Gameplay: Dedicated driver certification for MBT - Page 3

Figment · 2012-07-18, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by Ratstomper

Having three guys in a tank manning all stations means that tank has more efficiency than a gunnerdriver and gunner tank. The same amount of duties are being split among 3 people instead of two. That's an advantage. It's offset by the fact that if you want 3 guys in your vehicle focused on one thing each, then if the tank blows up, they all may die. That's a fair tradeoff.

Only if it has equal power to THREE people in other roles.

You keep comparing TO ONE VEHICLE. Stop acting so obstinate. You heard if 500 times and you keep refusing to balance 3 vs 3, but continuously whine that 1 vs 2 is in favour of 2 and 1 vs 3 in favour of 3.

OF COURSE IT IS. We never argued it wasn't. We're argueing about OTHER SCENARIOS YOU REFUSE TO ADMIT EXIST AND REFUSE TO BALANCE FOR. Like I said many times before, you're a horrible balancer due to your shortsightedness and incapacity and even refusal to draft various scenarios.

But 2 vs 2 should be in favour of the two in one unit.

And 3 vs 3 as well.

Because both times those two and three in one unit have less separate units and thus less other advantages.

How often do we need to tell you that before you realise you're the one who can't think out of ONE SINGLE SCENARIO, which is one unit (with x players) vs one of the SAME unit (with y players)?

While ignoring x units (with one player) vs one unit (of x players)

I'm comparing the variants of the one vehicle, not against anything else. If we're talking an optional sidegrade to separate gunners and drivers, then the optional sidegrade shouldn't have substantial benefits over the original.

Manpower "sidegrades" aren't the same as changing the gun. It's a sidegrade that REMOVES ANOTHER UNIT FROM THE FIELD.

It's completely non-comparable!

You're just unwilling to see this.

I'm not reading the rest of your BS wall of text. Learn to keep up with the discussion and then maybe I'll take you seriously.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You're the one not keeping up Ratstomper. You're really shortsighted about what a sidegrade is (changing unit stats for the individual player) and what manpower balance is (changing unit stats for a group of players).

EisenKreutzer · 2012-07-17, 08:53 AM

I'm all for making this option into a Certification. Seems like a sizeable part of the community (or at the very least a vocal minority) want this to be a thing in PS2, and I see no reason to deny them this. It would alter very little in terms of mechanics, and though a two/three-manned vehicle with a dedicated driver would have a minor advantage in terms of spotting and mobility, I don't think it's game-breaking in any way.

Figment · 2012-07-17, 06:42 PM

Fod, can't believe you think after so many posts I'd be pro-solo. I'm simply saying that this solution makes you - as a squad with limited manpower - make a comparison between pro's and cons of the available options.

Under the circumstances of this compromise, within the context of being able to solo the exact same unit (hitpoints etc) nobody would waste their manpower on this option. The advantage must be more distinct and require full manning to obtain.

Players optimise their choices and tend to secure choices: independency from others (nobody that can fail you but you). Thus, to get them to work together there has to be an advantage that is at the very least equal to other options players can have to optimise their fighting strength as a group. If not better.

So if you want to have two in one vehicle, it must rival all options for two separate units, not just best one separate unit.

fod · 2012-07-17, 07:25 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Fod, can't believe you think after so many posts I'd be pro-solo. I'm simply saying that this solution makes you - as a squad with limited manpower - make a comparison between pro's and cons of the available options.

Under the circumstances of this compromise, within the context of being able to solo the exact same unit (hitpoints etc) nobody would waste their manpower on this option. The advantage must be more distinct and require full manning to obtain.

Players optimise their choices and tend to secure choices: independency from others (nobody that can fail you but you). Thus, to get them to work together there has to be an advantage that is at the very least equal to other options players can have to optimise their fighting strength as a group. If not better.

