DUST Search - change tanks to:

ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:

did i say someone had to skill into the chassis,

did i say someone had to skill into the turrets,

i did say they are only responsible for their own space in the tank. specialise or jack of all trades it thats upto the individual crew member.

calling in the vehicle. why would anyone have to be skilled into it. on the current system they would have too but this is not in the current system its an idea and things could be changed so it could be implemented. like i said use it as a squad asset. orbitals are squad assets so they could easy be called in via a system like that.

also who is to say ccp couldn't come up with an option to fit your own part of the tank in vehicle fittings so just a chassis or just a turret with their own pq/cpu etc. the chassis pilot could call in the vehicle and it then is asked by the system which gunner he is using. he selects the main gunner and the main gunner gets a message to accept. once accepted the vehicle comes in with the completed vehicle with one persons chassis and the others turret


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
The Attorney General ZionTCD 961	Posted - 2013.09.19 21:07:00 - [1] - Quote lol no. Who skills the turret skills? Who pays for the tank? Unless all three can split the cost and the SP investment, it will never fly. No one is going to skill into something that they then need to find a friend to help them use. Also, having the main gunner have any part of his body exposed is absurd. There is a reason why militaries are going to RC turrets, because putting yourself in the open is pretty dumb. So why, in the far flung future would it even remotely be considered?
The Attorney General ZionTCD 963	Posted - 2013.09.19 21:16:00 - [2] - Quote I'm just amazed this guy actually came up with this idea, and no one he knows told him that was just stupid. He needs better friends to test his ideas on first.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 967	Posted - 2013.09.19 21:22:00 - [3] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: so much hostility. even mention "change" and "tank" in the same sentence and tank drivers lose it lol. there is a reason why there will always be issues with tanks and its nothing to do with the tanks themselves Bad idea is bad. Person who puts it forward gets slagged for not even thinking. Because really, your idea was so flawed, that even though it has been put forward by others, and you could have found it with a search, you just had to put it out there, of course the tankers are going to take a dump on you. Don't delude yourself into thinking it is because we are hostile to change, because we are not, we want changes, just not stupid pointless changes that would eliminate the entire role we are trying to protect.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 971	Posted - 2013.09.19 21:49:00 - [4] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: problem is tanks should have always been squad assets from the get go. biggest mistake CCP made was letting any tom,**** and harry with delusions of grandeur buy and use them. this only made everyone who used them feel they should be able to kill everything solo because they spent all the sp and isk on them. until tankers get it out of their heads that a tank is for soloing then nothing ccp does is going to fix tanks and your only hurting your own profession by not accepting suggestions even offering constructive criticism on the bad suggestions. it all adds to the bigger picture. simply asking for hp buffs or av nerfs is not going to fix nothing because the core of the tank role is so messed up to start with See this is where we differ. You think vehicles need a drastic overhaul why exactly? I don't think tanks need huge buffs, and I really don't think AV needs to be harshly nerfed. Tank v FG is fun and engaging for both parties. Tank v Swarm is ridiculous when the swarm user does not draw, but other than that, a slight extension of the mag dump time would be enough. AV nades just need to have their fitting costs jacked way the hell up. There is no need for an infantryman to have a pocket AV solution that doesn't cost him in either weapons to use against infantry, or major restrictions to his suit. It destroys the idea of tank>infantry>AV>Tank Now I could flip your ridiculous assumptions back onto you, but I know you are not bright enough to perform meaningful self examination without having a nosebleed and needing your mother to come and put you to bed so I will save us all the trouble.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 971	Posted - 2013.09.19 21:52:00 - [5] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: I mean, most of the people here want to be able to take the Small Turrets off because it OFFENDS them that there might be someone else using their vehicle while they are. You ever had an infantryman ride in your tank and refuse to hop out, even when you are under seige and he could actually kill the AV troop that is going to destroy you? I have, more times than I can count. You ever have an blue hop in to your whip, and start randomly firing at the enemy MCC for the duration of the match? I have, once again, more times than I can count. Removing small turrets actually helps out the infantry on the ground, because it now means that the AFK'ing scrub who is sitting in my turrets has to actually get out and do something, instead of collecting free WP off of my work. I have tanks built for gunners. I call them when I am playing with people I know and trust. That is when turrets are useful, not when someone who is not on mic, and is plainly handicapped is just along for the ride.