Vehicle Seats Question - Page 3

Stardouser · 2012-04-06, 10:20 PM

Originally Posted by bullet

Really? Come on, why make an engineer class then?

I'm not asking for a realism sim, I even gave an option to allow vehicle spawning. I just dont want mechanics where the battlefield is nothing but people appearing out of eachothers asses because then the fights go no where.

I didn't say there shouldn't be an engineer class, I said that you shouldn't be able to hop out and repair. In other words, you need teamwork with other people who are engineers.

In fact, and I do not consider this a realism feature, but rather a teamwork enhancing and dedicated role forcing feature, I think that when you get into a vehicle as either the pilot, or a gunner, you should lose your kit and be given a crew kit which has a pistol and med pac only. That way people don't use Reavers and other stuff as personal chariots to the battle.

But that part will never happen. But we can allow people to spawn on their squad leader in his vehicle.

Zenben · 2012-04-06, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I didn't say there shouldn't be an engineer class, I said that you shouldn't be able to hop out and repair. In other words, you need teamwork with other people who are engineers.

In fact, and I do not consider this a realism feature, but rather a teamwork enhancing and dedicated role forcing feature, I think that when you get into a vehicle as either the pilot, or a gunner, you should lose your kit and be given a crew kit which has a pistol and med pac only. That way people don't use Reavers and other stuff as personal chariots to the battle.

But that part will never happen. But we can allow people to spawn on their squad leader in his vehicle.

So you don't think the crew of an Abrams could damn near rebuild their entire tank if they had the right parts (nanites in this case)? You're sorely mistaken, the crew is required to know the tank inside and out.

bullet · 2012-04-06, 10:31 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I didn't say there shouldn't be an engineer class, I said that you shouldn't be able to hop out and repair. In other words, you need teamwork with other people who are engineers.

In fact, and I do not consider this a realism feature, but rather a teamwork enhancing and dedicated role forcing feature, I think that when you get into a vehicle as either the pilot, or a gunner, you should lose your kit and be given a crew kit which has a pistol and med pac only. That way people don't use Reavers and other stuff as personal chariots to the battle.

But that part will never happen. But we can allow people to spawn on their squad leader in his vehicle.

I'll go ahead and agree that people shouldnt be able to carry whatever they please into a vehicle. We saw what happened in PS2 with the reaver/mossie tower droppers, but what about passengers? Should they be restricted to just a medkit and pistol or can you allow an engy to ride with you for the opportunities to hop out and repair?

And I agree that it should be squad leader vehicles only that you could spawn into if you really need it, but then this makes part of the squad spawning orbital drop pods moot.

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Unfortunately, forcing the pilot to continue without a gunner creates more problems than it solves and this also isn't a realism sim.

Just for the lols.

But I need to go to bed now, looks like you've won the discussion.

Stardouser · 2012-04-06, 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by Zenben

So you don't think the crew of an Abrams could damn near rebuild their entire tank if they had the right parts (nanites in this case)? You're sorely mistaken, the crew is required to know the tank inside and out.

If we're going to talk about nanites, everything could just have powerful innate vehicle health regen.... But I don't think anyone wants that, either.

Originally Posted by bullet

I'll go ahead and agree that people shouldnt be able to carry whatever they please into a vehicle. We saw what happened in PS2 with the reaver/mossie tower droppers, but what about passengers? Should they be restricted to just a medkit and pistol or can you allow an engy to ride with you for the opportunities to hop out and repair?

And I agree that it should be squad leader vehicles only that you could spawn into if you really need it, but then this makes part of the squad spawning orbital drop pods moot.

Just for the lols.

But I need to go to bed now, looks like you've won the discussion.

You're a GENIUS!! You were concerned that if, say, people could squad spawn into a 3 person bomber, they would use it as a spawn point instead of the Galaxies. You just solved the problem!

How about this: People can squad spawn onto vehicles(such as multicrew tanks and Bombers), and when they do, they will receive Pistol, Medpac, and Repair Tool only. Because of this restriction on weapons, no one will squad spawn on a vehicle like that unless they were intending to fullfill the role of a crew member for that vehicle.

CutterJohn · 2012-04-07, 12:26 AM

Hmm.. I can see the need for it.. Without the strict access points of PS1, you'd need to be able to move around inside to get where you need to be.

