Should Heavy Assault Drive? [Archive]

Maticus

2012-07-09, 10:51 PM

Did a quick forum search to no avail. I'm sure it's been discussed before though....But should Heavy Assault be able to drive? Much like the Rexo in PS1, they couldn't drive closed-cockpit vehicles. And of course in the stream from Higby we saw him get out of a tank fight and fire the HA Anti-Vehicle weapon at a Magrider.

So anyway...Should driving (passenger/gunner excluded of course) be limited to Infil/LA/Medic/Engie? Or should the HA be able to drive as well?

(Of course, the Flash is excluded from this conversation)

Perhaps everything besides MBTs and air cav/lib. I don't think HA driving lightnings would be THAT big of an advantage. For the gal/bang bus, the more people able to drive support vehicles the better.

Electrofreak

2012-07-09, 10:51 PM

Littleman

2012-07-09, 10:54 PM

In this iteration I think it's fine. They can't heal themselves like they could in PS1, so they already have their limitations. Not sure we can leave a weapon slot empty anyway.

PhoenixDog

2012-07-09, 10:55 PM

I agree they should not be able to drive closed-cockpit vehicles. It's a bit too much to be able to tool around in a Vanguard with AV.

Either that, or dismounting from the driver seat should take several seconds. You shouldn't be able to bail at the last minute and start throwing AV.

That's been my problem with the lack of animations associated with the vehicles. the instant in and out allows for players to just shoot a shell, hop out, fire a rocket, hop in, and fire a shell again all while the other tank has maybe managed two shots...You got 3.

Zidane

2012-07-09, 10:55 PM

Now that they cant heal themselves I think it should be fine.

Ratstomper

2012-07-09, 10:56 PM

Last I heard all infantry except MAXes could drive vehicles.

Vehicle animations would go a long way to solve some of the class as driver problems. They would pretty much act like a delay so people can't just bail and start shooting (plus they look cool).

Envenom

2012-07-09, 10:56 PM

I can see that class being very boring and average if you take away such a huge facet of the game such as vehicles.

I disagree and think you're all over reacting.

Vehicle animations would go a long way to solve some of the class as driver problems. They would pretty much act like a delay so people can't just bail and start shooting (plus they look cool).

^ touche

Electrofreak

2012-07-09, 11:01 PM

That's been my problem with the lack of animations associated with the vehicles. the instant in and out allows for players to just shoot a shell, hop out, fire a rocket, hop in, and fire a shell again all while the other tank has maybe managed two shots...You got 3.

Yep, that's exactly my sentiment.

Now that they cant heal themselves I think it should be fine.

They may not be able to heal themselves, but they have something better; they can bail in a fraction of a second and pop a shield which will allow them to survive a tank round. Combine this with the ability to fire AV and they just have too much of an advantage.

QuantumMechanic

2012-07-09, 11:02 PM

I'm kind of surprised there's no dedicated Pilot/Wheelman class. I mean, when you are in a vehicle - your intent is to.... use the vehicle right?

Being able to hop out and rambo somebody down with your heavy weapon strikes me as overkill.

Edit: yes you could hop out and rambo somebody down with your HA weapon in PS1, but you could only do that in light armor while sacrificing most of your inventory space.

mintyc

2012-07-09, 11:04 PM

Galaxy, Sunderer and Flash + any future buggis and deliverer types = yes

all other aircraft and tanks = no

Xyntech

2012-07-09, 11:05 PM

Yes, HA should be able to drive and fly every vehicle.

MAXes are specifically balanced around being unwieldy, but HA is balanced more normally like every other class. HA will be balanced so that it has many pluses and minuses compared to LA, Engis, etc, rendering them all roughly equal. This won't be a clear upgrade from PJ's to agile to rexo like in the first game.

So long as HA's AV guns aren't able to be used as "I win" buttons against enemy vehicles after bailing (they currently can't) and as long as every other class has a reasonable chance of killing HA in a plenty of 1 on 1 situations, there is no reason not to allow HA to drive/fly.

This is PS1 bias that people are carrying over to PS2. If there does prove to be some serious balance problems in PS2, we'll have to address this issue again, but for now there is no good reason to think that PS2 will suffer any of the problems that PS1 would have suffered if Rexo could drive every vehicle.

PhoenixDog

2012-07-09, 11:06 PM

I can see that class being very boring and average if you take away such a huge facet of the game such as vehicles.

I disagree and think you're all over reacting.
I'M NOT OVER REACTING TO ANYTHING! YOU'RE OVER REACTING TO NOT ENOUGH!!!

They may not be able to heal themselves, but they have something better; they can bail in a fraction of a second and pop a shield which will allow them to survive a tank round. Combine this with the ability to fire AV and they just have too much of an advantage.

