Buggies

[CutterJohn]

So as not to derail the thread about shooting people out of buggies, I'm starting a new one about them, and what can be done to make them a more viable weapon and not so obviously outclassed by tanks.

It seems to me the only role of the buggy cert was to get a skyguard, and the remaining buggies were just lumped in for.. well, they were fun to drive, of course, but they were outclassed in nearly every respect by tanks, for an equivalent cert cost. Tanks were much better defended, had some AA capability, vastly better AI and AV capability, and at least double the hitpoints, and all you gained in return for all that was.. 20kph extra?

What can be done?

I would personally like to do 6 things to buggies, and one nerf to tanks.

1. Greater elevation and declination on the buggies
2. Alternate fire modes that allow for an aurora like spam shot that has a higher burst dps, but lower overall dps.
3. Add a coax machine gun for some limited AA cover, or buff the speed of the shells to be somewhat effective in this manner.
4. Make them detect mines farther out.
5. Put them somewhere in the same tree as tanks Perhaps as armored assault 1(now 2 points, and not including SG).
6. Reduced vehicle timer to 3 minutes or so.
7. Some(not total!) stabilization of the turret, to keep it less bouncy while at speed.
8. The tank nerf(and buff, I suppose).. greatly reduced tank AI splash, but a flatter arc, higher velocity shell for the prowler and vanny. Mag pretty much like the mag.

The role of buggies.. Dedicated AI machine. Meant to charge into the enemy lines and kill those infantry, hit and run style. The turret stabilization will let you shoot better while staying at full speed, the mine detection keeping you from instapopping, while still not letting you through. They will of course be a natural prey for tanks, but the reduced timer will help there. Tanks will no longer be the one machine to rule them all, and will need buggy support to kill infantry for them.

[Firefly]

Guessing you never drove a Marauder. That thing, when used properly, is beast-mode versus tanks.

[DviddLeff]

Not sure about buggies tbh; they need something.

They shouldn't require Tech for one, and perhaps only set off 50% of mines they pass over?

Maybe make the Harasser and ES buggies free?

[Aractain]

If you were that good in a marauder, you would be better in a Vangaurd (maybe even a prowler!)

The problem is roles. Tanks have massive AI damage, massive AV damage and high armour. Buggys have... errr... (Enforcer and thresher had crap all).

If tanks didn't have so much AI power (remove the splash damage, make the coaxial cannon actually useful) then buggys would be the primary AI vehicle.

So tanks need buggys to kill the infantry while tanks kill other tanks to protect the buggys and the wall turrets and push the front lines.

Sounds good to me.

[Bags]

Look up some of hamorad's frag videos if you think marauders need much more than a couple tweaks. Would love for them to take half mine damage.

[CutterJohn]

Guessing you never drove a Marauder. That thing, when used properly, is beast-mode versus tanks.

A very good team is adequate against tanks, and can kill them regularly, but not every time, and will die a horrible death to a good driver and gunner.

When I saw marauders I thought free BEP. They were easy to kill in a mag. Less easy, but more hp buffer in a vanny.

Look up some of hamorad's frag videos if you think marauders need much more than a couple tweaks. Would love for them to take half mine damage.

Those are pretty minor tweaks. 2 changes to the way the turret moves. A coax machine gun that will just ward off mosquitoes(seriously, nothing deserves to die to a mosquito except other air). The biggest change is the alternate fire spam shot, and the rest are cert changes, timer changes, and a nerf to tanks to make the buggies a better choice for the role of AI.

I've seen the buggy videos. And I've killed dozens or hundreds of people in buggies who were bored or thought they had enough skill to make them worthwhile, but never once was soloed by one that I can remember. If it happened, it was a rare thing indeed. They are ok at taking out infantry, excepting for the problems with turrets pointing down. They are very bad tank killing machines. It takes a master at the gun AND behind the wheel to make them marginally effective at that role.

[Firefly]

When I saw marauders I thought free BEP. They were easy to kill in a mag. Less easy, but more hp buffer in a vanny.
Mags were ridiculous. That's all I gotta say, honestly. Anything else would be pointless. I'd take a Marauder against a Mag-rider *ONLY* if I had three or more and they were decent crews who had experience working together.

