Move towards single-player vehicles?

[I SandRock]

Is it just me or does there seem to be a move towards singleplayer vehicles compared to how Planetside 1 required you to often have two players to make a vehicle effective. It seems now that even if you have two people in a vehicle, the 2nd player operates the weakest gun while the main player operates the main gun. Meaning that two individual tanks are better than one tank operated by two players. Which was completely the opposite with Planetside 1.

The same is true with the removal of the assault buggies and the Lightning taking over the Skyguard's function. The skyguard was a 2 player vehicle and only effective when operated by 2 players. The Lightning is a singleplayer vehicle.

Planetside is and always has been an MMO which centered around cooperative play, requiring multiple players to operate the stronger vehicles. While having a few alternatives (weaker) for the single-player.

I personally think this new direction is a bad one. It promotes self-centered uncooperative gameplay, way too much like any FPS on the market. Where it's all about personal glory and kill count rather than that great feel of being part of a team and having to work as a team to be most effective.


I don't understand why they chose this new direction, it's not like in a game the size of Planetside you lacked players to operate your vehicle..

[RedKnights]

The idea is, if you're investing all these resources yourself into making yourself a better tank driver, they want you to be able to full use the tank yourself and get that satisfaction.

At the same time, the secondary guns "ain't no joke" they do a fair bit of damage, so it'll be very advantageous to have a 2nd gunner in with you.

On another note, I'm pretty sure there's already 10 threads on this... search moar

[Figment]

There are a lot of topics on this already.

Suffice to say it's indeed a very controversial topic.

[Crator]

The skyguard example doesn't help your cause that much. You could be effective in contested areas with a skyguard by yourself. It took some strategic awareness and sometimes good hiding spots but you could park it and jump in the gun spot all by your lonesome and actually do some good with it.

[Death2All]

The idea is, if you're investing all these resources yourself into making yourself a better tank driver, they want you to be able to full use the tank yourself and get that satisfaction.

At the same time, the secondary guns "ain't no joke" they do a fair bit of damage, so it'll be very advantageous to have a 2nd gunner in with you.

On another note, I'm pretty sure there's already 10 threads on this... search moar

As RedKnights said, the rationale behind the idea is that these are YOUR resources you're spending on vehicles and they want you to be able to get the most out of it.

It makes me second guess the resource system if it's going to make players sacrifice teamwork for flexibility.


They did say however, that there's a certification you can unlock for your tank that would allow the driver to simply drive the vehicle and then have an entirely independent gunner, a la PS1. It was pretty well received and I hope the implement it. Personally, I'd prefer they keep that ideology and do away with the whole tank main gun controlled by the driver. If you want to invest some resources in a tank, great, but make sure you have someone to gun for you. A little teamwork never hurt anyone. It's not like there will be a shortage of gunners if this game is supposed to have thousands of players.

[Figment]

They did say however, that there's a certification you can unlock for your tank that would allow the driver to simply drive the vehicle and then have an entirely independent gunner, a la PS1. It was pretty well received and I hope the implement it.

It was pretty skeptically received in my experience, most people then commented it should be the other way around: start as full teamwork, slowly work towards more lonely - but even that wasn't warmly received, more like a "if it's going to have to be forced on us, then at least do it like this, cause we're not really happy with the compromise or the lone MBTs".

At least that's what it looked like to me. :/

Personally, I'd prefer they keep that ideology and do away with the whole tank main gun controlled by the driver. If you want to invest some resources in a tank, great, but make sure you have someone to gun for you. A little teamwork never hurt anyone. It's not like there will be a shortage of gunners if this game is supposed to have thousands of players.

Agreed.

But really, this topic's been done to death, I'd say merge or lock it.

[Canaris]

not at all in my opinion, if you start rolling out single player vehicles you will make them hugely vulnerable to certain enemy types,

Say 20 VS all roll in single magriders a NC bomber squadron or TR AV team will tear them to pieces, Having 2 people per tank (someone to work the AA/AI guns) will make them a lot more defensible as well attacking. I think SOE has gotten this one right.

My biggest beef in PS1 was certing for vehicles just to be a glorified chauffeur.

More fighting is always good I say and I think this will increase vehicle/player team work.

