Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 18:48:00 -
[1] - Quote
Even though I am a tank driver and have the most fun with tanks, I think two changes are necessary for the long term viability of the game: 1. The driver should drive only and not control the main gun 2. Since the driver cannot shoot anymore, you are free to implement a decent driving scheme with the controller. Like the old school tank driving with the two sticks, or the standard forward/reverse + direction controls.
To compensate a bit, the driver should have the ability to control who can enter the main gun controls (at the very least. Probably also every position in the tank, but that is another discussion). So if he really wants to do it all, he can restrict the main gun for himself only, and switch position when necessary. Or restrict to his squad mates, corp mates, whatever.
These two changes would balance and equalize all driving where you drive, but cannot shoot at the same time. It would also eliminate the one man army feel of guys in well fitted tanks.
To compensate, the driver could do a lot more. You could zoom, control the shields boosters/armor repairer, remote boosters/repairers and any other coming modules (sensor boosters, cloaking device, target painters, smoke bombs, chaff, etc). There could also be lock detection so a driver can decide to throw chaff, smoke bombs, or EVE style ECM.
Now that the driver can concentrate on the driving, it could become worth it to add modules to improve speed, acceleration and maneuverability. He could control overload for either the main engine (going faster for a bit), or the main gun.
And a small concession could be a small gun fitted in the front of the tank that cannot be moved and shoots only straight ahead. |
STB-stlcarlos989 EV
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
936
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 18:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
I'm sure EVERY tank driver will be against this idea, but it does make sense. |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 18:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
Indeed, I don't even like my idea :(
But I think it is necessary. |
Khun-Al
135
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 19:12:00 -
[4] - Quote
Maybe the driver should controll the small turret in front. |
STB-stlcarlos989 EV
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
936
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 19:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
This would be fair to implement when they add a grouping system, but I sense there would be strong opposition. |
carl von oppenheimer
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
158
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:07:00 -
[6] - Quote
Vehicles should definitely be a separate mini game on their own this way those who like tanks could play the game with a more diverse role. In RL a tank is driven with 2 sticks where each controls a separate side of tracks, although you can turn the tank on penny even now, having separate controls would improve driving experience quite a bit.
Also they should change the dead zones so that small guns cover both 180 to sides or keep the current but reduce the left side dead zone (keep it 180 but less right turn or add it to 270) and let the turret gun to turn full 360 degrees.
|
Kira Lannister
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
712
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
No. Bad Idea. You don't want your main cannon being in the hands of a scrubby who can't aim. You can't risk your tank worth over a million isk in the hands of someone else.
Thinking about it. HORRIBLE IDEA! |
STB-stlcarlos989 EV
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
936
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
Kira Lannister wrote:No. Bad Idea. You don't want your main cannon being in the hands of a scrubby who can't aim. You can't risk your tank worth over a million isk in the hands of someone else.
Thinking about it. HORRIBLE IDEA!
Won't be an issue with a grouping system or if tank drivers are allowed to kick out gunners. |
Bunny dee
Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:22:00 -
[9] - Quote
As a tank driver I hate the idea, but with a few exceptions I think its a good idea.
The exceptions being the driver(owner) needs to be able to control who is in the tank and what positions they are in. Without that control this would be a horrible idea. |
Just Bad
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:26:00 -
[10] - Quote
@ Sandair - Could you elaborate on why you think this change is necessary for the long term viability of the game? |
|
carl von oppenheimer
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
158
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:32:00 -
[11] - Quote
Just Bad wrote:@ Sandair - Could you elaborate on why you think this change is necessary for the long term viability of the game?
It would make driving a tank more of a team effort, though I wouldn't mind having a full team for tanks with tank commanders thrown in the mix and all. Problem is that it would make tank driving a perhaps too separate from the rest of the game play. |
Just Bad
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:39:00 -
[12] - Quote
@ Carl - I was looking for the OPs opinion since he's the one that suggested it but you make a good argument. Now this may seem like a stupid question, but please bear with me, do you think tank crewing isn't enough of a cooperative endeavour at the moment and if yes to that then why do you think that is the case? |
Skold Hagradsson
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:55:00 -
[13] - Quote
Owner = tank commander, with power to set up tank squad for his tank. Controls target acquisition,ewar, repair and secondary gun Driver = front gunner too, if the turret is fixed Gunner = main gun
I had thought about this too, main problem is that it's only one guys isk sink, maybe if there was a way to spli the costs so there were no more "free rides" that would be the answer. So when you enter the tank you share the risk, for asset time (10 secs) when you leave.