And I've killed dozens or hundreds of people in buggies who were bored or thought they had enough skill to make them worthwhile, but never once was soloed by one that I can remember. If it happened, it was a rare thing indeed. They are ok at taking out infantry, excepting for the problems with turrets pointing down. They are very bad tank killing machines. It takes a master at the gun AND behind the wheel to make them marginally effective at that role.
Then either the majority of players are stupid and unskilled, or I know a lot of master gunners and drivers. I know a number of people from way-back-when that would run circles around a captured Prowler or Vanguard and tear it to shreds.

[CutterJohn]

You answered your own question. Captured prowler or vanguard. Most mag drivers had piss all experience shooting those guns.

I never once had a buggy solo me in a tank. And I spent a lot of time in mags and vannys. Maybe I'm a good shot. Or maybe they are just a really bad choice for that job. How many times has a thresher killed you in a prowler?

[Firefly]

You answered your own question. Captured prowler or vanguard. Most mag drivers had piss all experience shooting those guns.
I didn't ask a question. I deliberately did not face down a Mag-rider in an assault buggy. They turn on a dime, their front guns go PEWPEWPEWPEWPEWPEW instead of PEW PEW PEW *AND* they have the damage to stack. Turrets turned rather quickly too, and the guns depressed, so getting in close wasn't a good idea. I'll stop short of calling it OP because I tend to think that's a weak man's argument, but it's definitely not something to go fucking around with. I'd solo a Prowler or Vanguard with a lone Marauder because it's got the ability to take a tank down - they do not suck against tanks, they just suck against a Mag-rider. Now, in packs? Your tank versus three of my Marauders, now that's a sporting fight. And you might win, if you're as good as you hype. But I guarantee you I'd make you pay for every hit.

I never once had a buggy solo me in a tank. And I spent a lot of time in mags and vannys. Maybe I'm a good shot. Or maybe they are just a really bad choice for that job. How many times has a thresher killed you in a prowler?
I lulz at Threshers. I think I've seen exactly three Threshers less than I've seen a Beamer, and that's counting the times I've stolen a dead Vanu's Beamer to go beam someone up. Those things are shit.

And as for a Marauder solo'ing a Mag-rider, see previous paragraph.

[Aractain]

Yeah... thats great and all guys but having less than 1% of the original release population capable in a vehicle shows that it needs something. Sorry but top level players shouldn't really be figured into balance. The skill bit is supposed to be important but if you require top level skill for something to work - it isn't working.

What I generally talk about is the average player. If you are better than that then you will be awesome and pwn n00bs all day and night. Those players not quite as awesome as these top level players need to have fun (or they quit and Planetside fails again).

[Firefly]

Yeah... thats great and all guys but having less than 1% of the original release population capable in a vehicle shows that it needs something. Sorry but top level players shouldn't really be figured into balance. The skill bit is supposed to be important but if you require top level skill for something to work - it isn't working.

What I generally talk about is the average player. If you are better than that then you will be awesome and pwn n00bs all day and night. Those players not quite as awesome as these top level players need to have fun (or they quit and Planetside fails again).
Then none of these examples work because somehow being an original release population member means that everyone who stuck it out is now an elite player.

I'm not saying you have to have a top-level uber1337 driver and two uber1337 gunners for a Marauder, except maybe for a Mag-rider. I'm talking merely competent and experienced. IE, a Marauder crew. Not mercs, but a coordinated crew. People presume skill is the make-or-break in this game, and it's often NOT. Coordination, communication and teamwork will often do just as well as one guy with superb twitch skills, up to and including doing him one better more often than not. I find it hard to believe that these lessons are lost on today's PS players.

[CutterJohn]

I lulz at Threshers.

And I lulz at marauders. In a vanny.

Which is fine. They aren't big AV powerhouses. They aren't supposed to be. I just want to see them have a role as the AI powerhouse instead of tanks having both.

If good buggy operators manage to take down scrub tankers along the way, thats fine too.

I'm not saying you have to have a top-level uber1337 driver and two uber1337 gunners for a Marauder, except maybe for a Mag-rider. I'm talking merely competent and experienced. IE, a Marauder crew. Not mercs, but a coordinated crew. People presume skill is the make-or-break in this game, and it's often NOT. Coordination, communication and teamwork will often do just as well as one guy with superb twitch skills, up to and including doing him one better more often than not. I find it hard to believe that these lessons are lost on today's PS players.