So if you want to have two in one vehicle, it must rival all options for two separate units, not just best one separate unit.

ahh now i think i understand - its been confusing with all the huge posts different people post it makes it hard to exactly follow whats going on, its probably nobodys else fault but my own but oh well (also i think i was starting to get different people confused)

so you believe (something like this anyways) that there should be more of an advantage to putting more people into tanks? im not sure i would agree with that but why dont we try and get the ability first then we can sort out afterwards how it should be balanced?

personally i think it will be an outfit/friend/choice/personal preference thing and they wont really care if 2 tanks are better than 1 with more people because they just want to team up with outfit/friends

Lumberchuk · 2012-07-18, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Fod, can't believe you think after so many posts I'd be pro-solo. I'm simply saying that this solution makes you - as a squad with limited manpower - make a comparison between pro's and cons of the available options.

Under the circumstances of this compromise, within the context of being able to solo the exact same unit (hitpoints etc) nobody would waste their manpower on this option. The advantage must be more distinct and require full manning to obtain.

Players optimise their choices and tend to secure choices: independency from others (nobody that can fail you but you). Thus, to get them to work together there has to be an advantage that is at the very least equal to other options players can have to optimise their fighting strength as a group. If not better.

So if you want to have two in one vehicle, it must rival all options for two separate units, not just best one separate unit.

The ability to fire on the move with increased precision is one advantage. Being able to concentrate on driving while your gunner concentrates on gunning will cause both of you to preform your respective tasks better. Also tanks have 2 seats anyway, so does that mean there is no point in finding a secondary gunner since he could just grab his own tank?

Figment · 2012-07-18, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by Lumberchuk

The ability to fire on the move with increased precision is one advantage. Being able to concentrate on driving while your gunner concentrates on gunning will cause both of you to preform your respective tasks better.

Nobody disagrees with that, the extend to which this is an advantage is disagreed upon.

The pro-SoloSide who don't really feel for team units and at most the suggested compromise that gives players no additional edge over them, thinks they're excellent solo drivers and wont suffer any significant disadvantages.

Meanwhile, they also claim what to them is a minor driving efficiency difference would completely balance everything if the other get more firepower and endurance for the same amount of players. Apparently that's not an advantage on multiple counts that directly affects TTK?

A very inconsistent and indefensible point of view if you ask me.

To your other point: Under the circumstances of the current PS2 system and this "compromise", basically that's what I'm saying, yes. Under the system I'd want, obtaining gunners would be far more valuable because the units are based on requiring gunners and would be endurance and firepower wise on par and THEN get the teamwork dedication bonus (rather than being half in either or both endurance and firepower to the alternative).

In my vision, either a multi-crew unit cannot effectively be used solo (very weak and restricted gun like PS1 Magrider or on their own trumped by other units like the PS1 Liberator), OR a multi-crew vehicle while running solo gets much worse endurance statistics.

Talek Krell · 2012-07-18, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by Lumberchuk

The ability to fire on the move with increased precision is one advantage. Being able to concentrate on driving while your gunner concentrates on gunning will cause both of you to preform your respective tasks better. Also tanks have 2 seats anyway, so does that mean there is no point in finding a secondary gunner since he could just grab his own tank?

That's pretty much the issue, yes. While allowing the crew to specialize increases their performance, it doesn't increase it enough to compete with 2 people single crewing equivalent vehicles.

Not only does that second option have twice the hitpoints, it can also flank the single tank, packs as much or twice as much AV power, and carries more power or more options in secondary weapons as well.

Lumberchuk · 2012-07-18, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

Not only does that second option have twice the hitpoints, it can also flank the single tank, packs as much or twice as much AV power, and carries more power or more options in secondary weapons as well.

On paper yes it has more damage potential, but in practice it could be completely different. For example coming from battlefield 3 (the tanks seem to be based off this game) to PS1 the first thing I noticed about tank combat was that it was much more mobile and happened at longer ranges. Why? Because of the separate driver gunner combo, if you could solo a tank in battlefield like you do a Vanguard in PS1 you would destroy enemy tanks without them getting a shot off on you. Not to mention it will be cheaper on resources (though we don't really know how much that will matter).

To be clear I think it would also make complete sense to give the 2 player tanks a stat boost as well, so I do agree with your suggestion, I just think its less likely for that to happen, as more has to be changed. Simply allowing the secondary gunner to control the main gun is an easier fix and IMO is very useful IF you have a gunner you can communicate with effectively. Which is why the option should be there.

