Eurika! TTK and vehicle changes explained. - Page 2

Mechzz · 2012-05-23, 01:34 AM

Originally Posted by basti

Blitzkrieg? YES! WE SHALL DESTROY!

Uh Oh, we remember the last time the Germans got all enthusiastic about Blitzkrieg. Glad u're on my side matey

Timealude · 2012-05-23, 02:18 AM

I just cant wait to hear what info Hamma has, if he has anything on TTK for us. Come on E3 and AGN night!

Serpent · 2012-05-23, 11:35 AM

This definitely seems interesting, I am intrigued by the Blitzkrieg idea.

However, they need to be careful not to make vehicles too easy to kill. It sounds strange, but it's true, TotalBiscuit's Night Ops shows him using only 2 C4 to destroy that mag tank.

IMMentat · 2012-05-23, 07:26 PM

The radius of the C4 seemed small, TB didn't die and he was fairly close. so had the mag had a gunner, minimap/awareness or support then TB would have been of little threat (it took TB a good 60-90 seconds to find the tank in a position he could C4 it in)

Haro · 2012-05-23, 08:08 PM

I agree with the OP, any changes that give infantry more chances to participate and actually make a difference in open battles outside of bases is a good thing. It makes ground transports worth more, and infantry worth doubly as much: infantry with AV weapons or explosives now are truly effective tank killers without needing 20 of them, and other infantry can act as very effective defenders, keeping friendly tanks safe. Tank columns can now act more like their real-life equivalents, a balance of offensive, defensive, and support capabilities, rather than what they used to be in PS1, just units almost always comprised of tanks (and maybe, MAYBE some anti-air, since air cav and libs were really the only things besides other tanks that could match tanks besides the BFR.)

Serpent · 2012-05-23, 09:16 PM

Originally Posted by IMMentat

The radius of the C4 seemed small, TB didn't die and he was fairly close. so had the mag had a gunner, minimap/awareness or support then TB would have been of little threat (it took TB a good 60-90 seconds to find the tank in a position he could C4 it in)

I get what you're saying, but what if there are a huge amount of infantry running around with C4? Tanks can't defend themselves all that well unless the AoE on the main gun is extremely powerful.

captainkapautz · 2012-05-23, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by Serpent

I get what you're saying, but what if there are a huge amount of infantry running around with C4? Tanks can't defend themselves all that well unless the AoE on the main gun is extremely powerful.

Easy, restrict C4/boomers to classes that fit, imo either Engineer or HA and make it replace one of the "extra toys".

I'd be for going oldschool PS1 and making ACEs turn into boomers, that way it's engi-only and the Engineer would have to think about using it.
Do I try and blow the unsuspecting tank, lay some mines to protect the base or maybe a turret would be better?

IMMentat · 2012-05-23, 09:54 PM

HA have the man portable AV weapons, why would they need C4?
Mobility troopers and stealthers are the logical users of remote detonated explosives. They can get in, and retreat easier than others)
Engineers will have access to mines which arguably suit support mechanic better (lay and pray instead of close the distance and run away). Real support troops have better things to pay attention to than if they can make it to one vehicle before it runs-away or kills them, like keeping the base in one piece and laying down supressive fire for the other specialists.

I get what you're saying, but what if there are a huge amount of infantry running around with C4? Tanks can't defend themselves all that well unless the AoE on the main gun is extremely powerful.

Run away! spam the main gun (when possible) and secondary (hopefully) AI weapon and call in support.
Vehicles in enclosed spaces have always been sitting ducks to infanty, thast what backup is for (Saving Private Ryan has several good examples).

captainkapautz · 2012-05-23, 10:01 PM

Do I read this right, you want cloakers and LA with C4?

ArmedZealot · 2012-05-23, 10:10 PM

Originally Posted by captainkapautz

Do I read this right, you want cloakers and LA with C4?

Cloakers had boomers in PS. I don't see what is so wrong with this.

IMMentat · 2012-05-23, 10:11 PM

It's not a case of #want#.
Role wise they make the most sense to use C4 properly.

It is the same reason I am hoping HA dont get all the gun variety.
Engineers and Medics make for useful indirect fire plarforms (grenade launchers) due to their position in battle while mid-range weapons like shotguns and the prolific submachinegun help ward off tougher targets.

captainkapautz · 2012-05-23, 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Cloakers had boomers in PS. I don't see what is so wrong with this.

I meant explosives like seen in the Night Ops video.

Elthbert · 2012-05-24, 04:42 PM

Vehicle combat is what makes PS 1 unique (notice the present tense) if tanks are going to be squishy there is no real reason to play it over any other game.

I really hope they get these vehicles more appropriately armored.

captainkapautz · 2012-05-24, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by Elthbert

Vehicle combat is what makes PS 1 unique (notice the present tense) if tanks are going to be squishy there is no real reason to play it over any other game.

What?

Yeah, no other games with vehiclecombat, or infantry and vehicles.

Elthbert · 2012-05-24, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

Cloakers had boomers in PS. I don't see what is so wrong with this.

boomers can't be placed on vehicles. That is a big difference.