Tank drivers acting as gunners in PS2 - Page 27

Figment · 2012-02-18, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by Aurmanite

Assumption is the mother of all fuckups.

You know I meant 1/2 gunner(s).

Your comment on crews and stuff is garbage because its theory-crafting, again, after it was clear that I wouldn't stand for any of that crap.

I saw your edit, was about to scrap the correction but noticed you already quoted. Figured as much though, yes.

How can you say it's theory-crafting if it was every day practice in PS1?! How far detached from reality are you? Did you even play PS1?!

PLEASE. PLEASE ask if TR used two or three people in their Prowlers to someone that's not me and played TR predominantly. While you're at it, ask the same about the Marauder's mortar vs 12mm and also ask if they used one Raider (at all) or two Deliverers. Make a new topic for all I care.

And since you again dodged the question, I'll just presume you admit your argument of being able to target more units from two pages ago is false.

After four, five times asking it's rather clear you just don't want to admit it. Childish attitude, but whatever.

Aurmanite · 2012-02-18, 08:35 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

I saw your edit, was about to scrap the correction but noticed you already quoted. Figured as much though, yes.

How can you say it's theory-crafting if it was every day practice in PS1?! How far detached from reality are you? Did you even play PS1?!

PLEASE. PLEASE ask if TR used two or three people in their Prowlers to someone that's not me and played TR predominantly. While you're at it, ask the same about the Marauder's mortar vs 12mm and also ask if they used one Raider (at all) or two Deliverers. Make a new topic for all I care.

And since you again dodged the question, I'll just presume you admit your argument of being able to target more units from two pages ago is false.

After four, five times asking it's rather clear you just don't want to admit it. Childish attitude, but whatever.

Because screaming "I want a cookie" over and over is mature behavior.

We rolled 3 man Prowlers all the time, back when the 15mm was a 12mm. Our outfit was on the leader board against outfits with 5 times as many players. We knew our business.

Planetside isn't match based and this is where your argument falls apart. For every fully manned Prowler there wasn't 1 and 1/3 Magriders/Vanguards. Sometimes we ran into 10 tanks, sometimes we ran into none, because Planetside is a persistent ever-changing game. If you try to assign numbers like you're doing, you don't understand how the game works.

You're wrong on this one for sure, and you should go back to demanding I reply to your skewed try-hard bull.

Figment · 2012-02-18, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by Aurmanite

Because screaming "I want a cookie" over and over is mature behavior.

Yes. Certainly beats "I'm trying to get away with it but damn this guy is persistent, so I'll just pretend to just be annoyed so I can get away with it".

You know, you could have just answered the first time if you really want to debate and not just hear your side of the argument.

We rolled 3 man Prowlers all the time, back when the 15mm was a 12mm. Our outfit was on the leader board against outfits with 5 times as many players. We knew our business.

Wow, stat authority claim. Luckily stats are never interpretable or wrongly correlated.

Also: thanks for proving my point by pointing out that the 12mm was a somewhat decent contribution to the Prowler firepower (against air, infantry and even vehicles alike), but the 15mm was not and certainly not in comparison to another AV Prowler, Skyguard or two Lightnings (if a crew of 6 is used as the basis).

Of course nobody runs a Prowler with just the 15mm, because it simply isn't effective.

Planetside isn't match based and this is where your argument falls apart. For every fully manned Prowler there wasn't 1 and 1/3 Magriders/Vanguards. Sometimes we ran into 10 tanks, sometimes we ran into none, because Planetside is a persistent ever-changing game. If you try to assign numbers like you're doing, you don't understand how the game works.

No, the point is not about the exact numbers on the enemy side and don't you try to say I'm saying that with the ratios. The ratios are about effectiveness as a unit with available crew numbers. NOT about actual tanks in the field.

It's about maximising your crew effectiveness by distributing them over units such that you maximise firepower vs endurance. The comparison ratio is how this efficiency is done per empire.

It has never been about what you will encounter in the field, it's about how many units a crew of 6 would be on each empire in each situation a crew of 6 could get in.

Having three semi-full Prowlers or two semi-full Prowlers with a SG escort, in any given situation simply beats having two full Prowlers. NC have an easier choice: they always bring three units when there's 6 people.

VS can be even more flexible and could even bring 6 vehicles with 6 people. But they didn't because they require a gunner, as their driver gun was weaker. In PS2, this situation is already confirmed as reversed.

