Vertical stabilizer for vehicle turrets? - Page 3

AncientVanu · 2012-02-13, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by Gortha

Wut? Even BF3 as noobish as it got has no Vertical Stabilization.
It would take out too much skill out of the game.

I really hope it sticks to the PS1 Mechanics the MBTs and the Lightning got.

you are right it has no vertical stabilization, I was wrong about it as I said in my comment.

Rbstr · 2012-02-13, 11:33 AM

I'm pretty sure the recent BF games do have stabilisation to some extent. They've certainly smoothed the turret bouncing compared to PS.
Perhaps they model a suspension somehow.

Remember there's a difference between tank elevation change and the tanks orientation in space (angle). Stabilisation won't help with elevation unless it's very sophisticated.

Warborn · 2012-02-13, 11:42 AM

BF maps tend to be a lot more flat/gradually sloped than Planetside. Planetside's terrain was incredibly rough in a lot of cases. Some places were nice and flat and gunning wasn't too bad, but other places were so goddamn rough you were constantly pitching back and forth.

AncientVanu · 2012-02-13, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Rbstr

I'm pretty sure the recent BF games do have stabilisation to some extent. They've certainly smoothed the turret bouncing compared to PS.

That's what I've noticed, it's not a stabilization though it's more like a bouncing dampening. Vertical and horizontal stabilization keep your aim on the target no matter what movement you are performing with the tank and what obstacles you are going through so long as you are withing the gun elevation limits. I don't think any game has this modeled unless it's a tank sim we are talking about.

Originally Posted by Warborn

BF maps tend to be a lot more flat/gradually sloped than Planetside. Planetside's terrain was incredibly rough in a lot of cases. Some places were nice and flat and gunning wasn't too bad, but other places were so goddamn rough you were constantly pitching back and forth.

In that regard PS2 terrain seems even more rough.

Hmr85 · 2012-02-13, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by xSlideShow

Nope, it was always the gun bouncing up and down. Was a great gunner on a stable platform.

Then it sounds like you need a better driver

Hmr85 · 2012-02-13, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by AncientVanu

In that regard PS2 terrain seems even more rough.

Actually I wouldn't be surprised if its quite the opposite. A lot of that jagged terrain we saw in PS1 should be gone come PS2 with the addition of newer technology.

ThGlump · 2012-02-13, 12:12 PM

For tanks there is no need for stabilizers as tank battles will be more static than in ps1 - more shooting from distance while standing than driving around and shooting (look at any game with driver/gunner style)

For sunderer there is no need either, as its primary transport, resupply utility vehicle with some defense, its not meant to have accurate weapons.

HitbackTR · 2012-02-13, 12:37 PM

Absolutely no. If the game is dumbed down enough for drivers and gunning to be performed by the same person I don't want the game dumbed down even more. SMH.

Belight · 2012-02-13, 01:07 PM

I think it needs to meet in the middle or be skill tree.

Being a machine gunner in BF3's jeeps is next to impossible and looks stupid becasue it bounces all around like crazy.

Modern day tanks can drive like crazy and still shoot the hell outta things. Dunno why they'd go backwards in technology in the future setting of PS....

Raymac · 2012-02-13, 01:16 PM

I voted before I read the thread and was thinking in the context of the secondary gunner, so I voted 'yes'. Having read the comments, I agree that I don't think the driver/main gunner should have the vertical stablization for a number of reasons, but I still think it's a good idea for the secondary gunner.

Azren · 2012-02-13, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by AncientVanu

Now I'm a little confused how it works in PS1 as I have never played this game, but the OP said there is horizontal stabilization in it. From the videos I've watched I don't think that's true, it looks close to the BF system (no stabilization at all) although the barrel movement seems kind of more robotic. Can anyone who has played both PS1 and BF tell if there is any difference in these games with regard to main tank gun movement?

I made no mistake here; in main battle tanks, sunderers, buggies the turrets are horizontally 100% independent from the vehicle. The tank can spin around and you won't notice it. Vertical stabilization is 0 though.

The ligthing, quad, aircraft guns follow the vehicle, so you have to adjust aim both horizontally and vertically in those (but this is no problem because of the nature of these vehicles).

If vertical stabilization was implemented, it would have to be very moderate. Only help with small bumps on the road. If your driver climbs a hill, you would have to adjust the aim. In other words: it does not help with elevation change, only keeps the turret at the same angle (as much as it's able to, it would have to have a speed limit to how fast it can adjust)

Originally Posted by Gortha

I really hope it sticks to the PS1 Mechanics the MBTs and the Lightning got.

The mechanics of MBTs and the lightning are very different, just which one is it you want them to stick with?

Gortha · 2012-02-13, 01:48 PM

I know all MBTs and the Lightning.
I also resubbed a few days ago and drove all Tanks at the Weekend,
where all Empire Vehicles were available cross factions.

The need to compensate vertical angles for the gunner or the driver in a lighning are very similar. It takes skill and reflexes. Not just dumb autoaim clicking.

VioletZero · 2012-02-13, 01:55 PM

I voted yes.

Anything that increases the skill gap should increase the game's depth. This does not. It is just an arbitrary hindrance that makes being a gunner harder to pick up and play.

BorisBlade · 2012-02-13, 02:06 PM

Sadly due to bad developer decisions, the driver is also a gunner now too. So the driving will be much worse compared to ps1 where the driver could focus on his skill as a driver, which means they wont focus as much on keeping a good shot with positioning and avoiding the crazy bumps or moving tactically. Vertical stabilization could be good. But honestly, I would have to test it out. It could be flat out terrible idea as well. Hard to say too much til we can test it out.

Now that i think about it more tho, definitely dont want it for the driver who also is a gunner, bad enough its an option on main tanks, it should be harder to do. Not quite as opposed, until i test it that is, for pure gunner slots. But again, it could just be bad period but I would need to test it a bit in the actual game versus real targets first.

CutterJohn · 2012-02-13, 02:32 PM

Yes and no.

I want some stabilization, but not perfect stabilization. There has to be a healthy compromise between the jittery mess of PS1 vehicles and a rock solid reticle regardless of what the driver was doing.

That said, I think PS2 vehicles are likely to have shock absorbers, rather than the perfectly elastic collision model of PS1 vehicles. This may be enough. Hell, the Magriders cannon should be silky smooth anyway. Its.. hovering.

Also, it could be an upgrade, meaning you have to replace one of the other useful items on the tank for increased stability of the turrets.

View Poll Results: Vertical stabilizers for ground vehicles, yes or no? Explain below.
Yes	46	52.27%
No	42	47.73%
Voters: 88. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode