Empire Specific Atributes

[Peacemaker]

Now this subject is open to just about everything about the differences in the equipment that each empire has. Vehicles, guns, maxs. I'm really going to focus on Vehicles, but I do have concerns for the Weapons. Ill hit on that fast at the end.

Lets review the old PS A tributes:
TR: Rate of fire = win
NC: Huge Explosions = win (Oh and more armor)
VS: Versatility = win

My concern basically lies in Vehicles such as the Prowler, vs the other MBTs, and other Empire Specific Vehicles. The best example however is the Deliverer variants.

Raider : 1 Driver 4 Gunners = Max DPS
Thunderer 1 Driver 2 Gunners = Max
Aurora: 1 Driver 2 Gunners = Max

Anyone see a problem here? With a squad of Ten you get two raiders or THREE of the others.

Next Issue, same vehicle, slightly different Idea

Raider: 4 gunners need to see, identify, track, and hit WITH ALL 4 guns
Thunderer / Aurora :2 gunners need to do the same.

Anyone not getting the issue? Id like to see PS2 fix this by not making ALL TR vehicles require a 3rd or 4th gunner. In equal population environments its too much of a disadvantage, and they are also just giant targets.

On the Infantry weapons, RoF advantage only works if you can land the rounds on target. The cycler in PS1 despite having the best RoF still got out DPS'd by the Gauss and Pulsar. In a situation where ping is key, lower RoF more damage = larger advantage than should be allowed. 5 High RoF bullets fired, but b/c of lag and bloom 3 miss vs 2 Low RoF bullets that both hit is the problem. The same can be applied to the vehicle weapons too.

Yes. I played all 3 empires. Yes I found it considerably easier to play as Vanu and NC. No I don't think TR guns / vehicles suck. The logic behind them is slightly flawed and should be addressed.

[Bags]

NC weapons are slow and heavy hitting, not explosive. Agree with the overall message though.

[MgFalcon]

Lasher needs to lash through doors, and lash from 20ft away. Then the game will be fixed and balanced! :D

Oh Omniscient Vanu God, I hope they bring my disco-ball launcher back :(

[Soothsayer]

yeah they need to burn any drawing boards that they went back to when they were cooking up the whole TR Concept...

If TR takes more bodies and that's the way you want the design philosophy to go, we need a bigger pop cap :D

hah not at all serious, TR can keep the more bullets is better philosophy, but they need to do it with less people.

[Valdae]

Its a good argument, but in truth I never saw the TR with less vehicles than other empires at any point.

And whilst I played VS for years, I used TR on another server cause I liked the Prowler. I believe that using 2 people to control 2 separate guns at the same time was much more dangerous than having one person switch between 2 - regardless of empire attributes. And dont even get me started on the magrider lol..

[Ranik Ortega]

Agreed. For the love of god SOE don't make TR have to have extra men to do the same thing the other empires do. The prowler 12mm was almost never manned as well as the deliverer variant.

[BorisBlade]

Its a good argument, but in truth I never saw the TR with less vehicles than other empires at any point.

And whilst I played VS for years, I used TR on another server cause I liked the Prowler. I believe that using 2 people to control 2 separate guns at the same time was much more dangerous than having one person switch between 2 - regardless of empire attributes. And dont even get me started on the magrider lol..

The problem is, if its you and another friend. You get a prowler and the main gun, sounds fine, but you run into any aircraft no matter what, even a mosquito and he can kill you and if he's smart will try. If you get attacked while in a vanguard you just switch to the 20mm and kick his ass. If i take my platoon out, i can get 15 vanguards and can handle the air or ground targets. But on my tr toon i can only get 10 prowlers. Or can get 15 and be a sitting duck to air. And yeah you can mix in a skyguard etc but its all a pain and just less effective than what you bring with a vanguard.

The extra man thing only works if you are still evenly balanced without using that other slot, aka you can have a weapon to hit air with just like the vanguard can. But then that just makes the tr tank end up even with one gunner but more powerful if the other gun is manned, its just options for the sake of options. bad design imo.

And dont get me started on the marauder, 6 people to gun 2 of those rolling coffins or for the same manpower get 3 vanguards. 2 marauders vs 3 vanguards, its absurd.