As a consequence, the spreading-of-crew choice is weighed differently as well. You can continue to ignore that and tell me I'm wrong, but then it seems you haven't really thought about from the appropriate perspective as you misunderstood the ratio perspective.

You're wrong on this one for sure, and you should go back to demanding I reply to your skewed try-hard bull.

Fine. Care to answer that question already now we've established we're apparently both immature? Don't dodge for the sake of dodging, please. I don't ignore any of your answers either.

Aurmanite · 2012-02-18, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Yes. Certainly beats "I'm trying to get away with it but damn this guy is persistent, so I'll just pretend to just be annoyed so I can get away with it".

You know, you could have just answered the first time if you really want to debate and not just hear your side of the argument.

Wow, stat authority claim. Luckily stats are never interpretable or wrongly correlated.

Also: thanks for proving my point by pointing out that the 12mm was a somewhat decent contribution to the Prowler firepower (against air, infantry and even vehicles alike), but the 15mm was not and certainly not in comparison to another AV Prowler, Skyguard or two Lightnings (if a crew of 6 is used as the basis).

Of course nobody runs a Prowler with just the 15mm, because it simply isn't effective.

No, the point is not about the exact numbers on the enemy side and don't you try to say I'm saying that with the ratios. The ratios are about effectiveness as a unit with available crew numbers. NOT about actual tanks in the field.

It's about maximising your crew effectiveness by distributing them over units such that you maximise firepower vs endurance. The comparison ratio is how this efficiency is done per empire.

It has never been about what you will encounter in the field, it's about how many units a crew of 6 would be on each empire in each situation a crew of 6 could get in.

Having three semi-full Prowlers or two semi-full Prowlers with a SG escort, in any given situation simply beats having two full Prowlers. NC have an easier choice: they always bring three units when there's 6 people.

VS can be even more flexible and could even bring 6 vehicles with 6 people. But they didn't because they require a gunner, as their driver gun was weaker. In PS2, this situation is already confirmed as reversed.

As a consequence, the spreading-of-crew choice is weighed differently as well. You can continue to ignore that and tell me I'm wrong, but then it seems you haven't really thought about from the appropriate perspective as you misunderstood the ratio perspective.

Fine. Care to answer that question already now we've established we're apparently both immature? Don't dodge for the sake of dodging, please. I don't ignore any of your answers either.

I can see why you think I dodge questions.

Aside from your demand that I over explain why 1 tank that can shoot 2 targets is better than 1 tank that can shoot one, your argument and the details of which change a whole-fucking-lot.

What if you had 6 people that didn't have the certs that you require for your 2 tank skyguard set up? Back when BR20 was cap, this was common. You'd run into stuff like this all the time, pull whatever you could to get everyone together and go out.

Why didn't everyone have the perfect certs for 2mbt/sg?

Because people generally certed what they liked.

Like I said, you're thinking about this too small. In your argument you're limited to 6 people with a specific cert make-up in order to satisfy some point you're trying to be right about.

The game didn't play like that.

Edit:
I realized I used an "I'm awesome" argument in that other post just after I posted it. Shit happens sometimes, know what I'm saying?

Sifer2 · 2012-02-18, 09:29 PM

I get the idea behind it but its going to make rolling a power vehicle like Tank or Heavy Aircraft something you do every chance you get. With no real need to gather someone up to get these vehicles to near full strength it will be diet BFR's to an extent.

It's obvious its part of their speed the game up philosophy though and they wont change it unless people scream bloody murder in beta.

Figment · 2012-02-18, 09:37 PM

I understand where you are coming from, but Higby already said you can maximise (and from what I understood, utilise) each skill tree over time (iirc he mentioned an estimated period of three years or so?).

In that sense I see your cert argument as a pre-BR40 situation where people are still limited. Similarly, 8 years ago, CR5s were fine because numbers were limited and it took time to get one. Then CEP doubled per cap and all zergfits got 20 new CR5s a months. Result: suddenly it was raining OSes everywhere. Not at all as planned when the game started. Density of availability simply increases over time.

So rather than short term, I'm thinking of balance over time. Plus I expect the majority of players (not all, obviously) to optimize their effectiveness to new 'standards'. Because either they feel that's the most fun, or because they feel they have to to compete. Think plasma nade + HA that was suddenly the new standard after plasma nerf.

Given they said you can get everything eventually, but it'd take a couple years I'm sure it could work somewhat fine for the first year and a half (by then the most powerful stuff would have been unlocked by most people). In my humble opinion, the dedicated specialists who focus on just a few trees will number relative few compared to the generalists who want a bit of all. But those who don't want to snipe, will not do that tree at first. Vehicles on the other hand is something everyone would do fairly soon next to their dedicated specialist tree.

