Magrider Fixed Gun - Page 4

**Malorn** · 2011-09-21, 01:01 PM

The concept of whether the gun is fixed has nothing to do with the damage it deals because the damage it deals is simply a balance tweak. BF2142's main guns on all tanks was equivalent so the only difference was the fixed gun strafe handling.

It boils down to a simple truth - the concept of the fixed main gun has been shown to be effective in another game. Talking about all the other balance issues with the magrider are irrelevant to whether the concept of the fixed gun is flawed or bad design.

They can always change damage numbers. They can always tweak strafing rates. That is something trivial to change that will likely change many times throughout alpha and beta. Judging the fixed frontal main gun in the context of other flaws of the magrider is just dumb. It doesn't make sense and shows your logic to be poor.

FIREk · 2011-09-21, 01:17 PM

The only problem with the fixed gun is, should they choose to give drivers control of the secondary guns only (and there are quite a few good reasons to do this), it wouldn't make much sense in a Magrider.

I only see benefits in making the Mag's weaponry mounted just like in any other vehicle, instead of making it a special snowflake.

**Malorn** · 2011-09-21, 01:23 PM

Except making it mounted like other vehicles means the mag cannot strafe, which fundamentally changes the vehicle.

I don't see this discussion going anywhere until we get a chance to play the magrider. Dismissing the concept outright would be dumb without actually seeing how it plays compared to other tanks. Playing it and finding problems with it is a whole nother discussion when you have that specific vehicle in context. The only sensible thing is to give the devs the benefit of the doubt and run with it and see how it turns out. If some folks still dont like it that is the right time to perk up and give specific reasons.

Sirisian · 2011-09-21, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by FIREk

The only problem with the fixed gun is, should they choose to give drivers control of the secondary guns only (and there are quite a few good reasons to do this), it wouldn't make much sense in a Magrider.

Exactly. Not that I used tanks much in the original, but I do enjoy the idea of gunning while at the same time understand how invaluable it can be to release control to a gunner while running away.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Except making it mounted like other vehicles means the mag cannot strafe, which fundamentally changes the vehicle.

Q and E...

NapalmEnima · 2011-09-21, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by FIREk

I only see benefits in making the Mag's weaponry mounted just like in any other vehicle, instead of making it a special snowflake.

Given that all drivers will also be the main gunner for all vehicles, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that all the tanks have a forward gun with little or no tracking ability, and only the secondaries will be able to spin 360.

I expect that the liberator will lose its 35mm cannon, and the pilot will also be the bomber. A secondary gunner will get the tail gun, hopefully with a better arc of fire.

The Lightening (if still in) may end up being the only vehicle where the driver gets a 360 weapon. I hope they'll draw a secondary view, one for the gun, one out the front, and be able to swap them as the primary display at will.

**Malorn** · 2011-09-21, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Q and E...

Three issues with this

1) It makes driving that vehicle significantly more complicated than other vehicles. The result will be sub-par drivers who will lose engagements compared to the other tanks that are easier to master. Its important that all the main tanks have roughly the same learning curve or you'll see differences in relative tank populations AND you'll see differences in the results of tank engagements irrespective of balance of the tank.

2) It makes driving that vehicle inconsistent with any other vehicle. You'd have those two keys bound and can't use them for other vehicles that don't have the same handling.

3)It makes driving that vehicle inconsistent with infantry movement, which normally maps quite well and easily to vehicle controls. Its intuitive and makes switching between vehicles and infantry easier.

And its still not necessary. As we've seen, a tank with a fixed main gun can be quite effective. I'm assuming you never actually played BF2142. I played it a lot and enjoyed that tank. It was different and had its own strengths and weaknesses. Mostly the strengths outweighed the weaknesses and personally I was far better at it than the other tank.

Sirisian · 2011-09-21, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Three issues with this
2) It makes driving that vehicle inconsistent with any other vehicle. You'd have those two keys bound and can't use them for other vehicles that don't have the same handling.

Per vehicle key bindings. Kind of like how the BFR uses shift+q and shift+e to strafe but most people just binded them to q and e. (Or at least I did).

Originally Posted by Malorn

Three issues with this
3)It makes driving that vehicle inconsistent with infantry movement, which normally maps quite well and easily to vehicle controls. Its intuitive and makes switching between vehicles and infantry easier.

