Chassis mounted main guns

[Talek Krell]

The PS2 Magrider's main cannon is currently fixed forward, probably in much the same way as the driver's gun on the PS1 Magrider. T-Ray has stated this and I think it's worth discussion, since I believe it puts the Mag at a severe disadvantage

The History Lesson
Tanks were designed during WW1 to destroy fortified positions, like machine gun bunkers. Bunkers aren't renowned for their speed and maneuverability, so the designers simply took as large a gun as the engine could move and mounted it directly to the chassis.

As bunkers and trenches fell out of favor, the primary purpose of the tank became killing other tanks. Designers found that a smaller weapon in a rotating turret was infinitely superior for this, and chassis mounted guns have been essentially obsolete since WWI ended. The tank destroyers are the closest thing to an exception but all of their designs had the ability to move the gun left and right to varying degrees, and after WWII those designs were abandoned as well.

The Point
Even with the ability to hover, having to use a fixed forward main cannon with no horizontal travel will put the magrider at a massive disadvantage. Especially if it's supposed to act as an MBT and not an anti-tank sniper. Setting up hover tanks like this has been tried before and they are inevitably:

1. Touchy and unstable, making it difficult to keep the main gun on a target even while "stationary".
2. Less mobile, due to being forced to choose between fighting and maneuvering while their turreted opponents can do both simultaneously.
3. Less aware, due to being forced to only look in the direction they are currently driving lest their tank go off course.

At the very least the new Mag needs a proper control scheme and a gun that has a small range of motion independent of the chassis, but if this thing is to really be competetive with the Vanny and Prowler then it needs its turret back.

[Zulthus]

http://www.lolroflmao.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/i-cant-see-shit.jpg

But I honestly think the Mag is fine the way it is. It has a massive advantage at ranges with the Railgun, as the projectile does not have an arc and always hits very close to where you're aiming. The front turret is also fine, I personally don't see why it should be changed. It isn't hard to aim with.

But where did it show the main turret being fixed forward? I don't think we've seen enough to determine that.

[FIREk]

Here's how I would do it.

The Mag doesn't need to have a hull-mounted gun (main or secondary - whatever) to be a "special snowflake" - it can move over water and strafe, which should be special enough. :P

Give it a main turret with top-mounted secondary gun, just like any other tank.

The control scheme:
- WASD keys used to accelerate/brake/reverse and strafe,
- the mouse is used to move the turret and look around,
- right-clicking turns the Magrider in the direction where the turret is currently pointing.
This is a pretty robust system, and should be pretty easy to get used to, considering every EverQuest clone requires that you right-click to change direction.

It also allows the devs to give alltank drivers control over the secondary gun only, which would make sense in terms of:
- balance (a powerful vehicle needs a second player for its main gun),
- achievement (the driver can use those expensive special secondary guns he's spend certs and resources on),
- situational awareness (secondary guns typically move around faster, making it easier to look around),
- navigation (since the secondary gun is typically weaker and less crucial, the driver can more often focus on driving, rather than drive blindly at some times, burdened by aiming and firing the main gun sideways or backwards),
- survivability (if the tank needs a second guy to be effective, then, from a design standpoint, it makes it more worthwhile to buff up its armor, since there are two frags inside:)),
- more design options (if an MBT can be used solo, there's no room for a vehicle like the Lightning; this may also be relevant to buggies - not yet confirmed in PS2 - which are too fast for one person to both drive and gun).

The devs have never stated this, but I've suspected it since the release of the teaser trailer and there's enough circumstantial evidence that I think it's worth discussion.

When I suggested that tank drivers would be better off having control of the secondary gun, Higby replied that this would be problematic on a Mag. To me this practically confirms that it's different in a way that its main gun is hull-mounted and, as initially designed, controlled by the driver.
It wouldn't work very well for the magrider, but allowing the driver to man the secondary weapon seems like it could be worth trying. We can consider that and see how it plays.

[Brusi]

There isn't much about the current magrider that would say that it will have a rotating turret. It looks in these screen caps that it is most certainly a fixed forward mounted main cannon.



http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg51/scaled.php?server=51&filename=mag1x.jpg&res=medium


Even with a fixed forward mounted main cannon, i still don't think this is a bad tradeoff for greater freedom of movement and increased accuracy. The shot pretty much lands exactly where the crosshairs are.


http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg13/scaled.php?server=13&filename=mag2xz.jpg&res=medium



I think these following shots are the most accurate in terms of what to expect from the magrider come PS2 beta...


