Tank drivers acting as gunners in PS2

[Aractain]

Originally Posted by Xyntech

[Good points and lots of awesome]

Different yes, but it could easily be balanced.

Balanced and in my opinion more fun because you can still do that teamwork awesomsauce while you have many more vehicles around you than in PS1. Requireing teamwork will always reduce numbers and that is counter productive to the game.

It could be very good.

[TheRagingGerbil]

Originally Posted by Xyntech

Vehicles are the only real solution for open terrain combat as it stands and as long as you have a skyguard for support, there isn't much that can stop a tank in the open these days anyway.

Tanks should dominate open space, so I don't see the problem there. Aircraft should be able to pick them off freely if they have no AA support, but the skyguard already provides that option. This is pretty much just removes the superfluous driver position on the skyguard and puts the turret on a tank.

Mind you, the tank will need a gunner for that AA and it will not be able to mount an AI turret while doing so.

The machine guns on tanks in Planetside aren't so great. Due to the over powerd main cannons and the longish TTK's on the machine guns, it's generally more useful for the gunner to just spam some shells and one shot an infantryman or two. If they hope to balance the soloable tanks, they will have to make the main gun either weaker against infantry, or at least make it a choice between high AV damage or a large AI splash. This is speculation, but it is also totally viable.

So if the developers aren't completely inept, a tank with no AA gun will die easily to aircraft, a tank with no AI gun will die relatively easily to concealed infantry and, if there is an option to make the main cannon an AI cannon, a tank with an AI main gun and an AA secondary gun will die easily to other tanks.

So what you would end up with is either a bunch of tanks who are easy prey for one type of enemy or another, or with a little team work you would end up with a group of coordinated tanks, some solo, some with AI weaponry and a few with AA weaponry, who would dominate open spaces. How is this so different than a dozen tanks with a couple of skyguards today?

Different yes, but it could easily be balanced.

QFT.

[Kalbuth]

Originally Posted by Xyntech

Vehicles are the only real solution for open terrain combat as it stands and as long as you have a skyguard for support, there isn't much that can stop a tank in the open these days anyway.

Tanks should dominate open space, so I don't see the problem there. Aircraft should be able to pick them off freely if they have no AA support, but the skyguard already provides that option. This is pretty much just removes the superfluous driver position on the skyguard and puts the turret on a tank.

Mind you, the tank will need a gunner for that AA and it will not be able to mount an AI turret while doing so.

The machine guns on tanks in Planetside aren't so great. Due to the over powerd main cannons and the longish TTK's on the machine guns, it's generally more useful for the gunner to just spam some shells and one shot an infantryman or two. If they hope to balance the soloable tanks, they will have to make the main gun either weaker against infantry, or at least make it a choice between high AV damage or a large AI splash. This is speculation, but it is also totally viable.

So if the developers aren't completely inept, a tank with no AA gun will die easily to aircraft, a tank with no AI gun will die relatively easily to concealed infantry and, if there is an option to make the main cannon an AI cannon, a tank with an AI main gun and an AA secondary gun will die easily to other tanks.

So what you would end up with is either a bunch of tanks who are easy prey for one type of enemy or another, or with a little team work you would end up with a group of coordinated tanks, some solo, some with AI weaponry and a few with AA weaponry, who would dominate open spaces. How is this so different than a dozen tanks with a couple of skyguards today?

Different yes, but it could easily be balanced.

I think you missed my point :
the difference is that currently, you can kill the SG independantly from the tank, using different mean than the one used to kill the tank.
You cannot kill the AA threat independantly if it is part of the same vehicle than the tank. You need a way to kill all at once.
In a tank vs tank battle in PS1, the SG in the middle can be targeted specifically and killed faster than the tanks.
In PS2, you won't be able to kill the AA threat specifically (any better than killing normal tanks) for your air vehicles to be usefull. Your air guys would far better be in tanks themselves.

[Xyntech]

Originally Posted by Kalbuth

I think you missed my point :
the difference is that currently, you can kill the SG independantly from the tank, using different mean than the one used to kill the tank.
You cannot kill the AA threat independantly if it is part of the same vehicle than the tank. You need a way to kill all at once.
In a tank vs tank battle in PS1, the SG in the middle can be targeted specifically and killed faster than the tanks.
In PS2, you won't be able to kill the AA threat specifically (any better than killing normal tanks) for your air vehicles to be usefull. Your air guys would far better be in tanks themselves.

I hear you and as a pilot, this certainly hits close to home for me. My hope would be that the faster TTK philosophy along with the weaker locational armor on some parts of the tank will still allow a surprise AV aircraft loadout to get the drop on a tank, the same way I can sometimes get the drop on a skyguard.