Forgot about the shield thing. In essence too, say another HA has almost killed your tank. While it's on fire and he's reloading the rocket to finish you, in a fraction you can hop out and kill him without him even realizing you got out of the tank...

This is PS1 bias that people are carrying over to PS2. If there does prove to be some serious balance problems in PS2, we'll have to address this issue again, but for now there is no good reason to think that PS2 will suffer any of the problems that PS1 would have suffered if Rexo could drive every vehicle.

I'm normally on the side of "wait until beta" too...But one thing that doesn't carry over from PS1 to PS2 is TTK. An extra rocket fired from the driver could potentially make a huge difference in a tank fight.

Reefpirate

2012-07-09, 11:12 PM

I literally JUST finished typing this up in the other thread, so I'm gonna paste it here as well seeing as this is the more appropriate place for it:

If you put delays on entry and exit of vehicles (as I'm sure they will), then I don't care if HA's can pilot or not. Your enemies can do it too, but also you're trading something off to be HA-in-tank so it can be balanced... ie. you could be engi-in-tank or LA-in-tank which would have their own advantages.

Also, there's a risk-reward for how long you try to stay in the tank (this will be even moreso with entry/exit delays). Do you stay a bit longer and use the more powerful tank gun one more time but risk being totally blown up, or do you decide to bail out early and trade one final large tank blast for maybe one or two AV rockets?

Time is a resource and so is opportunity, so it's not simply 'lol I get extra AV firepower if I go HA-in-tank'.

Littleman

2012-07-09, 11:14 PM

We're over reacting based on what little we saw and then speculate with little to no knowledge from previous info sources, as per usual. Pretty sure SOE isn't considering any of this as valid feed back, they really shouldn't.

Tank armor is directional. Note how little damage the prowler did to Higby's vanguard striking it from the front: very little, barely a 1/10th if that. When the prowler flanked him and hit him from the rear, he took some significant damage however.

I'm willing to bet when he hopped out of his lightning to engage the Mag-Rider (which he lost against by the way) it shrugged off his rockets in a similar fashion the front his vanguard did prowler shells.

I think unless the victorious tank is sitting at a sliver of life, as long as the bulk of it's armor is facing the bailer, said bailer is just waiting to be smeared across the ground. Lighter craft might be a different story, but unless there's an ejection seat, that's probably a dead HA guy, while the other guy might be an LA that can safely bail or an engi whom can easily retreat and repair his craft.

Also note: there ARE certs that influence how much time is spent entering, exiting, and switching seats. In this build (which is NOT the latest build,) those probably weren't implemented. So when one guy is clearly losing the fight, now he has to choose when he wants to bail. Make use of an extra shot, or get out way ahead of the soon-to-be fireball.

This is PS1 bias that people are carrying over to PS2.

I think this is the motivation for many posters in this thread.

Electrofreak

2012-07-09, 11:20 PM

We're over reacting based on what little we saw and then speculate with little to no knowledge from previous info sources, as per usual. Pretty sure SOE isn't considering any of this as valid feed back, they really shouldn't.

Tank armor is directional. Note how little damage the prowler did to Higby's vanguard striking it from the front: very little, barely a 1/10th if that. When the prowler flanked him and hit him from the rear, he took some significant damage however.

I'm willing to bet when he hopped out of his lightning to engage the Mag-Rider (which he lost against by the way) it shrugged off his rockets in a similar fashion the front his vanguard did prowler shells.

I think unless the victorious tank is sitting at a sliver of life, as long as the bulk of it's armor is facing the bailer, said bailer is just waiting to be smeared across the ground. Lighter craft might be a different story, but unless there's an ejection seat, that's probably a dead HA guy, while the other guy might be an LA that can safely bail or an engi whom can easily retreat and repair his craft.

Also note: there ARE certs that influence how much time is spent entering, exiting, and switching seats. In this build (which is NOT the latest build,) those probably weren't implemented. So when one guy is clearly losing the fight, now he has to choose when he wants to bail. Make use of an extra shot, or get out way ahead of the soon-to-be fireball.

For the most part, I agree with you. But given that the HA shield is specifically designed to allow the soldier to survive a tank round while he unloads AV, I think that he may be able to get enough rounds off that it really could make a difference. He won't end up a smear on the ground specifically because of the ability, even if Higby didn't employ it on the stream.

A battle between vehicles should be dependent upon the skill of the drivers and gunners (I noticed the greatly increased damage taken from the rear shot by the Prowler as well), not upon whether whom is able to bail, pop a shield, and finish off the other in a close fight.