And we're saying that if you put that same crew into a tank, they would be much more effective at their endeavors. Yes. You CAN kill tanks with buggies. That doesn't make it a great tool for the job.

[Bags]

If you start balancing the game so everything is 100% easy to use for the average WoW-tard (I play WoW so I feel justified in making that comparison) you end up with weapons like the thumper and dragon poisoning the gameplay.

[Warborn]

Make tanks primarily anti-vehicle, with diminished anti-infantry capability. Vehicles need actual niches. They seemingly just sort of put vehicles in and didn't really have specific roles in mind. Tanks could be anti-vehicle, some of the other stuff anti-infantry, some stuff anti-tank, etc.

Man, the vehicles really, really needed a sweeping balance pass.

[TRex]

Make tanks primarily anti-vehicle, with diminished anti-infantry capability. Vehicles need actual niches. They seemingly just sort of put vehicles in and didn't really have specific roles in mind. Tanks could be anti-vehicle, some of the other stuff anti-infantry, some stuff anti-tank, etc.

Man, the vehicles really, really needed a sweeping balance pass.

Thats why I agreed with (ThePeacemaker? ) on the AGN podcast when someone mentioned allowing the likes of vanguards to interchange their weapon loadouts to be AI /AV/AA , and he quite rightly pointed out all that would do is make the Vanguard the only vehicle you would need .

I'd like them to add newer engineering stuff that you could , say, blow the tracks off a vanguard with mines of a certain type than didnt affect mobile buggies as much. Repairable by an engineer, but render the vehicle an easier target while its steering and movement is impaired.

[DviddLeff]

Personally I am not content saying tanks are AV, buggies are AI because tanks are supposed to be powerhouses of the battlefield; but get wasted if they get cut off because of their slow speed.

Buggies have the speed to get in and get out of a fight quickly; if they stand still they should die.

So why would you pick a buggy instead of a tank? Lets look at the real world for ideas. The military currently use things like the HMMWV and Land Rovers for fast transport of infantry, recon, rapid assault and to provide fire support for infantry as they patrol. Transport in PS is already catered for with the Deli and variants, so the buggies need to provide fire support for infantry; something the tanks do already.

Therefore the buggies need to be able to be able to rapidly assault the enemy with a decent amount of firepower; something the TR and NC buggies have, but the Thresher lacks because of the comical gun.

Also the buggies need to be cheaper than tanks as they are in the real world, so reduce the cert cost.

[Warborn]

What's the point in having a wide variety of vehicles if tanks are the most durable and the best at killing all land targets? Why are they "supposed" to be the best at everything except killing aircraft?

[DviddLeff]

Rather than saying "this is AV, that is AI and the other is AA" I am saying that the vehicles could be balanced around three factors:

Armour
Speed
Firepower


Tanks have the highest armour and firepower, but are very slow.
Air cav have high speed, medium fire power and the least armour.
Buggies have medium armour, fire power and speed.

Buggies, while not excelling at any of these, occupies (or should occupy) the middle ground having more time in the combat zone than air cav before they have to retreat, but they are more capable than tanks at falling back to repair by using their speed.

[Warborn]

What is the negative associated with giving vehicles actual niches? Why would they not want to say "this vehicle is for AV, this vehicle is for AI, etc"?

Just to point out, what you're suggesting is exactly what they did in PlanetSide, and as it turned out speed was mostly useless because competent gunners can anticipate moving targets pretty accurately, and the net result is that the vehicle with the most armor and firepower becomes the most widely used and vehicles which can't get an inch in on them are relegated to gimmick roles or what you use when you're waiting for your tank timer.

[Aractain]

Rather than saying "this is AV, that is AI and the other is AA" I am saying that the vehicles could be balanced around three factors:

That works in a solo centric game like UT or something but teamwork is fostered by desireing someone to cover you. Tanks can still hit aircraft but they really want a mobile AA vehicle to stick with them (who ins't useless against other things though).