Driving and firing while moving is pretty impossible unless you are in a straight line with the turret. There is too much for the owner and no way to currently share that. As someone said, tanks can be a kind of mini game on their own then and grouped teams get their own renown.
Also if pilots are to get their own suits, drivers may be able to get mods for speed or extra shield, gunners ROF or Damage, commanders, engineering/electronic buffs. The squad system is kind of there it just needs a tweak to get it working. |
carl von oppenheimer
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
158
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 20:56:00 -
[14] - Quote
Well if we go with this route:
Lets think about how tank is actually driven which is that only commander actually knows what is going on outside the tank, this alone would change things drastically when operating a tank. In RL tank driver and a commander are two different persons for obvious reasons but this is future so driver and commander could be same person.
But main issue is communication and that you who calls in the vehicle don't really have any options on who is sitting in your tank this makes you a commander in name only.
So lets assume that we would have tank crew as in RL that would mean that your gunners could only see what their gun sees, and your driver would only have a camera view to sides, front and back and the commander (owner?) would be the only one who can view the tank as 3D model (the way we have it now) to signify that he has the best vantage point of the surroundings.
While the above would be neat I have doubts if that would really fly in an FPS shooter, hence we need a simpler version of the same where driver is the commander and everyone has a full view out side but you could not use the tank on well anything without extras which would automatically mean that you would need at least two for the crew.
Granted tanks can't already do much without a crew of 3 already but this change would further enhance the fact.
Well you could still use the tank alone for road kills even after the change. |
Fivetimes Infinity
Immobile Infantry
1086
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 21:23:00 -
[15] - Quote
This is how tanks worked in Planetside 1, and even there where vehicles were free and it wasn't a big deal to get skills necessary to drive a tank, it was really lame to do.
Imagine having many millions of skill points invested in a tank, and be spending hundreds of thousands of your own ISK on a vehicle, and yet your only payoff is being a taxi driver for other people to use all your personally bought items and skills you invested in. I guess it's okay if you're using the tank in a big important battle where it really matters, but it is amazingly lame to be a glorified taxi driver while strangers have fun shooting people on your dime.
In short, I am 100% opposed to this idea. I've played it in Planetside 1 and I know how much it sucks. It will suck even worse when it's your ISK and your SP that you can't make use of yourself. |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 21:26:00 -
[16] - Quote
Crap, my long dissertation on why I think it is necessary for the long term survival of the game got lost somehow... I love this forum!
Summary because I'm lazy: Tanks are currently sustainable for solo playing and they are the place to be. This is bad for the game, you want to encourage inter-dependency and social interactions. Everyone will become (at least) a tank driver for sure if nothing changes. Nerfing them is not an option. Giving others advantages over tanks (e.g.: maps favoring infantry, big bag anti-tank gun, etc) will only reduce the usefulness of tanks. The only way I see to improve the game without making some part of it (tanks) suffer at the expense of others (dropsuits), is to remove the main gun control from the driver.
Oh, and currently tank driving sucks and can't be improved if you keep the shooting ability. So if you remove the shooting controls from the drivers, you can drastically improve the driving because now you have options (like the two stick method). |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
583
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 21:31:00 -
[17] - Quote
I understand your logic, but I'd rather cope with the controls than hand over my main turret to someone else, grouping or not. There are many situations where I need to have complete control of the main turret and the tank at the same time to survive, and trying to communicate what I need done to the main turret controller is just going to make that even more difficult for me.
-1 in my book, sorry. |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 21:35:00 -
[18] - Quote
I agree with you Fivetimes, I was there in Planetside too. But Planetside did not have the Eve Online background to draw upon. Here I see the driving of vehicles more like in Eve, where you "manage" more than aim and shoot. And the driving could be made a lot more challenging by the design of the maps too.
