Some Thoughts on MBT's from a Veteran Tanker - Page 9

Gugabalog · 2012-08-04, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by ExquisitExamplE

Just a reminder to everyone, I've updated the OP and added a video demonstrating ETQW's Desecrator tank, cheers!

I actually covered this in the OP, it's not only possible to control such a tank using the keyboard, but also quite fluid and seamless once you've mastered it.

Turret control = Mouse
Forward/Reverse = W/S
Rotate Tank Body Counterclockwise/Clockwise = A/D
Strafe Tank Body Left/Right = Q/E

+1 For spreading the light!

RageMasterUK · 2012-08-04, 04:10 PM

And thats why I said about introducing new controls specifically for the Magrider.

Q and E are reserved keys as I understand from watching videos that Q is spot enemy and E is activate / enter / exit vehicle. Obviously these could be rebound, but for the purposes of giving extra capability to one faction specific tank that already has extra capability (hover / strafe) , it seems a little extreme to me.

These keys are like "global" keys as well, i.e. they need to preserve their function during infantry, ground vehicle, air vehicle stages of gameplay. Reworking the default control scheme would be a nightmare to include these keys for mag-pilots if spot enemey and enter / exit vehicle were relocated elsewhere on the keyboard, just for the magrider players. These keys always have to be close to the fingers because they get a lot of use

-RageMasterUK

Gugabalog · 2012-08-04, 04:22 PM

I always rebind crouch to x. Idk what to do about universal keys.

AJay · 2012-08-04, 04:31 PM

I am reinstalling ETQW now thanks a lot.

Can't wait to find it still dead as a door nail.

RageMasterUK · 2012-08-04, 04:33 PM

Yeah peeps always rebind keys (I do too), but if ExquisitE's suggestion was implemented in game then either...

A) "Spot Enemy" and "Enter/Exit/Activate" would have to be shifted away from WASD in the default scheme (affecting every player on every faction) or...

B) "Magrider tank strafe" in the default scheme would have to be put too far away from WASD to be useful.

-RageMasterUK

Inq · 2012-08-04, 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by RageMasterUK

And thats why I said about introducing new controls specifically for the Magrider.

Q and E are reserved keys as I understand from watching videos that Q is spot enemy and E is activate / enter / exit vehicle. Obviously these could be rebound, but for the purposes of giving extra capability to one faction specific tank that already has extra capability (hover / strafe) , it seems a little extreme to me.

These keys are like "global" keys as well, i.e. they need to preserve their function during infantry, ground vehicle, air vehicle stages of gameplay. Reworking the default control scheme would be a nightmare to include these keys for mag-pilots if spot enemey and enter / exit vehicle were relocated elsewhere on the keyboard, just for the magrider players. These keys always have to be close to the fingers because they get a lot of use

-RageMasterUK

You could avoid this by using combo keys like crouch. (I don't know if its used on a vehicle).

Turret control = Mouse
Forward/Reverse = W/S
Rotate Tank Body Counterclockwise/Clockwise = A/D
Strafe Tank Body Left/Right = Ctrl OR shift + A/D

RageMasterUK · 2012-08-04, 04:38 PM

Movement keys need to be jabbed at all the time during maneuvers, having to hold Ctrl every time would suck, hard. Also, there'd be no way you can rotate the tank body and strafe at the same time. Circle strafing would be impossible using the binds you're suggesting.

Perhaps Ctrl for left strafe and space for right strafe could possibly work.

-RageMasterUK

Gugabalog · 2012-08-04, 04:39 PM

Strafe Tank Body Left/Right = Ctrl OR shift + A/D

Composite key presses for movement are clunky and not user friendly.

I still advocate a universal dedicated driver cert to allow for this mechanic. It lacks the glaring flaws of alternatives and could be used to reward team play.

ExquisitExamplE · 2012-08-04, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by AJay

I am reinstalling ETQW now thanks a lot.

Can't wait to find it still dead as a door nail.

Hehe, No problem. It's pretty dead to be honest, although there is usually at least one full North American server up at all times. Will probably be deader than usual this weekend though, a lot of people from my clan (The Art of Warfare - www.TAW.net) are actually in Texas right now attending Quakecon.

AJay · 2012-08-04, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by ExquisitExamplE

Hehe, No problem. It's pretty dead to be honest, although there is usually at least one full North American server up at all times. Will probably be deader than usual this weekend though, a lot of people from my clan (The Art of Warfare - www.TAW.net) are actually in Texas right now attending Quakecon.

It is goddamn tragic, the game is so creative and unique among team shooters.

Splash Damage are like the Cool Runnings of Game Devs.

Blackwolf · 2012-08-04, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by RageMasterUK

Movement keys need to be jabbed at all the time during maneuvers, having to hold Ctrl every time would suck, hard. Also, there'd be no way you can rotate the tank body and strafe at the same time. Circle strafing would be impossible using the binds you're suggesting.

Perhaps Ctrl for left strafe and space for right strafe could possibly work.

-RageMasterUK

And we're ignoring the fact that if the tank had a rotating turret then most uses of strafe would be obsolete. Reverting the tank back to PS1 era where strafe and reverse were at little more then 10kph speeds while forward was at closer to 50kph. The ability to hover becomes more of a neat trick then an asset yet the entire machine continues to be balanced around this one aspect that makes it different from the other two. This is bad design.