But I hope its not instant and unrestricted.

Rules I'd like to see placed on it:

1. Switching is instant, but it takes several seconds for the vehicle/weapon to be started up. If you move out of the seat, the vehicle/weapon associated with it shut off, and must be restarted when moving back.

2. When in the driver seat, you are restricted from switching to another seat without coming to a full stop, or if in an aircraft, landing. Passengers/gunners can move around freely.

That would be enough to making having a gunner still a really, really good idea, and make it difficult/dangerous for a driver/pilot to switch to a gun.

Blackwolf · 2012-04-07, 01:46 AM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I don't see this as a big issue, but that's probably because as a BF player I'm accustomed to it. I concede that this may be an issue in ways I can't know right now. But with that said, I don't think you can operate a vehicle at "maximum" effectiveness alone. You can't drive while you're firing, since switching to gunner seat will stop the vehicle's movement. Actually, there could also be a tactical issue here. If, for example, a tank has a gunner and the driver can't fire the guns, INVADING tanks would be very ineffective, because as part of an offensive action, you need to constantly be moving up. However, as part of a defensive action, tanks are more likely to be OK with staying in one spot and waiting for the enemy. In a defensive situation, instead of 40 people fully crewing 20 tanks, you might want 40 people one-manning 40 tanks.

The real question is, what would you guys rather have? More 1 player vehicles in which the driver does everything? Or the ability switch positions?

I'd rather have the old PS1 tanks. The ones where the Driver didn't have a gun unless he drove a Magrider, and then it was a front mounted pee shooter that traded versatility for speed and added firepower when chasing enemies down.

When you start bringing numbers into the equation, it is mathematically impossible for the solo tanks to be out done in any way shape or form by the fully crewed tanks if both sides bring the same number of players. Because the only variable that changes is the level of armor vs the level of damage, and the secondary guns probably won't be as powerful as the main guns because "we are rewarding the players who spend the certs".

Both primary and secondary guns are interchangeable and drivers can set themselves up with whatever kind of platform they want. AA, AV, or AI. Now it seems that they can set themselves up with 2 platforms and swap between the two as needed. This makes the MBT the most versatile and most heavily armored vehicle on the battlefield, on paper.

The more I read about how ground warfare is shaping up, the more I think about flying... And the more I regret the idea that I probably won't have any fun as a sniper... Because everyone will be driving their very own MBTs which are pretty much cleverly disguised BFRs.

dsi · 2012-04-07, 03:18 AM

I could see allowing players to switch seats from the interiors of vehicles as long as it makes sense for the vehicle and takes a realistic amount of time. PS2 should improve on PS1 after all, not just be a remake of it. (and it shouldn't be an entirely different game either)

CutterJohn · 2012-04-07, 03:19 AM

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

When you start bringing numbers into the equation, it is mathematically impossible for the solo tanks to be out done in any way shape or form by the fully crewed tanks if both sides bring the same number of players.Because the only variable that changes is the level of armor vs the level of damage

And the ability to keep track of the battlefield, split attention between two tasks, unit cost, and we just plain don't know how the primary and secondary weapons will differ.

Math cannot answer the question by itself, though it is certainly a factor.

Both primary and secondary guns are interchangeable and drivers can set themselves up with whatever kind of platform they want. AA, AV, or AI. Now it seems that they can set themselves up with 2 platforms and swap between the two as needed. This makes the MBT the most versatile and most heavily armored vehicle on the battlefield, on paper.

Don't count your chickens before they're hatched. As brewko mentioned:

Originally Posted by BREWKO

You can switch seats using the Function Keys, though some vehicles/seats may have certain restrictions on them.

We have to wait to see what restrictions are in place before we can say its definitely going to be one way or the other.

Talek Krell · 2012-04-08, 04:08 AM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

1. Switching is instant, but it takes several seconds for the vehicle/weapon to be started up. If you move out of the seat, the vehicle/weapon associated with it shut off, and must be restarted when moving back.

2. When in the driver seat, you are restricted from switching to another seat without coming to a full stop, or if in an aircraft, landing. Passengers/gunners can move around freely.