I admit that the ISK and SP costs will have to be balanced with the rewards. That is why I was suggesting a lot more options for tanks (most of which are available in Eve). The driver could even be "tagging" enemies (like locking in Eve) and the gunner would get more points for getting these enemies quickly. Maybe even ammo selection (by the driver)? I don't have all the solutions, but I think the driver needs to be separate.
|
Noc Tempre
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 21:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
I could see an OPTIONAL copilot setup where you can hand off control of the main gun, but this would be an awful default, or worse mandatory, setup. |
Mo Gallas Gentralde
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
178
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 22:16:00 -
[20] - Quote
So.. in summary, you want to make sure that the owner of a tank... cannot use the tank.
Why would one invest Millions of Skill Points into Tank technology? Why would someone drop Millions of ISK into Tank parts?
They wouldn't. They'd drive dropships.
You want the tank to be a dropship.....? |
|
Noc Tempre
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1170
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 22:48:00 -
[21] - Quote
There has to be an improvement in gameplay to warrant such a change. Dropships are getting ewar to keep the pilot excited. Limiting a whole audience's enjoyment would not make the game better, even if you happen to believe that would be more "realistic". |
Super Cargo
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
428
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 22:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
Sandair Mulholy wrote:Even though I am a tank driver and have the most fun with tanks, I think two changes are necessary for the long term viability of the game: 1. The driver should drive only and not control the main gun 2. Since the driver cannot shoot anymore, you are free to implement a decent driving scheme with the controller. Like the old school tank driving with the two sticks, or the standard forward/reverse + direction controls.
To compensate a bit, the driver should have the ability to control who can enter the main gun controls (at the very least. Probably also every position in the tank, but that is another discussion). So if he really wants to do it all, he can restrict the main gun for himself only, and switch position when necessary. Or restrict to his squad mates, corp mates, whatever.
These two changes would balance and equalize all driving where you drive, but cannot shoot at the same time. It would also eliminate the one man army feel of guys in well fitted tanks.
To compensate, the driver could do a lot more. You could zoom, control the shields boosters/armor repairer, remote boosters/repairers and any other coming modules (sensor boosters, cloaking device, target painters, smoke bombs, chaff, etc). There could also be lock detection so a driver can decide to throw chaff, smoke bombs, or EVE style ECM.
Now that the driver can concentrate on the driving, it could become worth it to add modules to improve speed, acceleration and maneuverability. He could control overload for either the main engine (going faster for a bit), or the main gun.
And a small concession could be a small gun fitted in the front of the tank that cannot be moved and shoots only straight ahead.
I can't think of a more boring idea. On the plus side, maybe less people will drive around in tanks. I hate tank drivers. |
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
583
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 23:16:00 -
[23] - Quote
Super Cargo wrote:
I can't think of a more boring idea. On the plus side, maybe less people will drive around in tanks. I hate tank drivers.
You do realize this sort of statement just encourages us to drive them even more? |
Just Bad
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.07 23:22:00 -
[24] - Quote
@ Sandair - Thanks for elaborating on why you made the suggestion. I can see where you're coming from now.
That said I still don't know if I agree with it. I'm sure there are ways they could change things without removing a large part of the enjoyment for someone who invests the ISK and SP in tanks while better reinforcing that cooperation amongst the crew is needed to be successful.
If the problem boils down to one-man tanks being too effective at everything tanks do maybe they could narrow their abilities to compensate.
What if they could reduce the effectiveness of the large turrets against infantry - if you're going to lone wolf it in a tank you still get the joy of driving around shooting stuff with a big gun but the gamut of targets available to you is limited and you're comparatively easy pickings for infantry without a crew gunning for you. |
Kira Lannister
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
712
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 00:10:00 -
[25] - Quote
Just had to post again, this is a bad idea. |
Lurchasaurus
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
808
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 00:44:00 -
[26] - Quote
STB-stlcarlos989 EV wrote:Kira Lannister wrote:No. Bad Idea. You don't want your main cannon being in the hands of a scrubby who can't aim. You can't risk your tank worth over a million isk in the hands of someone else.