Reefpirate

2012-07-09, 11:24 PM

For the most part, I agree with you. But given that the HA shield is specifically designed to allow the soldier to survive a tank round while he unloads AV, I think that he may be able to get enough rounds off that it really could make a difference. He won't end up a smear on the ground specifically because of the ability, even if Higby didn't employ it on the stream.

A battle between vehicles should be dependent upon the skill of the drivers and gunners (I noticed the greatly increased damage taken from the rear shot by the Prowler as well), not upon whether whom is able to bail, pop a shield, and finish off the other in a close fight.

I'm pretty sure Higby popped the shield on in the video... He got the glowy blue effect around his arms. No?

QuantumMechanic

2012-07-09, 11:26 PM

MAXes are specifically balanced around being unwieldy, but HA is balanced more normally like every other class. HA will be balanced so that it has many pluses and minuses compared to LA, Engis, etc, rendering them all roughly equal. This won't be a clear upgrade from PJ's to agile to rexo like in the first game.

I hope that all of the classes are roughly equal in terms of perks and class abilities. But I sure hope they are not roughly equal in terms of survivability on the battlefield.

I think there's a big difference between a Heavy Assault guy jumping out of his Vanguard with his heavy armor, shield ability and AV rocket launcher versus an Engineer jumping out of his Vanguard with his flak armor, repair tool and SMG/carbine/turret.

Sledgecrushr

2012-07-09, 11:27 PM

All they have to do is add a one second delay bailing out of a vehicle and jumping into a vehicle. With that I would say yes to HA being able to drive vehicles.

PhoenixDog

2012-07-09, 11:27 PM

We're over reacting based on what little we saw and then speculate with little to no knowledge from previous info sources, as per usual. Pretty sure SOE isn't considering any of this as valid feed back, they really shouldn't.

Whether this issue has already been covered in the latest build or not...We don't know. And that's why we talk. Because we don't know. And whether SoE considers anything said here or not, we can still discuss potentials. That's part of the fun in it, no? Imagining the possibilities of such exploits and thus coming up with solutions to fix said exploits.

It's a forum discussion. Let's discuss.

Xyntech

2012-07-09, 11:29 PM

I'm normally on the side of "wait until beta" too...But one thing that doesn't carry over from PS1 to PS2 is TTK. An extra rocket fired from the driver could potentially make a huge difference in a tank fight.

I would be more worried if we had ever seen any footage from PS2 where a HA with an AV gun took out a vehicle who was actively trying to kill the HA. It just hasn't happened.

If it remains this difficult for a single HA to stand out in the open with no cover and try to kill enemy vehicles, then there is simply no problem. It doesn't matter if both tanks are pretty near death and one hops out and successfully kills the other vehicle once in a blue moon. He probably would have been just as able to stay in his vehicle and use that to kill the enemy in 99% of the situations anyways.

This is entirely an issue about how quickly you can exit vehicles, and how balanced HA are against the other classes. But as it stands, AV guns are not overpowered against vehicles. There is literally no footage to support anything otherwise.

I only say wait for beta to see if there is an issue because we have only seen evidence to the contrary from the footage we've seen thus far.

The noob

2012-07-09, 11:31 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if vehicle entry/delay times were a cert you could cert into, it may have not been in the build shown in the stream (they did say that this was using an older build compared to the more unstable, not QAed builds). If it isn't, and its instant, they should add in a delay towards entering and exiting vehicles, and create a certification for reducing (but not removing) the enter/exit times.

Electrofreak

2012-07-09, 11:34 PM

I'm pretty sure Higby popped the shield on in the video... He got the glowy blue effect around his arms. No?

I watched it again, and you're right... he did, right before he died. I missed it the first time around. So perhaps the shield isn't enough to survive a direct hit from a tank. I'm pretty sure that it'd been mentioned in the E3 footage that the purpose of that shield was primarily to allow them to survive against armor long enough for them to fight back.

If not, the majority of my concern is nullified.

Click to view the Lighting bailout at 9:45

Xyntech

2012-07-09, 11:35 PM

I hope that all of the classes are roughly equal in terms of perks and class abilities. But I sure hope they are not roughly equal in terms of survivability on the battlefield.

I think there's a big difference between a Heavy Assault guy jumping out of his Vanguard with his heavy armor, shield ability and AV rocket launcher versus an Engineer jumping out of his Vanguard with his flak armor, repair tool and SMG/carbine/turret.

Remember that an Engineer can drop a MANA turret and mow down a HA, while LA can jump to crazy vantage points to get the drop on HA or use their jump jets to escape a situation where HA has the advantage.

Clearly HA should and will have the superior armor and firepower in a straight up brawl, but the other classes will still be balanced and be able to take out HA in a 1 on 1 fight, so long as they play to their strengths. Just the same, HA will win so long as they keep a good eye on where LA is attacking from and don't rush in front of an engi manning a turret.