Tank AOE splash is skillless, sure if you can hit it really close you can do some damage still but lets just say they left the HEAT shells at home. This would imrpove the importance of the coaxial cannons which would still be powerful anti-infantry but cover would mean more and obviously requires more skill.

Now the tanks want the buggys near them too.

IMO its all about trying to inncetivise gameplay, having a choice between fast and slow is only going to end up the same way as is now (hint: mediocre at everything loses).

There is also the idea of buggys being a modular weapons system to improve thier desriability. AA (skygaurd), Artillery (rocket pack on the back of a marauder), Tank destroyer (big fat tank cannon on a buggy but with low DPS, more of a sniper keep your distance weapon).

[Timantium]

Thats why I agreed with (ThePeacemaker? ) on the AGN podcast when someone mentioned allowing the likes of vanguards to interchange their weapon loadouts to be AI /AV/AA , and he quite rightly pointed out all that would do is make the Vanguard the only vehicle you would need .

I'd like them to add newer engineering stuff that you could , say, blow the tracks off a vanguard with mines of a certain type than didnt affect mobile buggies as much. Repairable by an engineer, but render the vehicle an easier target while its steering and movement is impaired.

I guess you would need deployable magenets to hold the magrider down then?

[Firefly]

I'm going to do the unthinkable and apply real-world capabilities and intent to Planetside vehicles.

Tanks are the king of the battlefield, particularly modern Abrams-pattern tanks. They're virtually unkillable. Sure you can probably give one a flesh-wound, but they're incredibly powerful. A tank is a show of force. A tank shows up to a gunfight, and people start getting really scared. Or stupid, like the guy that stands in front of an Israeli tank and throws a rock at it. A tank is primarily a tank-killer. That's what it does. It doesn't shoot down jets or helicopters. It has a few machine guns for dealing with any infantry that are stupid enough or brave enough to get close. They're usually used to deal with light targets, though. You don't see a tank firing a shell at a random grunt. Not unless they're desperate or need to vape his position.

Something like a buggy, in this case I'll go with the Marauder since I love my Terran Republic, I see not as a Humvee but as a Ranger Special Operations Vehicle (RSOV). That's basically a stripped down Land Rover Defender that carries three Rangers as its crew. It has an M240 at the front and at the top is either a Fitty-cal or a Mk19 automatic grenade launcher. Excluding the Rangers and any Ranger passengers, it's still a helluva lot of firepower rolling up on an enemy position. I tend to see the Enforcer as an anti-vehicle vehicle but that's because I've driven one a sum total of once.

A Deliverer or its variants I see as a Cougar, MPPV, Combat Tactical Vehicle, armoured Humvee, whatever works for you. Either way, a small troop transport with enough armour to get you there and a gun or two.

The Sunderer I see as a Bradley. It's an infantry fighting vehicle with support guns. Roll it up to the front door, unload the squad of crunchies, give 'em some gunfire cover but don't hit the friendlies.

[DviddLeff]

What is the negative associated with giving vehicles actual niches? Why would they not want to say "this vehicle is for AV, this vehicle is for AI, etc"?

Just to point out, what you're suggesting is exactly what they did in PlanetSide, and as it turned out speed was mostly useless because competent gunners can anticipate moving targets pretty accurately, and the net result is that the vehicle with the most armor and firepower becomes the most widely used and vehicles which can't get an inch in on them are relegated to gimmick roles or what you use when you're waiting for your tank timer.

I'm trying to avoid having specific targets for vehicle types because of the customisable vehicle hard point system I have proposed, which would make any vehicle be able to be effective against other targets depending on what they chose to kit the vehicle out with.

That then leaves the armour, speed and size of available weapon hard points as the properties of the chassis, which are pretty important factors.

I think the buggies would be a lot more useful if they did have the customisable weapon hard points as Aractain says, combined with tanks being slightly slower perhaps and there simply being more cover available for the buggies to move behind to avoid tanks heavy weapons.

Regarding tanks being AV, buggies being AI we see that already as well with the VS; the Mag is crap against infantry while the Thresher/Aurora fill the AI role adequately, forcing the VS to field both when the NC and TR just roll Vanguards and Prowlers to do both.

