Driver/Gunners... NO! - Page 33

Sledgecrushr · 2012-07-13, 02:17 PM

Odds are pretty good in my book that the secondary gun on a mbt will be more powerful that the main gun on a lightning.

KaB · 2012-07-13, 02:28 PM

Not sure I've already seen it posted : instead of having three pilots, cant the drivers have the control of the machinegun ?
If the MG's HUD comes to look more like the one in BF (a sort of camera) and if we have no more the gun showing up on the screen, the driver will keep a good view of the action.

Deadeye · 2012-07-13, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by Azren

Can anyone explain why you all insist on having two solo tanks? Why not have one where you can drive/gun (lightning) and one where you can only drive? Don't tell me they are for different roles, with the cert system they can be made very similar in most aspects.

Because I, and I'm sure many others, don't want to PAY for a tank that we can only drive. There's a reason just 5 or 6 tanks was a cool site in PS1 but the skies were often filled with aircraft: people prefer solo vehicles. I prefer it too. I only ever cert for Lightning when I play PS1 and want a ground vehicle other than an AMS. However, in PS2, I plan on driving MBTs to some extent because I can now drive and gun it. It was all fun and games when the tanks were free in PS1, but now that we pay, we demand more.

As far as the the excuses against it, the main one seems to be some kind of idea that because one person is driving a tank, they aren't a team player. It's an excuse that has lived far too long. I can be just as much a team player in a one man tank as you can be in a 2. Why? Because I can do the same things as you can like support an infantry attack by providing supporting fire from afar or close in and I can do it while allowing one more infantry man to be in the fight rather than tied up in the tank.

If there is one balance change I would make to the idea it's this: if you only want to pay for half the tank, you can only drive it and the gunner will have to pay the other half. Otherwise, you pay full price and get to drive a full tank.

I'll bet, though, that even if 80% of people said they'd be up for the former option, 90% would choose the latter when ingame.

Raymac · 2012-07-13, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by Ratstomper

"Can be made similar in most aspects" is not the same thing as" has the same role". They're obviously made to do different things.

MBTs aren't solo tanks, they've got offensive spots for two people and will suffer if they don't have that second spot filled.

This point is ignored far too often. Why? Because theoryside says 2 mbts with 1 person may be better than 1 tank with 2 people? I don't buy that. The secondary gunner can watch your 6, (a 2nd tank could too, but who watches his back??), he can take out air, not be restricted by terrain on acquiring the same target as you, etc. etc.

No, but go out solo in 2 MBTs because I LOVE being a tankbuster in my Reaver, and you'll just double my kills while you pathetically try to kill me with the main gun, or sit still while you switch out of the driver's seat. So please, boost my stats. Thanks.

Flaropri · 2012-07-13, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

So you're going to make the Vanguard and Magrider what the Prowler was in PS1 and create manpower issues?

It's optional, so if people don't like it, they wouldn't have to take it and it could ultimately be removed if no one wants to use it after giving it a fair shake.

I don't really get how anyone can support the certing into either less or more crew in a vehicle, because both completely screw up balance.

I don't see how it messes up balance*. It's a playstyle preference, it doesn't actually effect overall power per resource spent in any particularly important way**. Long term, it's not an issue for the same reason why 2 Solo MBTs against 1 multi-crew MBT isn't an issue.

Besides; a lot depends on whether players or resource points are the scarcer resource, and diminishing returns for a given area.

*(Referring only to Certing to allow more players, since "rough" balance is based on fewer. But balance isn't fully done yet so it could be rebalanced around more players required in MBTs [rather than just optimal], I just dislike that option.)

**(Which is why I don't think it needs to be changed from how it is currently, but I tend to err on the side of letting players do stuff as long as it doesn't force everyone else as well.)

Tamas · 2012-07-13, 03:27 PM

OH this thread again. Is this back to the future?

maradine · 2012-07-13, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by KaB

Sorry you're saying we're bitching, but as you're taking this kind of master behavior comparing everyone, I just wanted to warm you that you're doing the same thing than us : you're saying things you have no idea of their validity as you never played PS2 yet.

You're absolutely correct - I'm making assumptions on developer intent and predictions on feel. And if you're willing to wait until beta and try it out before complaining about the situation, then so am I.

edit: sorry, too many US-centric idioms

SgtExo · 2012-07-13, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by Tamas

OH this thread again. Is this back to the future?

Its back to being bored and waiting for beta. So endless debate where no one is ready to budge from his view point.

Cutter · 2012-07-13, 03:32 PM

How about a 1 or 2 second delay in switching from the driver's seat to the gunner's seat and vice versa?

Flaropri · 2012-07-13, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by SgtExo

Its back to being bored and waiting for beta. So endless debate where no one is ready to budge from his view point.

That's what these forums are for, no?

SgtExo · 2012-07-13, 03:34 PM

I have been checking my email every 15 to 30 minutes.

Sephirex · 2012-07-13, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by SgtExo

Its back to being bored and waiting for beta. So endless debate where no one is ready to budge from his view point.

I didn't know you worked in the government!

SgtExo · 2012-07-13, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Sephirex

I didn't know you worked in the government!

Nope, still a student.

KaB · 2012-07-13, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by maradine

I'm making assumptions on developer intent and predictions on feel.

Considering the fact they've not tested their game with thousand players yet, let's say their intent and predictions are quite ... vague.

What I can say is : I loved the way tanks were in PS1. Being driver or gunner, I could always find cool people and make some effective offensives. And I was only a Planetside Reserves, which means I played occasionally, so I got neither clans nor long-time friends. And when I found nobody I changed to the planes, but I was a terrible noob.

And in every other games where the player had to drive and fire at the same time, I felt this so annoying, I was really Bad !

So my message to SOE : please make it optional, at least in the beta so that we can test it.

fvdham · 2012-07-13, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by Deadeye

Because I, and I'm sure many others, don't want to PAY for a tank that we can only drive.

PlanetSide 2 is free to play, so you don't have to pay anything.
You get the solo Lightning tank and there is can be a 2/3 person tank for team players.

In PlanetSide 1 I drive the Lightning tank 99,99% of the time.
But it is once in a while also fun to man a Prowler or Deliverer
with 3 people and just focus on driving.
Having practiced with Lightning you can keep the other 2 people alive longer.