Best choice would be the heavy tanks of all empires require pilot + 2 gunners, one with the main cannon, and one with a machine gun or similar that could be used for AA or AI. Helps to balance the manpower vs vehicle power better. All buggies should be pilot +one gunner only. Light tanks would have some transport ability, aka deliverer style and would have around 2 gunners with heavy caliber machine guns that are balanced much like the 20mm vs different targets. Mainly tho crew numbers between empires would remain the same for comparable vehicles.

[Peacemaker]

Having a higher RoF would be acceptable if the RoF was MUCH higher. And yes, most of the time the secondary gun position went unmanned. But if you look back at TTK comparisons for things like the Prowler vs Vanguard vs Magrider the Prowler needs its 12/15mm to beat out the Vanguard / Magrider in DPS AND it needs to hit every time to win. The vanguard has more armor and the Magrider has that drivers gun station. Flawed in the basic idea, but it seems you guys understand what I'm saying.

[Bags]

Agreed. For the love of god SOE don't make TR have to have extra men to do the same thing the other empires do. The prowler 12mm was almost never manned as well as the deliverer variant.

Cycler should require two people to use it.

[Volw]

How many TR do you need to screw in a lightbulb?:rofl:

[kaffis]

See, I always envied the Raider -- when my squad wanted to do the Mech Infantry thing, our two drivers could pull Thunderers, sure, but that left 4 guys staring at their screens waiting for us to arrive, instead of manning a gun or driving.

Sure, we could have had 3 Thunderers, I suppose, but that requires more people to dedicate certs to driving, and sucks NTU resources dry faster for the same population.

Look at other vehicles: Everybody loves Marauders; they were doing the party van before the Deliverer variants made it cool. Contrast with Enforcers, and I think you'd find significantly fewer on the field. (Threshers don't enter the discussion because, like everything Vanu, they're not even on the same scale as the other empires' equipment when it come to role and usefulness)

Prowlers and Vanguards compare pretty favorably, IMO. The Prowler has a slightly slower TTK, but it's damage under a middling skill gunner is much less spiky due to the higher ROF allowing somebody who doesn't have that gut-instinct level mastery of the trajectories to make small increment corrections on moving targets more easily. Poor gunners get a much more magnified difference in favor of the Prowler (because poor Vanguard gunners outright miss a lot, and lose a lot of damage for each miss), while master Vanguard gunners edge out similarly skilled Prowler gunners. So, yeah. Slight edge to the Vanguard in a 2 v 2 crew situation.

Throw the third Prowler crewman in there, though, and the Prowler's survivability against battlefield conditions goes way up. Making a Vanguard gunner choose whether to be killed by the enemy ground forces or the Reavers floating around isn't an advantage when you're talking about pitched battles on an appreciable scale.

So, I'd like to politely disagree with the premise that extra gunners = bad design. It's good design, and can be an advantage if your teammates cooperate with you. Fewer gunners means more drivers per capita means more certs "wasted" on the driving and engineering. Every gun manned by either empire is a player that can leverage the advantages of vehicles simultaneously with the ability to grunt it up on foot with the best of them. If TR don't make use of that advantage, well, I'd say that's on them.

[Ranik Ortega]

See, I always envied the Raider -- when my squad wanted to do the Mech Infantry thing, our two drivers could pull Thunderers, sure, but that left 4 guys staring at their screens waiting for us to arrive, instead of manning a gun or driving.

Sure, we could have had 3 Thunderers, I suppose, but that requires more people to dedicate certs to driving, and sucks NTU resources dry faster for the same population.

Look at other vehicles: Everybody loves Marauders; they were doing the party van before the Deliverer variants made it cool. Contrast with Enforcers, and I think you'd find significantly fewer on the field. (Threshers don't enter the discussion because, like everything Vanu, they're not even on the same scale as the other empires' equipment when it come to role and usefulness)

Prowlers and Vanguards compare pretty favorably, IMO. The Prowler has a slightly slower TTK, but it's damage under a middling skill gunner is much less spiky due to the higher ROF allowing somebody who doesn't have that gut-instinct level mastery of the trajectories to make small increment corrections on moving targets more easily. Poor gunners get a much more magnified difference in favor of the Prowler (because poor Vanguard gunners outright miss a lot, and lose a lot of damage for each miss), while master Vanguard gunners edge out similarly skilled Prowler gunners. So, yeah. Slight edge to the Vanguard in a 2 v 2 crew situation.