Obviously HA's particular strengths tend to play more to surviving encounters with enemy vehicles and dealing damage to them than some of the other classes, but they aren't AA gods like a MAX can be. So far, both aircraft and tanks seem perfectly capable of slaughtering a HA standing out in the open.

So if HA aren't mass slaughtering the tanks and aircraft who shot down the vehicles that they bailed from, and if HA isn't inherently superior to other classes in infantry warfare, what's the big problem with letting them drive all of the same vehicles as everyone else can drive?

Kriegson

2012-07-09, 11:45 PM

Like most balance discussion, I feel like it's a "Wait and see in beta" just like most else. Though something does come to mind...

Vehicles attract attention. Squishy humans amidst big nasty vehicles often get pasted quickly. That includes Rexos, as we saw with higby. Yes, the rexo might give you a few moments of defiance, but ultimately unless you bail in a very good spot (can get into cover almost instantly) You're still toast.

And what you can do in that limited amount of time between appearing next to your vehicle and getting pasted is still up to debate.

Alternatively, piloting as an LA you have a built in ejector seat. A player appearing next to his vehicle and attempting to sprint off will be a relatively easy target. Someone popping out of their vehicle and shooting off into the sky will prove quite a bit more problematic.
Especially when it comes to aircraft, where with the glider pack you can control your descent to a far higher degree.

Ultimately the Rexo while piloting might give you an extra shot or two (for what its worth) but Light assault ironically gives you much better chances for survival due to the ability to move quickly and unpredictably after bailing.

Not to mention the engineer can repair his own vehicle, the medic can better establish a base, and an infil could feasibly use a tank as a ruse, turning what appears to be a brute force rush by "some idiot ramboing it" into an opportunity to sneak into an enemy base with the fools thinking they killed him and partying around the burned out husk of his decoy.

Reefpirate

2012-07-09, 11:45 PM

I watched it again, and you're right... he did, right before he died. I missed it the first time around. So perhaps the shield isn't enough to survive a direct hit from a tank. I'm pretty sure that it'd been mentioned in the E3 footage that the purpose of that shield was primarily to allow them to survive against armor long enough for them to fight back.

Click to view 9:45 seconds into the stream (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=017I9ghLsYA&hd=1&t=9m45s)

Ok, I just watched that part about 6 times in a row, here's how I see it went down:

- Lightning gets totally owned by the Magrider despite getting the jump on it with some free volleys.
- Higby bails.
- (This is where it gets confusing)
- Higby hits Magrider with a rocket.
- Higby starts to flee the Lighting as it is destroyed by the Magrider...
- Higby pops the HA shield, but also seems to simultaneously take damage from the Lighting being destroyed (damage from Mag shell I guess) and his HA shield is knocked down significantly while his personal shields also seem to get knocked down.
- Higby fires another rocket at almost the same time Magrider fires the killing blow.
- Dead Higby. Magrider survives but it's uncertain what sort of condition it is in.

Talek Krell

2012-07-09, 11:51 PM

As people have observed, it depends on a lot of things that we aren't really sure of yet. I suspect that letting them fly might still be a bit much. If you can fire while bailing then the lock on rocket launchers will present an issue. Even if you can't then that's still a terribly easy method of getting HA weaponry and a rocket launcher into close range, with a strafing run to make things even easier. The cost of the vehicle is a potential balancing factor for that, but whether it discourages it that much is to be seen.

On a separate note, I think it would be interesting to see what effects banning HA from driving various things would have on the use of transport vehicles.

QuantumMechanic

2012-07-09, 11:51 PM

So if HA aren't mass slaughtering the tanks and aircraft who shot down the vehicles that they bailed from, and if HA isn't inherently superior to other classes in infantry warfare, what's the big problem with letting them drive all of the same vehicles as everyone else can drive?

For me, it's simply that of all the infantry classes HA has the distinct advantage in this situation (bailing from a vehicle only to further attack your aggressor). Specifically you have your heavy armor and shield (which is meant to protect you from vehicle attacks as has been said).

I agree that the classes overall should be balanced out against each other as you pointed out. But if you want to maximize your effectiveness in vehicles, I see no reason not to go as HA. As long as you have your vehicle's auto armor repair speed certed up, there's no reason to go as Engineer.

I suppose this is by design. And yes, we'll see how it pans out in beta. But I won't be surprised when I see everybody copying what Higby did in the stream today.