[I SandRock]

Removing lock-on weapons would already make buggies a lot better. Give them a little more speed, acceleration and ability to traverse inclinations. Buggies should be fast hitting high speed but vulnerable vehicles. Hit and run tactics. Their defense would lie in speed rather than sheer brunt defensive power like tanks. I also don't think heavy tanks should be able to 1 shot infantry. I don't like 1 shot on anything except MAYBE, just MAYBE the flail.

I can't comment on empire specific buggies besides the trasher. But an idea could be to reduce the trasher gun's damage by 40% and then give the driver the same turret. You would control the driver turret with the mouse while driving with WASD. It could potentially do 120% damage compared to what it does now. But driving and aiming at the same time is a lot more difficult than a dedicated gunner. On the other hand, you aren't completely useless witout a gunner and you are more versatile against AI being able to lay down more fire around an area.

The harasser really needs some love. I think it could serve well as a more all-round vehicle. The SG primarily AA with some AI (mg). The empire specific being AI with some AV. The Harasser being decent against AA and AI with the machine gun but requiring more accurate aim. And decent against light vehicles. Perhaps add an extra 3rd seat on the rear for another gunner.

I think the suggestions in the OP go too far. Buggies cost 3 points and you get 3 cars which have distinct functions, so you have more versatility. You can use them while in Rexo. AA1+2 is 3 points but you get a 1 man strong light vehicle (lightning) and a heavy tank which is AI + AV only, you only need to slightly reduce its AI capability. Perhaps increase it's cooldown a little. Basically you spend 1.5 points per vehicle while you spend 1 point per vehicle for the buggies, you have more versatility + They allow rexo use.

[Firefly]

I'm trying to avoid having specific targets for vehicle types because of the customisable vehicle hard point system I have proposed, which would make any vehicle be able to be effective against other targets depending on what they chose to kit the vehicle out with.
No offense mate, you've done great work with that, but I don't see the point in it aside from a possible gamer-job portfolio, or wishful thinking. And to be honest, customisable load-outs on vehicles is a bad idea. As it's been mentioned in this thread... "Thats why I agreed with (ThePeacemaker? ) on the AGN podcast when someone mentioned allowing the likes of vanguards to interchange their weapon loadouts to be AI /AV/AA , and he quite rightly pointed out all that would do is make the Vanguard the only vehicle you would need." Nuff said. Sorry, again no disrespect intended.

Removing lock-on weapons would already make buggies a lot better.
Did I miss something? Buggies now have lock-on?

But an idea could be to reduce the trasher gun's damage by 40% and then give the driver the same turret. You would control the driver turret with the mouse while driving with WASD.
That's what the Lightning is for.

[I SandRock]

Did I miss something? Buggies now have lock-on?
Nope, that would be a nerf if they had and you removed it :P But lock-on weapons are determinetal to a buggies survival as they rely on their speed to out mananeuver attacks made against them. Lock-ons make speed useless.




That's what the Lightning is for.

Not really. Its a 1-man light tank only operable as 1 man agile suit pilot. The trasher in my suggestion would not be as powerful as a lightning at all if only used by 1 pilot.

(TRAIN at station gotta go)

[DviddLeff]

No offense mate, you've done great work with that, but I don't see the point in it aside from a possible gamer-job portfolio, or wishful thinking. And to be honest, customisable load-outs on vehicles is a bad idea. As it's been mentioned in this thread... "Thats why I agreed with (ThePeacemaker? ) on the AGN podcast when someone mentioned allowing the likes of vanguards to interchange their weapon loadouts to be AI /AV/AA , and he quite rightly pointed out all that would do is make the Vanguard the only vehicle you would need." Nuff said. Sorry, again no disrespect intended.

Its cool, I dont expect everyone to like it, but I think the system has merit.

The Van is already an AI/AV killing machine, it only lacks a decent AA role. If you gave users the chance to customise it and they went for AA weapons then it would get chewed up by infantry and vehicles alike. Aircraft would have as much difficulty with it as they currently do with the Skyguard; the Van is a big slow target compared with the Skyguards smaller frame and speed, but the different armour values make up for its lack of speed.

Ground based AA isn't much of a problem for decent pilots; they can just after burn away after they have unleashed a volley or dodge behind hills to break lock ons, they really need to be concerned about other aircraft unless they try and stick around over a combat zone.

