My one 'dislike' of PS2 (Main Battle Tanks)

[Hyiero]

At like 8:30 or something matt talk's about the certs that you will be able to unlock to make it so you can have a dedicated driver and a dedicated gunner,if that is how you want to play it

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Oh my.... You do have fantasies don't you.

Here's another fantasy. A Galaxy...but not a gunship, or a troop transport...but...the Galaxy Minespreader! Carries a load of 100 mines with variable spread patterns.

Also, if appropriate, 45 second arm time so you can't simply drop them onto an existing convoy.

[Rhapsody]

Some people have brought up the "we had this discussion before and SOE said they 'might' look at creating a cert to allow the 2nd gunner to take control of the main gun". While this is a nice concession, i still think it should be that way by 'default' and that the 'concession' should be allowing a cert to be gotten that gave the driver control of the main gun.

To me it just seems like SOE is dumbing down the 'teamwork' aspect of PS. They remove the 2 person skyguard and instead give the single seat lighting its AA ability. And with the MBT's they give the driver control of the main gun. Both of these are 2-person 'teamwork' vehicles, that have been 'dumbed down' into single person 'zergling' roles.

In PS1 you had buggies that were multi-seat / designated job vehicles. You had the separate seat MBT's, You had the Skyguard, The transport vehicles, the gal-gunships, and the Liberators. All of these took teamwork to use, and each 'seat' had a designated job (driver, gunner, passenger).

In PS2, theyve completely scrapped the buggies, removing an entire line of 'team-work' oriented vehicles and the MBT's are now effectively Single-seat, 1 man army, vehicles. The only vehicles that still seem to have a 'separation of jobs' seems to be the transport craft, and the liberator, and i honestly wouldnt be surprised if we learned that the driver of the transport veh's now suddenly has control of a weapon as well.

It honestly just feels like their dumbing down the game to try to 'pull in' the console FPS gamers who are use to being able to 1-man army every vehicle.

And for those that keep bringing up the "well 2 tanks are better than 1" argument. Your correct.... but only in one situation. If all 3 tanks are sitting still and not moving. When you start adding movement into the mix, the 'winner' will be the one that can avoid fire the best while still landing the majority of their shots. While there may be some excellent lightning drivers from PS1 around, for the most part, the tank with a dedicated driver will out-perform any single-seat tank. The one with the dedicated driver can move threw a wider area of the fight-zone than the single-seater as the one in the single seat is having to mentally keep track of what 'was' around him and were he is within that mental picture. At some point he will forget were a tree or bush is, or even not realize another vehical/grunt has moved into his path. Then you have a stopped, and vulnerable, tank.

[Gandhi]

Originally Posted by Rhapsody

And for those that keep bringing up the "well 2 tanks are better than 1" argument. Your correct.... but only in one situation. If all 3 tanks are sitting still and not moving. When you start adding movement into the mix, the 'winner' will be the one that can avoid fire the best while still landing the majority of their shots. While there may be some excellent lightning drivers from PS1 around, for the most part, the tank with a dedicated driver will out-perform any single-seat tank.

But even in that situation it's only true if the 2 tanks combined miss twice as often as the crewed tank, and I would guess that's not likely to happen. In fact, both the 1 man tanks could sit still and fire at the moving crewed tank and still take it out before it can dispatch both of them, solely because they have twice the firepower.

Obviously this is the "ideal" scenario, where only these 3 tanks meet each other on the field. In reality you'll have tons of other factors in play, from terrain advantages to air support to infantry and other vehicles. But I would still guess that on the whole having 2 solo tanks is more effective than one tank with dedicated driver and gunner. You could help offset this by giving the dedicated tank more survivability, say a flat HP boost, but that doesn't make much sense and makes balancing more difficult.

[SgtMAD]

Originally Posted by DOUBLEXBAUGH

If you just pay attention to your surroundings you wont run into trees ect. I had no problem running and gunning in a Lightning in PS1, and now in PS2 I get a bigger gun!

I remember you and you were far and above the "average" player in PS,

both you and I know that 90% of the ppl that ever pulled a Lightning in PS sucked at driving and firing the veh and would usually be farmed by reavers

I have had armor certed on both NC/TR and never had a lightning that lasted more than one or two runs whereas I have had MBT's that seemed to last for hours due to the ability to dodge fire while fighting back and being able to retreat with the gunner covering our six as we ran away.

as for AA lightnings,that is going to be goddamn funny when you see ppl trying to run away while trying to keep the air above them targeted LOL

when we get to beta I think we are going to find that these veh ideas weren't very well thought out.

