Tank drivers acting as gunners in PS2 - Page 38

Figment · 2012-03-12, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

Also, if I understand you, you are opposed to the current understanding that the driver will gun the main gun? And does WoT influence this position and how so?

I am interpreting that you are opposed to it, yet have success coordinating with other players in WoT?

WoT basically plays like a Lightning with any tank, regardless of amount of power the tank has. Often stronger tanks have no drawbacks, quite the opposite.

But I would much prefer it if heavy units in WoT were two men crews. I really liked the PlanetSide method of allowing stronger tanks, without making them overpowered on an individual player basis. WoT allows for individual players to have significantly more power and control over a battle. PS2 will in that sense go back to the Dark Ages of tanking from a gameplay perspective.

EVILPIG · 2012-03-12, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

WoT basically plays like a Lightning with any tank, regardless of amount of power the tank has. Often stronger tanks have no drawbacks, quite the opposite.

But I would much prefer it if heavy units in WoT were two men crews. I really liked the PlanetSide method of allowing stronger tanks, without making them overpowered on an individual player basis. WoT allows for individual players to have significantly more power and control over a battle. PS2 will in that sense go back to the Dark Ages of tanking from a gameplay perspective.

Would you not say that the issue with WoT is the match maker? The reason there is such an imbalance is mostly because of the spread of tiers. Usually, you're either in the top 4 vehicles, or you're basically food for them. If properly balanced, would it not be completely different?

I have heard that the Lightning may be lightly armored with a harder hitting gun than a MBT. What if a MBT has heavier armor, but the driver gun (I'm ditching "primary and secondary) is weaker? That would put them pretty much on par with each other until you add the second gunner, then the MBT pulls ahead, as it should.

It's all in the balance. We simply cannot compare PS1 to PS2, it's a different game and Beta will tell us what needs to be adjusted.

Knocky · 2012-03-12, 03:37 PM

Combo breaker!!!

The Evilpig/Figment mutual admiration society meeting is over!

Figment · 2012-03-12, 04:04 PM

*Kicks Knocky for getting in the way of our wubbing*

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

Would you not say that the issue with WoT is the match maker? The reason there is such an imbalance is mostly because of the spread of tiers. Usually, you're either in the top 4 vehicles, or you're basically food for them. If properly balanced, would it not be completely different?

Although I agree that the tierspread is too great in WoT, to make a comparison with PS1... Say the Lightning was a stock PzIV and a MBT a slightly higher tier heavy (say a KV-3 or even Tiger II) and these two vehicles are the only things you'll ever encounter...

Say the one costs just slightly more resources (will it?), but will stay alive longer, has more hitpoints, firepower, better armour and has the potential of even greater firepower (if someone for whatever reasons wants to get a ride), would you ever consider getting the PzIV? Or only when the bigger tank is not available for whatever reason?

Doesn't that type of default selection pains you anywhere?

I have heard that the Lightning may be lightly armored with a harder hitting gun than a MBT.

All I heard from Higby in that AGN interview was that it had a harder hitting gun than MBT gunner. Where did you hear it would have a harder hitting gun than a MBT?

What if a MBT has heavier armor, but the driver gun (I'm ditching "primary and secondary) is weaker? That would put them pretty much on par with each other until you add the second gunner, then the MBT pulls ahead, as it should.

It's all in the balance. We simply cannot compare PS1 to PS2, it's a different game and Beta will tell us what needs to be adjusted.

I'm inclined to not expect that balance because that would completely skew the roles of such vehicles. Besides, if that were the case, two Lightnings would pull miles ahead of a MBT with gunner. Then you'd make the MBT pointless.

Azren · 2012-03-12, 04:14 PM

well the MBT got pointless the second they decided to make it a solo mashine, so what's the big deal?

ArmedZealot · 2012-03-12, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by Azren

well the MBT got pointless the second they decided to make it a solo mashine, so what's the big deal?

why is it pointless? doesn't having the driver being a gunner make it more powerful? I can have more on the field doing more.

EVILPIG · 2012-03-12, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

I'm inclined to not expect that balance because that would completely skew the roles of such vehicles. Besides, if that were the case, two Lightnings would pull miles ahead of a MBT with gunner. Then you'd make the MBT pointless.