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 973	Posted - 2013.09.19 22:15:00 - [6] - Quote Fine, heavies can't spawn unless there is a logi in their squad, with a rep tool equipped. No one is allowed to use equipment until the SL calls for it using the radial menu. AV weapons cannot be spawned in until a vehicle is lit on your tacnet. All these things promote teamwork, and would be for the good of the game.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 1004	Posted - 2013.09.20 15:21:00 - [7] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: my idea is a complete revamp of tanks so nothing that we have currently has any relevance to it, isk price, who owns it and what seat they get, what skills they have spent all their sp on. it has no relevance at this moment in time. its a basic idea so the argument i bought it and skilled into it so its all mine is irrelevent. its not just yours in my idea. its a squad asset. the owner could be the top gunner if that was his/ her prefered position although its unlikely but its still a choice. as for who buys it. you, corp,squad,team, a friend, borrow or steal it. as for sp well you no longer need 20-30 mil sp to be any good. you only need sp for the seat you prefer to take. Someone needs to skill into the chassis. Someone needs to skill into the main turret. If the person who skills into the chassis is the driver, he would never skill into turrets that he won't be using. If the person who skills into the chassis also has to skill into the turret, he is investing SP for someone else to use something, which is ridiculous. And yes, whomever is calling it in has to skill into the whole vehicle, which he can't use, because that is how the fitting system works. Your idea is bad, but instead of giving it up you are going to try and keep acting like it is a good idea. Also, you don't need 20 million SP to be good in tanks. You cna make very servicable fits for less than 6, can roll PC if you choose your skills wisely at 7, and be fit maxxed for one type of tank at around 8.5-9.5. So I'll support this type of BS as long as: Heavies need a Logi to spawn in their HMG for them. Only Logis can equip nanohives. All infantry must get their grenades from a nanaohive, as they spawn with zero. All infantry spawn with half of their current ammo, to promote teamwork. All infantry are limited by the meta level of what their squad leader spawns in. He goes MLT, you do to. Because if you want to promote teamwork, lets do it with infantry as well. Because as long as an Assault troop with a Duvolle and AV nades is an omni threat, then we can't be trying to force teamwork on other parts of the game. All of this is completely irrelevant because tanking is already highly team oriented if you want to survive. You can't ignore the infantry with you, because if they pull back and you decide to hang out and try and get more kills, you are getting blown up pretty fast.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 1011	Posted - 2013.09.20 20:24:00 - [8] - Quote ADAM-OF-EVE wrote: did i say someone had to skill into the chassis, did i say someone had to skill into the turrets, i did say they are only responsible for their own space in the tank. specialise or jack of all trades it thats upto the individual crew member. calling in the vehicle. why would anyone have to be skilled into it. on the current system they would have too but this is not in the current system its an idea and things could be changed so it could be implemented. like i said use it as a squad asset. orbitals are squad assets so they could easy be called in via a system like that. also who is to say ccp couldn't come up with an option to fit your own part of the tank in vehicle fittings so just a chassis or just a turret with their own pq/cpu etc. the chassis pilot could call in the vehicle and it then is asked by the system which gunner he is using. he selects the main gunner and the main gunner gets a message to accept. once accepted the vehicle comes in with the completed vehicle with one persons chassis and the others turret So you want CCP to change the entire skill system so that you don't get hurt by tanks? OK, whatever. You obviously have not thought this through, and are just clutching at straws. Oddly enough, you never respond to my counter proposals for infantry restrictions, most likely because you don't think infantry should have any restrictions, which makes your entire argument moot.
The Attorney General ZionTCD 1025	Posted - 2013.09.20 20:26:00 - [9] - Quote Also, having tanks be called in an as a squad asset is ridiculous. How would you adjust the fitting? Or would you only get to choose from a couple of preset configurations? Since when is that the ethos of this game? When your idea runs counter to some of the core concepts of the game, maybe you should just stop trying.