MagRider Main Gun Position

[Grognard]

I'll get right into it... I dont really have a problem with the driver gunning, yet... or it being fixed in a frontal firing arc since the whole tank can strafe. However, I do have a problem with the elevation of the main gun sitting so low, and so far forward, on the chassis.

From the standpoint of immersion, and playability - who would design such an impractical gun location for a vehicle that needs to; 1 Aquire targets in defilade, 2. Fire over terrain like big stones, fallen trees..., 3. Chassis-rock over rough surfaces, 4. Turn near verticle structures, etc. etc... What happens to that thing at the first ditch? Strafing near trees? Yeees... its a game, but cmon... most other things in this game at least seem to follow a futuristic version of form follows function...

If you look at the pictures, it just does not appear to "hover" high enough for this not to be a concern. The old Mag's forward arc gun was snub-nosed, the main gun is a long barrel rail-gun (or somesuch). It just does not seem to fit into a sensible application of what it is meant for, even as a hover-tank. Certainly, the mainstay defensive measure of tanks, "hull down aspect", will seemingly be absent by virtue of the firing geometry of the gun placement. I wonder if this is by design...

The gun just sits too low, and too far forward...

[WaryWizard]

yeah it looks like it would hit something if it were to come across a hill or small rock. It should be higher up

[sylphaen]

I share your concerns, Grog. Hopefully, devs changed their mind about the Magrider's main gun.

[Neurotoxin]

I like that it'll be a big anti-infantry gun instead of the small one in PS1. The Magrider may also float higher off the ground than in PS, which helps resolve many of the clearance issues for a low-mounted turret. I feel like it was also done for balance, that the Magrider will have a low and straight shot, while the other two tanks fire from higher up because of the arc.

Personally, I'd just replace the front end with some sorta energy ramming shield, that can reduce damage from forward impact and mines while adding more mowing power to the Magrider. Not for every situation, but I'd definitely use it to lead VS armor columns into battle, and for courtyard cleanup.

[Grognard]

Originally Posted by Neurotoxin

The Magrider may also float higher off the ground than in PS, which helps resolve many of the clearance issues for a low-mounted turret. I feel like it was also done for balance, that the Magrider will have a low and straight shot, while the other two tanks fire from higher up because of the arc.

I was thinking same thing, since now... the whole tank is the "turret". Maybe they want "hull-down" aspect to be lost on this tank, since it can be done by strafing around trees etc. so... "hull-side" aspect now, I guess...

Originally Posted by Neurotoxin

Personally, I'd just replace the front end with some sorta energy ramming shield, that can reduce damage from forward impact and mines while adding more mowing power to the Magrider. Not for every situation, but I'd definitely use it to lead VS armor columns into battle, and for courtyard cleanup.

I would, at least, prefer a more snub-nosed rail gun, or this thing will just be a futuristic weed-whacker. As far as mines... good point, I'd hate to be the engineer trying to figure out a way to protect the Mag gun from mines, since PS2 is going to have anti-mine unlocks.

[AncientVanu]

The Magrider is a low profile tank. Look at this image:
http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...g?hotlink=true

It is pretty much on par with the other two tanks even though it is several feet above ground. If it was laying on the ground it would have had a lot lower profile.
Think of it as sort of a German tank destroyer of the WW2. Like and advanced VS equivalent of the Stug Much like it it is a low profile vehicle with fixed gun (gun is not in a turret) with limited aiming capabilities.

I'm pretty sure it has been possible to design it differently, with the main gun in a turret and still keep a relatively low profile and hovering capabilities, but I guess it is in its current form for the sake of balance.

The way I see it it will be at a disadvantage on a rough terrain when facing the other tanks because of the really, really low positioned gun. How are the devs going to compensate for that, with better armor, rate of fire, or supreme maneuverability remains to be seen. I'm a bit pessimistic though cause unlike the WW2 Stug it won't be used mainly to ambush tanks so its cons eventually might come out to be more than its pros.

[Bags]

You can go over the water. There's your trade off.

