, so mining them result in SBH detection or kill. To counter vehicles trying to remove those mines, i often placed remote C4's in front 3m apart from eachother, from wall-to-wall and 3 rows. Yeah a shitload work for 1 vehicle detonation, but was often VERY succesfull against SBH infiltration and a rush by picking off 2-3 vehicles with those remotes.

Putting C4's on your vehicle is ok, but only on a humvee or APC patrolling the base, assaulting vehicles should not do this (Read Gerbil Tube's comment) Vehicles stolen in the field is darn anoying, but hey, in a team effort, a few engineers/technicians/hotwires are there to repair the vehicles on the fly, drivers dont need to get out. e.g. in a 12v12 match: 4 defenders 8 attackers, of which 2 are repairing the assaulting 6 vehicles. When the opposing team has such high pressure, they put more resources (aka engineers/technicians) to defend the buildings, which allows for the defending 4 people to attack some more. I've heard that the intended mine limit for this game is 30, so 45 is too much. I feel though, that 45 is still not enough. Point is, defending and assaulting should be a team-effort not a single engineer/technician's effort. I'm of the opinion that remote C4, timed C4 and mines should count differently. Minelimit as it should be 30, remote C4 perhaps a personal limit of 6, to prevent spamming and timed C4 a personal limit of 2 (see tech/hotwire carrying 2) This means that the base can be defended by 30 mines PLUS the amount of engineers/technicians/hots *6 remotes. In the 12v12 example that would lead to 30 mines + 4x6(=24) remote C4's. When tactically placed and active defending takes place, those remotes can be as deadly as mines.

Spend 5 minutes looking up what you meand and I found this video: Yeah, it's a design flaw and yeah, it was abused followed by a fix to prevent this, but it was unintended to begin with! Same as vehicle surfing and 'wall climbing' is in Renegade X. Blame it on 'bad game design' to cover it up, but in the end of the day, you are abusing the game mechanics to get an unintended unfair advantage over others which should be disallowed. For me, it makes the game less-appealing and I'm losing interest in this game due to those many abusers. If you can win by playing this game as it was intended, then and only then you can call yourself a better player. I'm fed up with being killed or defeated by people who do not play games as they are intended.

I just mark the entire forum as read, then when there is a new post, only need to watch the capital R in red.

about time? When I looked at that trailer, I was thinking all cool things to be had ingame, too bad they weren't. When registered for this forum, I've noticed a post or 2 about the rearming nodes and healing nodes being carried around and dropped to heal/rearm your team (but also the enemy) Still cool though! Can you give any light on what would be added in the future, regardless when (be it Beta 3, 4, 5 or 10)

When EVA messages mingle to form: "Hand of Nod destroyed" instead of 'GDI harverster destroyed' + 'Hand of Nod under attack'

I agree, with fewer numbers, the games are way too short due to 1 team rushing and the other team unable to defend properly. It's just not enough players to do that. I also agree as when I play, I play as 'the designated defender' meaning, maps like walls and whiteout, I'm the tech mining and occupieing the defensive structures. With other maps like field, defending the tunnels, goldrush defending the bridge with hot/tech/marksman/sniper; If i dont, the game is lost rapidly as no one cares to defend in that area, it's somehow boring (yes! it's boring, but needs to be done or we lose Hon/Bar/pp) I've seen a single flamer rushing up to the AGT without being killed (shot down to about 30%) the AGT doesnt do enough damage compared to the obelisk, especially in Field No, just ... no. Bots are no solution. The problem before was that they were able to see the spy and SBH even though they should not be visible. I believe it is fixed now, but even 1 single shot of the spy onto an enemy unit/building would 'mark' that spy/SBH as visible to the bots. For defensive purposes, it would be too much an unintended nerf for Nod SBHs and both team's spies. Snipers are fine. Sydney/Raveshaw are also fine. They all kill a free class with 1 shot, either head or torso, thats the price for being cheap (getting free classes) any other purchasable class, will not be killed with 1 shot, unless it's a headshot. Imo, fair game, even a deadeye's/blackhand sniper kills any character with a headshot. Thats ok. Thats a nice idea, I'm for it but keep in mind that 100.000 is a lot, maybe not for a full server, but when the ref is down, 100.000 is a lot to donate especially on lower populated server/off-peek hours. In a game of 30 minutes, it could be possible to passively gain 10.000 per player by ref ticks and harvester dumps. A full server (20v20) thats 5.000 credits per player per 30 minutes needed in order to restore a building. I´m more for the idea of base auto repair function. Kicking in when building health drops below 80%. What do you mean by this? Pistol-Automatic pistol? They are supposed to be weak and supplemental. The other weapons like heavy pistol (75 credtis) and the automatic 125 credits rifle (forgot the name) do reasonable damage imo. The marksman can kill a 1k character with 10 hits or so. It's a free sniper, shouldnt do much damage. It's a good free-choice to defend the goldrush bridges against techs/engineers. they die with 4 headshots or so. the timedC4 = every classes anti vehicle weapon. Get close, plant, run away. On your last notes, the chemtrooper should NOT be healed by tiberium. It's a 'normal human' in an anti tiberium radiation suit to prevent radiation damage. They should be unaffected by tiberium rifles, if anything should change about them. You are talking about tiberium mutants, they should be healed by tiberium, but they are not (yet) in the game

