DUST Search - Tanks: Separate Driver From Main Gunner

All Channels

General Discussions

Tanks: Separate Driver From Main Gunner

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 93	Posted - 2014.04.29 12:33:00 - [91] - Quote BDiD wrote: Holyyy, I've seen everything since beta. Ill be honest. Before there was a milkman. Noob tankers are easy to blow up. The only people that qq are the ones who can't figure out what the crazy builds that won't die are... Or someone who has proto swarms and they won't work... Proto forge and crazzzzyyy good scouts can one man tanks. Im not fully tanker, but when i have over 5,000,000 sp into tanks, turrets, passive reps, allll the good stuff... NO you should not be able to kill me or anyone else easily. It should take coordinated effort. Forge, remotes, and swarms. That's the way it is and has been for 15 + months. That's why there called tanks and take millions of SP to be half decent. If you get killed my Milita gear tanks, then well. You suck. An yes i know milt tanks can kill almost as well. BESIDES that.... Possibly solution... Just cut damage in half 50% to infantry Only 100% damage to other vehicles. I'm ok with that. I have more fun killing other tanks not infantry. This will cut down on tank spam in Amb. If a mil tank only did 52.5 hp a shot with mil turrets, (no dmg mods at milt level need to be put in) people would feel safer trying to kill them while on the ground. Why shouldn't I be at least CAPABLE of killing you solo, if I've spent the equivalent (or more) SP in a particular AV weapon, and other appropriate skills to enhance it's effectiveness? I'm not saying it should be easy but, with a COMPARABLE SP expenditure, the deciding factor should come down to player skill above all else. Personally, if it should take a coordinated effort for Infantry AV to take out a tank, then it should take an equally coordinated effort to operate a tank. Personally, I'd be okay with with that if the driver were limited to AV weapons ONLY and, if he wants to kill or protect himself from infantry, then he should have to equip an additional AI turret and bring a friend along to operate it.
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 942	Posted - 2014.04.29 12:39:00 - [92] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Korvin Lomont wrote: Supernus Gigas wrote: No. I mean come on seriously? Do people even think about the complications of their convoluted ideas? ***** Christ. edit:: Let me elaborate on why this a a terrible idea. What does this solve? Nothing. Now in order for a tank to work it needs too people to operate at the minimum. So what? All you've done is make it so two coordinating people with mics are needed to operate a tank. It's still the same tank. Still the same level of difficulty to take down. It solves nothing. "But tank spam!" But shut the up. Tank spam is so overblown it's *** ridiculous. In the past MONTH of playing Dust I have encountered tank spam literally three times. THREE matches out of several hundred had tank spam. The average for me is around ZERO to TWO tanks per match. Not to mention lone wolf tankers are **. People without a mic are ****. Teamwork should be recommended, but NEVER required just to play a role. Well this would even the playing field a bit in the numerical balance between av vs Hav. That's all, to be honest Havs have are unique in that regard as LAV's have the driver separated from the gunner as well as most dropships so this would bring havs more in line with the other vehicles in theory. The problem I see with this is the lack of roles Havs have..the LAV is more a fast transport than an attack vehicle (even if i can be used as such) and the same is true for a dropship. But a Hav... And that's the main problem Hav's have no real role besides slaughtering infantry and maybe Av if there is another Hav. With the Railgun nerf they are not even that effective vs dropships. So basically Havs are there to fight other Havs or to fight infantry and this is not good at all at least for the second part. They need a role that is important but does not rely on slaughtering infantry and currently I don't see such a role. So I am afraid the current problems will stay. With favoring one side and then the other side depending on who cries the loudest. But I doubt CCP is able to solve this issue in the near future... What would you say if the purpose of HAV was just what you said it was....to combat any and all other ground based vehicles of equal or lesser size? To compensate for this HAV would have trouble engaging mobile units like infantry, not impossible, but no easy. Under this model HAV would become the top tier ground units, the hardest, most expensive units that ground based vehicle users could skill into, designed to take down emplacements, enemy vehicles, and anchor the line. However they would be susceptible to infantry and to a greater extent AV fire, which would require HAV to equip turrets or work with friendly infantry if they wanted to survive against enemy infantry. I guess CCP somehow planned this, but I simply don't see this happen any time soon :(. This would require quite some changes to the current game not only content wise (currently there isn't much to fight for HAVs apart from Infantry) but also balancing and map design has to change rather drastically. I sure would love that i can just imagine how it would feel to attack an fortified position with Havs on my side or to have large infantry supported vehicle battles. But I really doubt CCP is able or willing do the necessary changes to achieve this.