Thinking about it. HORRIBLE IDEA! Won't be an issue with a grouping system or if tank drivers are allowed to kick out gunners.
no amount of grouping can make me comfortable with putting my millions into the hands of someone else....the main gun is obviously the primary weapon for the tank and only the driver has a 1:1 input on the controls. A secondary gunner for the large turret would be very inefficient as he would never be perfectly able to track targets due to unexpected driving changes. Simply communicating driving over comms would just be terrible since that is for tactics, not saying "turning left!" and people dont typically try as hard when its not their money on the line. |
Flux Raeder
WarRavens
83
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 01:00:00 -
[27] - Quote
This would only work if you could get the full 50 points and kill points from the kills made by your passengers. If you can allow only who you want into the tank then you can team up with a friend who's aim isn't crap and gain the full points to make it worth it instead of this "vehicle kill assist" 25 points. It does make some logical sense, as long as the driver is getting the tank to the kill-zone and keeping everyone alive he is participating, he HAS to participate, and as long as it is only the driver who gets full kill points from other kills there will be no freeloaders |
Skold Hagradsson
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 01:02:00 -
[28] - Quote
The main objection (save for investment of sp) is the isk issue. That will only be an issue in factional warfare but if you can set up a tank squad or make sure those who get in agree to contribute then the isk risk is shared. In the corp/alliance matches your corpies will form the crew, so usual eve risks of spies aside, the tank will either be bought by corp or you share in the rewards when the contract completes. Isk risk is what eve has always been about. You solo pvp that risk is managed by you, in gang you share it with your logi pilot or that the rest of the gang turn up when your in the ****.
For the factional warfare it might suck, but that could be managed, however it may add something to the corp battles when they arrive. The LAV already works similar to the suggestion and I still see people call them down to just drive. |
Flux Raeder
WarRavens
83
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 01:04:00 -
[29] - Quote
Also, give the tank driver more sensitive and in-depth controls to make it take more skill and attention to drive the tank, it's pretty bad right now with the laggy tank mechanics (rolling sideways into a wall) while trying to fire a weapon at a scout |
Kira Lannister
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
712
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 01:43:00 -
[30] - Quote
Not to mention when your tank starts break dancing in mid-air. |
|
Mic McCoy
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 01:58:00 -
[31] - Quote
I love this idea. I'm not a tank driver currently and do not plan to be in the future. I do think this would add an amazing depth to how tanks are played. I think the issue of having a separate commander in the tank can be set aside knowing that there will be a field commander who has an overview of the battle. Given the investment in a tank the commander will always give attention to the vehicles. It doesn't mean they should have to call primaries so to speak, but they can advise on group movements relative to a particular tanks movements. This would mean, however, that the overview for the commander would have to clearly show at least who is driving each vehicle so they can accurately relay commands.
I also think having the full crew of the tank split the costs of said vehicle is a prudent idea to implement alongside this. A ten to twenty second time window before the tanks destruction would ensure that no one can try to bail out to avoid the isk penalty. At the end of the match the isk would simply be deducted from the match earnings of the crew and given to the owner to compensate. Another option would be to split the cost between the whole team. This would encourage the whole team to protect its valuable assets and further increase the need for teamwork.
Again, I'm all for this idea! +1 |
Kira Lannister
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
712
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 01:59:00 -
[32] - Quote
No. What about when your main cannon gunner decides to get bored and jump out? Your stuck driving a over-sized taxi. |
|
CCP Frame
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
351
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 02:05:00 -
[33] - Quote
Moved to feedback/requests section. |
|
Encharrion
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
104
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 02:21:00 -
[34] - Quote
I don't particularly like that idea, but how about an extra seat that can operate extra equipment like shield boosters or ewar. Furthermore, the driver should CHOOSE to hand over the main gun controls to the 4th person. |
Zero Harpuia
Maverick Conflict Solutions
422
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 02:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
In a purely comparative fashion, it makes sense. No other vehicle gets to be a gunner and a driver, why should tanks?
On a more technical note, freeing up the controls so that the driver can run the modules quickly as well as, yaknow, DRIVE, makes sense.
Even if your gunner is 'some scrubby' he'll have WAY better accuracy than you because he doesn't also have to drive, just point and shoot.