Electrofreak

2012-07-09, 11:56 PM

Ok, I just watched that part about 6 times in a row, here's how I see it went down:

- Lightning gets totally owned by the Magrider despite getting the jump on it with some free volleys.
- Higby bails.
- (This is where it gets confusing)
- Higby hits Magrider with a rocket.
- Higby starts to flee the Lighting as it is destroyed by the Magrider...
- Higby pops the HA shield, but also seems to simultaneously take damage from the Lighting being destroyed (damage from Mag shell I guess) and his HA shield is knocked down significantly while his personal shields also seem to get knocked down.
- Higby fires another rocket at almost the same time Magrider fires the killing blow.
- Dead Higby. Magrider survives but it's uncertain what sort of condition it is in.

Yeah, I see what you mean. It looks like the shield goes up right as the Lightning explodes, which takes out most of the shield. I'm assuming the little indicator at the center bottom is the strength of the shield. At the very least, the shield appears to have allowed him to survive the explosion of the Lightning and first Magrider tank round.

So... perhaps I should be concerned about the ability for HA to pop that shield after bailing from a vehicle to use AV. I guess we'll have to Wait-And-See-In-Beta™. :p

Ultimately the Rexo while piloting might give you an extra shot or two (for what its worth) but Light assault ironically gives you much better chances for survival due to the ability to move quickly and unpredictably after bailing.

Not to mention the engineer can repair his own vehicle, the medic can better establish a base, and an infil could feasibly use a tank as a ruse, turning what appears to be a brute force rush by "some idiot ramboing it" into an opportunity to sneak into an enemy base with the fools thinking they killed him and partying around the burned out husk of his decoy.

Survival is one thing... being able to survive and strike back is another. Either way, changing dismounting to take several seconds may be the solution we need. Or, it may just cause people to begin the bail far too early.

Otleaz

2012-07-10, 12:02 AM

There are a couple of things I am concerned about.

The first is that it is already confirmed that there will be rockets which will do more damage than guided missiles. This would mean that the video we saw could have gone a different route if Higby was dedicated to his role of tank destruction.

The second is that there will be a secondary gunner most of the time. Tank battles could easily turn into a annoying and gimmicky experience if there is a second guy popping out and shooting you with a rocket.

Either way, this is a really gimmicky mechanic and it will leave a bad taste in everybody's mouth when it happens.

Reefpirate

2012-07-10, 12:06 AM

Or, it may just cause people to begin the bail far too early.

But you see that's where the balance lies... Why would you 'start the bail early' if your tank's cannon is clearly superior to a slow AV weapon that your HA has?

On a Lightning you might be slightly ahead with two HA rockets (if you can get two off before you get wasted), but on a Vanguard or Magrider you're better off staying in the tank doing damage with the main cannon I would think...

vVRedOctoberVv

2012-07-10, 12:08 AM

We're over reacting based on what little we saw and then speculate with little to no knowledge from previous info sources, as per usual. Pretty sure SOE isn't considering any of this as valid feed back, they really shouldn't.

The whole point of Beta, and observing the tests/gameplay is so we can state our opinions on this sort of thing.

Second, it's not over reacting to anything.

At present a heavily armored soldier, able to carry a large AT launcher into any vehicle can instantly dismount, instantly pop a shield allowing him to survive any potential fire directed at him, and fire his weapon at the enemy, very possibly changing the outcome.

Despite Higby personally being unable to kill the Mag, whether due to suckage or circumstances of the encounter, the PRINCIPLE DISPLAYED here is potentially a problem.

#1 It's more than a little silly to take a AT launcher into a cockpit with you. This is a video game, yes... But really?

#2 It promotes cheap gimmicky gameplay. And, as has already been mentioned by several people, there are clear and obvious ways to potentially abuse the mechanics at present (see guy saying "Fire gun, eject and fire missile, mount vehicle fire gun again")

It is not over reacting to state an opinion on something. Particularly when something is kind of stupid. Like this is.

Yes, this is a pre-release version of the game... However, if nobody says anything, they might not take it out, or worse, might think it's "good".

On the topic of whether HA should be able to drive most vehicles? No, not really. They're heavy infantry, with lots of guns that don't really jive well with a cramped cockpit. This is silly.

"HA would be bland and uninteresting if they can't drive all the vehicles like the other classes can"
Obviously, you lean towards being a vehicle user/tanker.

Playing as infantry will be bland if you don't like infantry, this is true. If you like infantry... Then you'll like being infantry...

Please note, I play exclusively as infantry. I do not use either planes or vehicles to any appreciable extent. I am "negatively affected" you might say, by my opinion, but I still hold it.

Reefpirate

2012-07-10, 12:10 AM

...there will be a secondary gunner most of the time. Tank battles could easily turn into a annoying and gimmicky experience if there is a second guy popping out and shooting you with a rocket.

I hadn't considered that in this equation... But the secondary gunner popping in and out of the tank would be annoying.