[Bags]

Nope, that would be a nerf if they had and you removed it :P But lock-on weapons are determinetal to a buggies survival as they rely on their speed to out mananeuver attacks made against them. Lock-ons make speed useless.


No offense but it's just as easy to hit a buggy with a lancer as it is to hit with a striker. Buggies aren't that agile.

I already love driving buggies so I'd love even more incentive to do so. :D

[Firefly]

Its cool, I dont expect everyone to like it, but I think the system has merit.
It's not that I don't like the entire concept that you've obviously put a lot of hard work and thought into - I do. I'm a big fan of stuff like that (player innovation and care of their game), between you and Hayoo I think had SOE pulled its head out of its arse and marketed the game, not done Core Comcrap/BFRs, and a small amount of other things, they wouldn't have had to lay off devs or shuffle them off to Evercrap. Then PS devs could have done stuff like what you guys proposed, and maybe the game would be something different than what it is today.

What I don't like is the customisable system for vehicles. You should scrap just about every vehicle except tanks and the Sunderer, and a Reaver, and put custom package options on it. Because that's about what'll be left.

[DviddLeff]

As it stands we hardly ever see buggies anyway, and if we go with making buggies AI focused then it will require nerfing the Van and Prowlers main gun to being as weak as the Mag against infantry which is pathetic. Then there is also severe overlap with the Deli variants which are AI machines already.

[Firefly]

As it stands we hardly ever see buggies anyway, and if we go with making buggies AI focused then it will require nerfing the Van and Prowlers main gun to being as weak as the Mag against infantry which is pathetic. Then there is also severe overlap with the Deli variants which are AI machines already.
Buggies aren't AI-focussed. True, you can do incredibly wicked things to infantry and MAX units, but - at least for the Marauder - they're good against tanks if you play smart, or attack in swarms. I don't know about the Thresher because I lol at them and never drove one. I drove an Enforcer once, gunned it. I can't recall what I did with it but it wasn't that impressive, obviously.

And no, you don't have to nerf any tank's main guns against infantry. Leave it the way it is.

[Bags]

Enforcer is decent but it has issue with firing angles.

[BorisBlade]

The problem with balancing buggies is you cant really do it with the current tech without gimping everything else. The thing is the net code limits how fast vehicles can go before you get into probs with warping and other issues with the estimation system they use in PS. If the buggies moved very fast, and with great acceleration and had some resistance to mines, they could be very useful.

They need to be fast (and prob half damage or less taken from mines too.) And have solid ability to take out infantry and they would be fine. Maybe even give em some other bonus, maybe they have less tech and so are immune to jammers or maybe they have that nifty jammer thingy the sunderers have or whatever, just somethin to give em a nice little niche.

We always ran lots and lots of deliverers way back when no one else did (maybe 6-12 months after release after one of the vehicle patches). Nobody used em, we got laughed at by those in our alliance. That is until one of the alliance events i was running, i called for some deliverer squads. Those things when used right are beast. Reavers and skeeters stand no chance at all, tanks are dead as well if you just stay mobile and stay back. (yes mags are harder with their sniper shells but they also have less armor) Those 20mm guns are meant to tear up armor and they do it well and do it well from a distance while the nice armor and speed of the vehicle keep you alive. Not to mention it can cross water making it killer on continents like cyssor. To this day the deli is one of my fave vehicles, as it is for many other of my friends who have spent any time with us on our many runs.

Giving a vehicle its niche is what makes a vehicle good. It needs to fit in with other vehicles and do somethin that others cant, somthin that keeps it unique. It has its strenghts and weaknesses, thats what you want. The buggies just need to fill that with the top speed of any ground vehicles, that includes acceleration. Great ai damage and ok av damage. They shouldnt be meant for takin out tanks but can do ok in a quick hit and run scenario. They dont have the extra passenger slots, the higher armor or the water crossing (except for the vs) that other vehicles have so the other bonuses i mentioned before would help to give them that niche they need.

Also, i havent checked lately, but if they still require tech plants, that needs to go.