The other tanks will be using a and d to rotate. Using a and d to strafe makes it inconsistent with the other tanks. It's hardly a strong point to make.

Your other comments about making the Magrider too different are true. That's the crux of the problem. The Magrider being a hover tank is just a different vehicle compared to the NC and TR tanks. It's much harder to balance for that reason and more complicated to control. I don't think it should be dumbed down though to a fixed gun platform; however, I also personally don't feel it needs to strafe. It would be much more balanced if it handled similar to the other tanks and the hovering was merely an aesthetic.

This is a problem I saw with the original Magrider also.

Originally Posted by Malorn

And its still not necessary. As we've seen, a tank with a fixed main gun can be quite effective. I'm assuming you never actually played BF2142. I played it a lot and enjoyed that tank. It was different and had its own strengths and weaknesses. Mostly the strengths outweighed the weaknesses and personally I was far better at it than the other tank.

Got it the first day it came out and enjoyed it for a month. Like I said before I didn't really like it, and I don't think it will be a good fit for the VS.

**Malorn** · 2011-09-21, 02:33 PM

All of my comments were true. We just have to wait and see how it feels and how it operates. Cannot fairly judge the decision without seeing the results.

Graywolves · 2011-09-21, 02:41 PM

The VS are supposed to have things that are completley different from other empires.....that's pretty much the entire theme of the VS.

Sirisian · 2011-09-21, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by Malorn

All of my comments were true.

I refuted your arguments. It's also easy to see the the tanks never had the same learning curve in PS1 and it wasn't that big of a deal.

Also you said yourself that you enjoyed the BF2142 tanks with a fixed turret. It's obvious to me that you've never used a Magrider or a tank in PS1 while going through a forest. A turreted cannon allows you to shoot at your enemy. So while the NC and TR will have this advantage the Magrider won't unless it drives at an odd angle to face its enemy. Suddenly going between two trees becomes a problem.

I'm starting to think people have something out for the VS. I mean someone in the IRC made a joke that they liked the new Magrider since it'll be an easy kill with the new fixed turret and to keep it. That's one of the reasons I separated the poll like it is so we could try to get unbiased results.

kidwithstick · 2011-09-21, 03:02 PM

there was nothing wrong with the original? why nerf it?

it wasnt over powered... it was the weakest of the 3 tanks from a damage/armor point of view... which it made up for with no arc and being more maneuverable.

Id be pretty upset if they changed the magrider

FIREk · 2011-09-21, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by kidwithstick

there was nothing wrong with the original? why nerf it?

It couldn't fit the new design direction. PS1's Mag had the pathetic secondary gun available for the driver. Now drivers operate the main guns, hence the big change.

Now, if they kept PS1's design, can you imagine how useless a Magrider's AA secondary would be if it could only fire forward?

**Malorn** · 2011-09-21, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by Sirisian

I refuted your arguments.

I disagree. But I find I dislike much of your posting and threads and find your thinking eccentric and flawed. So I'm not going to continue this discussion. It isn't something we can resolve without playing the game and so it is pointless to debate it now.

Talek Krell · 2011-09-21, 03:53 PM

I'd like to point out that in BF 2142, and in that video in particular (you can see when he pulls the map up that it's just that one bridge for the entire map), the lack of a turret has less impact than it might in PS due to the difference in scale. When engaging multiple targets you'd generally (at least I would) kill the weakest threat first, while giving the largest threat your thickest armor. The inability to do that is just a trade-off so whether it's balanced or not will remain to be seen, but my concerns remain.

Graywolves · 2011-09-21, 04:20 PM

View Poll Results: Do you like the new fixed turret on the Magrider?
I play as VS and like the new fixed turret	7	17.95%
I play as VS and prefer a swivel turret like the NC and TR	11	28.21%
I play as VS and prefer a swivel top and a tank that's more similar to the NC and TR	1	2.56%
I don't play as the VS and like the new fixed turret	8	20.51%
I don't play as the VS and prefer a swivel turret like the NC and TR	5	12.82%
I don't play as VS and prefer a swivel top and a tank that's more similar to the NC and TR	1	2.56%
Other opinion	6	15.38%
Voters: 39. You may not vote on this poll