Lastly, as someone brought up before, it allows two separate Pilot dropsuits to be utilized, empowering the tank and the gun separately.
As a sidenote, be honest with yourselves people, unless you have an EVE sugardaddy or are taking them from the corp hanger, exactly how many tanks do you think you can afford to own for private use anyway? Go look at the original trailer, there was a tank and its price there. 1,400,000 ISK. The tank was a Gunnlogi. Imagine how much a Sagaris or Marauder will be. Now that you've finished chucking your dinner, TANKS are a TEAM thing, because of COST and ATTENTION. (them bold words are the important ones) A lone merc won't be rolling a Proto tank because he has to rely on his team to kill AV troops (in a random match, that isn't happening), it will kill his reserves (it only takes one good forge gun to make you go from Trump to chump), and everyone will focus on him (which a random team won't consciously take advantage of).
Will people be running tanks alone in the next build? No. Not because of this, but because it will take over eight games to buy and fit one Proto tank. Wanna run around on your own with a big gun? Let me introduce the Forge Gun. |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 03:02:00 -
[36] - Quote
Lurchasaurus wrote: no amount of grouping can make me comfortable with putting my millions into the hands of someone else....the main gun is obviously the primary weapon for the tank and only the driver has a 1:1 input on the controls. A secondary gunner for the large turret would be very inefficient as he would never be perfectly able to track targets due to unexpected driving changes. Simply communicating driving over comms would just be terrible since that is for tactics, not saying "turning left!" and people dont typically try as hard when its not their money on the line.
This is an easy one to rectify: When the controls are not touched, the turrets stay pointing in the same direction all the time, independent of the tank direction (they still bobble up and down with the tank). It is like that in some games (I just can't remember which ones now) and it works pretty well.
As for the ISK, unlike EVE, you get ISK reward at the end of a match, and it is already dependent on how much you spent (kind off). A tank driver that sacrificed his tank would just get more to compensate than a gunner with only his dropsuit lost. The idea of Dust is that the more you put in a match, the more you get back out. With a little balancing that could work.
I have no solution for the SP put toward the tank; I guess it would have to be fun and challenging (by adding other tasks to the driver, like I mentioned). And maybe get more skill points (as it is now) from a match if you drive a tank.
In still feel bad for proposing this because I love the tanks as they are, and like most my first reastion would be: NO WAY. But I have been thinking about it for a while, I look at the bigger goal and I ask myself if I would still train, buy, fit and drive tanks if I could just "drive" them. And I keep coming up with a "most probably yes". With a Lock alarm, smoke bombs (or equivalent), target painter, maybe a small fixed gun in the front and other stuff like that, my answer becomes a definite yes.
And many more things can be done: . Make it an active job to keep the tank defences up to their max, like manual shield boosters and repairers . Manual decisions on where to send power: to engine for speed, to main gun for maximum vehicle and installations damage, to small guns for maximum close quarter infantry damage, to shield for maximum regeneration, ...
|
Fivetimes Infinity
Immobile Infantry
1086
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 03:07:00 -
[37] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:I could see an OPTIONAL copilot setup where you can hand off control of the main gun, but this would be an awful default, or worse mandatory, setup.
Yeah, having it as an option would be fine I think. Having it as mandatory would be a tremendous mistake, especially if that were carried over to every vehicle, where spending the SP and ISK on an expensive piece of hardware meant your reward was to be a taxi driver for other people who're having a good time while you're watching. |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 03:28:00 -
[38] - Quote
Fivetimes Infinity wrote:Noc Tempre wrote:I could see an OPTIONAL copilot setup where you can hand off control of the main gun, but this would be an awful default, or worse mandatory, setup. Yeah, having it as an option would be fine I think. Having it as mandatory would be a tremendous mistake, especially if that were carried over to every vehicle, where spending the SP and ISK on an expensive piece of hardware meant your reward was to be a taxi driver for other people who're having a good time while you're watching.
I thought that was sarcastic, but reading your previous post, I think it might not be. So let me just say that all other vehicles in Dust are already like that: you are driving only, no shooting. |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 03:39:00 -
[39] - Quote
Just Bad wrote: What if they could reduce the effectiveness of the large turrets against infantry - if you're going to lone wolf it in a tank you still get the joy of driving around shooting stuff with a big gun but the gamut of targets available to you is limited and you're comparatively easy pickings for infantry without a crew gunning for you.