Once again, this is solved if there is enough of a delay on entry/exit to discourage it. Getting IN to a vehicle or a position in a vehicle should be a commitment and not something you can just dance around with willy-nilly.

Pancake

2012-07-10, 12:10 AM

Based on the internal beta test stream, they can drive any vehicle.

Otleaz

2012-07-10, 12:11 AM

But you see that's where the balance lies... Why would you 'start the bail early' if your tank's cannon is clearly superior to a slow AV weapon that your HA has?

On a Lightning you might be slightly ahead with two HA rockets (if you can get two off before you get wasted), but on a Vanguard or Magrider you're better off staying in the tank doing damage with the main cannon I would think...

Yes, and it will also be substantially more difficult to time it so you don't get a shell in the back when you get out. Heck, the enemy could even stop firing to prepare if they see the enemy tank stop moving and firing.

Electrofreak

2012-07-10, 12:12 AM

But you see that's where the balance lies... Why would you 'start the bail early' if your tank's cannon is clearly superior to a slow AV weapon that your HA has?

On a Lightning you might be slightly ahead with two HA rockets (if you can get two off before you get wasted), but on a Vanguard or Magrider you're better off staying in the tank doing damage with the main cannon I would think...

With sufficiently powerful AV weapons (as in unguided rockets above) coupled with the reasonable chance of survival using the HA shield could potentially make initiating a bail when your tank reaches half armor become preferable to staying inside. Of course, we have no way of knowing this, but I think we all agree that this is the kind of mechanic we would like to avoid.

Ratstomper

2012-07-10, 12:15 AM

The whole point of Beta, and observing the tests/gameplay is so we can state our opinions on this sort of thing.

From what I've seen (and from how it was in PS1), the AV that infantry have is not very potent at all. It's designed to be formidable with multiple infantry using them at once. I feel if the fight between two vehicles was close enough that hitting that tank with one rocket would kill it...well, that's too bad for the tank.

vVRedOctoberVv

2012-07-10, 12:32 AM

@RatStomper

I agree. The complaint is not that the tank might lose, but that the manner in which it took place is overly gimmicky, and just plain stupid. While things will be refined in coming days, at present there is a potential for abuse/idiocy, so suggestions to alter it are appropriate.

And as was mentioned by someone else, a point I didn't consider either, about the passenger/secondary gunner.

I personally don't consider the situation a "gamebreaker". Perhaps I chose my words incorrectly. I just consider it "stupid and infeasible", and in particular the near instantaneous entry/exist at present lends to that.

A lengthier entry/exit and having to load your weapons would satisfy, if HA MUST drive, and MUST be able to carry heavy weapons into a cockpit.

Bravix

2012-07-10, 12:37 AM

Yes, and it will also be substantially more difficult to time it so you don't get a shell in the back when you get out. Heck, the enemy could even stop firing to prepare if they see the enemy tank stop moving and firing.

I disagree, it'd be easy to time.

1. Wait for enemy tank to fire
2. Enemy shell hits your tank (or misses).
3. Hop out immediately, fire rocket launcher, get back in vehicle
4. Fire tank cannon

Repeated would be slightly harder if you have to reload, but still just one rocket shot could make the difference.

Otleaz

2012-07-10, 12:41 AM

I disagree, it'd be easy to time.

1. Wait for enemy tank to fire
2. Enemy shell hits your tank (or misses).
3. Hop out immediately, fire rocket launcher, get back in vehicle
4. Fire tank cannon

Repeated would be slightly harder if you have to reload, but still just one rocket shot could make the difference.

I think you misunderstood. I was saying this in regard to the delayed exit.

Reefpirate

2012-07-10, 12:41 AM

I disagree, it'd be easy to time.

1. Wait for enemy tank to fire
2. Enemy shell hits your tank (or misses).
3. Hop out immediately, fire rocket launcher, get back in vehicle
4. Fire tank cannon

Repeated would be slightly harder if you have to reload, but still just one rocket shot could make the difference.

I think the example he/she was referring to would be with longer entry/exit times and not instantaneous as we saw them in the video.

Bravix

2012-07-10, 12:45 AM

I think you misunderstood. I was saying this in regard to the delayed exit.

My mistake

Ratstomper

2012-07-10, 12:50 AM

A lengthier entry/exit and having to load your weapons would satisfy, if HA MUST drive, and MUST be able to carry heavy weapons into a cockpit.

I completely understand and also hate gimmicky game mechanics. I would agree animations would help to fix it, but what if all AV weapons had to be loaded when you pulled them out? I wonder how feasible it would be for a soldier to go walking around with a loaded and cocked rocket launcher strapped to his back all the time. Sounds like someone I'd want to avoid.

