Compromise for the driver=gunner issue. - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: killing me softly
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Reply
Click here to go to the first VIP post in this thread.  
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2011-09-26, 10:55 PM   [Ignore Me] #1
BorisBlade
First Lieutenant
 
Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


Since they seem determined to stick with the BF style, solo power tanks. I was tryin to think of a compromise to the problem. This is what i came up with that required the least amount of changes while still leavin their idea mostly intact.

A driver specialization. This completely voluntary spec would allow you to gain a "driver only" slot in appropriate vehicles. As in it wouldn't work on reavers or lightnings, but on most other vehicles that have the gunner=driver idea.

As a trade off for losing the weapon and requiring more manpower, you also gain more armor, significantly more, atleast a third more. Since you do require 50% more manpower a third more armor minimum seems fair. This allows for the more solo-style tanks to have their more appropriate weaker armor while giving those who work as a team in focused roles with more manpower the benefits of better (focused) drivers/gunners and the armor to make up for the manpower needed.

There are no vehicle enter/exit animations so zero changes other than the new entry point would need to be activated upon certing, a relatively simple thing. The only real change would be to vehicles designed for rambo play like the magrider. Its gotta get a real turret like an actual tank. But that's hopefully one of the only vehicles that would need a model change.

Seems like a mostly simple fix to appease the devs who want their solo stuff and the majority of vets who prefer the more team oriented style. I for one would be fine with that. The opportunity to show the Battlefielders how much better the Planetside design is as we literally run circles around em as they try to drive/gun at the same time and get decimated.

At this point I'll settle for anything to get atleast somethin of Planetside to remain, esp my fave part. But I'm interested to hear any of your ideas, suggestions, or tweaks.
__________________
Waiting for the return of the superior, real PS style teamwork oriented vehicles with drivers not gunning, and in fixed vehicle slots so we can once again have real, epic, vehicle battles where the tanks actually move in combat rather than a silly 1700's era line up and shoot.
BorisBlade is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-26, 11:26 PM   [Ignore Me] #2
Draep
Master Sergeant
 
Draep's Avatar
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


The driver taking control of the main gun is just a bad idea. It has also spawned the even worse idea of adding secondary AA. Honestly, no compromise should take place, its a bad system and I think we'll see that in beta. With that being said, you have a decent idea. Anything that can give the driver his job back is a good thing.
Draep is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-26, 11:29 PM   [Ignore Me] #3
Sirisian
Colonel
 
Sirisian's Avatar
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


Don't worry I'll leave the thread alone since I completely disagree with it.
Originally Posted by Draep View Post
Anything that can give the driver his job back is a good thing.
Surely you mean give the gunner his old job back?
Sirisian is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-26, 11:30 PM   [Ignore Me] #4
nomotog
Sergeant
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


What if you just included two kinds of tanks. Some with the driver controlling the main gun some with the driver controlling a side gun or no gun. (The driver should control some kind of gun I think even if it's just a laser pointer.) Actually well we are at it. Lets get crazy. Have tanks that hold 4 turrets and a driver.
nomotog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-26, 11:38 PM   [Ignore Me] #5
Furret
First Sergeant
 
Misc Info
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


I always thought the magrider was a good compromise, the driver could gun, and take out infantry, but you couldn't expect to do much against vehicles with it. They already have vehicles for solo players, drive a lightning, don't change up the game for the people who like teamwork.
Furret is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-26, 11:46 PM   [Ignore Me] #6
Draep
Master Sergeant
 
Draep's Avatar
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


Originally Posted by Furret View Post
I always thought the magrider was a good compromise, the driver could gun, and take out infantry, but you couldn't expect to do much against vehicles with it. They already have vehicles for solo players, drive a lightning, don't change up the game for the people who like teamwork.
I see that the community is pretty much universally against the drivers taking over the spot of the main gunner. I just wonder why the devs thought it would be popular with Joe Gamer. It's pretty early in the development cycle I'm assuming so maybe they'll change it to what it should be.
Draep is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-26, 11:51 PM   [Ignore Me] #7
nomotog
Sergeant
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


It might just be that the game plays better when drivers act as gunners.
nomotog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-27, 12:11 AM   [Ignore Me] #8
Brusi
Contributor
Major
 
Brusi's Avatar
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


sweet, another whole thread about this.
__________________

”You can have hundreds of players fighting against hundreds of players fighting against hundreds of players in these massive cluster-fuck battles

Matt Higby on the scope of Planetside 2
Brusi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-27, 12:33 AM   [Ignore Me] #9
Lonehunter
Lieutenant General
 