That would just reduce the effectiveness of tanks. Tanks are supposed to be force multipliers. So a well manned tank (3 people now) means that you have 3 less pairs of boots on the ground, so that tank better be worth more than three guys in dropsuits. And as they stand, I think they are. Reduce the effectiveness and it might not be worth to put them in combat. That is why I prefer to remove the one man army tank option (even if it pains me) instead of nerfing the tank in any way. |
testguy242
44
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 04:25:00 -
[40] - Quote
I support this idea.
As someone that drives/flies vehicles, I think it'd be more fun to have one role and really have to work together. There should also be a vehicle-chat system--I think Red Orchestra has this. It'd be easier to drive really well also without having to worry about the main gun. |
|
Mobius Wyvern
BetaMax.
1216
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 04:32:00 -
[41] - Quote
Sandair Mulholy wrote:Even though I am a tank driver and have the most fun with tanks, I think two changes are necessary for the long term viability of the game: 1. The driver should drive only and not control the main gun 2. Since the driver cannot shoot anymore, you are free to implement a decent driving scheme with the controller. Like the old school tank driving with the two sticks, or the standard forward/reverse + direction controls.
To compensate a bit, the driver should have the ability to control who can enter the main gun controls (at the very least. Probably also every position in the tank, but that is another discussion). So if he really wants to do it all, he can restrict the main gun for himself only, and switch position when necessary. Or restrict to his squad mates, corp mates, whatever.
These two changes would balance and equalize all driving where you drive, but cannot shoot at the same time. It would also eliminate the one man army feel of guys in well fitted tanks.
To compensate, the driver could do a lot more. You could zoom, control the shields boosters/armor repairer, remote boosters/repairers and any other coming modules (sensor boosters, cloaking device, target painters, smoke bombs, chaff, etc). There could also be lock detection so a driver can decide to throw chaff, smoke bombs, or EVE style ECM.
Now that the driver can concentrate on the driving, it could become worth it to add modules to improve speed, acceleration and maneuverability. He could control overload for either the main engine (going faster for a bit), or the main gun.
And a small concession could be a small gun fitted in the front of the tank that cannot be moved and shoots only straight ahead. Made a thread about this myself. Once we have basic Corp structuring, or at least a party system, I would heartily support this. |
Eirik DenRoue
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 04:48:00 -
[42] - Quote
I think the tank driver only driving is a great idea!
I also think restriction of passengers is a great idea!
+1 to both.
This really drives team work and excellence. Which is the driving force for Dust 514.
|
Mako LandSharkX
Goggles Inc.
48
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 09:35:00 -
[43] - Quote
I support this idea. So long as drivers start getting more piloting points (like for squad spawning, more kill assist points, etc) rather then weak gunner assists.
For those complaining that it's "their isk investment-they should be manning the guns too" must not have driven an LAV or a Dropship-I dont think tanks should be any different in this regard.
tanks vs dropships should be based on squad makeup and map terrain/layouts. I'd hope with a change like this Tanks will mainly be used in squads with logistic support reppers and for specific terrains/maps that make tanks more survivable, maneuverable, and/or devastating then similar dropship squads...and not so much as one player's uber suit. |
Arramakaian Eka
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
363
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 10:49:00 -
[44] - Quote
Does anyone who supports this idea actually drive tanks most of the time, or even often? If you take away gun control from the driver, you need to create something compelling for the driver to do. As a long-time Battlefield tank ***** (20 tank hours in BF3 alone, over 20% of my gametime), I don't see much else out there.
I drive tanks to melt faces. If I wanted just to drive around, I'd get in a jeep.
Maybe controlling ECM or other defensive measures would bring something to the driver's role, but I doubt it would be enough to make driving a tank fun.