Reefpirate

2012-07-10, 12:53 AM

I completely understand and also hate gimmicky game mechanics. I would agree animations would help to fix it, but what if all AV weapons had to be loaded when you pulled them out? I wonder how feasible it would be for a soldier to go walking around with a loaded and cocked rocket launcher strapped to his back all the time. Sounds like someone I'd want to avoid.

Eeep! I like your idea about loading before shooting too...

But I think we gotta be careful to not request "animations" because this has been denied several times now. It's not going to happen for release.

But what we can get, and I'm convinced is already in the game just not in this build, is DELAYS on entry/exit without new animations.

Electrofreak

2012-07-10, 12:57 AM

This thread has far too much constructive criticism and intelligent debate.

Spiritbeast

2012-07-10, 12:58 AM

i dont have a problem with any class driving/gunning vehicles, including maxes. As long as i have a few teammates with me i have a chance to live. In 1v1 it would be ahh crap, but that might help promote teamwork, and i might have an HA with me with a rocket launcher ; P doesnt sound so bad then

Malorn

2012-07-10, 02:11 AM

Nothing stopped drivers from carrying AV weaponry in PS1, or gunners from being HA. The exit animation caused a delay which often resulted in the tank blowing up in the time it took for the driver to exit, or the exploding tank would kill them immediately afterwards.

Seems to me the thing missing is an enter/exit delay which would make it a risk to leave the vehicle.

FuzzyandBlue

2012-07-10, 03:01 AM

I don't really see how a HA bailing, is any worse than an engy getting out and repping the tank mid fight. I would imagine he would be able to live if he was behind the tank rather than in front of it.

Personally I would much rather have someone repping my tank over a guy that can shoot on extra shot. So should we not let engys drive tanks or be the gunner in a tank because he can get out and repair the tank mid fight?

A exit/enter animation or delay could fix these particular gimmicks. But is an exit/enter animation or delay a fun mechanic? Do we do them for all vehicles? should it take 3-4 seconds to get in and out of a sunderer or a flash? What about gal drops?

Envenom

2012-07-10, 03:37 AM

There's arguments for both sides. Pretty much it boils down to vehicle exit/enter animations make everyone happy. SOE, get on it.

Littleman

2012-07-10, 04:34 AM

Whether this issue has already been covered in the latest build or not...We don't know. And that's why we talk. Because we don't know. And whether SoE considers anything said here or not, we can still discuss potentials. That's part of the fun in it, no? Imagining the possibilities of such exploits and thus coming up with solutions to fix said exploits.

It's a forum discussion. Let's discuss.

Most of this thread during page 1 was simply "I don't like the idea of HA jumping out and killing me with a rocket! Say NO to HA drivers!" It wasn't a discussion of potential maneuvers and their counters ("exploits," please,) it was ill informed people stating fear/hate borne opinions that sounded eerily reminiscent of PS1 expectations.

The whole point of Beta, and observing the tests/gameplay is so we can state our opinions on this sort of thing.

Second, it's not over reacting to anything.

At present a heavily armored soldier, able to carry a large AT launcher into any vehicle can instantly dismount, instantly pop a shield allowing him to survive any potential fire directed at him, and fire his weapon at the enemy, very possibly changing the outcome.

Despite Higby personally being unable to kill the Mag, whether due to suckage or circumstances of the encounter, the PRINCIPLE DISPLAYED here is potentially a problem.

#1 It's more than a little silly to take a AT launcher into a cockpit with you. This is a video game, yes... But really?

#2 It promotes cheap gimmicky gameplay. And, as has already been mentioned by several people, there are clear and obvious ways to potentially abuse the mechanics at present (see guy saying "Fire gun, eject and fire missile, mount vehicle fire gun again")

It is not over reacting to state an opinion on something. Particularly when something is kind of stupid. Like this is.

Yes, this is a pre-release version of the game... However, if nobody says anything, they might not take it out, or worse, might think it's "good".

On the topic of whether HA should be able to drive most vehicles? No, not really. They're heavy infantry, with lots of guns that don't really jive well with a cramped cockpit. This is silly.

"HA would be bland and uninteresting if they can't drive all the vehicles like the other classes can"
Obviously, you lean towards being a vehicle user/tanker.

Playing as infantry will be bland if you don't like infantry, this is true. If you like infantry... Then you'll like being infantry...

Please note, I play exclusively as infantry. I do not use either planes or vehicles to any appreciable extent. I am "negatively affected" you might say, by my opinion, but I still hold it.

If the developers react to our opinions/beliefs or speculation based on what we see in a video and make changes based on that, this game is already long since ****ed. I trust in their first hand experience with PS2 more-so than a bunch of critics voicing personal beliefs while watching a choppy stream. Personal beliefs on what should be possible have no place in the balancing of a game.