Talek Krell · 2012-07-19, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by Lumberchuk

On paper yes it has more damage potential, but in practice it could be completely different.

Not just more damage potential but more survivability and more tactical flexibility as well. And since the number of individuals working together in either scenario is two, I doubt they're really losing much in the way of situational awareness. The sole quantifiable downside is the cost and while I don't dismiss that entirely I believe that cost is and should be used to keep people from being suicidal with their equipment rather than to pose a significant barrier to entry.

Forgive me if I drift in and out of the conversation, work neverending and so on.

Originally Posted by Azren

What we should try to achieve is to get this cert in a form how it can be implemented. The balance in power can be addressed later.

There's a legal concept I've heard of that if you accept any form of compensation for an issue then you forfeit the right to complain. For me this is basically that. I would rather go back and forth and hammer out an agreeable solution than accept a subpar one on the assumption that it will just be fixed later.

Figment · 2012-07-18, 01:16 PM

More then wanting to do that, they should be encouraged. They should be stronger.

Talek Krell · 2012-07-18, 02:23 PM

I think you've made a mistake by keeping the same stats. While I applaud your apparent desire to appeal to various playstyles, if all you do is offer them lip service then they're only going to end up unhappy with you. And since the variant you're suggesting is statistically inferior to the base MBT lip service is precisely what this would be.

We have enough units that we can use them to appeal to all playstyles, I see no reason to shaft one group in favor of the other.

fod · 2012-07-18, 06:28 PM

i havnt been fully following the conversation about 1 man tank vs tank with 2 men inside (one with main gun) but have you considered that the gunner of your tank might not have any tank certs? or want to spend his certs there?

that is my situation - my gunners are usually pure infantry that dont drive tanks themselves

so if i never had my gunner (main cannon gunner) then there simply wouldnt just be another tank out there solo, just another infantrymen

Figment · 2012-07-18, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by fod

i havnt been fully following the conversation about 1 man tank vs tank with 2 men inside (one with main gun) but have you considered that the gunner of your tank might not have any tank certs? or want to spend his certs there?

Everyone will have access to every vehicle in game, be it standard or certed. So that's a non-issue. Sidegrade and certs will only give a minor advantage and mostly are about tweaking them to your personal preference.

They do not make you utterly pwn all of a sudden, plus even if you don't drive a tank, you can grab something else or even as infantry you'd be another unit with own firepower and hit points. So yes, it's been considered from multiple perspectives.

This wouldn't be such an issue if there'd be less available units to players, because then they'd get stuck on timers sooner and wouldn't all be able to afford these units.

that is my situation - my gunners are usually pure infantry that dont drive tanks themselves

so if i never had my gunner (main cannon gunner) then there simply wouldnt just be another tank out there solo, just another infantrymen

Nobody is pure infantry in PlanetSide 2 even if they wanted to. In PS1 it's possible yet extremely unlikely. Though I don't think I know anyone who doesn't have any vehicles in PS1. (Besides, you get ANT free these days.)

Most players have personal transport as it's really cheap to get and sustain.

On top of that, you can't determine general balance on the premise of an extremely small minority not having their own vehicle (which as said, doesn't even exist in PS2 because you get access to all basic units and classes from the start, just not all their tweaking abilities).

fod · 2012-07-18, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Nobody is pure infantry in PlanetSide 2 even if they wanted to. In PS1 it's possible yet extremely unlikely. Though I don't think I know anyone who doesn't have any vehicles in PS1. (Besides, you get ANT free these days.)

Most players have personal transport as it's really cheap to get and sustain.

in my own situation that exactly what it is - i have every vehicle /engineering and unimax where as my gunner has all the abilitys (medic/hacking/engineering) with most of the weaponry in PS1

Azren · 2012-07-19, 02:24 AM

Maybe you should not argue about the balance between the two variants. There are too many variables to come to a conclusion on that without actually seeing them in game.
What we should try to achieve is to get this cert in a form how it can be implemented. The balance in power can be addressed later.