Throw the third Prowler crewman in there, though, and the Prowler's survivability against battlefield conditions goes way up. Making a Vanguard gunner choose whether to be killed by the enemy ground forces or the Reavers floating around isn't an advantage when you're talking about pitched battles on an appreciable scale.

So, I'd like to politely disagree with the premise that extra gunners = bad design. It's good design, and can be an advantage if your teammates cooperate with you. Fewer gunners means more drivers per capita means more certs "wasted" on the driving and engineering. Every gun manned by either empire is a player that can leverage the advantages of vehicles simultaneously with the ability to grunt it up on foot with the best of them. If TR don't make use of that advantage, well, I'd say that's on them.

Spoken like someone who didn't play TR and never had to struggle to get someone onto the extra gun. :rolleyes:

[Peacemaker]

See, I always envied the Raider -- when my squad wanted to do the Mech Infantry thing, our two drivers could pull Thunderers, sure, but that left 4 guys staring at their screens waiting for us to arrive, instead of manning a gun or driving.

Sure, we could have had 3 Thunderers, I suppose, but that requires more people to dedicate certs to driving, and sucks NTU resources dry faster for the same population.

Look at other vehicles: Everybody loves Marauders; they were doing the party van before the Deliverer variants made it cool. Contrast with Enforcers, and I think you'd find significantly fewer on the field. (Threshers don't enter the discussion because, like everything Vanu, they're not even on the same scale as the other empires' equipment when it come to role and usefulness)

Prowlers and Vanguards compare pretty favorably, IMO. The Prowler has a slightly slower TTK, but it's damage under a middling skill gunner is much less spiky due to the higher ROF allowing somebody who doesn't have that gut-instinct level mastery of the trajectories to make small increment corrections on moving targets more easily. Poor gunners get a much more magnified difference in favor of the Prowler (because poor Vanguard gunners outright miss a lot, and lose a lot of damage for each miss), while master Vanguard gunners edge out similarly skilled Prowler gunners. So, yeah. Slight edge to the Vanguard in a 2 v 2 crew situation.

Throw the third Prowler crewman in there, though, and the Prowler's survivability against battlefield conditions goes way up. Making a Vanguard gunner choose whether to be killed by the enemy ground forces or the Reavers floating around isn't an advantage when you're talking about pitched battles on an appreciable scale.

So, I'd like to politely disagree with the premise that extra gunners = bad design. It's good design, and can be an advantage if your teammates cooperate with you. Fewer gunners means more drivers per capita means more certs "wasted" on the driving and engineering. Every gun manned by either empire is a player that can leverage the advantages of vehicles simultaneously with the ability to grunt it up on foot with the best of them. If TR don't make use of that advantage, well, I'd say that's on them.

Now make it 6 guys. 2 Prowlers vs 3 Vanguards. Vanguard wins, hands down. The Vanguard hardly "Edges out" above the prowler it down right demolishes it. On your first point though, Thunderers are absolutely god like next to Raiders. Go jump in game right now and get in a Raider. Get 4 gunners and see how many kills you get. The range is low, the DPS sucks because how hard it is to stay on target, the thing cant shoot a Vanguard thats on top of it, AND it requires 5 guys instead of 3. Ill take 3 Thunderers to 2 Raiders any day and come out on top. Hell 2 Thunderers would probably beat 2 Raiders.

[Hamma]

I never understood why the prowler was 3 man. :lol:

[Bags]

Thunderer is hands down the most fun vehicle to gun in the game though.

[Baneblade]

I never understood why the prowler was 3 man. :lol:

I never understood why it was the only tank that required more than 2. All tanks should require 3 or 4 to be fully operational.

[Bags]

What would the other people do?

[Baneblade]

What would the other people do?

Driver, Main gunner, and one or two secondary gunners.

[Ranik Ortega]

What would the other people do?

1: Driver
2: Main Gunner
3: Commander/Machinegunner

Make ALL tanks take 3 people that will fix it.

[Rbstr]

I'd be ok with 3 player tanks.

Driver, Cannon + Coax MG (or other utility gun) gunner and then an MG on the top.

More than that and you're in 40k and/or WW1 territory. As as much fun as 40k is, it becomes too cumbersome.

[Hamma]

I never understood why it was the only tank that required more than 2. All tanks should require 3 or 4 to be fully operational.

