Besides BF4

Gotcha.
That sounds cool except that as soon as a match starts I typically mute everyone and wouldn't communicate with them anyway.

Metalzoic wrote:Gotcha.
That sounds cool except that as soon as a match starts I typically mute everyone and wouldn't communicate with them anyway.

You wouldnt be very good at Planteside 2 lmao

Sym wrote:

Metalzoic wrote:Gotcha.
That sounds cool except that as soon as a match starts I typically mute everyone and wouldn't communicate with them anyway.

You wouldnt be very good at Planteside 2 lmao

That's what I'm thinking.

Most battles in PS2 are zergfests that end with you camping a spawn with 40 other people for 5 minutes... There's very few bases with layouts that are actually defensible in any way. More people in your zerg = win almost every time with the exception of biolabs and The Crown. Individual skill means almost nothing, and the meta game of capturing territory is a giant merry-go-round that is almost meaningless.


PS2 is fun, but nothing about it is done better than BF3 except for squadding mechanics.

Ante wrote:Most battles in PS2 are zergfests that end with you camping a spawn with 40 other people for 5 minutes... There's very few bases with layouts that are actually defensible in any way. More people in your zerg = win almost every time with the exception of biolabs and The Crown. Individual skill means almost nothing, and the meta game of capturing territory is a giant merry-go-round that is almost meaningless.


PS2 is fun, but nothing about it is done better than BF3 except for squadding mechanics.

Well. You sold me on it. Sign me up!

that's what I was thinking, the territory thing seemed useless...I don't think you can actually take a faction's home base,just the stuff out from that. I mean it could be fun with a group of people,and the time to kill with guns seemed good,but idk it didn't click or have any magic with me

Ante wrote:Most battles in PS2 are zergfests that end with you camping a spawn with 40 other people for 5 minutes... There's very few bases with layouts that are actually defensible in any way. More people in your zerg = win almost every time with the exception of biolabs and The Crown. Individual skill means almost nothing, and the meta game of capturing territory is a giant merry-go-round that is almost meaningless.


PS2 is fun, but nothing about it is done better than BF3 except for squadding mechanics.

Didn't you know, they "fixed" the Crown.

Ante wrote:Most battles in PS2 are zergfests that end with you camping a spawn with 40 other people for 5 minutes... There's very few bases with layouts that are actually defensible in any way. More people in your zerg = win almost every time with the exception of biolabs and The Crown. Individual skill means almost nothing, and the meta game of capturing territory is a giant merry-go-round that is almost meaningless.


PS2 is fun, but nothing about it is done better than BF3 except for squadding mechanics.

I haven't experienced this at all. If you are severely outnumbered, sure, your spawn will be camped, but in that case you've already lost so your PL wouldn't have you fighting there.

They've introduced alerts now, which tend to mass all the people on the server and all of the outfits onto one continent with a goal.

On a bad night, PS2 in unplayable because you're just outnumbered, and in that case I play on a different character.

On a good night, the fights are pretty evenly matched and tactics actually do play a role. A well timed armor column or max crash can turn the tide, or sometimes i've managed to clear out a bunch of maxes with C4 that lets us capture a point, then the territory, which opens up the grid to allow us to capture further territory (there's a new grid system that gives some focus to it). I'm actually kind of fed up being NC on Matherson because leadership is lacking and we tend to lose alerts even with equal numbers because the other teams are doing smarter things with their guys.

Duck wrote:

Ante wrote:Most battles in PS2 are zergfests that end with you camping a spawn with 40 other people for 5 minutes... There's very few bases with layouts that are actually defensible in any way. More people in your zerg = win almost every time with the exception of biolabs and The Crown. Individual skill means almost nothing, and the meta game of capturing territory is a giant merry-go-round that is almost meaningless.


PS2 is fun, but nothing about it is done better than BF3 except for squadding mechanics.

I haven't experienced this at all. If you are severely outnumbered, sure, your spawn will be camped, but in that case you've already lost so your PL wouldn't have you fighting there.

They've introduced alerts now, which tend to mass all the people on the server and all of the outfits onto one continent with a goal.

On a bad night, PS2 in unplayable because you're just outnumbered, and in that case I play on a different character.

On a good night, the fights are pretty evenly matched and tactics actually do play a role. A well timed armor column or max crash can turn the tide, or sometimes i've managed to clear out a bunch of maxes with C4 that lets us capture a point, then the territory, which opens up the grid to allow us to capture further territory (there's a new grid system that gives some focus to it). I'm actually kind of fed up being NC on Matherson because leadership is lacking and we tend to lose alerts even with equal numbers because the other teams are doing smarter things with their guys.

VS on Waterson. Outnumbered.

Then I got a TR on Matterson. STILL OUTNUMBERED.

The only character I can have a fairly equal fight on with is my NC on Connery.

Sacred 3

That is all.

MH wrote:

Duck wrote:

Ante wrote:Most battles in PS2 are zergfests that end with you camping a spawn with 40 other people for 5 minutes... There's very few bases with layouts that are actually defensible in any way. More people in your zerg = win almost every time with the exception of biolabs and The Crown. Individual skill means almost nothing, and the meta game of capturing territory is a giant merry-go-round that is almost meaningless.


PS2 is fun, but nothing about it is done better than BF3 except for squadding mechanics.

I haven't experienced this at all. If you are severely outnumbered, sure, your spawn will be camped, but in that case you've already lost so your PL wouldn't have you fighting there.

They've introduced alerts now, which tend to mass all the people on the server and all of the outfits onto one continent with a goal.

On a bad night, PS2 in unplayable because you're just outnumbered, and in that case I play on a different character.

On a good night, the fights are pretty evenly matched and tactics actually do play a role. A well timed armor column or max crash can turn the tide, or sometimes i've managed to clear out a bunch of maxes with C4 that lets us capture a point, then the territory, which opens up the grid to allow us to capture further territory (there's a new grid system that gives some focus to it). I'm actually kind of fed up being NC on Matherson because leadership is lacking and we tend to lose alerts even with equal numbers because the other teams are doing smarter things with their guys.

VS on Waterson. Outnumbered.

Then I got a TR on Matterson. STILL OUTNUMBERED.

The only character I can have a fairly equal fight on with is my NC on Connery.

The VS on waterson have actually been kicking ass lately. They usually switch off with TR with who's winning. NC is always a clusterfuck.