I think the air looks great but the gameplay of the ground vehs,especially the armor, seems off in execution

[Rhapsody]

Originally Posted by HtSgtMAD

I think the air looks great but the gameplay of the ground vehs,especially the armor, seems off in execution

Yea, i love what they did with the Air vehicles.. but the ground. It just seems like they threw away the 'mobile war' and instead made things stagnant. We'll see alot less of the 'moving and gunning' and more of the 'park next to a hill, tree, building, and shoot'.

I mean, go back and watch the GDC video were he's driving the Vanguard. He never looks more than 45deg's off center while following everyone else nearly single-file. Granted it was a demonstration, but still.

[SpcFarlen]

I dont really like the idea of it being a cert to spec into. If im playing and see a tank with one person in a MBT, if by default driver can man the gun, i may not go and hop in because i dont want to man a turret. So how am i do know they are using that cert and NEED a gunner? I think that just adds more confusion.

I always like tactics and teamwork. So i fully agree that by default they should be separate. There is already a one man tank, so i feel it is redundant to not have the seats split.

[Rozonus]

Originally Posted by Rhapsody

It honestly just feels like their dumbing down the game to try to 'pull in' the console FPS gamers who are use to being able to 1-man army every vehicle.

Unfortunately this is probably right. More potential players = more potential purchases in the in-game store. As much as the devs would like to keep the PS1 veterans happy, making money will be a bigger concern for their bosses at SOE.

In a way it's a good thing! The game should get more players, and we should get more people to shoot.

Originally Posted by SpcFarlen

So how am i do know they are using that cert and NEED a gunner? I think that just adds more confusion.

If this becomes a problem in the beta, we can ask them to add a symbol above the tank which indicates that they need a gunner.

[Rhapsody]

I actualy just thought of something. A 'answer' to the "well what about the VS MBT" problem. And its actually lore related, with a slight modification.

What are the 3 sides traditionally focused on?

NC = Bulky, squared, vehicles with the biggest gun they can find mounted on it.
TR = Overly obsessed with circles and curves, and cramming as many 'different' weapons/people into each vehicle as they possibly can.
VS = Sharp Edges you can dice your dinner on, combined with alien technology and 'hover' tech.

Ok... so the above is roughly how the 3 sides were described in PS1. Here's my 'idea' on the MBT's based on the old lore.. and how i'd like to see them done.

NC - 2 person MBT (as before), dedicated driver, dedicated gunner. Driver is given a forward racing 90-120 arc firing gause or shotgun type weapon mounted near the driver hatch/front 1/4 of the tank's top. Gunner has control of the main cannon.

TR - 3 person MBT (as before), Dedicated driver, Dedicated Main gunner, dedicated secondary gunner. Driver, just like the NC, has controle of a forward facing 90-120deg arc MCG/Thumper. Primary Dedicated gunner has the main gun. Secondary gunner gets controle of that AA/AI/AV 2nd gun.

VS - (and here is were my idea comes in). 2 person MBT. Driver + Main gunner, Secondary gunner. Instead of a 90-120deg forward facing weapon such as the TR or NC drivers have, the VS driver is given control of the main gun due to two things. Advances in weapon controles due to the alien tech combined with the fact that the tank has to 'face' its target to shoot it, it would be redundant to have the 'gunner' rely 95% on the driver to 'aim'. So, combining the Alien tech with standard controls, the Main gun is now linked with the Driver and aims were he looks, so-long as the tank itself is pointed in a direction which allows the main gun to line up a shot. The secondary gunner is now focused solely on defense of the tank itself from other threats and is given an AI/AV/AA type weapon.

This'll put the MBT's back the way they were in which they required a dedicated 'gunner' for the main guns (except for the VS who get the bonus of shooting their own gun due to it being 'fixed' + alien Tech). The drivers are given a weapon which they can use to help defend themselves with. And the tanks 'defensability' goes back to being in line to how they use to be. The NC focus on raw power so they forgo a 3rd 'defense' weapon. The TR follow their 'put as many guns as possible on it' routine which gives them the added 'defense' with the 3rd AA/AI/AV weapon. And the VS as usual make use of Alien Tech with linking their primary gun into their drivers as well as make use of the hover-tech which lets them use the whole tank as a 'turret' in a way that while still less-useful than having a 'turret', isnt as bad as if they'd tried the same system with a 'tracked' chases.