Well yea, my only point was that one was different than the others. :)

[Ranik Ortega]

I'd be ok with 3 player tanks.

Driver, Cannon + Coax MG (or other utility gun) gunner and then an MG on the top.

More than that and you're in 40k and/or WW1 territory. As as much fun as 40k is, it becomes too cumbersome.

Well yea, my only point was that one was different than the others. :)

Yeah bottom line Empire vehicles should not require more or less players per vehicle to be effective. Unless the vehicle has SERIOUS advantages to having multiple gunners.

[Valdae]

Best choice would be the heavy tanks of all empires require pilot + 2 gunners, one with the main cannon, and one with a machine gun or similar that could be used for AA or AI. Helps to balance the manpower vs vehicle power better. All buggies should be pilot +one gunner only. Light tanks would have some transport ability, aka deliverer style and would have around 2 gunners with heavy caliber machine guns that are balanced much like the 20mm vs different targets. Mainly tho crew numbers between empires would remain the same for comparable vehicles.

Ok, you've convinced me. As long as they can balance firepower/armor/hovering then yeah, 3 people per tank and 2 per buggy sounds good to me.

[SKYeXile]

Will somebody PLEASE explain to me how the VS is more versitile than the TR?

[Ranik Ortega]

Will somebody PLEASE explain to me how the VS is more versitile than the TR?

Tank wise? Magrider sniping. Amphibious etc etc

[Valdae]

Strafing ability? Arent our vehicles quicker too?

[Sifer2]

Extra gunner seats are potentially a good advantage as free transportation. I'm almost certain that's where they were going with it in PS1. In the case of Tanks though I don't really see those as transport vehicles an so seat number should probably be balanced across the factions for those.

[Traak]

Will somebody PLEASE explain to me how the VS is more versitile than the TR?

Strafing
Driver has a powerful weapon
Drives over water

Have you ever played Planetside?

[Bags]

Strafing
Driver has a powerful weapon
Drives over water

Have you ever played Planetside?

Not to mention instant AV mode for two weapons and flying maxes.

[CutterJohn]

Crew requirements should be equal for equivalent vehicles.

Tanks should have a gunner spot with a main gun and a coax, a secondary gunner spot with a turret, and the driver should be able to control that turret if there is no secondary gunner.

Now, the vehicle can be 2 or 3 man. 3 man is nifty, as it lets the driver concentrate on driving and has an extra man for repairs/watching out during repairs. 2 man is also nifty, and going 2 man doesn't nerf the vehicle. It also allows the drivers who are confident in their driving the ability to have something extra to do other than drive.

Other vehicles should follow this model and optionally allow 2 or 3 people where possible. Single man vehicles should also have an extra spot to turn into 2 man vehicles. Lightnings were fierce little beasts solo, well driven. They would have also been pretty decent two man vehicles with their speed, allowing the driver to concentrate fully on evasion.

[SKYeXile]

Strafing
Driver has a powerful weapon
Drives over water

Have you ever played Planetside?

Yea buddy. (http://future-crew.net/images/lb.JPG)

the characteristics of a single tank and buggy is hardy make the VS the most versatile empire.

In terms of AV, the lancer isn't the most versatile, it maybe the most powerful in the right hands, but the stryker is by far the most versatile since it can easily take down aircraft and vehicles.

MA, yea the pulsar is the better gun than the cycler, in all scenarios except close range where they would more or less be even.

HA, the MCG is BY FAR the most versatile weapon, its good up close and at range, it also takes gold ammo which is alot better than AP mode. AP ammo can rape aircraft and MAXes and in alot of cases you can not pickup AV and run duel MCG's in rexo, leaving you 3 extra cert points...which you can use on other things making you more versatile.

Tanks, Magrider is really AV only its AI capabilities are terrible, the power is competent in AV, deadly at AI and can takeon aircraft. with its 2nd gunner. same deal with buggys really.

Del variants. raider is good AV AA and average AI, aurora is really only good for AI.

My statement was not to say which empire is better, but rather the most versatile, i think SOE failed at making VS the most versatile. Flying maxes and hover tanks don't make us versatile.

[Bags]

That picture is probably shopped.

[SKYeXile]

That picture is probably shopped.

how so?

[exLupo]

My statement was not to say which empire is better, but rather the most versatile, i think SOE failed at making VS the most versatile. Flying maxes and hover tanks don't make us versatile.

