TTK for Vehicles - Page 4

Rbstr · 2011-07-23, 01:23 PM

The idea that there is going to be more AV weapons on the field compared to now just isn't certain, or even likely. The class system is certainly going to limit the kinds of AI weapons an AV soldier can take.
Do many people forgo an AI weapon in agile armor for an AV gun? No. If you were forced to take a Suppressor if you have AV, do you think it would be anywhere near as prevalent in the second slot?

In the extremes, your vision of insta-dead tanks is possible, it's just not likely. Even in BC2 where tanks go down in just a couple hits, they often stay around for very long times because of both repair efforts, aware driving and nobody being an engineer.

Also:
Nobody gives a shit about how good you are, Bags.

Gandhi · 2011-07-23, 01:28 PM

Personally I think the TTK for vehicles is fine right now, but obviously it'll have to be changed for PS2 to be in line with the TTK for infantry, the new class system and locational damage. So rather than speculate on that I just wanted to mention AV infantry and how annoying they are right now. Specifically the fact that everyone carries AV weapons when they're outside. It's easy to avoid dying to them, but if you're not careful they'll constantly cause you to retreat and repair. Not a real threat but definitely enough to put a dent in your plans, and more importantly a repairing tank is a useless tank until it can get back to the front line. And personally I think that's just where AV infantry should be, just enough to drive off attacking tanks and be a serious threat to light vehicles like Lightnings and Harassers.

If TTK for infantry vs vehicles is lowered then there better be some serious restrictions on carrying AV as infantry, because the kill statistics for them only tell half the story.

Kietharr · 2011-07-23, 02:20 PM

Headshots with certain guns will be weakened against infantry, I imagine locational damage with Infantry weapons will also be weaker than with vehicle weapons against heavy vehicles.

Goku · 2011-07-23, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by Rbstr

The idea that there is going to be more AV weapons on the field compared to now just isn't certain, or even likely. The class system is certainly going to limit the kinds of AI weapons an AV soldier can take.

Do many people forgo an AI weapon in agile armor for an AV gun? No. If you were forced to take a Suppressor if you have AV, do you think it would be anywhere near as prevalent in the second slot?

In the extremes, your vision of insta-dead tanks is possible, it's just not likely. Even in BC2 where tanks go down in just a couple hits, they often stay around for very long times because of both repair efforts, aware driving and nobody being an engineer.

Also:
Nobody gives a shit about how good you are, Bags.

If people get stuck with having a suppressor as a gun for going outdoors good luck seeing any guys with AV out there. I highly doubt SOE is going to limit AV use that much besides there is no correlation between what class AV is in or if it can be used in multiple classes. A lot of people in BC2 use the AV weapon to instagib infantry anyway, this will not happen in PS2.

I never said PS2 was going to have a BC2 style AV tank damage anyway. You referenced a pair of infantry wielding AV should be able to take on a tank.

Talek Krell · 2011-07-23, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by Rbstr

Even in BC2 where tanks go down in just a couple hits, they often stay around for very long times because of both repair efforts, aware driving and nobody being an engineer.

Let's not use BC2 as our model for vehicles. Please? The idea that my tank should be most effective when there's someone hiding behind it repairing the missile damage faster than AV can dish it out makes me sad.

Aractain · 2011-07-23, 04:14 PM

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

Let's not use BC2 as our model for vehicles. Please? The idea that my tank should be most effective when there's someone hiding behind it repairing the missile damage faster than AV can dish it out makes me sad.

Thats what we used to do to make prowlers useful against phenixes.......

Rbstr · 2011-07-23, 04:49 PM

What is with you guys and your persistent inability to see the difference between an example or analogue, opposed to a literal game mechanic?
BC2 provides an example of a game where tanks can go down quick against a couple of well placed infantry. That doesn't render them useless at all. Largely because getting hit in the front does a fraction of the damage. If it works in one game it can readily work, with modification, in another game that fits many of the same tropes. That doesn't mean it has to be identical or even function the same way in PS. Just that it could work that way.