...




http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg508/scaled.php?server=508&filename=mag3u.jpg&res=medium



...




http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg706/scaled.php?server=706&filename=mag4i.jpg&res=medium

:rofl:

[Zulthus]

Heck, we don't even know if that IS the Magrider or not at this point...

[Accuser]

Heck, we don't even know if that IS the Magrider or not at this point...

I dunno... Brusi's logic looks impeccable. Also, I'd like my Magrider in 'desert camo' brown please.

http://h3.abload.de/img/shipoben2dfyy.jpg

[Talek Krell]

Heck, we don't even know if that IS the Magrider or not at this point...
I'm pretty sure they've said a couple of times that we've seen the Mag, although I don't know where to look for the quotes.

[SgtMAD]

if the driver is going to man the main gun and you can pick up a gunner for secondary guns, what are the Tr going to do with three gunners? or are the TR going to be like the other two empires and only have two seats now?

[Fuel Truck]

if the driver is going to man the main gun and you can pick up a gunner for secondary guns, what are the Tr going to do with three gunners? or are the TR going to be like the other two empires and only have two seats now?

That would be disappointing as hell

[Sirisian]

Personally I hate the new design of the Magrider. I prefer a swiveling top. If this is one of those things where you can now go the same speed in all directions. Ugh. Would much rather design it like a regular tank that hovers and fires an energy based shell. The whole railgun always seemed difficult as hell to balance. I shot planes out of the air with it all the time in the original. Bit too different.

[BorisBlade]

I hate being forced to be a lightning pilot. =( I want to drive, not drive and shoot. Terrible change, but as with everything else it seems, if it was in ps1 they have to take it out or change it ....usually to clone BF when possible.

I hope there are some good vehicles in the game that arent designed for one man armies. Somethin where teamwork and fun are the key. Where i can focus on just driving and get gunners to focus on gunning. No more half ass gunners and half ass pilot vehicles.

Seems odd that a game with so many players is focused on getting vehicles with as little players in them as possible. Seems so counterproductive to teamwork and social interaction. The stories you hear of memorable vehicle fights, and esp those where people met their teamates and friends were not those with solo lightnings or bfr's but those such as deliverer runs (pre tank/AV buff), or prowlers, raiders, etc. Those are fun as hell. And we know there are gonna be plenty of people around, there's no need to put in selfish, boring, solo kill whore vehicles. I mean who really thought this was a good idea?

[Brusi]

if the driver is going to man the main gun and you can pick up a gunner for secondary guns, what are the Tr going to do with three gunners? or are the TR going to be like the other two empires and only have two seats now?

3rd seat is strapped to the front of the tank, as in "Operation: Human Shield"


note: must have "******" cert to occupy this position

[FastAndFree]

You know, after seeing it on picture, we were pretty sure about the new Reaver being a 2-seater too, and yet apparently it isn't...

Also the new Vanguard quite clearly has a turret. It sounds very unlikely to me that they would give one empire's MBT a rotating turret and a fixed cannon to another's. Hover or not

So either

The Magrider does have a turret - it's that entire narrow top section
What we thought is a turret on the Vanguard is actually fixed -why would they do that-
The vehicle on the above pics isn't the Magrider/the Vanguard and the Magrider are now in different vehicle classes

[Brusi]

Higby did allude to the fact that the Magrider would be different to the Prowler and Vanguard in terms of allowing the pilot to control the secondary weapons, instead of the primary weapon.

Sounds like the whole design for the Magrider is based on the Pilot operating the primary weapon (hence the fixed cannon assumption).

I do agree that the images originally released are pretty old now though, and have probably been through some design iterations since then. I would love to see how they implement the second gunner position on the vanguard, as it will most likely get a revamp... (notice the anti-infantry guns are still mounted in the turret to the left of the main cannon, like the original PS Vanguard)

http://psnextwiki.planetsidesyndicate.com/images/thumb/8/8c/Vanguard.jpg/180px-Vanguard.jpg

[FIREk]

(notice the anti-infantry guns are still mounted in the turret to the left of the main cannon, like the original PS Vanguard)

http://psnextwiki.planetsidesyndicate.com/images/thumb/8/8c/Vanguard.jpg/180px-Vanguard.jpg

It may simply be that the Vanguard in this early screen simply doesn't have the secondary gun mount "attached" (much like the Mosquito didn't have any weapons, but seems to have them in the trailer).

The two smaller cannons/HMGs could simply be coaxial weapons, however they look too powerful compared with the usual 7,62mm MG - like the coax both the M1A1 and T80 have in BFBC2 for the odd infantry suppression/kill.

OR it means that initially they thought about of copying the PS1 concept, and giving the drivers no weapons at all, with the exception of the Magrider, which would have a weak hull-mounted weapon for the driver...