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 667	Posted - 2014.04.29 12:56:00 - [93] - Quote Jack McReady wrote: Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Why wont a CPM make a post about the poison that is in the community and stop trying to push their agenda's ??? here is a tissue... for your whiny vag. why dont you finally git gud and stop posting useless scrub stuff? he has all right to express his feelings and post suggestions. if you do not like it, well, COD is that way =>>>>>>> My KDR is almost 4 with over 12,000 kills and less than 4,000 deaths ( playing for seven months ) and I didn't get that from just sniping and tanking either , I know for a fact that I'm not a scrub , now elite I'm not but I'm getting there but a scrub , nope sure not ... I'm sure I can out infantry , snipe and tank you also prob out fly you too so I will see you on the battlefield , don't have to comment on this one I will let my actions back me up on this case . Don't worry , I excepted your challenge . A CPM is suppose to be the rep for the community , like in a union or government if a rep sees something wrong being done it's their obligation from taking up that post to confront that wrong doing and correct those who are participating . Why do I have to read about their thoughts on tiericide or see comments about scouts when that issue comes up with them in defense of scouts ??? They should speak about the propaganda spam in concerns of tanks , they should speak in defense of tankers and vehicle users because that is their job . I know a lot of you doesn't know or understand what that mean , even though you work you still might not understand what dedication means , responsibility of and in upholding values that are suppose to be a part of this game and it's environment . That should be a priority not pushing their own personal agenda , the actions of keeping the calm among members of the community , putting those who exaggerate in their place by confronting them on the forums and exposing their lies , they can do it for the roles that they play and in their pushing of their beliefs in what they feel would make the game better , why not make the game better by exposing the lies and correcting those who are trying to spam propaganda in the forums in an attempt to have players roles changed for the worst . If I played COD then you wouldn't see me here but you will see me sir and you might regret it when you do . I will show you what happens when you call certain players out , you might not like what you have to deal with because I know for a fact that I'm not a scrub . This is why The Horned Wolf should be a CPM , he sees problems in the forums and he speaks up about it and addresses it . He at least makes an attempt to show players the error of their ways by stating facts and showing flaws in their propaganda . People like that command respect and not coddling to your friends or those who you seek acceptance from . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui The Containment Unit 667	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:03:00 - [94] - Quote Clone D wrote: Why does an LAV require a separate driver and gunner, yet an HAV does not? This is not true as well because I operate my LAV alone and perform quite well in killing infantry . Maybe I should do this all day so as to show those who I happen to play with in the community that this can be done . Some of you players are a joke in your comments and statements that you make . Stop asking for tiercide , your killing variety and the fun of this game at the same dam time .
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 943	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:37:00 - [95] - Quote Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: Clone D wrote: Why does an LAV require a separate driver and gunner, yet an HAV does not? This is not true as well because I operate my LAV alone and perform quite well in killing infantry . Maybe I should do this all day so as to show those who I happen to play with in the community that this can be done . Some of you players are a joke in your comments and statements that you make . You could do this as a HAV Pilot as well...so there you have not really a point here... Even though I still believe that is not the answer to the underlying problem...
