Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Flame's not welcome
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
View Poll Results: Do you want disabling? | |||
No | 73 | 64.04% | |
Yes, exactly per BF3 | 3 | 2.63% | |
Yes, but no burning | 3 | 2.63% | |
Yes, but it shouldn't happen until 20-25%, not 50% | 24 | 21.05% | |
Other yes | 9 | 7.89% | |
Other (completely different idea) | 2 | 1.75% | |
Voters: 114. You may not vote on this poll |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2012-04-19, 11:54 AM | [Ignore Me] #65 | ||
Second Lieutenant
|
I don't really like the implementation of the mechanic in BF3. I like the idea, but I really don't think it's necessary.
It would be better if you could disable a vehicle by doing specific damage to a key component. Like blowing away a track, or hitting the engine compartment, or knocking the turret out. That would give infantry a little more strategy in their play when encountering vehicles. Just throwing that out there. I've seen the system in other games, it works quite well. Last edited by wasdie; 2012-04-19 at 11:55 AM. |
||
|
2012-04-19, 11:58 AM | [Ignore Me] #67 | ||
Contributor Major
|
It's make sense if you were able to damage certain parts of the vehicle in detail. Shoot the tracks to slow it down or disable its movement. Shoot the turret to jam it up and make it not turnable. But tanks just have locational damage as a function of total health not part health.
So I'd just rather leave it out based on the devs implementation of damage. And I agree that vehicles should show much more so how damaged they are, so that they are more obvious to both friendly engineers and enemy AV. Last edited by ArmedZealot; 2012-04-19 at 11:59 AM. |
||
|
2012-04-19, 06:09 PM | [Ignore Me] #68 | ||
Private
|
In a little game called Darkest Hour: Europe '44-'45, there's a pretty involved damage system for armored vehicles. The following things can happen to your tank:
Having this kind of damage model would not be in the vein of PlanetSide unless of course you could repair your tanks (which you can?). This kind of thing would add a lot of meta-game to armor engagements. |
||
|
2012-04-19, 06:59 PM | [Ignore Me] #69 | ||
Colonel
|
It's awesome to see that you guys are mostly against disabling, and overwhelmingly against BF3's extreme version of it.
However, I'm concerned that the devs are nevertheless going to outright cater to infantry because BF3 does. And so we need to get in before that happens, and here is a compromise for PS2 disabling: 1. NO Burning, that's the worst part of BF3 disabling 2. Disable occurs at 20%, and ends when repaired past 30%. 3. For air vehicles with afterburners, disable simply means no afterburners, but they can fly at their normal non-afterburner speed. For any air vehicles without afterburners, a 30% reduction to maximum speed. 4. For land vehicles, IF they have a sprint function like BF3 does, then disable simply means sprint is disabled. If they do not, a 30% maximum speed reduction. 5. If damaged vehicles smoke in this game,they should heavily smoke to indicate their disabled status. If they don't smoke, then a disabled vehicle should have heavy electrical shorting graphics to indicate it. This is on top of any armor plates that migh fall off. So basically, doesn't happen until 20%, ends when repaired past 30% vehicle health, and means loss of afterburner/sprint or 30% off the top. I think if we don't support a compromise like this now, they are going to cater to infantry like BF3 and you're going to see disables at 50% AND burning, you have to repair to 100% to end it, and both loss of afterburner/sprint AND a 50% reduction to normal speed. What's more, if it is like that, you're going to find lots of tanks camping at the longest possible range with a team of engineers repairing. Last edited by Stardouser; 2012-04-19 at 07:05 PM. |
||
|
2012-04-19, 09:24 PM | [Ignore Me] #70 | ||
Major
|
I'm sorry, but I'm not liking any ideas about disabling without actual hit boxes that are mapped to systems.
Damage to system could cause: Tracks: slowed and/or steering sluggish Weapons: slowed ROF or increased COF. Can blow up if too damaged Vents: can cause overheating or fire Gun slots: should damage the gunner inside. Cockpit: should damage pilot Anything else that doesn't involve the small hitbox would damage armour. This would improve tactics for C4 sticky bombs and even very good snipers as well as other vehicle damage. If I run up and chunk a grenade inside the gun slot, the occupants should feel it.
__________________
Extreme Stealthing |
||
|
2012-04-19, 09:29 PM | [Ignore Me] #71 | |||
Colonel
|
Also, I agree with there being an ability to hurt the drivers/gunners, especially with aircraft, but are they even going to model infantry inside vehicles so that that's possible? Especially relevant for Galaxies. |
|||
|
2012-04-19, 09:35 PM | [Ignore Me] #72 | |||
Major
|
__________________
Extreme Stealthing |
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|