"VS=Versatile" was a theme, not a hard rule for every piece of gear. Something else missed was that infantry used, in general, a single ammo type. The high level view of VS weapons and vehicles was to provide a feel of versatility and, on the whole, it succeeded. It's easy to tear down the argument when you put every item under a magnifying glass but that's not the point of a general theme.

Subway sandwiches advertise healthy options but there's always some guy who gets double bacon, cheese and ranch on his salami and meatball gutbomb. The theme survives individual missteps.

---

Regarding variable crew numbers: It's true that 6 people = 2 Prowlers or 3 Vannies but, design wise at least, we're looking at 10-50x as many people per team and, at that point, your resource allocation is no longer going to be a 1:1 balance equation. In a large number, mixed arms battle, the multi-crew option for the Prowler was, in theory, superior as you could combine fire or split fire while the Vanny was stuck to a single option/direction and the Magrider could split but the front gun was.. eh..

Sadly, the reality is more like what was said above. How many times did you really ever get someone in the chaingun? Personally, I loved that thing. Good damage and a great range of movement but, more often than not, if people couldn't ride in the penis expanding big numbers gun, they would wait for the next one off the bay.

For simple balance reasons, equal crew per tank is probably for the best. Put up to a vote and I'd go with a 3 man driver/main gun/secondary gun configuration for each team. However, looking at the video, I don't think those mags had more than 2 players inside.

[Bags]

how so?

Look at the pixels. It's all in the pixels.

[exLupo]

Look at the pixels. It's all in the pixels.

The question we then have to ask is: Why would someone fake a screenshot of something that anyone who'd played for any substantial amount of time can confirm?

edit: I mean, I guess you could if you wanted a quick source of "proof" but I dunno, it's like putting a fake wiki entry stating that Bill Clinton was once a US president.

[Senyu]

Poorly written but hopefully the jist is understood. On a side note, each empires strengths are similar to the races of Starcraft.

TR. lots of bullets. Less damage alone. Numbers. Their kinda like Zerg.

But NC and VS, cant decide which is Protoss and which is Terran. Not judging by looks, but by similair style of combat since they have qualiaties of both. Just random thought.



TR: High Rate of fire. Lots of bullets. Target being shot by all turrets will go down very quickly but only being fired upon by a few will be much less damage than other empires. It needs to be done so that 1 turret deals less damage, but every other stacking turret thats firing at the target, the damage the target recieves jumps exponetially

NC: Slow, Explosive (AOE), High Damage, Hard to Aim. Probably the strongest hitting weapons, but should be slower and have less accuracy. And with many explosions.

VS: VS is a little hard to really specify. Technology = Might, Versatility. But how should it show? Pure mobility can only do so much. They should stay away from the High Rate of Fire Less damage and the Slow High damage while not being the middle ground. They need to be unique as well, not the filler between.

[Volw]

VS: VS is a little hard to really specify. Technology = Might, Versatility. But how should it show? Pure mobility can only do so much. They should stay away from the High Rate of Fire Less damage and the Slow High damage while not being the middle ground. They need to be unique as well, not the filler between.

Wearing pink makes them unique enough! ;-)

[Traak]

Subway sandwiches advertise healthy options but there's always some guy who gets double bacon, cheese and ranch on his salami and meatball gutbomb. The theme survives individual missteps.



:lol:

Still laughing

[SKYeXile]

"VS=Versatile" was a theme, not a hard rule for every piece of gear. Something else missed was that infantry used, in general, a single ammo type. The high level view of VS weapons and vehicles was to provide a feel of versatility and, on the whole, it succeeded. It's easy to tear down the argument when you put every item under a magnifying glass but that's not the point of a general theme.


lol this statement might be true if AP mode was even remotely comparable to AP ammo, but as it stands, its not.

[Bruttal]

Lasher needs to lash through doors, and lash from 20ft away. Then the game will be fixed and balanced! :D

Oh Omniscient Vanu God, I hope they bring my disco-ball launcher back :(

http://okasaneko.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/i_like_this_facebook_thumbs-up1.jpg

[Ranik Ortega]

Poorly written but hopefully the jist is understood. On a side note, each empires strengths are similar to the races of Starcraft.

TR. lots of bullets. Less damage alone. Numbers. Their kinda like Zerg.