From my perspective, it all stands or falls with restrictions that remain over time. Think you can agree with that?

Aurmanite · 2012-02-18, 09:40 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

I understand where you are coming from, but Higby already said you can maximise (and from what I understood, utilise) each skill tree over time (iirc he mentioned an estimated period of three years or so?).

In that sense I see your cert argument as a pre-BR40 situation where people are still limited. Similarly, 8 years ago, CR5s were fine because numbers were limited and it took time to get one. Then CEP doubled per cap and all zergfits got 20 new CR5s a months. Result: suddenly it was raining OSes everywhere. Not at all as planned when the game started. Density of availability simply increases over time.

So rather than short term, I'm thinking of balance over time. Plus I expect the majority of players (not all, obviously) to optimize their effectiveness to new 'standards'. Because either they feel that's the most fun, or because they feel they have to to compete. Think plasma nade + HA that was suddenly the new standard after plasma nerf.

Given they said you can get everything eventually, but it'd take a couple years I'm sure it could work somewhat fine for the first year and a half (by then the most powerful stuff would have been unlocked by most people). In my humble opinion, the dedicated specialists who focus on just a few trees will number relative few compared to the generalists who want a bit of all. But those who don't want to snipe, will not do that tree at first. Vehicles on the other hand is something everyone would do fairly soon next to their dedicated specialist tree.

From my perspective, it all stands or falls with restrictions that remain over time. Think you can agree with that?

I can dig it.

HitbackTR · 2012-02-18, 09:59 PM

Another example of 'fixing' what wasn't broke in PS1 for PS2. Don't like it one bit as it dumbs down the game and detracts from the teamwork required to gun and drive a tank in PS1 and turns it into a 2 man, (almost BFR like) configuration for PS2. Planetside was about relying on the people around you to do different jobs and to do them well. Drivers that also occupy the role of gunner is a step backwards in my opinion.

Livefire · 2012-02-18, 10:44 PM

HIGBY please read this.

99% OF ALL PLANETSIDE PLAYERS WILL AGREE WITH THIS.

I have now read this whole thread, I missed this driver/gunner system change and only learned about it last week. I have driven tanks the whole time I played planet side and I am with the fears that they could ruin them. OK so this is the only way I can see that they can do it and it makes sense for all players both solo and team or oriented. It needs to be left up to the player to decide!

If every MBT has 2 guns you do it like this:
All main battle tanks can fit up to 3 people just like the prowler could. Lets move up not down in evolution.
1. Driver=COMMANDER - who ever pulled the tank
2. Main gunner
3. Secondary gunner
The player that pulls the tank becomes the TANK COMMANDER he then has control of the tank permanently and all aspects of it through a small UI just like last time in PS1. This allows him to lock/unlock (so your own empire guys can't steal your tank from you!) the whole tank or just one or both of the guns. He can drive the tank and shoot ether gun or he can unlock the gun spots and allow gunner spots to open and can then choose to release one or both guns or choose not to. He could have 3 people in his tank but not let the other gun or let both of them or only one gun and he manages the other say if its some noob that sucks and the driver can actually do it better so he has that choice as the TANK COMMANDER being its his tank. It will all be easily done in a simple UI like we had in PS1 and with tanks today going all digital so drivers and gunners are only looking at a computer screen and operating a gun with a computer screen and joy stick this is what the future will do. New tanks only hold 3 they are auto loading now like the Stryker tank which is the future of tanks. And all the tank passengers sit side by side in the forward and most heavily armored part of the tank with computer touch screens and a joy stick in front of them. Its ether this or you give use the PS1 version I do not see another way to make all the players happy

Here is an examples of how new tanks work please build ALL the empire tanks around this very functional and proven modern system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1128_Mobile_Gun_System use link for crew information.