Similarly giving AV troops a Suppressor is an example of the kind of thing they could do to help lower then number of AV if they become more effective.You and I both have NO idea what the class system will restrict. It could go either way. But when was the last time a class based game gave guys with rocket-launchers the full on rifle or better?

Goku · 2011-07-23, 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by Rbstr

What is with you guys and your persistent inability to see the difference between an example or analogue, opposed to a literal game mechanic?

This is what you said:

Originally Posted by Rbstr

The problem is that, currently, a pair or even a few AV wielders can't take out a tank in any semblance of a timely manner, no matter how well they get the drop on it.

When I read this I believed you wanted infantry to pull this off. You never mentioned BC2 or any other game when talking about this.

BC2 provides an example of a game where tanks can go down quick against a couple of well placed infantry. That doesn't render them useless at all. Largely because getting hit in the front does a fraction of the damage. If it works in one game it can readily work, with modification, in another game that fits many of the same tropes. That doesn't mean it has to be identical or even function the same way in PS. Just that it could work that way.

BC2 is at most 16vs16. The original PS had 133vs133vs133. See how many more troops could potentially be shooting you? You could have an entire hill of infantry numbering the size of one team on BC2 shooting your tank easily.

Similarly giving AV troops a Suppressor is an example of the kind of thing they could do to help lower then number of AV if they become more effective.You and I both have NO idea what the class system will restrict. It could go either way. But when was the last time a class based game gave guys with rocket-launchers the full on rifle or better?

This example cannot be used. The rocket in BC2 got one shot infantry, which gives them a viable weapon in addition to shotgun or small rifle. Higby said rockets will be not be used to one shot infantry in PS2 as that is what too many people would use. With that there would be need to be a better weapon for people carrying AV. In PS you can say HA/AV is OP carrying on Rexo, but MA/AV is acceptable. Thats why I do not see as far fetch being in PS2.

Above in red.

Talek Krell · 2011-07-23, 07:31 PM

I simply mean that I think BC 2 is a bad model. The vehicle TTK it uses is based partly on the fact that people can repair that quickly, while the vehicle is in motion, and that one person can drive, gun, and repair simultaneously with only a minor loss in effectiveness.

Rbstr · 2011-07-23, 09:09 PM

Goku, don't do that, it makes it impossible to requote without scrolling and copy/pasting back and forth. There's a reason you can have multiple quote tags in a post.

BC2 is at most 16vs16. The original PS had 133vs133vs133. See how many more troops could potentially be shooting you? You could have an entire hill of infantry numbering the size of one team on BC2 shooting your tank easily.

There are also many, many, more tanks on the field at any given time in planetside. In the end, I would wager the number of AV guns per tank/vehicle within any given draw distance is lower in PS than BF.
Ignoring that entirely, if there are 16 people on a hill shooting your tank at the same time time it should die instantly. Currently 16 people shooting one phoenix round wouldn't blow up either a prowler or vanguard from full health, with no shields.
That's ridiculous.

In PS you can say HA/AV is OP carrying on Rexo, but MA/AV is acceptable.

In the context of really ineffective AV weapons it doesn't really even matter that much.

Goku · 2011-07-23, 09:51 PM

Sorry, that is how I normally respond to others quite a few forums is all.

There maybe more tanks yes, but I do not agree with the ratio being higher for BF. Most infantry outside right now have AV I would wager (shame PS stats isn't around anymore <3 that site). I am not totally opposed to infantry doing more damage to vehicles I just want to avoid duo teams raping tanks. If tanks have to work in more of a team setting that is fine due to this being the focus of PS2. Solo crews will either have to be highly skilled or they will be scrap metal. You are right a hill worth of infantry should murder a tank if all are firing at it too.

Like I mentioned before I do not think this will be as much of an issue in PS2 due to the map changes. We will actually have dedicated forests and urban areas for infantry. That is where infantry will rein supreme, just like there being places for air and tanks. Even so there will be more coverage for infantry compared to PS today for the air and tank areas.