Goes against the idea of vehicles having infinite ammo, as was with the original renegade. You'd want to proceed and make tanks having finite ammo as well. This brings an end to spamming but starts the era of continuous rushing. rush-die-rush-die-rush-kill-die-rush-die-rush-kill-die-rush-rush-rush

When you fill in your specs in the website, you can check it. check this link, i've done it for you: http://www.game-debate.com/games/index. ... quirements The website rates your system against the recommended settings: CPU: 4/10 GPU: 3/10 RAM: 4/10 It is worth a note though, Devs still have some optimization to do, so the recommended specs might lower although i think they will be the same since the recommended specs still made my system crash due to lack of memory

I both like and hate this idea and here's why: In some maps, like Walls and Mesa, dustparticles blow up and are very anoying when I'm trying to snipe. It blows my vision shitloads! On the other side, this also affects other snipers I hate it when it happens to me, but would abuse it if I counter snipers that way love-hate-love-hate-love-hate, can't choose

2GB RAM is not enough, you'd need atleast 3.5GB RAM (on a 32bit system thats max anyway) and even then, when I had a 32bit windows with the 3.5GB RAM it crashed occasionally for me due to lack of memory. Check out this website to see whats in need of upgrading in order to play the game: http://www.game-debate.com/games/index. ... ack%20Dawn

This might occasionally work but more times than not, I see people doing this and the vehicles remain empty in the base. Sometimes the opposing team comes up with a rush while a player is buying vehicles for others this way. Realize that upon production, the vehicle is locked for 20 seconds for the purchaser, but not for the opposing team. Many times this caused a drawback; the opposing team rushes, few of their vehicles get killed but the drivers rush towards the emty vehicles and continue the rush. To prevent such happenings, I make it a habit of putting timed C4's on the empty vehicles after i entered it. If it takes more than 30 seconds for someone to enter it and join the advance, it's too late. But imo a vehicle destroyed is better than handed to the enemy.

I'm aware of that but I had the illegality of his question in mind

I don't think this is an apropriate forum to discuss this, especially it being a public forum with a totally different purpose.

Hi! It's hard to tell what kind of games you can play and how well exactly, but I find the following website ideal for that situation: http://www.game-debate.com/games/index. ... ack%20Dawn It lets you estimate your systems performance per game and gives you recommended settings to play them on. Hope it helps!

Yeah yeah, you 'muricans are happy about the low ping, screw that! The serverlist showed this: !SubGlobal.net - 1,000Mb/s Lagless! with 39/40 players with a ping just under 100 in Europe. Vehicle limit 255, minelimit 255. I was thinking, this is another server with a mocked player count, but I was fooled. As soon as I joined and the harvester dumped it's load, I had a total of 7k credits on my name. Whuuuuuuut?! That's right! But that's the entire team having the same thing. Just 10 minutes after that, orca's started to fly around. -sigh- you 'muricans ruin the fun drawing all the playerbase to that f#cked-up (excuse the language) server. Anywho, I'm not going to join that server, it's for kiddo's who don't like the game as is.

SFJake, as I understand it, everyone will play on a server closest to that player. That server communicates to a central server coordinating everyone into 1 play session creating the illusion of playing on the same server. I foresee communication and syncing problems though, between the servers causing errors in calculating positions e.g. player 1 sees an enemy running behind a wall towards a gap. The enemy wants to run to the gap but not expose himzelf. Player 1's server calculates that the enemy is continuing to walk thus seeing him, shooting and killing him while in fact the enemy was never exposed in his own screen/server. Server settings need to be the exact same while the server providers do not communicate that well.

I'm a fan of banning this behaviour, but as I understand it, it's unintended but accepted as an "advanced tactic" by the server owners. BTW, it's easily countered when you are a raveshaw or sakura, 5 ramjetshots kill an orca. It just means, there wasnt anyone actively defending with 1k characters when you lost your powerplant.

Have you been playing GDI at all? Or are you the one that spams the "change team" button as soon as you realize you are on GDI team? SBH needed a detection nerf as it was nigh impossible to detect SBHs, especially the cloak should fluctuate when they get hit by bullets. At the moment, only driving/running around in the hope you get an SBH off-guard will give you a chance of foiling an SBH investation. Mounted guns for infantry only? then they need a targetting buff, higher fire rate/faster bullet travel and larger magazines in order to support the "anti-infantry" paradigm.

I still read "blablabla I want more people to play with blablabla" but as I mentioned before, player amounts are a point of discussion. Some find 20 more than enough while others find it enjoyable when the amount reaches above 30. To the above quote: Developers get nothing now, other than the gratitude and eternal thanks from the community for making this epic game. They are already doing such enormous work and haven't gotten a dime for it.

The problem is that the game becomes unplayable with many vehicles on them. This is the reason for the 40 player limit. The game needs optimization. "mega servers" as you suggested it sound like you want more people to play with in 1 place. As nice as this idea may be, the game is nog designed for more than 64 players per gamesession. Even the original renegade wasnt designed for more than 40 people. This has to do with balancing issues and building health and the likes. There are other topics on the subject discussion the wish for some to have the player limit increased while there are also people wanting to even lower the player limit (to say 24; 12v12) I dont see your idea taking flight