[GuyFawkes]

I do hope by launch or soon after they bring in some of the small troop empire specific vehicles , enforcer etc .
Just appears to be a choice of johnny no mates or a full galaxy atm ( not including the mbt's) transport wise

[Nasher]

Vehicles are not really solo though. The 2nd spot in MBTs is the machine gun, which is really needed vs infantry and aircraft. The smaller lightning tank was always solo anyway.

In PS1 the only MBT where the driver could also gun was the mag rider. I guess they wanted to even things out this time and make driving less boring.

[Immigrant]

I believe that they've said that secondary turrets could be anti-vehicular and they will be able to make substantial damage. Anyway we see that all vehicles will cost resource so driving solo will be equal to flushing the part of your resources down the toilet since you won't have 100% efficiency.

[asdar]

I agree with the OP 100%, but I hope the rest of you are right and that multiplayer coordination is still greater than the sum of individuals.

On a side note, I don't really understand the hate for duplicate threads as long as the front page isn't flying by and wasting current topics. If there's duplicates on the first page, then I understand that it's annoying, but this topic hasn't been hashed since before E3.

More threads is greater than less threads, just like more players, even if they're CoD players is going to be greater than less players. Just my opinion, I hope I didn't offend.

[SgtMAD]

after watching the streams and seeing how the lightning was a friggin beast,

I don't see why MBT's can't go back to the 2 man setup we had in PS,I know they would have to redesign the Mag but in the end it would be worth it.

and i don't get why we don't have any buggies/deliverers,after seeing how the ground was laid out,they would be perfect for this game.

there are going to be so many friggin targets,

ppl are going to freak out during the open beta when they stress test the server.

[MrBloodworth]

The whole game has moved to focus on the individual, as opposed to the squad, team, empire.

[ThermalReaper]

Why not just add a mechanic that allows you and your friend to share the resource cost for the vehicle so one can drive and operate the weaker(or even no guns, the gunner can do that) gun and the other one can control the main gun or all the guns? But you wouldn't be able to operate without two players.

[GuyFawkes]

The whole game has moved to focus on the individual, as opposed to the squad, team, empire.

bit unfair, since we havent seen any of the squad leader certs , outfit stuff , or tactical stuff at all so far in the brief glimpse we had at e3. just people running around trying stuff out and playing domination.

[Daimond]

I dont mind the idea but think it should be something they can cert into, not start out with. Cuase in my opion if you want to drive and gun, then get a Lighning.
The hole idea of PS is co-operation, not a one man team, and this promotes that.

[ArcIyte]

The idea is, if you're investing all these resources yourself into making yourself a better tank driver, they want you to be able to full use the tank yourself and get that satisfaction.

What about all those certs I put into the Sunderer/Liberator/Galaxy? I'm investing all these points into being a better pilot and yet other people are reaping the rewards!! :rolleyes:


Tanks should have always been 2 man imo. Give them the assist killspam that medics get from TF2, so that they get recognition in chat and the kills that the gunner gets. Give them a coaxial MG (another gun to customize and make money off of) so they can attack enemies too.

[kaffis]

What about all those certs I put into the Sunderer/Liberator/Galaxy? I'm investing all these points into being a better pilot and yet other people are reaping the rewards!! :rolleyes:


Tanks should have always been 2 man imo. Give them the assist killspam that medics get from TF2, so that they get recognition in chat and the kills that the gunner gets. Give them a coaxial MG (another gun to customize and make money off of) so they can attack enemies too.
Seconded on all points.

[Haro]

I think TB demonstrated very well the danger of a lone tank driver: without the cover of AI or AA fire from the secondary turret, expect a Light Assault to drop on your head with a big C4 surprise.

There aren't any more single-player vehicles than there were in Planetside. Every vehicle that had more than one player in PS1 has it in PS2. It's just that drivers can do more in PS1 than in 2, but they're giving up more for that.

[I SandRock]

What about all those certs I put into the Sunderer/Liberator/Galaxy? I'm investing all these points into being a better pilot and yet other people are reaping the rewards!! :rolleyes:


Tanks should have always been 2 man imo. Give them the assist killspam that medics get from TF2, so that they get recognition in chat and the kills that the gunner gets. Give them a coaxial MG (another gun to customize and make money off of) so they can attack enemies too.

Yeah that's what I was thinking. Give the driver shared kills and everything. And let them operate the 'secondary' gun instead.