Two lightnings might be better, depends on the situation. Would two lightnings be better than a MBT that is set up for Anti-V/Anti-V? Would two lightnings be better than a MBT with AV/AA if air was present? Or AV/AI with infantry present?

I don't know, but I can't wait to find out!

ThGlump · 2012-03-12, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

I have heard that the Lightning may be lightly armored with a harder hitting gun than a MBT.

I remember them saying that lighting has same armor as MBT, but very vulnerable from behind - dont run from battle with them.

Azren · 2012-03-12, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by ArmedZealot

why is it pointless? doesn't having the driver being a gunner make it more powerful? I can have more on the field doing more.

Nope. Look at PS1, and see how little the Lightning is used. One manned vehicles fail in mobility. It is not possible to move and gun at the same time. Sure, it may work in BF and CoD where the maps are designed to benefit your vehicle, and the tanks are overpowered, but in PS they are fragile.
I know from my PS1 experience that most of the time I would not be able to shoot my gun, while driving. It only works if you sit back at a safe distance and "snipe" the enemy.

Aurmanite · 2012-03-12, 04:46 PM

Originally Posted by Azren

Nope. Look at PS1, and see how little the Lightning is used. One manned vehicles fail in mobility. It is not possible to move and gun at the same time. Sure, it may work in BF and CoD where the maps are designed to benefit your vehicle, and the tanks are overpowered, but in PS they are fragile.
I know from my PS1 experience that most of the time I would not be able to shoot my gun, while driving. It only works if you sit back at a safe distance and "snipe" the enemy.

This is completely untrue. Towards the end of my time playing Planetside I was able to drive using the radar while firing behind me. I just paid attention to the road on the minimap. In fact, I resubbed for a month recently and still have some ability to do it. I shot down a mosquito the other night because he was lazy and didn't think I was a threat as I retreated to my base.

I could snipe MAX's and people all day doing drivebys or even just charging at them to do some mowin.

The problem the lightning had in Planetside was staying power. In many ways it was much easier to survive on foot than it was in the mini tank. AV hit it too hard and it didn't have very much health.

PrISM · 2012-03-12, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

You guys seriously need to wait for Beta.

That's a terrible cop-out that it used all to often in today's day and age where "betas" are used more for marketing than to make smart revisions to gameplay.

Khellendros · 2012-03-12, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by Aurmanite

This is completely untrue. Towards the end of my time playing Planetside I was able to drive using the radar while firing behind me. I just paid attention to the road on the minimap. In fact, I resubbed for a month recently and still have some ability to do it. I shot down a mosquito the other night because he was lazy and didn't think I was a threat as I retreated to my base.

I could snipe MAX's and people all day doing drivebys or even just charging at them to do some mowin.

The problem the lightning had in Planetside was staying power. In many ways it was much easier to survive on foot than it was in the mini tank. AV hit it too hard and it didn't have very much health.

You, I daresay, are not typical. Most people cannot do this very well.

Aurmanite · 2012-03-12, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by Khellendros

You, I daresay, are not typical. Most people cannot do this very well.

Maybe

But there are a lot of players who are better than me out there.

Figment · 2012-03-12, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by Khellendros

You, I daresay, are not typical. Most people cannot do this very well.

There are not a lot of players that actually practised driving the Lightning if they could get a Mossie, MBT or Reaver instead. So I'd not be surprised about that.

I've seen awful, REALLY, REALLY awful Fury drivers as well. The Lightning started to get used more after the much needed armour buff. Either way, the Parthian Shot with tanks is not that hard as long as you know the local terrain well and planned your escape route.

Aurmanite · 2012-03-12, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

There are not a lot of players that actually practised driving the Lightning if they could get a Mossie, MBT or Reaver instead. So I'd not be surprised about that.

I've seen awful, REALLY, REALLY awful Fury drivers as well. The Lightning started to get used more after the much needed armour buff. Either way, the Parthian Shot with tanks is not that hard as long as you know the local terrain well and planned your escape route.

You said it, chum.

Until BFR's.