This is about what I'd aim for as well. There are certain seats where it makes sense, in terms of both logic and balance, that one guy would be able to switch between seats. One guy scrambling around the inside of a Gal is probably fine. Letting people man their own secondary on the MBTs on the other hand would likely throw any semblance of balance right out the window.

Hmr85 · 2012-04-08, 07:29 AM

I'm fine with players being able to move to different seats. I do however think there should be a time limit on how long it takes for the player to swap and get in the firing position. Say like 5 seconds because that seems like a realistic amount of time for me.

I'll list below what I think is a acceptable time it takes for players to swap spots. This is just my opinion.

Galaxy: Allow players to move to all seats if needed. My reasoning behind it is you have a huge cargo hold in the middle of it. There is no reason you couldn't get up and walk to the other side. 5 sec timer on it. If there is a vehicle in the cargo hold extend the timer out 10 seconds. After all they gotta walk around that thing.

MBT's: Your sealed inside the tank with your crew. Even in todays standards if your gunner gets taken out your commander/reloader has the ability to assume that position. Put a 5 sec timer on it. If SOE goes back to the PS1 style of MBT's then the driver should not be able to move to the gunner spot. After all the driver seat and the turret are sealed off from one another if you look at the modern tanks of today.

Sunderer: Same as the two mentioned above. There is no reason why you couldn't get up and move to the gun if needed. Its a APC and the inside should be open. 5 sec timer on it.

Liberator: I don't have a problem with the Bomber moving to the tail gunner spot if the new lib is as big as the galaxy. I kind of look at it as a huge B-24 with the ball turret. No reason you couldn't scuttle back to the turret and assume the position. I believe the timer on this one though should be about 8 seconds. Its gonna take you a little longer to get into that ball turret and get the gun powered up. After all it was a cramped position for the old WW2 gunners.

Knocky · 2012-04-08, 07:39 AM

Since there is no loading animation anyway....i suppose it is ok to move while still in the vehicle.

As long as there is a timer to actually take control of whatever seat you are moving into.

headcrab13 · 2012-04-08, 10:17 AM

CutterJohn had the best suggestion. Just add in a slight delay when switching seats so you can't be driving down a winding road, switch to a cannon for a quick kill, and teleport back to the driver's seat.

aleksandrgrc · 2012-04-08, 05:52 PM

in ps 1 your avatar had an animation for getting in and out of the tank, i dont see why it cant be a blend of both. you switch seats and the computer shows your avitar walking across the top of the tank and getting settled back in. under fire you just might die. takes time. but less than micromanaging walking to the other side of the tank and pressing a button. just have it all automated and less of a hassle but not a yellow dot in a circle that moves around with no vulnerability or lag in time.

Purple · 2012-04-08, 06:17 PM

id like the vehicle to be at a complete stop (and landed for air) in order to switch seats if they allow this feature.

Marinealver · 2012-04-09, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I don't see this as a big issue, but that's probably because as a BF player I'm accustomed to it. I concede that this may be an issue in ways I can't know right now. But with that said, I don't think you can operate a vehicle at "maximum" effectiveness alone. You can't drive while you're firing, since switching to gunner seat will stop the vehicle's movement. Actually, there could also be a tactical issue here. If, for example, a tank has a gunner and the driver can't fire the guns, INVADING tanks would be very ineffective, because as part of an offensive action, you need to constantly be moving up. However, as part of a defensive action, tanks are more likely to be OK with staying in one spot and waiting for the enemy. In a defensive situation, instead of 40 people fully crewing 20 tanks, you might want 40 people one-manning 40 tanks.

Not at all. If the driver just stands still the tank will be all torn up by AV weapons, reavers Tanks and BFRs. The driver focus on driving while the gunner focuses on gunning. It works perfect in assaults. Sure it wont be a big one hit punch through the entrenched enemy. But it dose good at slow advances unleashing punishing volleys. Not to mention if the tank needed repairs it can simply fall back only a short distance. the drive could get out and repair while the gunner covers for enemy threats. Or both driver and gunner could get out to repair twice as fast. I had on the spot organized plenty of tank rushes aka Magrider/Vanguard/Prowler crashes into bast and the fact that they are multiple seaters sort of forces players to group together even in tanks. So teamwork is the basis of the game.I would rather have 40 people in 20 tanks than 40 soloist doing their own thing.