But NC and VS, cant decide which is Protoss and which is Terran. Not judging by looks, but by similair style of combat since they have qualiaties of both. Just random thought.



TR: High Rate of fire. Lots of bullets. Target being shot by all turrets will go down very quickly but only being fired upon by a few will be much less damage than other empires. It needs to be done so that 1 turret deals less damage, but every other stacking turret thats firing at the target, the damage the target recieves jumps exponetially

NC: Slow, Explosive (AOE), High Damage, Hard to Aim. Probably the strongest hitting weapons, but should be slower and have less accuracy. And with many explosions.

VS: VS is a little hard to really specify. Technology = Might, Versatility. But how should it show? Pure mobility can only do so much. They should stay away from the High Rate of Fire Less damage and the Slow High damage while not being the middle ground. They need to be unique as well, not the filler between.

My only issue with the old empire strengths is that that they may well be worthless in the new game. With the reduced TTK / increased importance of cover system a lot of things change.

TR - have lots of bullets? Ok what does that matter? Do they actually out kill vs VS/NC weapons in close quarters or in exchanged long range fire fights? Are they designed to suppress the enemy from popping out of cover? Will the damage drop off make the weapons useless in open fields? etc etc

NC - Strong powerful weapons? Will they rule open field combat since they have higher damage potential and less drop off? Will the high damage potential make them best at close quarters fights? Will flatter trajectories/smaller COF make them more accurate?

VS - Versatile weapons with interesting effects? Ok will the lasher be able to remove the entire purpose of cover via spam? How effective would the AV mode be in the new system? Will the magrider main gun be able to one shot infantry? Jumping maxes vs light assault is overlap ok or will it be too much since there is a lot of "vertical gameplay"?


Me? I am torn. Between either sticking to the old themes wherein some items may be clearly superior at certain things or relaxing the themes a bit and focusing on the roles of weapons / Vehicles so one doesn't become too superior in any one field.

It's odd that I feel a bit of generic-ism might actually be good for balance :rofl:

[kaffis]

Now make it 6 guys. 2 Prowlers vs 3 Vanguards. Vanguard wins, hands down. The Vanguard hardly "Edges out" above the prowler it down right demolishes it.
Okay, now make it 8 guys. 2 prowlers, 2 reavers, vs. 4 vanguards. Or 3 vanguards, 2 reavers.

Who wins?

Battlefield conditions, people. If you give the Vanguard gunner the easy choice of which gun to fire, of course it comes out on top. Make him need both, though, and you'll have a bunch of blue and yellow smoldering craters.

[Ranik Ortega]

Okay, now make it 8 guys. 2 prowlers, 2 reavers, vs. 4 vanguards. Or 3 vanguards, 2 reavers.

Who wins?

Battlefield conditions, people. If you give the Vanguard gunner the easy choice of which gun to fire, of course it comes out on top. Make him need both, though, and you'll have a bunch of blue and yellow smoldering craters.

In order to win a tank battle you have to have air support or distractions ? ..... yeah hell no.

[CutterJohn]

Regarding variable crew numbers: It's true that 6 people = 2 Prowlers or 3 Vannies but, design wise at least, we're looking at 10-50x as many people per team and, at that point, your resource allocation is no longer going to be a 1:1 balance equation. In a large number, mixed arms battle, the multi-crew option for the Prowler was, in theory, superior as you could combine fire or split fire while the Vanny was stuck to a single option/direction and the Magrider could split but the front gun was.. eh..

My worry is not about empire balance, but fun balance. If you were on VS, and had 2 friends online that wanted to play together, you got to pick a deli/aurora, or a liberator. Delis were just subpar combat vehicles, and I never much cared for libs.

With optional 3rd seats in vehicles, it opens up a lot of options. Have 2 people? Run a tank or a buggy. Have 3? Run a tank or a buggy with 2 gunners. Have 4? Run two tanks.

Makes things easier if the vehicles have an optional extra gunner slot, since then you can accomodate an odd number of friends online at the same time.

[kaffis]

In order to win a tank battle you have to have air support or distractions ? ..... yeah hell no.
Because, yeah, that's exactly what I said.

No, I was just commenting that battles don't happen in a vacuum. Not the ones that matter, anyways.

[Ranik Ortega]

Because, yeah, that's exactly what I said.

No, I was just commenting that battles don't happen in a vacuum. Not the ones that matter, anyways.