[Warborn]

I was really hoping with PSN they'd totally rework vehicles. We've seen four vehicles so far which are just remakes of existing ones, but I hope it doesn't go too far. Talking about for example deliverer variants... why do we anticipate those to be in the game? The fact is that a lot of the vehicles and variants were added with no real point in mind. Why is there a deliverer variant? The deliverer itself really has no significant function, putting slightly more firepower onto it doesn't change that. It's still eclipsed by other vehicles, and being able to travel across water doesn't change that.

I would say most of the vehicles in PS don't have any real function. They were just dreamed up and added in and forgotten by players within a month of their release, because they were totally redundant. So I wouldn't expect all the variants and so on to be in the game. The new developers are hopefully not going to be as keen on wasting their time developing stuff nobody uses as the old developers.

As for vehicle customization, being able to significantly change the armament of vehicles isn't a good idea, for the same reason that not giving vehicles specific niches isn't a good idea. If every vehicle can swap between AI/AV and maybe even AA loadouts, clearly superior vehicle/weapon mixes will be found and they will instantly eclipse other variants and make them superfluous. It will be a balance nightmare. Although, as Firefly said, if they want to just make the game consist of three ground vehicles or something and simply give them different weapons instead of making a wide range of vehicles with static weapons that might be a possible alternative.

[Bags]

Er, I don't know what you're smoking but the thunderer is amazing. It fills the role of kicking ass and taking names.

[I SandRock]

No offense but it's just as easy to hit a buggy with a lancer as it is to hit with a striker. Buggies aren't that agile.

I already love driving buggies so I'd love even more incentive to do so. :D

Sure sure mr TR :p

[Bags]

Sure sure mr TR :p

Er, I actually have the enforcer certed on my NC and not my TR (mainly because I don't have anyone to gun my maruader any more)

It's amazing that when people on this forum have no way to rebut my posts they just point out that I play TR or some other inane bullshit. Class acts all around.

[I SandRock]

Er, I actually have the enforcer certed on my NC and not my TR (mainly because I don't have anyone to gun my maruader any more)

It's amazing that when people on this forum have no way to rebut my posts they just point out that I play TR or some other inane bullshit. Class acts all around.

I wasn't talking about your buggy cert but so far in every thread you've been saying TR is underpowered and needs love when they're the easy-mode empire by a long shot :p

[Warborn]

Er, I don't know what you're smoking but the thunderer is amazing. It fills the role of kicking ass and taking names.

Some of them were okay. Not worth three people, or especially 5 people in the case of the TR one, but fun to screw around with.

[Bags]

Some of them were okay. Not worth three people, or especially 5 people in the case of the TR one, but fun to screw around with.

The thunderer is worth three people. It instagibs softies and does serious AV damage. The aurora and raider are not.

[CutterJohn]

Thats why I agreed with (ThePeacemaker? ) on the AGN podcast when someone mentioned allowing the likes of vanguards to interchange their weapon loadouts to be AI /AV/AA , and he quite rightly pointed out all that would do is make the Vanguard the only vehicle you would need.

Quite rightly, if, and only if, it was a straight up conversion from base PS to the modular weapon system with NO other balance considerations to make other chassis viable choices. If you design the vehicles with certain weapons in mind, then switch the weapons without further consideration to the vehicles, of course it will fail.

Tanks are the king of the battlefield, particularly modern Abrams-pattern tanks. They're virtually unkillable. Sure you can probably give one a flesh-wound, but they're incredibly powerful. A tank is a show of force. A tank shows up to a gunfight, and people start getting really scared. Or stupid, like the guy that stands in front of an Israeli tank and throws a rock at it. A tank is primarily a tank-killer. That's what it does. It doesn't shoot down jets or helicopters. It has a few machine guns for dealing with any infantry that are stupid enough or brave enough to get close. They're usually used to deal with light targets, though. You don't see a tank firing a shell at a random grunt. Not unless they're desperate or need to vape his position.

A big part of the reason tanks don't go after infantry with the big gun is because of the huge limitation on ammo they have. But they can and will be used to take out hardened infantry positions.. machine gun nests and bunkers. This is one of their primary purposes, along with hunting other tanks.

So perhaps a big chunk of the problem may not that they are too effective at killing infantry, but that they store waaaaaaaaay too much ammo to do the job with. An M1 stores 34 rounds of ammo in it. It has to be very, very selective about what it shoots at. Its not going to waste a bullet on a single grunt. And it won't even have 34 rounds of HE.. Much of the ammo will be AP, depending on expected opposition.