I think TB demonstrated very well the danger of a lone tank driver: without the cover of AI or AA fire from the secondary turret, expect a Light Assault to drop on your head with a big C4 surprise.

There aren't any more single-player vehicles than there were in Planetside. Every vehicle that had more than one player in PS1 has it in PS2. It's just that drivers can do more in PS1 than in 2, but they're giving up more for that.

The thing is, why bring a heavy tank with two occupant when that other occupant can get out and bring his own heavy tank / lightning which will do more damage than if he had gunned for his mate. Because two individual vehicles are better than one multi-gunned vehicle.

It should be that two gunners in a single vehicle make a more powerful unit than two separate vehicles (with one gunner).

[Greenthy]

Yeah that's what I was thinking. Give the driver shared kills and everything. And let them operate the 'secondary' gun instead.



The thing is, why bring a heavy tank with two occupant when that other occupant can get out and bring his own heavy tank / lightning which will do more damage than if he had gunned for his mate. Because two individual vehicles are better than one multi-gunned vehicle.

It should be that two gunners in a single vehicle make a more powerful unit than two separate vehicles (with one gunner).

Because resources are limited.


I am all for pilots having the main gun. It gives the player more personal satisfaction instead of being (as mentioned) glorified chauffeurs.
Why spend resources if your passenger gets all the fun/credit/kills.

The current PS1 system is fine if you're like playing with friends/family/outfit.
But to rely on the first stranger to pop in your tank to earn something for your spent credits... Doesn't feel right.

Plenty of other ways to promote teamplay I'd say. Making the second turret more than just a prop-shooter will already help in that.

[Azren]

Because resources are limited.


I am all for pilots having the main gun. It gives the player more personal satisfaction instead of being (as mentioned) glorified chauffeurs.
Why spend resources if your passenger gets all the fun/credit/kills.

The current PS1 system is fine if you're like playing with friends/family/outfit.
But to rely on the first stranger to pop in your tank to earn something for your spent credits... Doesn't feel right.

Plenty of other ways to promote teamplay I'd say. Making the second turret more than just a prop-shooter will already help in that.

If resources are so limited that you can not pull a tank whenever you want, vehicles won't be used anyway. Seeing how squishy the ground vehicles are, if you add high cost to them, they will not be used.

[Goldeh]

Driving is boring. Period.

Reason why driving is boring is because your disconnected from the fight. You're doing nothing really, you're driving around basically, or not driving at all.. gotta keep the gun steady after all.

How lame is it to spend 200 or so Auraxiam points on a massive metal beast only to drive it around and let some other dude who hasn't contributed to paying for it have all the fun with the main gun while you have to taxi his ass too and fro between fights. How lame. Or reverse the roll, beg on chat to have someone drive for you while you gun it. Lame is lame. The way I see it, "drivers" are simple people. They can't mutitask. Doesn't take "skill" to drive away or drive somewhere, it just doesn't.

"No! Teamwork! We need more teamwork"

What? The teamwork is when you gather 50 of your tank buddies to roll over a Vanu's face, that's teamwork on a massive scale right thar. I thought that was the point of the game is massive teamwork on a massive scale? Cos' if you tell me to drive a tank that's 25 less tanks on the field since I can't gun and drive my tank so I might as well get in yours. More tanks (50) means more cordination, thus more teamwork required right? I'm confused...wheres the no teamwork?

Also, you get the second turret on top of the main gun! A turret that I add, is that's actually worth a squirt of piss. You can even cordinate with your Second gunner with the main gun to maximaze firepower! Teamwork! BAM! Now everyone can be involved in the actual battle instead of being a glorified taxi driver for someone elses fun.

[Greenthy]

If resources are so limited that you can not pull a tank whenever you want, vehicles won't be used anyway. Seeing how squishy the ground vehicles are, if you add high cost to them, they will not be used.

I'm considering that the cost is high enough to discourage non-stop tanking:
You take advantage of the 'downtime' of your friend and switch around driving a tank.

Although I agree that it really depends on the cost/income. But for now it's all theory :)

Besides that, the primary reason to discourage one-man tanking is the need for AI/AA. The cost of the tanks is something I'm just to be the second major factor. (as the first one is being discussed here already)

[Bags]

Yeah, the liberator, Galaxy, Sunderer, 3 ES tanks with 2 slots all encourage to you solo.

[ringring]

Driving is boring. Period.