That IS essentially what you said. If you are comparing vehicles then you compare them in a vacuum

3 man prowler vs 2 man vanguard

or 2 - 3 man prowlers vs 3 - 2 man vanguards.

Its easier to just keep all vehicles 2 man or make them all three man. Rather than commenting on battlefield conditions.

[SKYeXile]

That IS essentially what you said. If you are comparing vehicles then you compare them in a vacuum

3 man prowler vs 2 man vanguard

or 2 - 3 man prowlers vs 3 - 2 man vanguards.

Its easier to just keep all vehicles 2 man or make them all three man. Rather than commenting on battlefield conditions.

I think when you're comparing tansk you need to take into account the empires strengths and weaknesses in weapons as a whole. But I agree...get rid of the 2/3man stuff and make them all the same.

[kaffis]

I'm not saying it won't be easier to balance if we get rid of the variable crew size across empires.

I'm just saying that the prowler takes way more flak for its balance than it deserves, because outside factors in normal battlefield conditions makes the discrete gunner positions valuable, and all the comparisons that try to pit single-vehicle type engagements against each other ignore that strength.

[Ranik Ortega]

I'm not saying it won't be easier to balance if we get rid of the variable crew size across empires.

I'm just saying that the prowler takes way more flak for its balance than it deserves, because outside factors in normal battlefield conditions makes the discrete gunner positions valuable, and all the comparisons that try to pit single-vehicle type engagements against each other ignore that strength.

A moot point as it was always a struggle to actually get that gun manned :rolleyes:

[Bags]

No one wants to gun the chaingun on the prowler is the biggest problem. It's boring compared to the main canon.

[Ranik Ortega]

No one wants to gun the chaingun on the prowler is the biggest problem. It's boring compared to the main canon.

Boring? No thats not the problem. It was weak. That third player could jump in a lightning and do the exact same job the chaingun would have with an additional 75mm

So to fix this they need to put a lightning turret on top of the prowler turret :D

[Bags]

It was boring because it was weak.

And this is true.

[Ranik Ortega]

It was boring because it was weak.

And this is true.

Actually the more I thought about it the more I was ok with a lighting turret being on top of the prowler one.

MAMMOTH TANK GOOOOOOOOOO!!!! :rofl:

[kaffis]

Well, it *is* tall enough, I suppose.

[Ranik Ortega]

Well, it *is* tall enough, I suppose.

Hmm maybe as a more practical (and aesthetic ) extra gun the turret should be in the front of the tank on a 90-120 degree mount so the gunner or driver had access to a lightning turret with a forward firing arc while the main gun and coax are operated by the main gunner.

[p0intman]

as an nc, i do not see the problem.

infact i prefer the raider over the thunderer.

[Ranik Ortega]

as an nc, i do not see the problem.

infact i prefer the raider over the thunderer.

You are a bizarre man indeed. :rofl:

[kaffis]

You are a bizarre man indeed. :rofl:
I don't see why that should be the case.

As an NC, my most memorable PS evening was when my outfit didn't have a bunch of guys on, but were able to jack 3 prowlers. We hared around behind enemy lines and near the front line, causing havok all night with hit and run strikes.

It could be that it was the sheer novelty of a Prowler vs. a Vanguard, but we had a lot of fun. The handling was different, and as one of the gunners (we switched off over the course of the night), I had a TON of fun with the main gun at one point -- the arc was different enough from a VG that we were able to shell the doors of a base from outside the walls (the Prowler's arc drops off much more steeply) in a position that a Vanguard wouldn't have been able to hit. Any one of the 9 guys that evening has stories to tell of that night.

Could we have done similar feats Vanguards? Yeah, probably. Might've ended sooner, though. The machine gun saved our bacon a few times.

[exLupo]

It was boring because it was weak.

Weak against armor but it tears reavers and mossies apart. And, yes, that 3rd body could get into a lightning and then get rocket strafed or hit a single mine or die to one of a hundred other tiny deaths because it was a 4 tracked coffin.

People don't like the support gun because they believe it is weak, not because it actually is weak. Perception always trumps reality. In this lies the Prowler's true weakness. Bad press plus a gun that didn't use big numbers to stroke egos. The vehicle is great on paper and in reality, especially in a large field, mixed arms scenarios, but players are too stupid and selfish to take advantage of it.