Poonmunch Sanguis Defense Syndicate 870	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:10:00 - [96] - Quote Clone D wrote: The tank driver and main gunner should be two distinct functions and therefore two separate positions inside of a tank. So a single operator would either drive or use the main gun, but not both simultaneously. Thus to drive and fire the main gun simultaneously would require two crew members. Why does an LAV require a separate driver and gunner, yet an HAV does not? This is a common sense, excellent idea. They should be separate. If a guy wants to tank he needs a crew. Please implement this CCP. Munch Minmatar Patriot (Level 7) Dedicated Sniper
Clone D 349	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:06:00 - [97] - Quote If I requested a new class of dropsuit with the following specs, the community would tell me that I am out of my mind. Dropsuit Class: Demigod Armor: 2500 Shield: 2500 Movement Speed: 80 km/h Weapon: Dual Shoulder Mounted Cannon Damage: 1250 Splash Damage: 250 Rate of Fire: 3 per second However, people who want a single-operator tank embrace the above idea because it is wrapped up in the form of a tank. A tank should require a crew, otherwise you're just giving one person a sh*tload of power. Typically, they gang up now to cover each other which only magnifies the problem. .
da GAND L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 811	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:10:00 - [98] - Quote Supernus Gigas wrote: No. I mean come on seriously? Do people even think about the complications of their convoluted ideas? ***** Christ. edit:: Let me elaborate on why this a a terrible idea. What does this solve? Nothing. Now in order for a tank to work it needs too people to operate at the minimum. So what? All you've done is make it so two coordinating people with mics are needed to operate a tank. It's still the same tank. Still the same level of difficulty to take down. It solves nothing. "But tank spam!" But shut the up. Tank spam is so overblown it's *** ridiculous. In the past MONTH of playing Dust I have encountered tank spam literally three times. THREE matches out of several hundred had tank spam. The average for me is around ZERO to TWO tanks per match. Not to mention lone wolf tankers are **. People without a mic are ****. Teamwork should be recommended, but NEVER required just to play a role. Well maybe people with a pilot suit can man a tank by themselves but without a pilot suit it requires a few people to man a tank. How about that? Rage at Fanfest??
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1341	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:34:00 - [99] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: This bad idea once again pops up In comparision to a LAV lolfail the turret is at the back of the LAV Also who skills up what? who pays for what? who fits up the vehicle? who calls it in? do i have to use 2ppl for my playstyle all the time? do our skills stacking together? do we get a stronger vehicle since it takes 2 to operate it? will it require 2 AV to kill a 2man vehicle? This idea doesnt allow soloing as a vehicle pilot, you are punished and are forced to always have to work with someone Any of the crew can train the fitting skills and then call in the tank. Fitting skills and operations skills would be independent, so a driver would have driving skills, the gunner would have skills to increase DPS. Whoever calls it in pays for it; the rest of the crew can donate ISK if necessary. No, you don't have to have a crew all the time. Drive a MAV solo if you want, just don't expect it to have several thousand HP and a large turret. Yes, HAVs would get stronger if they require a crew (preferably of 3) to operate. But most AV players wouldn't object because balance would be maintained. 3 v 3 is fair. Quote: Maybe we should do this to infantry, 2 ppl to a dropsuit, 1 person controls the legs and the other controls the gun Probably best that I ignore this RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 375	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:39:00 - [100] - Quote Awry Barux wrote: This has been suggested 1000 times. CCP has already said that they do not intend to implement this. ^ Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?

R F Gyro Clones 4u 1342	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:40:00 - [101] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: Awry Barux wrote: This has been suggested 1000 times. CCP has already said that they do not intend to implement this. ^ Is there a link to that CCP statement, out of interest? RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1949	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:40:00 - [102] - Quote Zaaeed Massani wrote: Awry Barux wrote: This has been suggested 1000 times. CCP has already said that they do not intend to implement this. ^ Blue Tag Link or GTFO? Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
Zaaeed Massani RisingSuns Dark Taboo 375	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:41:00 - [103] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Awry Barux wrote: This has been suggested 1000 times. CCP has already said that they do not intend to implement this. ^ Is there a link to that CCP statement, out of interest? You could probably find it somewhere, though I'm at school and haven't the time at this moment. Minmatar & Gallente A.R.C. Program Instructor / Do you even lift?