Frankly, if HA can't drive vehicles, the only thing HA brings over a MAX is hacking capability. The shield is a temporary save, but it won't last forever, especially against the sheer firepower of a tank. They're both designed solely to shoot stuff, the latter is just better at it. How's that for an opinion formulated while observing tests/gameplay?

Otleaz

2012-07-10, 04:53 AM

Most of this thread during page 1 was simply "I don't like the idea of HA jumping out and killing me with a rocket! Say NO to HA drivers!" It wasn't a discussion of potential maneuvers and their counters ("exploits," please,) it was ill informed people stating fear/hate borne opinions that sounded eerily reminiscent of PS1 expectations.

Discussions have a tendency to move on. I suggest you take that into consideration next time you make a post berating people about irrelevant material after only reading part of the first page.

Canaris

2012-07-10, 04:53 AM

if they have their liecence why not, let HA drive! :D

Karrade

2012-07-10, 07:28 AM

I honestly can't call this, too many variables. Have to wait till beta to see the class balance.

Flaropri

2012-07-10, 11:10 AM

They may not be able to heal themselves, but they have something better; they can bail in a fraction of a second and pop a shield which will allow them to survive a tank round. Combine this with the ability to fire AV and they just have too much of an advantage.

And LA can fly away to avoid getting hit entirely and then plant explosives on the enemy vehicle, Engies can pop out and put down an AV turret or similar small structure, etc.

As far as HA being able to supposedly hop in an out of a tank to fire off extra shots between cannon fire... just reset the timer on the cannon when someone enters that seat. So for example, you've got the timer after firing off multiple shots in a Lightning, if you hop out, have that timer start again from zero when you get back in, that removes the ability to take advantage of timing like that. It also keeps the Engi from being able to take advantage of such timing via repairs.

I don't think it's that strong of a tactic to begin with mind, since it means you and the vehicle are stationary, but if it is an issue that's a way to resolve it without removing the entire class from most vehicles.

sylphaen

2012-07-10, 11:23 AM

FYI, I see more an issue with instant exits from heavy tanks than using HA after bailing.

PS1 had a nice balance between soldier/vehicle set-up.

MAX = No vehicles
REXO = No heavy vehicles/light vehicles allowed
EXO = All vehicles
Infil = All vehicles+stealth vehicles

Heavy vehicles = no bailing for drivers (i.e. no instant exit) but high armor
Light vehicles = bailing for drivers but fragile armor
(passengers always get bailing so they cannot be hijacked by the driver)

This system worked well, what are the reasons why it should be changed ? Wanna bail with AV --> use buggies !
(They said buggies are coming post release)

NOTE: the sunderer was an exception because it allowed the driver to be HA. It still did not allow bailing though.

Xyntech

2012-07-10, 12:02 PM

For me, it's simply that of all the infantry classes HA has the distinct advantage in this situation (bailing from a vehicle only to further attack your aggressor). Specifically you have your heavy armor and shield (which is meant to protect you from vehicle attacks as has been said).

I agree that the classes overall should be balanced out against each other as you pointed out. But if you want to maximize your effectiveness in vehicles, I see no reason not to go as HA. As long as you have your vehicle's auto armor repair speed certed up, there's no reason to go as Engineer.

I suppose this is by design. And yes, we'll see how it pans out in beta. But I won't be surprised when I see everybody copying what Higby did in the stream today.

But what is a person giving up for having the auto repair module? It's all about tradeoffs. I'm going as LA as a Scythe pilot for multiple reasons, but one of them is because I want to be able to bail without installing a module for it.

I don't doubt that there will be people copying what Higby did, and maybe sometimes they'll be successful with it, but unless it is consistently used to win tank fights or dogfights, then who cares if it gets used a lot? We already know that we get rewarded for killing vehicles regardless of if the person bails or not.

I think that a good aircav pilot will tend to be LA, and a good tank or Liberator crew will tend to be a mix of engi's and HA. I definitely can't see medics and infiltrators being first choice options for your average vehicle crew, but as long as there are a variety of decent options for classes to pick when driving and flying, it seems balanced enough to me.

But yeah, if I ever see HA bailing tactics suddenly becoming the method of choice for winning a vehicle fight, I'll definitely be in support of it getting fixed. I just see zero evidence that it's a problem at the moment.

Now what could be interesting is if the tactic gets used in a Sunderer. Sunderer rolls up close to an enemy tank with it's enormous amounts of health, 8+ HA guys jump out with AV, unload into the tank and destroy it, then anyone who died gets revived by a medic who was sitting inside manning one of the Sunderers turrets.

But considering how that would be 10 people vs the 1 or 2 in the tank, that seems perfectly fair to me. Besides, that shit would be viable even if HA couldn't drive any vehicles at all.