|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
513
   |
Posted - 2013.09.21 16:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:1)driver drives and operates front turret and tanking modules
2)main gunner operates main turret and turret modules.
3)top gunner is exposed out of the top turret like on an lav.
double tank ehp due to complexity of new tank controls. no more solo tanking.
add in complete lock out on tanks by the owner. when he/she calls it in it is locked completely until he/she unlocks it for crew or it is hacked by the enemy. this allows them to select the position in the tank they want. they can also unlock for squad only or free for all.
add in climbing in and out of vehicles to commit people to the tank crew and not just instant hitch a ride or hide.
vehicle views would have to be tweaked slightly.
driver would get a front view screen only which incorporates his /hers forward turret.
main gunner would have full allround view as the tank driver currently gets while not in turret view. this comes at the expense of having your head out the top of the turret. when in turret mode you are no longer exposed but have only the turret zoom view.
the top gunner is always exposed but has an extended view of the area around the tank. his turret would have a forward shield for shield tanks and an arm shield for arm tanks. he is completely protected from the direction his turret is facing..
the full crew makes the tank very effective when they work together. if 1 is taken out then this effectiveness is reduced. when the tank is in full combat mode then the top gunner is the general allround eyes. if he is taken out then its doen to the main gunner who is now at a reduced visual effectiveness.
this basicly allows players to disable tanks without actually needing to destroy them
This is an excellent idea, but the tanks drivers simply won't accept it (in my experience).
The problem is, even though one player in a HAV is already significantly more powerful than one player not in a HAV, the tank drivers somehow think their HAVs need to be buffed "because its a tank". They have been able to lonewold pwn for so long they feel entitled.
|
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
513
|
Posted - 2013.09.21 16:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:Explain why you feel it's an excellent idea.
Because I really want tanks (HAVs) to be big, bad monsters of the battlefield. I want tanks and AV balanced so that it takes several players using good teamwork to kill them. I want proto tanks that can only be killed by a group of proto AV infantry.
However, in order for tanks to be so strong it takes multiple players working as a team to kill them, and for the game to remain balanced, it must take multiple players working as a team to operate them.
All the other HAV/AV balance suggestions I've seen so far are based around balancing on ISK, which is doomed to failure as we all get richer. We need to balance the game first and foremost on the most limited resource in Dust battles, which is the players. Balance on that first, and then tune the balance with ISK.
|
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
513
|
Posted - 2013.09.21 17:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
Spkr4theDead wrote:R F Gyro wrote:Spkr4theDead wrote:Explain why you feel it's an excellent idea. Because I really want tanks (HAVs) to be big, bad monsters of the battlefield. I want tanks and AV balanced so that it takes several players using good teamwork to kill them. I want proto tanks that can only be killed by a group of proto AV infantry. However, in order for tanks to be so strong it takes multiple players working as a team to kill them, and for the game to remain balanced, it must take multiple players working as a team to operate them. All the other HAV/AV balance suggestions I've seen so far are based around balancing on ISK, which is doomed to failure as we all get richer. We need to balance the game first and foremost on the most limited resource in Dust battles, which is the players. Balance on that first, and then tune the balance with ISK. Lol you can't get infantry that visit the forums to use teamwork to take out tanks now. It's a terrible idea.
Ahh.... I see.
I need to explain my reasoning, whereas you merely need to "lol" and state "its a terrible idea".
I admit, you've soundly beaten me in this debate. |
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
528
|
Posted - 2013.09.22 17:17:00 -
[4] - Quote
Crash Monster wrote:Hey, I have a thought...
If you think tankers need to buddy up -- maybe infantry should have to buddy up big-time to be able to take out a tank. No more lone proto gunners being able to take out a tank. Turnabout is fair play isn't it?
It's a tank for crying out loud.
Let me say that again... IT'S A TANK!
"Its a TANK" is an emotional appeal, not a valid game balance argument.
I agree that lone proto gunners shouldn't be able to take out a tank, assuming a roughly equivalent level of player skill on both sides. Obviously an expert proto forge gunner should be able to solo someone who doesn't know how to effectively operate his tank. |
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
528
|
Posted - 2013.09.22 17:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
Godin Thekiller wrote:Well, I'll explain why this is a horrible idea, as well as counter your points:
1: I pay for the entire thing, so why should I give half of the purpose of it to a random bluedot?
2: I've not seen that many balancing around ISK, other than reduction in price for specific ones (such as the PROTO turrets that are almost a million), as they aren't balanced with the other's price.
3: Requiring more than 3 or 4 people to kill one HAV with PROTO weapons is imo overkill at that point. The HAV should be able to survive long enough to stay for a short period, and escape, and if they trap it, or have more than enough AV, it's dead.
4: Like I said, we already do require more than just the pilot for a HAV to do well. Backup AV, a Logistics or two and a LLV repping it and the people around it, and gunners keeping the infantry away (well, if they would fix the small turret aim on HAV's anyways), as well as a spotter to tell the said HAV where incoming AV is, and where infantry that needs to be hit is.
1. Of course you shouldn't give anything to blue dots. I absolutely support locking vehicles so that only members of your squad can get in them, unless hacked.
2. The "balancing on ISK" thing is a counter to the argument that tanks should be stronger because they cost more. I realise that at the moment they aren't balanced on ISK, but I think they should be. Top end AV infantry gear should be very expensive.
3. Yep, I agree. I'd balance around a 3 man AV team fighting a 3 man HAV crew.
4. That teamwork scenario you describe isn't a common one at all; by far the most common tank tactic is the lone wolf. Clearly they need to fix vehicle turret aim; you can't balance a game based on what are clearly bugs.
One suggestion I made in another thread is that HAVs could still be operated solo as they are now, but would get extra bonuses (resists probably) for extra occupants. Also, I think the tank commander should be able to delegate driving/main gun use if they want to. Things can then be balanced separately for lone-wolf HAVs and team-operated HAVs. |
|
|
| |
|