The point still stands however that with just a couple skyguards and/or other AA, there isn't much that any air craft can do to a tank column now anyways, barring overwhelming air power (which just means there will be obscene aircraft losses as well). Maybe, depending on balance and flight mechanics, a good pilot will actually be able to harass the new tanks effectively, even if they don't outright destroy the tanks. I just don't see the new system making things any worse for pilots than things currently are, but again, I think there will be more than enough room to tweak things for balance if they aren't working. That's just me.

Hopefully these threads are very much on the developers radar, so if they are playing with the new tank concept and are checking if these potential problems can be avoided. Unfortunately, they are the only ones who can know for sure right now, as long as they don't have blinders on in favor of the new design.

[Kalbuth]

Well, in my view, in a kind of rock/paper/scissor system, if the air is still good at destroying tanks, air counter (AA) should be destroyable by something else than air, let's say, some other tank or infantry
In ideal PS1 (which is not played ), in a tank battle with 1 team SG equipped and the other air equipped, the air equipped team's tanks should synchro with their pilots and target SG as priority, even if they get some losses to enemy tanks in the process. Once SG are gone, the aircrafts are going to handle enemy tanks.
You can even defeat superior tanks with this

If AA and tank is the same, once you have defeated the AA, so that your air buddies can come kill the tanks, you have de facto also destroyed the tanks. Why have aircraft at all in the first place in this case? => people will only use their multipurpose tank platform, you're actually reducing the variety on the battlefield

So this doesn't go well imho with a rock/paper/scissor philosophy. You'd need, like you explain, the natural prey (aircraft) to be able to kill its natural killer (the AA) because it is also its natural prey (a tank)... A little weird for my tastes

[Xyntech]

In PS1, an aircraft could kill land vehicles, infantry and other aircraft. An infantryman could kill aircraft, within reason they could kill land vehicles and they could kill other infantry. A vehicle could kill infantry, to varying degrees (depending on the vehicle) could kill aircraft and could kill other land vehicles.

In my mind, it's a little less rock paper scissors than it is situational effectiveness.

Infantry are good in tight places or where there is a lot of cover and rough terrain. They are easy to kill but hard to spot.

Land vehicles are big old targets that are easy to find and shoot at, but they mount the heaviest weaponry and have the most armor. They can survive unlike anyone else out in plain site, but are too big to get a lot of places and are sitting ducks for sneakier enemies.

Aircraft are somewhere in between. They aren't always so hard to spot, but they are hard to catch due to their speed. They die pretty quick like infantry but they can pack a punch like a vehicle.

Infantry belong in one type of environment and vehicles belong in another. There will be areas where both are effective due to a balance of moderate cover and moderate open space, but for the most part you will probably have one or the other dominating. As for aircraft, I suspect that almost every terrain will be welcoming to them, except for areas saturated in AA.

Edit: The rock paper scissors is in my mind more of a matter of a combination of what you are and what your weapons are good against. AA, AV or AI equipment on aircraft, vehicles or infantry.

[Traak]

Selectable proximity-fused ammo for tank weapons. The German WWII 88s had such ammo flexibility. Why not tanks in AWII?

Sorry, I didn't mention this was for AA defense purposes.

[MasterChief096]

No one complained about tanks having to have gunners at all over the 8 years of PlanetSide. It seems like right now people are (upon having found out about this new system) are fabricating reasons to complain about it. If you're a solo player and want to gun a tank, go find another solo player and gun his tank for him, don't whine for SOE to dumb down one of the most important aspects of PlanetSide. You're still "solo'ing", you aren't communicating with the driver, he isn't telling you what to shoot, you just have to rely on him not to be a suicidal maniac.

I can't even think of any instances in which people complained about gunning for any of the vehicles.

Oh but wait, I can. People complained that BFRs DIDN'T get gunners often enough, and that BFR pilots were "solo-whoring" too often in a game that required "teamwork". I remember how this upset a lot of people.

Oh but chill out right? SOE said its in the game so they know what they are doing.

The only way I foresee one-manned tanks is if the customization allows you to slice off half the armor of the standard 2-man variant (with a significant change in appearance in the tank to be able to differentiate), and have 1-man tank SPECIFIC weapons that aren't as effective as 2-man tank ones.

Solo play shouldn't have a distinct advantage in an MMOFPS. Granted a lot of MMOs try to offer options for solo guys to have fun, but I never had any problem soloing in PlanetSide. Being a lone infantry, finding random vehicle drivers, or piloting aircraft provided enough solo experience for me.

[Xyntech]

Originally Posted by MasterChief096

No one complained about tanks having to have gunners at all over the 8 years of PlanetSide. It seems like right now people are (upon having found out about this new system) are fabricating reasons to complain about it. If you're a solo player and want to gun a tank, go find another solo player and gun his tank for him, don't whine for SOE to dumb down one of the most important aspects of PlanetSide. You're still "solo'ing", you aren't communicating with the driver, he isn't telling you what to shoot, you just have to rely on him not to be a suicidal maniac.

