Tank drivers acting as gunners in PS2

[Logit]

Originally Posted by DviddLeff

Initially outraged as a veteran Mag driver, but then I remember that it works in BF so why not here?

I wish Higby never played BF, or anyone at SOE for that matter.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Graywolves

What it boils down to is how to keep the single-manned vehicled from being able to compete with a fully crewed vehicle head on. I am sure that someone somewhere will figure out how to take a one-manned vehicle and wreck everything they find. But there still needs to be a clear advantage from having a focused crew of drivers and gunners.

I think what you mean (or should mean) to say is,

"how to keep two single-manned vehicles from being able to compete with a fully crewed vehicle head on"

That's the real issue, IMO.

[XPquant]

I think the answer here lies in the customization of vehicles. The ultimate reward for a tanker I believe, would be to allow him to unlock tank load outs designed for one person or multiple. There are so many way's you could design an unlocks tree to support this with just turret mods with the higher echelon requiring more manpower or simply just limit some higher power systems to requiring a gunner, for main gun or otherwise.

As an avid tanker in planetside I feel the pain of never getting to enjoy my own tank, but when I had a squad going with full tank crews it was amazing and i didn't miss the gun at all. The true power of a tank comes from combined arms and I think having a static gunner/driver position will greatly limit the tactical application of tanks. That being said I still think the option of being able to drive and gun in some aspect is important.

Armor should not be as reliant on manpower as it was in PS1 but it should not be placed in a one dimensional role. A tank with one man in it should never be a match for a tank with two. I think the best approach would be to use the already existing doctrines of the empires to influence the tank designs just like in PS1. The main battle tank should represent the core military values of their faction and the associated upgrades/sidegrades should follow that path. So a TR tank while able to be driven/gunned alone but would never match an NC tank driven alone, because the two have fundamentally different views of power. To completely remove the gunner role would kill a large tactical portion of the game.

[Goku]

Originally Posted by Logit

I wish Higby never played BF, or anyone at SOE for that matter.

/sign.

[Traak]

I don't think trying to whore PS2 out to BFOMGz players is how to succeed.

I think the way to succeed is to actually spend more than fifteen cents on advertising and marketing.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Raymac

Also, I'm not worrying about balance at all at this point. The devs obviously have balance in mind, and the balance details will get ironed out in beta.

That's the thing. I'm not worried that it can't be balanced. I'm worried that I won't like the way a Main Battle Tank that's balanced to have the main gun operable while the tank is crewed by a single person will feel.

Now, maybe there's a wild card we're not privvy to, like "the 'main' gun isn't the biggest threat on the tank; why do you think we give you so many options for the secondary gun?" or something else that could turn the whole argument on its head in a jiffy. And that's fine. That's why I said I'm happy holding off from voicing dissent until I get a chance to test out the feel and balance in, say, a beta.

In the meantime, though, I'm happy to help make sure the discussion gets framed in what I feel are useful, meaningful, and intelligent terms.

I will say, however, that I like the notion of people referring to a tank "commander." I'd like the cert tree to be for tank commanders, and commanders can either gun or drive, and must be the first in/last out of the vehicle (or else the other seats are locked or people are ejected). That way, it gives the option of what role to actively take in the tank to the player with the certs who's pulling the vehicle, without just giving the driver the keys to the kingdom.

[kaffis]

Originally Posted by Logit

I wish Higby never played BF, or anyone at SOE for that matter.

That might be a bit strong. But I would like the devs to keep in mind that there's a reason I'm excited for a Planetside 2, but don't care a fig about Battlefield 3. And it's not, surprisingly enough, because one's made by the devil's own video game developer.

[basti]

Originally Posted by Higby

1) I love AV in BFBC2 also, but I always do with a Assault + Lightweight kit + C4. C4ing tanks in that game is the most fun thing imo. It's CURRENTLY not quite as easy to take a tank down, but well placed shots definitely count, and concentrating fire is very possible with our AV classes.

2) Yes.

3) It wouldn't work very well for the magrider, but allowing the driver to man the secondary weapon seems like it could be worth trying. We can consider that and see how it plays.