Might as well code the tank controls to be exactly like the other two tanks, where it's ability to hover becomes eye candy and nothing beyond that. No strafe, just an ability to drive over water.

The simple fact is that the Turret over complicates the issue and you end up going full circle strait back to a fixed gun, or veer off into other unhappy areas of development. All for one tank.

Personally, I have no problem steering with the mouse. I've gotten plenty of practice from the Magrider in PS1 which ALSO featured a fixed gun position that the driver could control and had no issues. A high powered splash weapon from that position would do a lot better then the high RoF PPA that the Magrider sported.

With all due respect to the OP and his well thought out post, I'm not personally convinced that this topic needs to be discussed now.

Again, my advice is wait for beta and try it out for yourself before you jump to the conclusion that it's going to be horrible and the world is going to end.

And no I'm not going to discuss yet another beating of the dedicated gunner dead horse topic. The more I think about that subject the more I realize it's actually a far better thing to have drivers gunning their vehicles. This is a balance point that makes tanks more difficult to handle and forces them into stopping to fire or running and gunning with reduced accuracy. This coupled with tanks being a bit more vulnerable (particularly to infantry, who now stand a chance against them) will prevent tanks from being the ONLY things to survive outside of buildings.

JesNC · 2012-08-04, 07:52 PM

My 2c: Sacrificing a bit of armor is no adequate tradeoff for enhanced mobility at the level the Magrider offers. You'd be down to nearly Lightning-level health/armor to properly balance the Mag with a turret IMO. And that would defeat the purpose of a MBT completely.

Keep in mind the role MBTs play in PS2. They're assault vehicles, supposed to lead an attack and break stalemates and other tanks aren't the only threat to them. Trading armor for mobility might work in a 1vs1 environment, but I don't see how a down-armored Mag would survive even with the rotable turret perk.

tl;dr: I'd rather drive the Magrider as an adequately armored assault gun than as a turreted glass tank.

Again, my advice is wait for beta and try it out for yourself before you jump to the conclusion that it's going to be horrible and the world is going to end.

And this, of course.

infected · 2012-08-04, 09:11 PM

i'm not a fan of the way soe is holding on to this concept that each faction has some trade-off with vehicles. bottom line is they are all gimped in one way or another, making none of them desirable and ultimately making the game less desirable as a result.

soe should just stick to aesthetic and cosmetic (and lore) differences between factions.

the actual vehicles and weapons should not be so drastically opposite. NC vehicles turn too slow. VS and TR can run circles around them in the air and ground. NC default sniper is gimp. every weapon in the game has random cone of fire calculated in to remove any appeal for skill-based fps gamers.

many of us just wish ps2 would take bf3 modern game ballistics, physics and features and make it into 2000 player maps. bf3 has proper weapon ballistics, feedback, and audio. bf3 vehicles have proper movement, cockpit gui's, 3rd person view, etc, etc.

planetside 2 is failing on a lot of levels in comparison and not living up to the promise of being a modern AAA shooter. and that's just the underlying stuff. i'm not even going to bring up the issues with choice of map/base design, and how all of this broken stuff ruins the flow of the game.

Gugabalog · 2012-08-04, 09:20 PM

Originally Posted by infected

i'm not a fan of the way soe is holding on to this concept that each faction has some trade-off with vehicles. bottom line is they are all gimped in one way or another, making none of them desirable and ultimately making the game less desirable as a result.

soe should just stick to aesthetic and cosmetic (and lore) differences between factions.

the actual vehicles and weapons should not be so drastically opposite. NC vehicles turn too slow. VS and TR can run circles around them in the air and ground. NC default sniper is gimp. every weapon in the game has random cone of fire calculated in to remove any appeal for skill-based fps gamers.

many of us just wish ps2 would take bf3 modern game ballistics, physics and features and make it into 2000 player maps. bf3 has proper weapon ballistics, feedback, and audio. bf3 vehicles have proper movement, cockpit gui's, 3rd person view, etc, etc.

planetside 2 is failing on a lot of levels in comparison and not living up to the promise of being a modern AAA shooter. and that's just the underlying stuff. i'm not even going to bring up the issues with choice of map/base design, and how all of this broken stuff ruins the flow of the game.

AzureWatcher · 2012-08-04, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by infected

i'm not a fan of the way soe is holding on to this concept that each faction has some trade-off with vehicles. bottom line is they are all gimped in one way or another, making none of them desirable and ultimately making the game less desirable as a result.

soe should just stick to aesthetic and cosmetic (and lore) differences between factions.

the actual vehicles and weapons should not be so drastically opposite. NC vehicles turn too slow. VS and TR can run circles around them in the air and ground. NC default sniper is gimp. every weapon in the game has random cone of fire calculated in to remove any appeal for skill-based fps gamers.

many of us just wish ps2 would take bf3 modern game ballistics, physics and features and make it into 2000 player maps. bf3 has proper weapon ballistics, feedback, and audio. bf3 vehicles have proper movement, cockpit gui's, 3rd person view, etc, etc.

planetside 2 is failing on a lot of levels in comparison and not living up to the promise of being a modern AAA shooter. and that's just the underlying stuff. i'm not even going to bring up the issues with choice of map/base design, and how all of this broken stuff ruins the flow of the game.

You came to the wrong neighborhood, I'm afraid.