Viability of a Driver/Pilot Class

Bravix · 2012-07-16, 10:07 PM

I'm not here to say, "OMFG WE NEED A SEPERATE CLASS FOR PILOTS AND DRIVERS!!!" I haven't played the beta yet, and even if I was in it, there needs to be enough players participating to determine whether this is necessary.

However, I would like to discuss the viability of such a class based on what we have been shown.

The why, is that it would prevent abuse of the pop in/out of vehicle mechanics...well, at least limit the abuse. It would also prevent people from, for example, hopping into 100 scythe's with their heavy assault class and drop over the enemy base. Sure, you can do this with Galaxies, but it's easier to take out a handful of galaxies and expect and drop.

How I would have the class set up (feel free to list your own ideas or say that my idea sucks

) :

Pilot/Driver Class
Weapons: Carbine and pistol, maybe light shotguns? No grenades except maybe smoke.
Armor: The same amount as light assault/engineer/medic (Don't know armor values at this time, hard to say).
Abilities: Only class able to pilot/drive vehicles. On top of this, they could have a minor skill from one of the other support classes.

It would be important to keep the class viable in combat. Otherwise the complaints would flow. But of course you wouldn't want them overpowered. That is why my idea would be to allow them to have a skill from one of the other classes. The pilot/driver would be able to select which one they want.

For example, a pilot could choose to have the standard medical applicator (unable to use advanced versions though as pilot). Or they could take an engineer skill and be able to repair their aircraft, though at a reduced rate compared to an full fledged engineer. This would of course need balancing.

Just my idea. Would prevent some abuse of the vehicle boarding system. It would make it so that you can't just drive up to a base, blow people to hell with your tank, and then hop out last minute as a heavy assault and soak up even more damage.

It would also make playing both vehicles and infantry a more dedicated class, instead of something you switch on a whim. It'd still be very easy to switch roles, all you'd have to do is die or go to an equipment term. But as things currently are, all you have to do is hop out of a vehicle or hop in it.

I'd like to point out that the driver/pilot class would be combat capable, just not quite as versatile and heavily armed as their dedicated infantry counterparts.

GreatMazinkaise · 2012-07-16, 10:28 PM

This is a bad idea and you should feel bad for suggesting it. We've already got our optimum driver class (Engineer) and our optimum flyboy class (Light Assault); there's no point in putting in a class just to drive/pilot vehicles.

AzureWatcher · 2012-07-16, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by GreatMazinkaise

This is a bad idea and you should feel bad for suggesting it. We've already got our optimum driver class (Engineer) and our optimum flyboy class (Light Assault); there's no point in putting a class just to drive/pilot vehicles.

Pretty much this. A pilot class would be overkill and would be unnecessary.

Atheosim · 2012-07-16, 10:43 PM

A pilot class would be a balance nightmare. Not to mention I think people would be pissed if they had to give up their fravret class just to drive a vehicle.

Reizod · 2012-07-16, 10:53 PM

At this point, let's just wait until they start taking everyone's input during beta.

Though, having set classes is NOT going to happen. They seem very set on having the classes that are generic/common among current FPS games.

Pyreal · 2012-07-16, 10:54 PM

It seems the seed of trouble for your idea is players popping out of their burning vehicle with their bazooka at the ready and engaging, that is the issue that should be directly addressed.

The classes are set and there is very little probability that will see any major change or additions.

As for the instant bail and attack this is still something that can be addressed in beta, and that should be your aim.

1: Weapons should be holstered at bailout and wielding a weapon after bailout should take 1-3 seconds.
2: There should be a .5 seconds delay in sprinting ability after bailout.

Those two things would address both issues as I see them:
1: HA players bailing after losing a vehicle engagement to engage enemy vehicle with AV weapons.
2: Players bailing after losing a vehicle engagement to engage enemy with C4 at a sprint.

Marinealver · 2012-07-17, 09:40 AM

I actuall sugested making a vehicle benifits for say a medic or a HA to fly a vehicle.

but yeah it is going to be the Jetpack Aircav and Engineer Tanks, while Medics, Grunts, Cloakers, will ATV zerg it. MAXs will autorun.

ThermalReaper · 2012-07-17, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by Bravix

I haven't played the beta yet, and even if I was in it, there needs to be enough players participating to determine whether this is necessary.

I smell lies here.

But just place restrictions on piloting classes and that's it, no need for another class.