"Teamwork? Not in my FPS." - The Western Gamer's Creed

[Ranik Ortega]

Weak against armor but it tears reavers and mossies apart. And, yes, that 3rd body could get into a lightning and then get rocket strafed or hit a single mine or die to one of a hundred other tiny deaths because it was a 4 tracked coffin.

People don't like the support gun because they believe it is weak, not because it actually is weak. Perception always trumps reality. In this lies the Prowler's true weakness. Bad press plus a gun that didn't use big numbers to stroke egos. The vehicle is great on paper and in reality, especially in a large field, mixed arms scenarios, but players are too stupid and selfish to take advantage of it.

"Teamwork? Not in my FPS." - The Western Gamer's Creed

All perks were rendered moot by not being able to get a third gunner. And uneven distribution of personnel to be effective between empire tanks etc etc.

[exLupo]

All perks were rendered moot by not being able to get a third gunner. And uneven distribution of personnel to be effective between empire tanks etc etc.

"Regarding variable crew numbers: It's true that 6 people = 2 Prowlers or 3 Vannies but, design wise at least, we're looking at 10-50x as many people per team and, at that point, your resource allocation is no longer going to be a 1:1 balance equation."

"...but players are too stupid and selfish to take advantage of it."

Welcome to the thread. :)

For the reason of simple stupidity, having the prowler be a 2 man vehicle is probably for the best this time around. that's also why every mossie and reaver pilot felt comfortable coming up on a lib. Bombers got about as many tail gunner volunteers as prowlers did on the chain.

[Duriel]

i hope this is balanced i have always hated the fact we needed more bodies to be effective but had the same pop cap...not very logical.

[Whoknowswhat1]

I don't see why that should be the case.

As an NC, my most memorable PS evening was when my outfit didn't have a bunch of guys on, but were able to jack 3 prowlers. We hared around behind enemy lines and near the front line, causing havok all night with hit and run strikes.

It could be that it was the sheer novelty of a Prowler vs. a Vanguard, but we had a lot of fun. The handling was different, and as one of the gunners (we switched off over the course of the night), I had a TON of fun with the main gun at one point -- the arc was different enough from a VG that we were able to shell the doors of a base from outside the walls (the Prowler's arc drops off much more steeply) in a position that a Vanguard wouldn't have been able to hit. Any one of the 9 guys that evening has stories to tell of that night.

Could we have done similar feats Vanguards? Yeah, probably. Might've ended sooner, though. The machine gun saved our bacon a few times.


I am assuming since u jacked the prowlers, that you were facing the TR. They said they were removing hacking because of "balance nightmares", this is an excellent reason why. It is harder for an Empire to kill their own vehicles. Not only that, but if a TR sees a prowler coming at them, they dont react until they see the red name indicator.

[Bags]

It is harder for an Empire to kill their own vehicles.

How did you arrive at this conclusion? The prowler is much easier to kill than the vanguard due to its high profile.

[Baneblade]

Not only that, but if a TR sees a prowler coming at them, they dont react until they see the red name indicator.

What kind of BRetardos are playing TR these days? Surely a giant white Prowler isn't easy to confuse with the black and red one.

[Talek Krell]

I think the difficulty of getting a second gunner for the prowler is kind of overblown here, but I suppose I can sympathise. What about having the optional extra gunner seat you're thinking of be something specific to the TR? Let their vehicles work normally with a normal crew count, and then extra gunners up your DPS and let you split your fire as appropriate.

I'd prefer to keep the mag as a two person vehicle, I was very happy with how it worked in Planetside 1. Not as strong as the other MBTs in a straight up fight, but powerful when playing the field to it's advantage.

[Ranik Ortega]

I think the difficulty of getting a second gunner for the prowler is kind of overblown here, but I suppose I can sympathise. What about having the optional extra gunner seat you're thinking of be something specific to the TR? Let their vehicles work normally with a normal crew count, and then extra gunners up your DPS and let you split your fire as appropriate.

I'd prefer to keep the mag as a two person vehicle, I was very happy with how it worked in Planetside 1. Not as strong as the other MBTs in a straight up fight, but powerful when playing the field to it's advantage.

If the second gun was a real asset then it might be fine. The current gun just isn't quite enough for that extra guy.

Hence why I suggested putting a lightning turret on top of the main turret or on the front of the vehicle. :D