Reason why driving is boring is because your disconnected from the fight. You're doing nothing really, you're driving around basically, or not driving at all.. gotta keep the gun steady after all.

How lame is it to spend 200 or so Auraxiam points on a massive metal beast only to drive it around and let some other dude who hasn't contributed to paying for it have all the fun with the main gun while you have to taxi his ass too and fro between fights. How lame. Or reverse the roll, beg on chat to have someone drive for you while you gun it. Lame is lame. The way I see it, "drivers" are simple people. They can't mutitask. Doesn't take "skill" to drive away or drive somewhere, it just doesn't.

"No! Teamwork! We need more teamwork"

What? The teamwork is when you gather 50 of your tank buddies to roll over a Vanu's face, that's teamwork on a massive scale right thar. I thought that was the point of the game is massive teamwork on a massive scale? Cos' if you tell me to drive a tank that's 25 less tanks on the field since I can't gun and drive my tank so I might as well get in yours. More tanks (50) means more cordination, thus more teamwork required right? I'm confused...wheres the no teamwork?

Also, you get the second turret on top of the main gun! A turret that I add, is that's actually worth a squirt of piss. You can even cordinate with your Second gunner with the main gun to maximaze firepower! Teamwork! BAM! Now everyone can be involved in the actual battle instead of being a glorified taxi driver for someone elses fun.

Fair points. But whiule driving can be boring it actually the more skilled role in a tank while gunning is more point shoot.

By far the most fun tank to drive in PS1 was the magrider and the driver had an effective, if not the main, gun. Crucially it was able to strafe and the drivers gun wasn't located on the turret.

Handling the Lightning was more of a handful.

The solution to this is to give the driver the minor gun and his oppo the big dog and Higby has indicated that they are looking at that.

[Azren]

Driving is boring. Period.

Reason why driving is boring is because your disconnected from the fight. You're doing nothing really, you're driving around basically, or not driving at all.. gotta keep the gun steady after all.

How lame is it to spend 200 or so Auraxiam points on a massive metal beast only to drive it around and let some other dude who hasn't contributed to paying for it have all the fun with the main gun while you have to taxi his ass too and fro between fights. How lame. Or reverse the roll, beg on chat to have someone drive for you while you gun it. Lame is lame. The way I see it, "drivers" are simple people. They can't mutitask. Doesn't take "skill" to drive away or drive somewhere, it just doesn't.

"No! Teamwork! We need more teamwork"

What? The teamwork is when you gather 50 of your tank buddies to roll over a Vanu's face, that's teamwork on a massive scale right thar. I thought that was the point of the game is massive teamwork on a massive scale? Cos' if you tell me to drive a tank that's 25 less tanks on the field since I can't gun and drive my tank so I might as well get in yours. More tanks (50) means more cordination, thus more teamwork required right? I'm confused...wheres the no teamwork?

Also, you get the second turret on top of the main gun! A turret that I add, is that's actually worth a squirt of piss. You can even cordinate with your Second gunner with the main gun to maximaze firepower! Teamwork! BAM! Now everyone can be involved in the actual battle instead of being a glorified taxi driver for someone elses fun.

This might be a longshot, but I presume that you never player PS1. If you did you knew how much more engaging driving is then just being a taxi. While your points may be valid in a game where vehicles are overpowered, but very limited in number (like BF series), in game where they come in umlimited number, the difficulty of keeping them alive is enhanced greatly.
Get preoccupied with one target for two seconds and you might very well be on your way to the spawning area again.
In the long run the drivergunner setup will cost you more then a dedicated driver setup would as your longevity will be redudec greatly. Reason for this is very simple; driving requires you to have a constant understanding of your surroundings including enemy movements and positions. Gunning requires you to concentrate on one target. Hence, gunning reduces your situational awareness.

I'm considering that the cost is high enough to discourage non-stop tanking:
You take advantage of the 'downtime' of your friend and switch around driving a tank.

Although I agree that it really depends on the cost/income. But for now it's all theory :)

Besides that, the primary reason to discourage one-man tanking is the need for AI/AA. The cost of the tanks is something I'm just to be the second major factor. (as the first one is being discussed here already)

You can non-stop tank, if you don't die in a few seconds. What you will not be able to do is pull tank after tank and just die to the first enemy.

On the other hand, having high cost would encourage tanks to use gunners, but with the low armor they have, this is not likeley.