[Captain1nsaneo]

http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg13/scaled.php?server=13&filename=mag2xz.jpg&res=medium


Check out the little health picture in the top right. It seems that there is only 1 slot for a person as the little mark in the middle near the top seems ornamental. My guess is that this is actually NOT the magrider. Unless it is but now it's a one man vehicle which would make me VERY sad though that would line up with Mr.Higby's comment on it being hard for the driver to man the secondary weapon.

[2coolforu]

There's two slots, I did an analysis of the trailer. If you zoom in on the top right you can see the pilots name "Shuttledem" and a slot 2 "Empty". If you look at the vehicle Icon you can see a small number '1' in the top slot of the icon and the other slot is empty and seems to be placed in the turret

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-sDdbrc3nKn0/ThsZgRH6h-I/AAAAAAAAADQ/LPQKfIu2phw/s1152/VANUSOVEREIGNTY.jpg

[FIREk]

Check out the little health picture in the top right. It seems that there is only 1 slot for a person as the little mark in the middle near the top seems ornamental. My guess is that this is actually NOT the magrider. Unless it is but now it's a one man vehicle which would make me VERY sad though that would line up with Mr.Higby's comment on it being hard for the driver to man the secondary weapon.

Look closer. There's a list of seats below the health image thingie. One of the seats is unoccupied.

EDIT: just how did I miss 2coolforu's reply? :O

[Draep]

Might be better to have the driver operate the coaxial machinegun while the gunner operates the main cannon. As we have all discussed in two other threads, the community hates the idea of a combo driver/main gunner

[FastAndFree]

edit 5 eh forget it I have no idea what I was actually trying to say

[Traak]

Could be the new Thresher. And perhaps the turret doesn't show up until there IS a person to gun it.

[Atuday]

Could be the new Thresher. And perhaps the turret doesn't show up until there IS a person to gun it.

This would lead to transforming tanks. You do realize how silly that sounds right?

[Traak]

This would lead to transforming tanks. You do realize how silly that sounds right?

It's Vanu. Aren't they all organic and whatever?

[FastAndFree]

It's Vanu. Aren't they all organic and whatever?

They saved time/resources on enter animations so I doubt they would make morrigi-style pop-up weapon mounts. Especially for only one of the 3 empires

[Talek Krell]

You know, after seeing it on picture, we were pretty sure about the new Reaver being a 2-seater too, and yet apparently it isn't...If I understand correctly the reaver was 2 seat at the time they released the render, but then they chose to revert it to a 1 seat design as in PS1.

Also the new Vanguard quite clearly has a turret. It sounds very unlikely to me that they would give one empire's MBT a rotating turret and a fixed cannon to another's. Hover or notEmpire uniqueness. I think the devs are just trying to create variation between the empires, and they think that this can work because the Mag hovers. Obviously I disagree.

Might be better to have the driver operate the coaxial machinegun while the gunner operates the main cannon. As we have all discussed in two other threads, the community hates the idea of a combo driver/main gunnerOperate the coax? The coaxial is parallel with the main gun by definition (right?) so I can't see that working. I'm all for vehicle crew teamwork but having one guy aim a gun for the other to shoot is a bit much.

[Draep]

Operate the coax? The coaxial is parallel with the main gun by definition (right?) so I can't see that working. I'm all for vehicle crew teamwork but having one guy aim a gun for the other to shoot is a bit much.

Hmm, I don't think it is. I always remembered coaxial machinegun on tanks being mounted on the front, near the driver and below the turret. It's lower to the ground than the turret to make for easier infantry killing. Having one guy aim for the other to shoot? I don't see what you're talking about.

[Talek Krell]

Ah, no. That's a hull gun. The coax should be mounted in the turret along the main cannon. Generally used when an HE shell is a bit overkill I think.

Fuggit, I'm gonna wiki this nonsense.


Edit: Gentlemen! BEHOLD!

Coaxial
A coaxial mount is mounted beside the primary weapon and thus points in the same general direction as the main armament, relying in the turret's ability to traverse in order to change arc. The term coaxial is a misnomer as the arrangement is actually paraxial (i.e., parallel axes, as opposed to the same axis).

Nearly all main battle tanks and most infantry fighting vehicles have a coaxial machine gun mounted to fire along a parallel axis to the main gun. Coaxial weapons are usually aimed by use of the main gun control. It is usually used to engage infantry or other "soft" targets when the main gun collateral damage would be excessive, or to conserve main gun ammunition.

[Draep]

Ah yep, you're right. Well lets talk about the hull gun then. I wouldn't mind that!