Now, with this 'extra cert' thing. Give the NC and TR the ability to 'cert' into the option for the drivers to drop their forward-facing weapon and take direct control of the main gun. And since theyve dropped the forward-facing weapon, their now 'secondary' gunner gets a new, smaller, turret to use. Or, barring that, they simply no-longer HAVE that extra gunner. IE the Vanguard would be a over-sized lighting and the TR would drop from 3 people down to 2.

Thoughts?

*edit*

And not to leave the VS out of the 'extra cert' option. Give them the ability to cert a varient of the Magrider which gives them a 'turret' instead of the fixed gun (still controlled by the driver), but they drop their extra gunner, or keep him, either way.

[roguy]

Originally Posted by Rhapsody

Thoughts?

I like the idea in theory (especially the van and prow) but giving the VS a tank that remains functional with only the driver is a balancing nightmare waiting to happen. Better just have the magrider the way it was in PS1.

[Rhapsody]

Originally Posted by roguy

I like the idea in theory (especially the van and prow) but giving the VS a tank that remains functional with only the driver is a balancing nightmare waiting to happen. Better just have the magrider the way it was in PS1.

Not realy. The main thing with the VS is they always focused on maneuverability over protection. They didnt have 40 tones of armor (they probably couldnt have as much due to limitations on how much weight they could 'float'). They use the fact that they can simply fly over lakes and rivers and such to escape/evade fire. And as their focused mainly on maneuverability, their cannons dont do as much damage as the monster the Vanguard carries. (which is how it was back in the day anyway). Also, they have to turn the entire tank to fire. which leaves them dangerously exposed if their going up against two other people who are cooperating (i.e: Forcing to VS to expose his rear to the 2nd guy while the first acts as bait)

I'd much rather see a system similar to what i just posted put in place so we'd actually be playing "Planetside 2" and not "Battlefield 4: Auraxis".

[Blackwolf]

Originally Posted by Rhapsody

Not realy. The main thing with the Vs is they always focused on maneuverability over protection. They didnt have 40 tones of armor (they probably couldnt have as much due to limitations on how much weight they could 'float'). They use the fact that they can simply fly over lakes and rivers and such to escape/evade fire. And as their focused mainly on maneuverability, their cannons dont do as much damage as the monster the Vanguard carries. (which is how it was back in the day anyway)

I'd much rather see a system similar to what i just posted put in place so we'd actually be playing "Planetside 2" and not "Battlefield 4: Auraxis".

TR often complained about needing 3 people to make their tank effective. I don't think the TR should be forced into a 3 man vehicle again unless buggies came out, at which point I think ALL ES buggies should have 3 person crews.

The other glaring problem with your idea is the same problem as it started with. Magrider has to point it's gun and body at the enemy vehicle at all times, terrain like hills and such will make this very difficult particularly while trying to drive and aim. And if the side/reverse speed of the magrider isn't equal to it's forward speed, the thing will fail.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by DOUBLEXBAUGH

If you just pay attention to your surroundings you wont run into trees ect. I had no problem running and gunning in a Lightning in PS1, and now in PS2 I get a bigger gun!

Yeah, unfortunately for me I fall into the "sucks at driving and gunning category". Honest question to you though, will you be able to drive and gun without third person view, which is not planned to be in the game for ground vehicles and infantry.

[Serpent]

Originally Posted by Rhapsody

I actualy just thought of something. A 'answer' to the "well what about the VS MBT" problem. And its actually lore related, with a slight modification.

What are the 3 sides traditionally focused on?

NC = Bulky, squared, vehicles with the biggest gun they can find mounted on it.
TR = Overly obsessed with circles and curves, and cramming as many 'different' weapons/people into each vehicle as they possibly can.
VS = Sharp Edges you can dice your dinner on, combined with alien technology and 'hover' tech.

Ok... so the above is roughly how the 3 sides were described in PS1. Here's my 'idea' on the MBT's based on the old lore.. and how i'd like to see them done.

NC - 2 person MBT (as before), dedicated driver, dedicated gunner. Driver is given a forward racing 90-120 arc firing gause or shotgun type weapon mounted near the driver hatch/front 1/4 of the tank's top. Gunner has control of the main cannon.

