Driver/Gunners... NO!

[Azren]

Originally Posted by Deadeye

Because I, and I'm sure many others, don't want to PAY for a tank that we can only drive. There's a reason just 5 or 6 tanks was a cool site in PS1 but the skies were often filled with aircraft: people prefer solo vehicles. I prefer it too. I only ever cert for Lightning when I play PS1 and want a ground vehicle other than an AMS. However, in PS2, I plan on driving MBTs to some extent because I can now drive and gun it. It was all fun and games when the tanks were free in PS1, but now that we pay, we demand more.

As far as the the excuses against it, the main one seems to be some kind of idea that because one person is driving a tank, they aren't a team player. It's an excuse that has lived far too long. I can be just as much a team player in a one man tank as you can be in a 2. Why? Because I can do the same things as you can like support an infantry attack by providing supporting fire from afar or close in and I can do it while allowing one more infantry man to be in the fight rather than tied up in the tank.

If there is one balance change I would make to the idea it's this: if you only want to pay for half the tank, you can only drive it and the gunner will have to pay the other half. Otherwise, you pay full price and get to drive a full tank.

I'll bet, though, that even if 80% of people said they'd be up for the former option, 90% would choose the latter when ingame.

I do not think that anyone here ever questioned that at least 50% of the population prefers to play solo. The devs are well aware of this and have supported them in a great number of ways. Just in terms of vehicles, they have an option to use very solid vehicles for both air and ground roles.

However you should not question the rest of the population who wants a different experience. An experience only PS was able to provide so far in terms of tank combat. Obviously I am talking about MBT setup PS1 used.

I have to disagree with you on your reasoning as of why much more aircav was used than MBTs. They were used because how benefitial they are; they are the fastest vehicles in game, they give you the greatest freedom, they were very deadly (could take out an MBT easy), they were not dependent on anything, ect. In contrast the MBTs were very dependent on support, starting from aquireing a gunner to constant repairing.

For many players it was frustrating to pull a tank and not get a gunner. However this was only an issue for soloers, anyone with an outfit never had a problem with it. You must also see that the reason people didnt want to gun for them is related to their previous experience where the driver got them killed very fast.

I can respect the soloers way of gaming, however I wish they would do the same towards other people. PS2 already supports a great number of solo roles both as grunts and as vehicle operators, why do you have to be so selfish as to request the only role that was meant to be played by dedicated gunner and driver teams for yourself also?

You argue that the Lightning's role is different than MBT's, but so what? Does it hurt so much not being able to play a single role in an MMOFPS alone?