Rago · 2012-07-17, 09:43 AM

When i take The Liberator i want to be a Engineer and my Fellows , too.
Nothing more is needet.

Stardouser · 2012-07-17, 09:48 AM

The purpose of a pilot class would be to limit them to pistol and medkit or maybe repair tools, so that people can't just bail and continue the fight on foot, treating vehicles as throwaway.

Sledgecrushr · 2012-07-17, 09:54 AM

I am very comfortable with the idea of all the classes barring max using vehicles. I would not and do not want a dedicated vehicle class.

Baneblade · 2012-07-17, 11:15 AM

A class that is a hybrid of the Engineer (repair only) and Light Assault (jetpack) that carries a pistol would make the most sense to me.

Bravix · 2012-07-17, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by GreatMazinkaise

This is a bad idea and you should feel bad for suggesting it. We've already got our optimum driver class (Engineer) and our optimum flyboy class (Light Assault); there's no point in putting in a class just to drive/pilot vehicles.

You're so sweet. You make an assumption however that everyone will just use Engineer/Light Assault. I'm willing to bet that we'll see a lot of Heavy Assault thanks to the auto-repair cert.

Originally Posted by Marinealver

I actuall sugested making a vehicle benifits for say a medic or a HA to fly a vehicle.

but yeah it is going to be the Jetpack Aircav and Engineer Tanks, while Medics, Grunts, Cloakers, will ATV zerg it. MAXs will autorun.

You don't want benefits for a HA to fly. Medic I would support though.

Originally Posted by Baneblade

A class that is a hybrid of the Engineer (repair only) and Light Assault (jetpack) that carries a pistol would make the most sense to me.

That's sort of what I was suggest, though it would allow you to choose what you'd be a hybrid of. You could take the Engineer's repair tool, allowing you to repair the vehicle. However, you wouldn't be as powerful as a full on engineer since you wouldn't have the other assortment of weapons, MANA turret, etc.

You could take a medic gun. This would be useful for people who like hotdropping over enemy bases in groups.

I'd say you could hybrid into light assault and have a jetpack, but that would be a little harder to balance since you'd basically be a light assault soldier with a weaker weapon.

And I do agree, it would be an interesting system to have to balance. But, personally, I don't see it being any worse to balance than the current system lol.

QuantumMechanic · 2012-07-17, 11:56 AM

There will be a number of people using HA while piloting vehicles as Higby did himself in his stream of the technical test done almost two weeks ago.

He was driving a lighting, attacked a magrider, and after his lighting was almost blown to bits he jumped out and tried to finish off the magrider with his anti-vehicle rocket launcher (and for all we can tell was close to being successful).

The issue to me particular with Heavy Assault being able to pilot vehicles. The have a special ability which is a strong AV shield which is supposed to temporarily protect them from vehicle fire while they try to take down their target.

So I forsee HA "Rambos" jumping out their burning tanks at the last minute, popping that shield and then finishing off their opponent (who previously just won in a strictly tank-on-tank battle).

This type of gameplay probably sounds cool to some people. I'm just not a fan of it, and think piloting should be restricted to light armor classes only.

Anyway beta will tell.

Bravix · 2012-07-17, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by QuantumMechanic

There will be a number of people using HA while piloting vehicles as Higby did himself in his stream of the technical test done almost two weeks ago.

He was driving a lighting, attacked a magrider, and after his lighting was almost blown to bits he jumped out and tried to finish off the magrider with his anti-vehicle rocket launcher (and for all we can tell was close to being successful).

The issue to me particular with Heavy Assault being able to pilot vehicles. The have a special ability which is a strong AV shield which is supposed to temporarily protect them from vehicle fire while they try to take down their target.

So I forsee HA "Rambos" jumping out their burning tanks at the last minute, popping that shield and then finishing off their opponent (who previously just won in a strictly tank-on-tank battle).

This type of gameplay probably sounds cool to some people. I'm just not a fan of it, and think piloting should be restricted to light armor classes only.

Anyway beta will tell.

But if you simply restrict it to light assault classes, you'll breed another type of rambo. You might have light assault guys with C4 that will charge at you when their vehicle is almost dead, hop out of it last minute, then jet pack on top of/slightly passed your vehicle. Place C4, and boom.

Now, this would require more skill then hopping out and firing a launcher obviously and would be more rare. Just something I thought I'd bring up!