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3511	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:45:00 - [104] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: This bad idea once again pops up In comparision to a LAV lolfail the turret is at the back of the LAV Also who skills up what? who pays for what? who fits up the vehicle? who calls it in? do i have to use 2ppl for my playstyle all the time? do our skills stacking together? do we get a stronger vehicle since it takes 2 to operate it? will it require 2 AV to kill a 2man vehicle? This idea doesnt allow soloing as a vehicle pilot, you are punished and are forced to always have to work with someone Any of the crew can train the fitting skills and then call in the tank. Fitting skills and operations skills would be independent, so a driver would have driving skills, the gunner would have skills to increase DPS. Whoever calls it in pays for it; the rest of the crew can donate ISK if necessary. No, you don't have to have a crew all the time. Drive a MAV solo if you want, just don't expect it to have several thousand HP and a large turret. Yes, HAVs would get stronger if they require a crew (preferably of 3) to operate. But most AV players wouldn't object because balance would be maintained. 3 v 3 is fair. Quote: Maybe we should do this to infantry, 2 ppl to a dropsuit, 1 person controls the legs and the other controls the gun Probably best that I ignore this No we cant If i stay as a driver and dont fit up any gunnary skills i cannot fit on any guns to it, how can i fit guns to it if i dont have the skills for it? The fit would be invalid and i wouldnt be able to call it in Also MAV doesnt exist yet Why should you ignore it? that is what your are asking is to do, 2 for our playstyle but only 1 for yours
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1342	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:52:00 - [105] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: No we cant If i stay as a driver and dont fit up any gunnary skills i cannot fit on any guns to it, how can i fit guns to it if i dont have the skills for it? The fit would be invalid and i wouldnt be able to call it in If you only train driving skills then, no, you won't be able to run solo. But that would be daft, and you wouldn't do it. As a driver, you'd probably train fairly balanced vehicle fitting and operations skills, but with extra emphasis on the driving ones. Quote: Also MAV doesnt exist yet We're talking about the future state of the game, remember. As many tankers have rightly pointed out, completely preventing you from running solo is a terrible idea, and introducing MAVs is the solution to that. You can play solo in a MAV and go 1v1 against AV. Or you can play as a crew in a HAV and go 3v3 against AV. Quote: Why should you ignore it? that is what your are asking is to do, 2 for our playstyle but only 1 for yours I should ignore it because if I didn't I'd think you were being petulant and foolish. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1949	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:54:00 - [106] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: R F Gyro wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: This bad idea once again pops up In comparision to a LAV lolfail the turret is at the back of the LAV Also who skills up what? who pays for what? who fits up the vehicle? who calls it in? do i have to use 2ppl for my playstyle all the time? do our skills stacking together? do we get a stronger vehicle since it takes 2 to operate it? will it require 2 AV to kill a 2man vehicle? This idea doesnt allow soloing as a vehicle pilot, you are punished and are forced to always have to work with someone Any of the crew can train the fitting skills and then call in the tank. Fitting skills and operations skills would be independent, so a driver would have driving skills, the gunner would have skills to increase DPS. Whoever calls it in pays for it; the rest of the crew can donate ISK if necessary. No, you don't have to have a crew all the time. Drive a MAV solo if you want, just don't expect it to have several thousand HP and a large turret. Yes, HAVs would get stronger if they require a crew (preferably of 3) to operate. But most AV players wouldn't object because balance would be maintained. 3 v 3 is fair. Quote: Maybe we should do this to infantry, 2 ppl to a dropsuit, 1 person controls the legs and the other controls the gun Probably best that I ignore this No we cant If i stay as a driver and dont fit up any gunnary skills i cannot fit on any guns to it, how can i fit guns to it if i dont have the skills for it? The fit would be invalid and i wouldnt be able to call it in Also MAV doesnt exist yet Why should you ignore it? that is what your are asking is to do, 2 for our playstyle but only 1 for yours Here you go again, decrying something because the mechanics for it aren't in game yet, though when it suits, you don't hesitate to bring up the Pilot suit (which, surprise, surprise, the mechanics for it aren't in game yet) Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1342	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:56:00 - [107] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Here you go again, decrying something because the mechanics for it aren't in game yet, though when it suits, you don't hesitate to bring up the Pilot suit (which, surprise, surprise, the mechanics for it aren't in game yet) Not sure what you mean. I'm saying I agree with the OP that HAVs should require a crew to operate effectively, but that I think that would be conditional on introducing MAVs to support solo tanking. I thought I was being reasonable. And I don't recall ever mentioning pilot suits, though I do happen to believe they would be a good idea. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1949	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:58:00 - [108] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: Here you go again, decrying something because the mechanics for it aren't in game yet, though when it suits, you don't hesitate to bring up the Pilot suit (which, surprise, surprise, the mechanics for it aren't in game yet) Not sure what you mean. I'm saying I agree with the OP that HAVs should require a crew to operate effectively, but that I think that would be conditional on introducing MAVs to support solo tanking. I thought I was being reasonable. And I don't recall ever mentioning pilot suits, though I do happen to believe they would be a good idea. This was directed at English, not you my lovely Faction fitting. Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
Ander Thedas Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 585	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:59:00 - [109] - Quote Stupid Blueberry wrote: Clone D wrote: The tank driver and main gunner should be two distinct functions and therefore two separate positions inside of a tank. So a single operator would either drive or use the main gun, but not both simultaneously. Thus to drive and fire the main gun simultaneously would require two crew members. Capsuleers perform the jobs of whole crews when operating their ships. False. Every EVE ship is manned, even the smallest ones. In addition to the Capsuleer there are crews (sometimes of thousands) keeping a ship operational. Omnia mutantur nihil interit FW lvl10 reward
Takahiro Kashuken Red Star. EoN. 3511	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:08:00 - [110] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Takahiro Kashuken wrote: No we cant If i stay as a driver and dont fit up any gunnary skills i cannot fit on any guns to it, how can i fit guns to it if i dont have the skills for it? The fit would be invalid and i wouldnt be able to call it in If you only train driving skills then, no, you won't be able to run solo. But that would be daft, and you wouldn't do it. As a driver, you'd probably train fairly balanced vehicle fitting and operations skills, but with extra emphasis on the driving ones. Quote: Also MAV doesnt exist yet We're talking about the future state of the game, remember. As many tankers have rightly pointed out, completely preventing you from running solo is a terrible idea, and introducing MAVs is the solution to that. You can play solo in a MAV and go 1v1 against AV. Or you can play as a crew in a HAV and go 3v3 against AV. Quote: Why should you ignore it? that is what your are asking is to do, 2 for our playstyle but only 1 for yours I should ignore it because if I didn't I'd think you were being petulant and foolish. If i drive i focus on driving, i wouldnt train up useless skills in the hope that i actually have 1 person willing to go gunner but if i cant even fit up the vehicle or even deploy it then the idea is useless Currently we cant use anything if we dont have the required skills for it so having a 2nd person with the skills for it wont be able to make the 1st person use it because they dont have the skills MAV doesnt exist

Void Echo Total Extinction 2477	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:37:00 - [111] - Quote Ander Thedas wrote: Stupid Blueberry wrote: Clone D wrote: The tank driver and main gunner should be two distinct functions and therefore two separate positions inside of a tank. So a single operator would either drive or use the main gun, but not both simultaneously. Thus to drive and fire the main gun simultaneously would require two crew members. Capsuleers perform the jobs of whole crews when operating their ships. False. Every EVE ship is manned, even the smallest ones. In addition to the Capsuleer there are crews (sometimes of thousands) keeping a ship operational. those little guys don't really exist, they don't do anything, they do not help in battle nor in any practical way, there was a dev post somewhere that says that a single capsuler controls the whole ship with his mind thus the immortal capsuler. Youtube Closed Beta Vet CEO: Total Extinction
Poonmunch Sanguis Defense Syndicate 871	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:53:00 - [112] - Quote Clone D wrote: If I requested a new class of dropsuit with the following specs, the community would tell me that I am out of my mind. Dropsuit Class: Demigod Armor: 2500 Shield: 2500 Movement Speed: 80 km/h Weapon: Dual Shoulder Mounted Cannon Damage: 1250 Splash Damage: 250 Rate of Fire: 3 per second However, people who want a single-operator tank embrace the above idea because it is wrapped up in the form of a tank. A tank should require a crew, otherwise you're just giving one person a sh*tload of power. Typically, they gang up now to cover each other which only magnifies the problem. This. Munch Minmatar Patriot (Level 7) Dedicated Sniper