Yeah, the liberator, Galaxy, Sunderer, 3 ES tanks with 2 slots all encourage to you solo.

liberator, Galaxy, Sunderer are support usnits.
The tanks allow you to swich to secondary gun by pressing one button instantly. Yes, very encouraging.

[Bags]

liberator, Galaxy, Sunderer are support usnits.

And that somehow makes them not vehicles?

The tanks allow you to swich to secondary gun by pressing one button instantly. Yes, very encouraging.

You only become a sitting duck. It's not like tanks in this build die in 3 - 4 shots from another tank or anything. ;)

Just me, if you solo in your tank as of now you're doing it wrong, unless resource wise it works out to be more efficient to just pull two.

[Shogun]

i just don´t understand why the devs have done this.

the lightning is a badass 1 man tank and all vehicles are available without certing to everybody now. so the bf kiddys who don´t understand the concept of a two man tank are already catered to.

in ps1 you had to sacrifice something to be able to drive the lightning. this isn´t even the case anymore.

so why are they taking away the great concept of ps1 2man tanks?

if you rage because you have to sacrifice ressources for just driving something, someone else will gun in, you could still draw a lightning. in a sunderer you don´t get to gun as well and you pay the ressources!
don´t ask what your empire can do for you, ask what you can do for your empire!

and driving without gunning is far from boring. if you think it´s boring, you just don´t get what it´s all about (and again you should get your lightning or fighter).

tanks need to have dedicated drivers. period!
if you really have to please bf kiddys who would cry if they cannot get control over the gun of EVERY vehicle as the driver, force THEM to spec in this. don´t punish the real tank teams just to prevent their whining.

i would like the old system (2 men needed). but i would tolerate a cert to be able to get gun control as driver.
and if the magrider is the problem, switch the guns and put the maingun on the turret and you are set. worked in ps1,too. or redesign it. you redesigned a lot of stuff more than one time.

[JacksonFatBack]

I don't understand SoE's thinking on this one. I know it's popular to accuse SoE of pandering to the greater audience, but I think that;s exactly what's happening here.

First, there are single player tanks, such as lightnings. And if that isn't enough, add a few more.

If it were up to me, lightnings would be ~40% of the strength of a full mag/vanny. Keep in mind that having to coordinate between the gunner and driver can be challenging. In addition, the lightning can have greater mobility versus the MBTs.

Want to have full use of the certs you spent? Buy a Lightning. Want that more powerful shot but have to get a gunner? Grab a MBT.

I don't even really understand what is so bad about driving. I usually preferred it over gunning. Another solution is to just let the one who has the cert gun, and then let anyone drive.

Finally, what about other vehicles, such as the liberator, sunderer, and deliverer? I sure hope the bomber/tailgun on the lib are not just accessories to the main gun.

Edit: Totally agree with the guy above me, Shogun. We pretty much stated the exact same thing.

[MrBloodworth]

bit unfair, since we havent seen any of the squad leader certs , outfit stuff , or tactical stuff at all so far in the brief glimpse we had at e3. just people running around trying stuff out and playing domination.

No, its quite fair, and by design.

[Neksar]

I've been wondering what the ramifications would be of a cert that gives both guns to the gunner. Would they have to switch between them, or could they fire them both at once? On the one hand, letting both be fired at once seems unfair, but allowing them to fire only one at a time also seems to make them weaker than the now-standard driver/gunner combination.

[Mechzz]

I've been wondering what the ramifications would be of a cert that gives both guns to the gunner. Would they have to switch between them, or could they fire them both at once? On the one hand, letting both be fired at once seems unfair, but allowing them to fire only one at a time also seems to make them weaker than the now-standard driver/gunner combination.

Cool idea Neksar!

If you cert dual gunner then the screen should go into split screen mode so you gun and drive and gun at the same time. That could actually work on the magrider. Excellent!

[Senyu]

IMO having single player in vehicle that has access to the main gun can make him do some good damage, but reduces his survival abilities or prevent specilization. If he had a secondary gun that helps fight agaisn't aircraft or other vehicles. Or one helping you focus on what your killing. And while this does give counters to one-man vehicles I still prefer the way they did it in PS1.

On regarding of driver only certification, with it they should also make the vehicle perhaps cheaper in resource cost? IDK just trying to think of another incentive to go for it for more than the already driver dedicated drivers.