If we cut back severely on tank ammo for the big gun, sure, they can still rape infantry. But not very many, nor for very long. If they overload on explosive rounds and neglect the AP, they're going to be hurting if they run into a tank.

The Sunderer I see as a Bradley. It's an infantry fighting vehicle with support guns. Roll it up to the front door, unload the squad of crunchies, give 'em some gunfire cover but don't hit the friendlies.

I'd love to see the sunderer as more of a bradley type vehicle, instead of the 4 turret monstrosity it is.

If there are 3 man or more vehicles in the game, like the deli and sunderer, they should be more like the prowler or liberator.. works great with two, but is all the sweeter with 3. Tbh, I would love it if that 3rd man was optional. 2 men in a prowler, 1 controls both turrets, switching between them. 3? You can use both at once. And never saw a reason the bombardier couldn't pull double duty as a tail gunner.. Just balance it as a two man vehicle.

Although, as Firefly said, if they want to just make the game consist of three ground vehicles or something and simply give them different weapons instead of making a wide range of vehicles with static weapons that might be a possible alternative.

Original PS ground vehicles.

Ant
AMS
Wraith
Basilisk
Buggies
Lightning
Deliverer
Sunderer
Tanks

9 different chassis classes. Of them, over half have a specialized role that means people will use them anyway, regardless.

That leaves 4 classes of combat vehicle chassis.

ATVs
Buggies
Lightnings
Tanks

People will still use ATVs and Lightnings, since they are solo vehicles, and they most definitely have different quirks and uses.

Which means that exactly 2 classes of vehicle chassis would have clashed in general use. Buggies, and tanks. Pretty sure I could think up enough differences and costs that people would like to choose buggies over tanks. The rest will still be chosen regularly anyway, since they have unique roles not associated with guns, or use differing numbers of people.

[Warborn]

Yeah, your assessment of the original vehicles is pretty off I think. ATVs were totally pointless when aircav was far better for traveling around, had incredible utility in the form of hot dropping, and was actually pretty effective in combat (mosquito aside initially, it was pretty mediocre until they totally eliminated its dispersion).

All of the ground transports were gimmicks. Taking a vehicle around the twisty, winding paths of most PS continents was stupid when you could just get a galaxy and actually fly to the place and then drop on the target. Realistically, most people had some aircav cert anyway, so if you wanted to get somewhere fast you could usually get people to pull their own air transports.

Buggies were stupid and pointless as they weren't as good at killing anything as tanks, and their speed didn't change their lifespan much.

So realistically, all of the land transports were at odds with all aircraft because land transit is always less practical than air transport, and any ground vehicle that had a gun was eclipsed by tanks. Suggesting people "regularly" used ATVs, harassers, assault buggies, and deliverer/sunderers is a pretty incorrect statement. People used aircav en masse and used tanks whenever they were able to. The rest were gimmick vehicles that people used because using the same couple vehicles repeatedly got boring.

As a caveat, sunderer wasn't so bad if you parked it somewhere good and just shelled the crap out of an area the enemy was. It also wasn't so uncommon for people to pull an enforcer solo, park it near an infantry swarm, and one-shot a few guys before someone blew them up with a deci.

[CutterJohn]

Wasn't assessing the relative value of the vehicles. I was merely pointing out that there were indeed only 4 primary combat vehicles in the game at the time of release(as in, having no value other than shooting things), two of which were single player, and two of which were multiplayer. As such, it would have been simplicity to balance changeable weapons between those two sets of two vehicles so as not to make one the obvious choice over the other for all things.

He said what purpose would there be to take anything besides vanguard? Think of something, since all there was besides the vanguard to fit the role of 2 man combat vehicle was a buggy.

Obviously the original PS went a different way with vehicles, and added more dedicated vehicles. But they could have easily updated and gone with a modular vehicle system instead, and balanced for that.

Sadly, I've participated in my own derailment. Oh well. Modular vehicles or no, I still think buggies can use some buffs, tanks a few nerfs.

Tbh, so long as my thresher handles like the Battlezone2 tanks, and less like a vehicle with invisible wheels with no suspension, all will be swell. :)