Tank drivers acting as gunners in PS2

[VioletZero]

I like how teamwork is encouraged, but going solo in a tank is still an option.

One thing that people have to remember is that not everyone has a microphone. And using a microphone should not be a requirement to use one of the main features of the game.

[ThGlump]

Teamwork is encouraged but in second tank and not gunner. If reaver is on me ill be moving, second tank switch to gunner AA and kill it.
Its not about killing cooperation (you probably need more if you are separated in different vehicles), but that it make gunner position unwanted and wasted if you can have additional tank instead.

[Raymac]

Originally Posted by ThGlump

Teamwork is encouraged but in second tank and not gunner. If reaver is on me ill be moving, second tank switch to gunner AA and kill it.
Its not about killing cooperation (you probably need more if you are separated in different vehicles), but that it make gunner position unwanted and wasted if you can have additional tank instead.

It is far easier to coordinate within the same vehicle than it is between 2 vehicles. I think your scenario is a distinct possibility, but I predict that tanks with gunners will be more effective and more common than 2 solo tanks.

[Azren]

Originally Posted by Raymac

1) This may not apply to the tanks, only to transports like the Sunderer and Galaxy.
2) If it does apply to tanks, then your tank will be immobile and a sitting duck. A stationary target in the middle of a battle is toast.
3) The seat change may not be instantaneous. They could balance it with a 1-2 second time delay.

I don't like the idea either, but let's stop fucking panicing every fucking time we hear something new. Please.

1) Doubtfull
2) It will be immobile either way. As seen in the recent videos, you can't drive and gun at the same time, hence you stop for better aim.
3) Entering and exiting the vehicle is instantaneous, why would this be different?

The AA you lose by not having a gunner can be easily suplemented by a lighting. What this would mean is; your duo has the best AA in game (lighting) and a backup AA (MBT) if needed.

With seat changes there is no more any logical reason why two solo MBTs would not outpreform an MBT with gunner in almost any situation.

[ThGlump]

2 tanks are harder to coordinate but more profitable. 2 tanks will be move effective against ground (since AA gunner would be useless, and with directional dmg you can flank), and even against air (especially when attacker is flying over so you can risk to stop and shoot with both tanks).
There can be situations when gunner would be better than second tank, but most time i expect ppl will chose additional tank instead gunner.

[DayOne]

Aren't the turrets supposed to be quite powerful? So having a gunner is actually a good idea?

[VioletZero]

Originally Posted by DayOne

Aren't the turrets supposed to be quite powerful? So having a gunner is actually a good idea?

Yes.

[EVILPIG]

I did not read 31 pages and I will give what is becoming an automated response, wait till we play Beta and see. But, I will say that at this point I support the idea and disagree that it waters down teamwork. You don't have to multi-crew a vehicle to get teamwork. Field the tanks and coordinate amongst them.

The other thing is that everyone seems to be assuming that the 2ndary weapons will be so weak. Again, wait till Beta. If the 2ndary position turns out to be super fun, all the whining will be forgotten.

[ThGlump]

Originally Posted by DayOne

Aren't the turrets supposed to be quite powerful? So having a gunner is actually a good idea?

Powerful but weaker than main gun. That was whole idea giving the one who spend cert strongest gun.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by ThGlump

Powerful but weaker than main gun. That was whole idea giving the one who spend cert strongest gun.

That and Higby said the Lightning weaponry is more powerful than a MBT gunner's.

Maths > beta.

[Rivenshield]

Anything you incentivize, you get more of.

What the game designers are choosing to do is to turn every tank into a big giant Lightning. Everybody will have tank certs, because it will be impossible to set foot outside a base without getting squished by someone else's tank zerg.

The thing that makes the Planetside experience unique are the teamwork and coordination required to get anything done and do it well. Armored companies used to be feared -- infrequent -- special. Now they will be humdrum...... and every tower/base/capture point will be carpeted with abandoned armor as people reach the objective, get bored, and jump out to fight.

Planetside is not merely an FPS writ large. It is a full-blown online war, with logistics and supply and *teamwork*. One at a time, I see the old virtues being weeded out in favor of appealing to the Cawadooty crowd.

This is not a good idea.

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Rivenshield

Anything you incentivize, you get more of.

What the game designers are choosing to do is to turn every tank into a big giant Lightning. Everybody will have tank certs, because it will be impossible to set foot outside a base without getting squished by someone else's tank zerg.

The thing that makes the Planetside experience unique are the teamwork and coordination required to get anything done and do it well. Armored companies used to be feared -- infrequent -- special. Now they will be humdrum...... and every tower/base/capture point will be carpeted with abandoned armor as people reach the objective, get bored, and jump out to fight.

Planetside is not merely an FPS writ large. It is a full-blown online war, with logistics and supply and *teamwork*. One at a time, I see the old virtues being weeded out in favor of appealing to the Cawadooty crowd.

This is not a good idea.

Wait for Beta. Anti-Armor infantry weaponry will probably shred armor. Infantry can hide easier. Truth is, we know nothing at this point.

[Saintlycow]

2 guns that fire at the same time and allow you to move.

or 1 gun and movement/ 1 aa gun.

[dsi]

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

I did not read 31 pages and I will give what is becoming an automated response, wait till we play Beta and see. But, I will say that at this point I support the idea and disagree that it waters down teamwork. You don't have to multi-crew a vehicle to get teamwork. Field the tanks and coordinate amongst them.

The other thing is that everyone seems to be assuming that the 2ndary weapons will be so weak. Again, wait till Beta. If the 2ndary position turns out to be super fun, all the whining will be forgotten.

We watched someone play an Alpha and we got to listen to them complaining about falling off a ridge while trying to focus on driving with a giant cannon.

Honestly, they're making terrain harder to drive on and making it harder to focus on driving. What kind of logic is that?

[Raymac]

Originally Posted by Azren

1) Doubtfull
2) It will be immobile either way. As seen in the recent videos, you can't drive and gun at the same time, hence you stop for better aim.
3) Entering and exiting the vehicle is instantaneous, why would this be different?

The AA you lose by not having a gunner can be easily suplemented by a lighting. What this would mean is; your duo has the best AA in game (lighting) and a backup AA (MBT) if needed.

With seat changes there is no more any logical reason why two solo MBTs would not outpreform an MBT with gunner in almost any situation.

I think you have a point with 1) and 3), but 2) is way off base. You've played PS1 so you know the importance of shooting while on the move. Hell it's important for any shooter.

Also, I think it is arrogantly premature to conclude that 2 solo MBTs will be better than 1 MBT with a gunner, especially if that is not the intent of the devs and they have the ability to balance it still.