[Brusi]

@Draep: This is what higby was talking about when he said that he would think about the driver controlling the secondary customisable weapon and the gunner firing the main weapon. That he didn't know how that could work for the Magrider.

I am also under them impression that the look of these tanks will have to change slightly, due to the ability add custom secondary weapons.

The mag in these pics might just be the vanilla version. Stick a mortar on top of that, or a flack cannon... and you have yourself a 2-man mag.

Someone also mentioned that even though the reaver is confirmed a 1-seater, that they are still considering a 2-seater Reaver variant as an uprgade? Is this just speculation?

[FIREk]

Hmm, I don't think it is. I always remembered coaxial machinegun on tanks being mounted on the front, near the driver and below the turret. It's lower to the ground than the turret to make for easier infantry killing. Having one guy aim for the other to shoot? I don't see what you're talking about.

The coaxial machinegun is fixed - mounted side-by-side with the main cannon.
Therefore, if one person were to operate the main gun, and another person were to operate the coaxial machinegun, then the only thing the second person would be able to do is press the trigger. Because the coax is fixed.

http://cdn8.wn.com/pd/f0/53/93a2c4336910bf0332a2665a3979_grande.jpg

The type of machinegun you're thinking about could probably be called hull-mounted, and hasn't been used since WW2. It was typically used by a tank's radio-operator.

Someone also mentioned that even though the reaver is confirmed a 1-seater, that they are still considering a 2-seater Reaver variant as an uprgade? Is this just speculation?

Speculation on my part. There was something about the way Higby responded, during NapalmEnima's dinner interview, that made me think. I would have to re-listen the interview, but I think he said that the Reaver is a one-seater, Napalm mentioned the screenshot, and then Higby sad something like "yes, that Reaver was a two-seater". All speculation, though.

Apaches/Havocs in BFBC2 are two-seaters and the co-pilot controls wire-guided missiles and a 30mm turret. Maybe the one-seat Reaver will only have dumb-fire rockets?

[basti]

Aye, mag got a fixed main gun these days, T-Ray told me via twitter.


Thats gonna be interresting.

[Brusi]

Pity, i liked the idea of Apache style, 2 man gunships :)

Pilot controls dumbfire rockets and copilot controls 30mm chaingun mounted under the nose.

[Talek Krell]

Aye, mag got a fixed main gun these days, T-Ray told me via twitter.Could we have a link for that? Navigating twitter makes my head hurt.

Pity, i liked the idea of Apache style, 2 man gunships :)Was looking forward to those myself. :\

[Draep]

Damn, that true? Sorry VS.

[basti]

Could we have a link for that? Navigating twitter makes my head hurt.


If you cant even get to T-Rays or my twitter acc and look there, then you dont deserve help. Srsly man, Learn how you do your interwebz...

btw, you cant link that.

[Sirisian]

Magic Link (https://twitter.com/#!/sepomat/status/115999621226049536)

Agreed with your later comment (http://twitter.com/#!/sepomat/status/115999621226049536). They better change that.

Am I the only one that wants the mag to be more like a traditional tank?

[Talek Krell]

If you cant even get to T-Rays or my twitter acc and look there, then you dont deserve help. Srsly man, Learn how you do your interwebz...

btw, you cant link that.No need to get your knickers in a bunch. Yeesh.

[Raymac]

I don't like it. Tactically, it's probably a benefit to me since I like being a tankbuster in my reaver and a good Mag gunner is scary. However, I still hate the idea of locking the main gun forward, especially if only the driver can use it. You can give it double secondary AA Starfire guns all over it, but I still don't like locking the main gun forward on the Mag or any other tank for that matter.

What tank designer, either in real life or video games, would think that locking the main gun was a good idea?

[Azren]

fixed main gun on a tank... yea that will do wonders for teamplay. Just like all the one manned two seater biffers running around.

Geez, get your act together SOE, we want a TEAMPLAY based game, not some idiotic one man armee shooter - there are enough of those already.

[FIREk]

Am I the only one that wants the mag to be more like a traditional tank?

No, sir. I won't play VS, ever, but I will feel sorry for those sad bastards if they have to deal with a crappy fixed gun.

Either that, or the Mag in PS2 will be retarded-nimble - move in all directions with max speed and turn with the speed of other tanks' main turrets. This would allow it to function on par with other vehicles, rather than being a stationary tank sniper, but would look damn retarded... :P

[Malorn]

BF2142's hover tank had a fixed cannon and it was fine. The strafing still put it at an advantage compared to the other tank, while the swivel turret was more useful while sitting in cover or while fleeing and firing or that sort of maneuver (but if you're fleeing and firing you aren't paying attention to where you are going...). In tank vs tank fights the hover tank had the advantage due to the strafe and the fixed cannon really wasn't an issue because it would turn just like the other tank's turret only it would rotate the entire tank.