[Whalenator]

Just more targets for speedy, high DPS Vanguards.

[Vash02]

Originally Posted by Bags

You can go over the water. There's your trade off.

Only an advantage on Cyssor.

[ringring]

Think you have a problem ....

with the vannie the main and secondary guns are in the turret with no seperate turret for the secondary.

Whatever the driver is looking at the secondary gunner is looking at the same thing.

(this seems to be the case on some version of the prowler too).


tbh I think the mag got the better of the gunner/driver deal simply *because* the main gun is fixed forward while the whole tank can strafe.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by Bags

You can go over the water. There's your trade off.

and the float aspect gives a more stable shooting platform over rougher terrain.

*remember the prowlers main gun won't have the arc of the old one so hull down positions will not be as feasible.

[Saintlycow]

if you watch the reveal from last summer, you can see the mag main cannon shot does not have an arc and fires completely straight. Of course, that was last summer, but it may still be applicable

[Erendil]

Originally Posted by Bags

You can go over the water. There's your trade off.

...because in all of the media they've shown us so far there's been so much water around for the Mags to take advantage of.


Oh wait. No there hasn't.

Originally Posted by ringring

Think you have a problem ....

with the vannie the main and secondary guns are in the turret with no seperate turret for the secondary.

Whatever the driver is looking at the secondary gunner is looking at the same thing.

(this seems to be the case on some version of the prowler too).


tbh I think the mag got the better of the gunner/driver deal simply *because* the main gun is fixed forward while the whole tank can strafe.

If you look at both this pic and the one AncientVanu posted, you can clearly see that the Vannie has three weapon mounts on it: The main cannon and coaxial LMG for the driver (like PS1's Vannie turret), and a top-mounted independent turret for the gunner.

As for the Mag, it's pretty obvious to everyone what my opinion is *looks at sig*.... The success of the Dev's fixed-forward main cannon design will depend largely on how fast the mag can strafe, rotate, and drive in reverse. It's going to have to be able to move quickly enough to be able to maneuver the whole chassis to deal with threats from the sides, and be able to retreat fast enough going in reverse, otherwise it'll simply be chewed up by any threats that occur from any direction other than the front. Especially for people who want to drive it solo.

TBH I think the design will be extremely difficult to balance just by its very nature. A fixed-forward design may work in small-scale 32vs32 games like BF4192 where there's only a handful of enemy vehicles to deal with, you can hug the edges of the map, and most attacks come from generally one direction. But not in the chaos of huge 666vs666vs666 wars that have dozens if not hundreds of vehicles.

[ringring]

Originally Posted by Erendil

...

If you look at both this pic and the one AncientVanu posted, you can clearly see that the Vannie has three weapon mounts on it: The main cannon and coaxial LMG for the driver (like PS1's Vannie turret), and a top-mounted independent turret for the gunner.

As for the Mag, it's pretty obvious to everyone what my opinion is *looks at sig*.... The success of the Dev's fixed-forward main cannon design will depend largely on how fast the mag can strafe, rotate, and drive in reverse. It's going to have to be able to move quickly enough to be able to maneuver the whole chassis to deal with threats from the sides, and be able to retreat fast enough going in reverse, otherwise it'll simply be chewed up by any threats that occur from any direction other than the front. Especially for people who want to drive it solo.

TBH I think the design will be extremely difficult to balance just by its very nature. A fixed-forward design may work in small-scale 32vs32 games like BF4192 where there's only a handful of enemy vehicles to deal with, you can hug the edges of the map, and most attacks come from generally one direction. But not in the chaos of huge 666vs666vs666 wars that have dozens if not hundreds of vehicles.

You're right ... and yet in this one there isn't one. http://www.planetside-universe.com/m...hp?img_id=1716

(those little 2nd guns on both the vannie and prowlie look pretty anaemic)

Even so, I think the mag will be more user friendly. I'd feel happier with it anyway.

[Azren]

Those gunner guns look pathetic. Anyone still questions how they will measure against the main guns? lol