I still dont understand how you guys could even remotly consider this new concept. It wasnt broken in Planetside 1.

Ofc you sometimes ended up with a stupid gunner who didnt hit crap, or you jumped into a tank to gun and the guy drove you right into a mine field, but thats part of the game. I often enough ended up getting a random guy who actually got a clue, heck i sometimes spend several hours in the same magrider with some random guy.

Im guessing that none of you guys ever did a big proper tank collum. ITs a shame. :/

I strongly suggest you give the driver power over the secondary weapon, and let the gunner get the main weapon.

[Logit]

Originally Posted by kaffis

That might be a bit strong. But I would like the devs to keep in mind that there's a reason I'm excited for a Planetside 2, but don't care a fig about Battlefield 3. And it's not, surprisingly enough, because one's made by the devil's own video game developer.

I agree man, I was really pumped for Planetside 2. Part of me still is, but the more I hear this game being a clone of Battlefield, the less it appeals to me.

There's a reason we all loved Planetside 1, most of all because of the originality and innovation of a new genre of game play.

Seems piece by piece the things that made Planetside so awesome are getting changed, conformed if you will, and it's a damn shame.

When we first heard of the sequel we all had this vision in our heads of what it would be. Sadly, this wasn't mine.

[FIREk]

Originally Posted by Higby

1) I love AV in BFBC2 also, but I always do with a Assault + Lightweight kit + C4. C4ing tanks in that game is the most fun thing imo. It's CURRENTLY not quite as easy to take a tank down, but well placed shots definitely count, and concentrating fire is very possible with our AV classes.

2) Yes.

3) It wouldn't work very well for the magrider, but allowing the driver to man the secondary weapon seems like it could be worth trying. We can consider that and see how it plays.

Thanks for replying!

1) I haven't played in a while, but mine was Engineer with a pump-action shotgun and whatever made me have more rockets and run better.
I hope that you liking the concept of C4ing tanks semi-suggests that we may see sticky Boomers in PS2?

2) Good to know, sorry for putting that in doubt. Just checking, you know?

3) I'm assuming this means that you switched weapon positions on the Mag and put the main gun in the hull, ass opposed to the turret in PS1's Mag?
Thanks for putting this under consideration.


This driver/gunner concept makes me wonder, though - what about buggies? Assuming they're in the game (and I hope so - buggies are cool too drive, too bad they were gimped in every Battlefield title I ever played, though), do they currently also require only one person to drive and use the main gun?

[Talek Krell]

Originally Posted by Logit

I wish Higby never played BF, or anyone at SOE for that matter.

/sign

Battlefield's vehicle gameplay isn't remarkable for being good, it's remarkable for being present. They are winning the vehicle race because no one else bothered to show up.

If the secondary gun is at all weaker then people will just pull their own vehicles. There's no reason to have a tank with an AA gun when you can have a tank and a skyguard, unless the skyguard is so terrible at it's job that no one will ever pull it.

Originally Posted by Higby

3) It wouldn't work very well for the magrider, but allowing the driver to man the secondary weapon seems like it could be worth trying. We can consider that and see how it plays.

You fixed the main gun forward didn't you? This is stupid, and I have never seen any situation in which it was implemented well.


And then there's the Lib. Are you kidding me? The Lib has 3 seats, 1 of them never fills. You should be combining the bomber with the TG not the pilot. All you've got now is the BF2 jets, which were so hilariously bad that the devs came out and basically said "we fucked this up pretty bad last game, so we're leaving it out of the next one".

[basti]

Just got an idea: What about optional gunners? MEans, if i have no gunners in the tank, im taking control of whatever weapon while also driving. If i get one gunner, the guy takes control of one gun. If i get a second gunner, the guy takes control of the other gun, and im just down to driving the thing.

Because, lets face it, gunning and driving at the same time is a bad bad bad idea, and every serious mag driver will tell you that. Its not just that you do the boring driving, you also have to take care of pathing etc. Its a lot to do to be a good tank driver...