Proof of concept was established many years ago that it can work just fine and is a good way to do that sort of tank so as not to make the controls so complicated that only a few people can drive it well. You want nubcakes to be able to drive the thing or you'll be crying for months about how you never have good tank drivers.

[Talek Krell]

Issues with not looking where you're driving only come up if the driver is both driving and gunning. A lot of us would like to ditch that as well as the fixed mount.

I could never justify buying 2142 so I have to ask you some questions:
1. Was battle infantry centric i.e. bf2142, or vehicle centric i.e. field battles in Planetside?

2. Did the tanks have directional armor?

3. What camera view was used? We were told most vehicles would be locked to first person so one of the things I'm concerned about is having to slow down the entire vehicle and shift the weak points in the armor around just to stay situationally aware.

[NapalmEnima]

I could never justify buying 2142 so I have to ask you some questions:
1. Was battle infantry centric i.e. bf2142, or vehicle centric i.e. field battles in Planetside?
Depended on the map. Some were sans vehicles, others were Quite Large with lots of vehicles and wide open spaces.

2. Did the tanks have directional armor?

yep. Rear hits HURT. Side hits weren't much fun either.

3. What camera view was used? We were told most vehicles would be locked to first person so one of the things I'm concerned about is having to slow down the entire vehicle and shift the weak points in the armor around just to stay situationally aware.

All first person IIRC. It's been a long time though.


I really liked the air-timed grenades in that game. The punkbuster integration wasn't so hot though. That's what finally got me to stop playing.

[TheGoatFather]

So the main gun is fixed...what about the other guns? Have the secondarys been confirmed yet? They could be homing missile spouting rocket pods for all we know (although they won't be).

If it's just rocking that one, fixed gun then it'll be at a severe disadvantage. Will need fixing.

[TheGoatFather]

"PS_TRay
@CMcGreevy *confusion* the magrider is the same as it was in #planetside. The forward gun is now the main gun, the turret is secondary"

Ah. (sorry if everyone reached this conclusion already btw).

[Talek Krell]

While we haven't got excessive detail on any of the tanks, we're told the gunners will be using secondary weapons in modular turrets. As a couple of examples they've mentioned an AA gun (probably flak) and a mortar launcher.

[Talek Krell]

the magrider is the same as it was in #planetside. The forward gun is now the main gun, the turret is secondary"I think it's entirely inaccurate for him to say that that's the same as in Planetside. >.>

[Raymac]

I think it's entirely inaccurate for him to say that that's the same as in Planetside. >.>

I actually agree with you. That was me on twitter and I should have called him out on that assessment when I had his attention. Then again, he just fell back on the "talk to Higby, I'm in art" which I can understand.

[Talek Krell]

I actually agree with you. That was me on twitter and I should have called him out on that assessment when I had his attention. Then again, he just fell back on the "talk to Higby, I'm in art" which I can understand.
I'd like to get in touch with Higby and ask him to elaborate on why they went this route with the vehicles and what effect they expect it to have. Twitter doesn't seem like the format for it...maybe I'll try e-mailing Smedley...

[Graywolves]

I'd like to get in touch with Higby and ask him to elaborate on why they went this route with the vehicles and what effect they expect it to have. Twitter doesn't seem like the format for it...maybe I'll try e-mailing Smedley...

through the new hexagon territory capture system they intend to have more vehicle based battles. He felt that in PS1 you had between base vehicle battles, the combination of vehicles and infantry, then infantry in the base. This forced everyone into an infantry role of some sort and made vehicles useless until the following battle.

They want to have more air-themed and armor-themed battles. Through letting drivers gun, they provide more incentive and manpower into the armored fights than you could in the previous system. Another perspective was that if you were spending skill points into driving a tank, you should be able to experience all of it.

[Talek Krell]

Another perspective was that if you were spending skill points into driving a tank, you should be able to experience all of it.I could understand it as an attempt to get more people into vehicular combat, although I would have to point out that if you're leaving the crew numbers the same then either you intend for there to be a bunch of half crewed tanks or the increase comes more from the larger population.

The skill points thing doesn't seem like it holds water though. For one, if you didn't want to drive then why would you spend skill points on it? We had the Lightning for soloers. It was weaker, but that was a balance issue. And then there's that Mag drivers are apparently going to be spending a bunch of points unlocking and upgrading the gunner's weapons anyway, which they won't be allowed to use. It doesn't make sense.