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1343	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:55:00 - [113] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: This was directed at English, not you my lovely Faction fitting. Doh! My reading comprehension is as good as my gun game RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1343	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:07:00 - [114] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: If i drive i focus on driving, i wouldnt train up useless skills in the hope that i actually have 1 person willing to go gunner but if i cant even fit up the vehicle or even deploy it then the idea is useless Currently we cant use anything if we dont have the required skills for it so having a 2nd person with the skills for it wont be able to make the 1st person use it because they dont have the skills Sorry, I'm really struggling to follow you here. If you are saying that you don't have any corpmates or friends that you could team up with then you'll clearly need to run solo. I have absolutely no problem with that, and have suggested implementing an entire class of vehicles to support your play style. Just don't expect me to support you having way more DPS, EHP and speed than any infantry player. My advice though, in the unlikely event that this is implemented, would be to train a basic level of vehicle fitting and operations skills so that you can handle any role reasonably well, then decide on one of the 3 tank crew roles (driver, gunner, commander) and skill up even further in those. Quote: MAV doesnt exist Minmatar Heavy didn't exist until recently. Didn't stop people wanting them. Didn't stop CCP from implementing them. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Void Echo Total Extinction 2477	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:19:00 - [115] - Quote If it were implemented tanks would die off literally because they surve no purpose anymore and their practical use would no longer exist. Dropsuits should also have this done, one person controls movement, one person controls aiming and the other person controls firing, if you want tanks to require 2 people to drive, then dropsuits should require 3 people to use as well. Youtube Closed Beta Vet CEO: Total Extinction
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1351	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:21:00 - [116] - Quote Void Echo wrote: If it were implemented tanks would die off literally because they surve no purpose anymore and their practical use would no longer exist. Dropsuits should also have this done, one person controls movement, one person controls aiming and the other person controls firing, if you want tanks to require 2 people to drive, then dropsuits should require 3 people to use as well. Don't be silly. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 1951	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:27:00 - [117] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Void Echo wrote: If it were implemented tanks would die off literally because they surve no purpose anymore and their practical use would no longer exist. Dropsuits should also have this done, one person controls movement, one person controls aiming and the other person controls firing, if you want tanks to require 2 people to drive, then dropsuits should require 3 people to use as well. Don't be silly. Gyro, it is the only argument they can come up with, at least that doesn't include faeries and magical HAV bunnies. Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
Big Burns Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 143	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:31:00 - [118] - Quote Clone D wrote: The tank driver and main gunner should be two distinct functions and therefore two separate positions inside of a tank. So a single operator would either drive or use the main gun, but not both simultaneously. Thus to drive and fire the main gun simultaneously would require two crew members. Why does an LAV require a separate driver and gunner, yet an HAV does not? Because HAV take a lot more isk and SP to use. Possibly the best around.
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1037	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:33:00 - [119] - Quote Clone D wrote: The tank driver and main gunner should be two distinct functions and therefore two separate positions inside of a tank. So a single operator would either drive or use the main gun, but not both simultaneously. Thus to drive and fire the main gun simultaneously would require two crew members. Why does an LAV require a separate driver and gunner, yet an HAV does not? This is a very old topic. Usually the discussion has ended in majority siding with solo-tanks, with some okay reasons. Still I would prefer HAVs having separate main gunner. Why? Because I would like to leave the vehicular solo slaugher to frigin' MTACs!!!! Came back to Dust from a break and what did I find? Cloakies with physical invisibility which works in all situations.=(
Awry Barux Ametat Security Amarr Empire 2333	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:35:00 - [120] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Zaaeed Massani wrote: Awry Barux wrote: This has been suggested 1000 times. CCP has already said that they do not intend to implement this. ^ Blue Tag Link or GTFO? Here you go. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1847233#post1847233 CCP LogiBro wrote: Changing HAV control scheme to a LAV-like control scheme - Thread It's always been an intriguing idea, one that's been floating around for a while. However, we don't have any plans to do this in the short term. /thread, shut up, all of you. Nerdier than thou



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.