I can't even think of any instances in which people complained about gunning for any of the vehicles.

Oh but wait, I can. People complained that BFRs DIDN'T get gunners often enough, and that BFR pilots were "solo-whoring" too often in a game that required "teamwork". I remember how this upset a lot of people.

Oh but chill out right? SOE said its in the game so they know what they are doing.

The only way I foresee one-manned tanks is if the customization allows you to slice off half the armor of the standard 2-man variant (with a significant change in appearance in the tank to be able to differentiate), and have 1-man tank SPECIFIC weapons that aren't as effective as 2-man tank ones.

Solo play shouldn't have a distinct advantage in an MMOFPS. Granted a lot of MMOs try to offer options for solo guys to have fun, but I never had any problem soloing in PlanetSide. Being a lone infantry, finding random vehicle drivers, or piloting aircraft provided enough solo experience for me.

Nobody here is complaining about the old system. The devs have said that the driver will control the main gun in Planetside 2 and the argument is about whether this is going to destroy the game or not.

I don't think either option is going to be bad. All I'm arguing is that the new system will work if the devs decide to keep it.

I still think the solution of being able to install a second, bigger anti vehicle cannon in the gunner position and replace the drivers cannon with heavier armor would be a fair compromise.

[Aractain]

There was a hell of a lot of threads about tank balance due to the gunner requirement and how that effects the game and how aircraft don't need such a penalty.

The devs have now evened up that imbalance without making tanks one man only, they still have teamwork options within the vehicle (which is useful for people who don't have tanks upgraded). They simply removed the required teamwork element to get more tanks on the field.

[Traak]

What was the biggest demotivator to pulling a tank? If it was finding a gunner, see my thread about semi-automatic VNG seat filling.

http://www.planetside-universe.com/f...ad.php?t=37429

[Aractain]

Its never about one issue, its about all the issues stacked together. Back in PS1 if you were unorganised (a luxury only some can afford unfortunately, a tiny porportion of the game) you were faced with either no gunners or idiot gunners and even with a good gunner a one man reaver would pop up and annhiliate you before you even got to the combat zone meaning you also needed 2 more people in a skyguard to protect you (which would die to a mine just as you enter battle).

Finaly the stars have aligned and you get to the edge of a battle and for once in the last 3 hours you are having fun, you help push the battle to the base. Its an NC base. Your vehicle blows up in a stream of phantom missiles that you can't do anything about apart from tear up as the pheonix cruely removes the last drop of fun from the game.

"Welcome to Planetside newbie; the cert aircav button is there and the cancel sub button is over there, make your choice."

[Azren]

Aractain, in the old days of PS, finding a gunner was no problem. In fact there were always like 10 guys staning at the vpad exit, waiting for someone to roll a vehicle that needs a gunner.
There is a reason why you can lock the gunner position, something you don't really need to use these days anymore.

Getting a tank used to cost a lot of cert points, if you wanted engineer skills too (which is a must), your character was pretty much maxed out. No rexo, no heavy assault, just your tank and engi. Of course not many people wanted to get stuck with just that, so not everyone had a tank. Same is true for air cav. The problem is that nowadays the cert points needed for vehicles is much lower than it used to be, so one guy can have tank, air cav, and a load of other stuff too.

Now about your experience in PS: if you started recently, than that is exactly what you would experience. Getting blown up by reavers, or AV rockets, or biffers. This is what it all comes down to: join an outfit. If you join a reasonable outfit you will have a great time driving tanks. For example just yesterday we had a tank column of 5 mags and one SG weraking havoc on the TR and NC. Nothing beats the joy of destroying a biffer in your tank

Tanks do not need a driver gun, but if any, it should be an AI gun with limited turn (30° or so).

[Talek Krell]

Originally Posted by Aractain

A load of bullshit.

I don't know what sort of Chinese knockoff Planetside you've been playing, but you should try mine. The MBTs work great.

[Aractain]

I played since 2003 dawg, I usualy had a friend gun (prefered buggys actually) but the times when I played solo was just like... no.

If you look at a Vterm even early in the game it was mostly air. Maybe they want to change that in PS2?

I think maybe part of the problem here is that most of you guys had nice outfits to run with so don't have the experinces of what the lonewolf (who probably will account for 60% of the game if it does well) will go through. With out the support structure of a guild or ar least a few friends MMOs are usualy terrible experinces.

Making it fun to play the game solo does not mean the game is broken or less fun to play the game with friends. Indeed a well done solo game will keep people playing who might then end up with a nice outfit as a result of that.