Livefire · 2012-02-18, 11:12 PM

Other tank changes they need to make:
Tanks should be completely invulnerable to small arms fire, small ordinance like hand grenades and anti personal mines. You should have to have AV to do any damage with AV Rockets/Missiles/Mines but when used and used right should kill tanks FAST! 1-3 hits max. Because AV is a class now it will be balanced, every one will not be running around with a AV rocket on there back. If you are a good tank driver you will own, if you are a bad tank driver you will die real quick as you should. This is realistic and very fair. Tanks in open combat should move the battle field and should be a game changer if used right and at the right time. They should not have any weaknesses except to AV from the ground and air but being AV is suppose to be designed for just that it should DO IT WELL. This game design employs what called combat envelopes, if your in the envelope you are going to have a GOOD time, if you are not you are probably going to die. The skill of the player is shown by him being able to put him self in the envelope again and again and by the other player staying out of it. In Planetside 2 I want things to be designed well and work like they are designed. This is the only way to have a fun game and have enough realism to not be cartoonish but still balanced naturally by the weapon systems that actually work!

Firefly · 2012-02-18, 11:24 PM

I just wanna say... twenty pages (for me, due to personal forum settings) of two people arguing back and forth with a few interjections and random posts from various other posters...

... and all I really got out of this thread was...

Many, many years ago when I was twenty-three
I was married to a widow who was pretty as could be.
This widow had a grown-up daughter who had hair of red.
My father fell in love with her and soon they, too, were wed.

This made my dad my son-in-law and changed my very life
For my daughter was my mother, 'cause she was my father's wife.
To complicate the matter, even though it brought me joy
I soon became the father of a bouncing baby boy.

My little baby then became a brother-in-law to dad
And so became my uncle, though it made me very sad
For if he was my uncle, then that also made him brother
To the widow's grown-up daughter, who, of course, was my step-mother.

My father's wife then had a son who kept them on the run
And he became my grand-child, 'cause he was my daughter's son.
My wife is now my mother's mother, and it makes me blue
Because, although she is my wife, she's my grandmother too.

If my wife is my grandmother, then I am her grandchild
And every time I think of it, it nearly drives me wild
For now I have become the strangest case you ever saw
(This has got to be the strangest thing I ever saw)
As husband of my grandmother, I am my own grandpaw.

EVERYBODAY!!!!!!
I'm my own grandpaw
I'm my own grandpaw
It sounds funny I know
but it really is so
Oh, I'm my own grandpaw.

Twheee · 2012-02-19, 12:02 AM

Go figure the post where firefly doesn't swear is the post where he snaps.

Graywolves · 2012-02-19, 12:12 AM

Originally Posted by Firefly

I just wanna say... twenty pages (for me, due to personal forum settings) of two people arguing back and forth with a few interjections and random posts from various other posters...

... and all I really got out of this thread was...

Many, many years ago when I was twenty-three
I was married to a widow who was pretty as could be.
This widow had a grown-up daughter who had hair of red.
My father fell in love with her and soon they, too, were wed.

This made my dad my son-in-law and changed my very life
For my daughter was my mother, 'cause she was my father's wife.
To complicate the matter, even though it brought me joy
I soon became the father of a bouncing baby boy.

My little baby then became a brother-in-law to dad
And so became my uncle, though it made me very sad
For if he was my uncle, then that also made him brother
To the widow's grown-up daughter, who, of course, was my step-mother.

My father's wife then had a son who kept them on the run
And he became my grand-child, 'cause he was my daughter's son.
My wife is now my mother's mother, and it makes me blue
Because, although she is my wife, she's my grandmother too.

If my wife is my grandmother, then I am her grandchild
And every time I think of it, it nearly drives me wild
For now I have become the strangest case you ever saw
(This has got to be the strangest thing I ever saw)
As husband of my grandmother, I am my own grandpaw.

EVERYBODAY!!!!!!
I'm my own grandpaw
I'm my own grandpaw
It sounds funny I know
but it really is so
Oh, I'm my own grandpaw.

And I thought I went insane.

Grognard · 2012-02-19, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Firefly

I just wanna say... twenty pages (for me, due to personal forum settings) of two people arguing back and forth with a few interjections and random posts from various other posters...

... and all I really got out of this thread was...

EVERYBODAY!!!!!!
I'm my own grandpaw
I'm my own grandpaw
It sounds funny I know
but it really is so
Oh, I'm my own grandpaw

Something "light" in a tank thread, ironic and funny at once... excellent

Azren · 2012-02-19, 11:38 AM

Really no point to this thread anymore. Beta starts in a month with drivergunner system. Like it or not, that is what PS2 will have, that's final. Even if it is unplayable, they will just make drivinggunning easier, not remove a core concept of that vehicle class.

If you don't like it, better hope buggies will turn out better.

Don't give me that crap about the devs changing this if we don't like it. The misery with iron sights showed everyone just how much they care. What did Higby say? Something along the lines of "We know lot of people don't like them, but we will have it anyway".