Lonehunter's Avatar
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


As long as no single driver with a gun can beat a tank with a driver and gunner It'll be fine
__________________
Originally Posted by Higby View Post
And if you back in 2003 decided you wanted to play RTS games, between then and now you'd have dozens of RTS games you could have played. If you decided to play MMOFPS' between then and now, there were none
Lonehunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-27, 12:53 AM   [Ignore Me] #10
SgtMAD
Captain
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


we don't know that the gunner thing isn't going to be changed,we don't need to be compromising yet.

wait for beta and let everyone see how this idea sux

Last edited by SgtMAD; 2011-09-27 at 10:34 AM.
SgtMAD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Click here to go to the next VIP post in this thread.   Old 2011-09-27, 02:10 AM   [Ignore Me] #11
Malorn
Contributor
PlanetSide 2
Game Designer
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


The best compromise is to do it how PS1 did it.

You have 1-man killwhore vehicles (Lightning, Reaver, etc)
You have 2-man (or more) teamwork vehicles that have a lot more impact potential and power (ES Tanks, buggies, Liberator, Sundy)

For vehicles that are similar they can have some common certs in the tree. But going down one way would improve the 1-man vehicles and going down the other way improves the 2-man vehicles, with some shared.

PS1's system worked. It worked very well. I'm not sure why they feel the need to change something so fundamental to planetside.
__________________
Malorn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-27, 02:39 AM   [Ignore Me] #12
Talek Krell
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


Originally Posted by HtSgtMAD View Post
we don't that the gunner thing isn't going to be changed,we don't need to be compromising yet.

wait for beta and let everyone see how this idea sux
Going with Mad on this one. The forum is rife with reasonable fixes at this point, I think we've accomplished about all we can with brainstorming alone.
Talek Krell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-27, 03:11 AM   [Ignore Me] #13
cellinaire
Captain
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


My personal impression from this topic is : They(dev team) are basically toying around with this 'driver can also act as main gunner' idea to support the faster-paced gameplay they're striving to achieve in PS2. And from what I've observed very recently from Higby's twitter, he knows this issue now and is also thinking about some kind of compromise I guess.

Anyway, I think they're willing to change this kind of controversial things based on enough beta feedbacks from us in this time around, so we still can't be certain whether this'll make it into the actual gameplay or not.
cellinaire is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-27, 06:16 AM   [Ignore Me] #14
Captain B
First Sergeant
 
Captain B's Avatar
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


I wouldn't mind drivers being able to do more than just drive if certed properly and in some vehicles (like MBTs), but being able to fire the main gun and be able to operate independently, even if not as effective as a two- or three-manned vehicle, is still going to put more tracks than boots on the ground. PlanetSide is awesome because of the combined arms nature of the game - infantry, tanks and air - not just all vehicles.

Not to mention they don't need to be treated as "power-ups", as someone had put it in the other thread. Just another cog in the war machine.
__________________
I bleed blue and gold.
Originally Posted by T-Ray View Post
The Reaver belongs to NC now.
Captain B is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2011-09-27, 07:11 AM   [Ignore Me] #15
Azren
Sergeant Major
 
Re: Compromise for the driver=gunner issue.


Originally Posted by Lonehunter187 View Post
As long as no single driver with a gun can beat a tank with a driver and gunner It'll be fine
No it won't. As long as two driver only tanks can kill one tank with driver + gunner, this idea is very bad. Because that is precisely what you have to compare, the combined effort two people can do, and however you look at it two one manned tanks (two main guns, twice the armor) will do much better than one with a gunner (just one main gun and one "other", not AV gun, and half the armor).

Originally Posted by Brusi View Post
sweet, another whole thread about this.
Make as many as it takes until this stupid idea gets scrapped.

Originally Posted by HtSgtMAD View Post
we don't that the gunner thing isn't going to be changed,we don't need to be compromising yet.

wait for beta and let everyone see how this idea sux
If we wait for beta it will be far to late.

1 - they stated that they want beta be a stress test mostly, they will not want to bother with other aspects (even if they said they will, we all have heared those empty promises before, do not trust them)

2 - even if they do, this is a CORE gameplay issue here, every single sidegrade / upgrade a tank can have will be influenced by this. Each vehicle would have to be re-ballanced to meet this change. If they want to change it later, they have to rework every aspect of the tanks - something they will not do

No, the only way is to make them scrap this idea as soon as possible (along with that fixed magrider main gun).

We have people leaving already because of this...

Last edited by Azren; 2011-09-27 at 07:14 AM.
Azren is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply
  PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Bookmarks

Discord

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:49 AM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.