TR - 3 person MBT (as before), Dedicated driver, Dedicated Main gunner, dedicated secondary gunner. Driver, just like the NC, has controle of a forward facing 90-120deg arc MCG/Thumper. Primary Dedicated gunner has the main gun. Secondary gunner gets controle of that AA/AI/AV 2nd gun.

VS - (and here is were my idea comes in). 2 person MBT. Driver + Main gunner, Secondary gunner. Instead of a 90-120deg forward facing weapon such as the TR or NC drivers have, the VS driver is given control of the main gun due to two things. Advances in weapon controles due to the alien tech combined with the fact that the tank has to 'face' its target to shoot it, it would be redundant to have the 'gunner' rely 95% on the driver to 'aim'. So, combining the Alien tech with standard controls, the Main gun is now linked with the Driver and aims were he looks, so-long as the tank itself is pointed in a direction which allows the main gun to line up a shot. The secondary gunner is now focused solely on defense of the tank itself from other threats and is given an AI/AV/AA type weapon.

This'll put the MBT's back the way they were in which they required a dedicated 'gunner' for the main guns (except for the VS who get the bonus of shooting their own gun due to it being 'fixed' + alien Tech). The drivers are given a weapon which they can use to help defend themselves with. And the tanks 'defensability' goes back to being in line to how they use to be. The NC focus on raw power so they forgo a 3rd 'defense' weapon. The TR follow their 'put as many guns as possible on it' routine which gives them the added 'defense' with the 3rd AA/AI/AV weapon. And the VS as usual make use of Alien Tech with linking their primary gun into their drivers as well as make use of the hover-tech which lets them use the whole tank as a 'turret' in a way that while still less-useful than having a 'turret', isnt as bad as if they'd tried the same system with a 'tracked' chases.

Now, with this 'extra cert' thing. Give the NC and TR the ability to 'cert' into the option for the drivers to drop their forward-facing weapon and take direct control of the main gun. And since theyve dropped the forward-facing weapon, their now 'secondary' gunner gets a new, smaller, turret to use. Or, barring that, they simply no-longer HAVE that extra gunner. IE the Vanguard would be a over-sized lighting and the TR would drop from 3 people down to 2.

Thoughts?

*edit*

And not to leave the VS out of the 'extra cert' option. Give them the ability to cert a varient of the Magrider which gives them a 'turret' instead of the fixed gun (still controlled by the driver), but they drop their extra gunner, or keep him, either way.

Not to be rude, but a lot of the VS idea is basically how BF3 system works. I realize PC gamers generally hate Console gamers ( ) but seriously, I never see a main gunner winning a battle against engineers. There must be a person manning the MBT's machine gun, which is extremely effective at killing infantry. The Driver basically focuses on flanking enemy vehicles, and the secondary gunner defends the tank from literally everything else, even helicopters sometimes have problems with tanks.

That's just how I see it.

[Rhapsody]

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

TR often complained about needing 3 people to make their tank effective. I don't think the TR should be forced into a 3 man vehicle again unless buggies came out, at which point I think ALL ES buggies should have 3 person crews.

The other glaring problem with your idea is the same problem as it started with. Magrider has to point it's gun and body at the enemy vehicle at all times, terrain like hills and such will make this very difficult particularly while trying to drive and aim. And if the side/reverse speed of the magrider isn't equal to it's forward speed, the thing will fail.

For the first part (the TR), that 'extra cert' would remove the need for that 3rd person. And the same for the VS as the 'extra cert' would give them a 'turret' rather than forcing them to always point their tank.

Originally Posted by Serpent

Not to be rude, but a lot of the VS idea is basically how BF3 system works. I realize PC gamers generally hate Console gamers ( ) but seriously, I never see a main gunner winning a battle against engineers. There must be a person manning the MBT's machine gun, which is extremely effective at killing infantry. The Driver basically focuses on flanking enemy vehicles, and the secondary gunner defends the tank from literally everything else, even helicopters sometimes have problems with tanks.

That's just how I see it.

Your not being rude . What i wrote is basically a 'compromise' between us old PS1 players and the BF3 crowd that SOE is apparently trying to cater to that also stays true to the original PS1 lore.

If a BF3 newcomer wants to jump into a tank and one-man-army the thing, he has 3 choices. Drive a lighting, Roll VS (which gives him a driver-is-gunner tank off the start, or Spend time needing a 'gunner' before 'certing up' into the ability to use his own gun.

It gives the BF3 crowd what they want without force-feeding the old PS1 players the one-man-army mechanics most Console FPS's have.