[FIREk]

Originally Posted by Logit

2 Shotting tanks? Is that what I'm getting out of this?

If they follow the BFBC2 concept, then it's 2-3 shots to kill a tank, IF you've got the proper class (Engineer) with the proper weapon (AT4 or RPG-7, which are less all-rounders and more tank-busters), had good aim and, most importantly, worked your way into a good position.
You had to place these shots on the tank's sides or, ideally, the rear. And believe you me, it can be really difficult.

On the other hand, the MBTs in PS1 require very little care and skill from the driver in order to be successful. All they need to do is watch the health and start running when it's down below 50% or so.
Unless the conditions are really bad (a minefield, superior air, BFRs, or multiple enemy vehicles/infantry with AV), they can just waltz through the battlefield, soaking up damage, then bolting behind a hill to do some repairs.
Tanks in BFBC2, however are generally very powerful and tough, but require cautious and skillful driving. They have obvious weak points that can be ruthlessly exploited if the driver doesn't know what he's doing. You screw up, you get punished, hard and fast.

So you can still munch a lot of AV missiles, or tank shells, as long as only your front armor is exposed. If you let me get behind you, or don't notice me waiting in ambush while you drive past me, you deserve to get 2/3-shotted dead.

Originally Posted by Logit

I wish Higby never played BF, or anyone at SOE for that matter.

There's no way I can agree with this.
The Battlefield series is very successful because of how vehicles, aircraft and infantry are balanced and work together on the same map. The balance is near-perfect, so it's a good idea to draw inspiration from this series when making a combined arms game.
Whether or not this balance holds water when you remove the let everyone get a tank or plane, that's a different story.

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

And then there's the Lib. Are you kidding me? The Lib has 3 seats, 1 of them never fills. You should be combining the bomber with the TG not the pilot. All you've got now is the BF2 jets, which were so hilariously bad that the devs came out and basically said "we fucked this up pretty bad last game, so we're leaving it out of the next one".

Wait up. We know the Lib is a 2-seater now, and I only assumed that the pilot becomes the gunner, essentially making the Liberator a dive-bomber, instead of a high-altitude, hovering, carpet bombing tedium generator.

[Raymac]

Originally Posted by basti

I still dont understand how you guys could even remotly consider this new concept. It wasnt broken in Planetside 1.

Ofc you sometimes ended up with a stupid gunner who didnt hit crap, or you jumped into a tank to gun and the guy drove you right into a mine field, but thats part of the game. I often enough ended up getting a random guy who actually got a clue, heck i sometimes spend several hours in the same magrider with some random guy.

Im guessing that none of you guys ever did a big proper tank collum. ITs a shame. :/

I strongly suggest you give the driver power over the secondary weapon, and let the gunner get the main weapon.

I think one excellent reason is for the casual player.

It's hard for most of us to put ourselves in that position, but I've been there alot. Say you don't know alot of people in game. Right now, if that's the case, and you want to take part in using a tank, you have to spam and beg for a gunner, or wait around and spam and beg to gun for somebody else. This makes multi-person vehicles very much a hassle to use, and takes away from one of the amazing aspects of Planetside.

Now, with the new system of the driver getting a gun too, it's infinitely more inviting and FUN to the casual player that just wants to jump in, blow stuff up for a little bit, then get on with their busy lives.

I think it's a great idea that a tank can be effective with just the driver, but be far deadlier when filled with a full crew.

For many of us, we are used to running with organized outfits where setting up tank columns is common, but I don't want Planetside 2 to ONLY be for the hardcore, well-organized players. I want scale more than anything.

[Logit]

I don't know how many times I've said this.

The reason things work in Battlefield is because there are 64 people playing. When you have thousands, and you lower the TTK, no matter where you have to shoot the tank if you have 50 people shooting at it, like..ya know..in the original. It's going to die, and quickly.

Balance doesn't mean a damn thing when you're cloning a game that doesn't compare in scale. SOE can't possibly test this until Beta so they, like us, have no idea how it will work.

And once the game is in beta it's going to be too late because you're not going to remake the whole game.