To put a finer point: DUST has tanks, and tanks need drivers. If driving a tank is not a compelling, fun experience, nobody will drive tanks. Some might like that outcome, but DUST is supposed to be a battlefield FPS - and for that we need tanks. |
Jonquill Caronite
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
115
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 10:57:00 -
[45] - Quote
I can't in good consciousness approve this idea until I KNOW I can control who's in my tank, and team grouping is available... Then maybe... As it stands I have enough trouble keeping retards without mics out of my vehicle, because whenever I get out to repair my crippled tank INEVITABLY my brain dead turret gunner switches seats and takes my 10% armor vehicle right back into the battle to get blown up... I seriously wish I was underestimating the situation but I figured I was doing pretty well on money so I'd have faith in my fellow gamers common sense and capabilities and trust them not to be total morons, and EVERY time I did this with a player who didn't have a Mic I was time and time again disappointed by their remarkable lack of intelligence...
If this is what I have to work with as a tank driver, then I NEED to be able to lone wolf it because team work with people fresh from the special olympics category or the support group 'gamers with downs' is completely impossible.
Small caveat, when fighters and gunships come out other vehicles will have pilot manned guns, its just not available yet because the other two vehicles are clearly not designed to be pilot operated gunships... |
Arramakaian Eka
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
363
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 11:06:00 -
[46] - Quote
Jonquill Caronite wrote:As it stands I have enough trouble keeping retards without mics out of my vehicle, because whenever I get out to repair my crippled tank INEVITABLY my brain dead turret gunner switches seats and takes my 10% armor vehicle right back into the battle to get blown up...
That's a rather bad faux pas, and will get better when we get more FPS players.
Gunner is supposed to stay inside the tank at all times, protecting whoever is repairing. Driver is the driver unless she allows others to take over. Unfortunately it happens occasionally in games with randoms even in hardcore FPSs.
One way to stop that would be a password/PIN to enter driver's seat for anyone other than the original driver/owner of the tank. Possibly this would reset to zero or allow teammates if the original driver/owner dies, or goes too far away from the tank. |
Just Bad
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 11:28:00 -
[47] - Quote
@ Sandair - I'm not sure if it would just reduce the effectiveness of a crewed tank by a significant amount - a one man tank yes without doubt, that's the price you'd pay for lone wolfing it. I think essentially it'd be similar to your proposal if there was only one person in it but with the driver & large turret operator switching to one of the small turrets to put down infantry as opposed to switching between the driver only and any gunner position to do the same. I'd like to think a fully crewed HAV would still be a fearsome thing to face off against as infantry.
From what I understand your proposal would have the large and one small turret being fully effective (since they're manned) I'm curious what your plans are about the other small turret - does it get removed (and how does that impact the tanks effectiveness?), shared operation by the driver (and how is that going to work effectively?) or are your thinking 4 man tanks?
Comparing these two proposals they both nerf tanks in some capacity one way or another. Crewed or otherwise.
Although I appreciate that you're wanting to help the game be more about team work and bring coherency to all vehicles in that the owner is the driver and not more I'm still not sold on the idea. Sorry. |
Grit Breather
BetaMax.
660
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 11:40:00 -
[48] - Quote
May I suggest a change of thought direction on this matter? The discussion right now is all about the driver's options in a tank he owns and how keeping him as just a driver will make the owner unhappy. But what if the owner wasn't the driver but the commander? Work with me on this...
Think of a real life situation. Say you have a really cool vehicle with a gazillion gadgets and capabilities. These all require you to not be driving as that takes too much distraction. If you'd own such a vehicle you'd get a good driver but stay with your gadgets (or large turret + vehicle command in our example).
So let's change the way we think of tanks. The tank owner should be the tank commander and not the driver. That makes a lot more sense to me and pretty much solves all these disputes.
What do you think? |
Arramakaian Eka
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
363
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 12:52:00 -
[49] - Quote
Grit Breather wrote:May I suggest a change of thought direction on this matter? The discussion right now is all about the driver's options in a tank he owns and how keeping him as just a driver will make the owner unhappy. But what if the owner wasn't the driver but the commander? Work with me on this...
Think of a real life situation. Say you have a really cool vehicle with a gazillion gadgets and capabilities. These all require you to not be driving as that takes too much distraction. If you'd own such a vehicle you'd get a good driver but stay with your gadgets (or large turret + vehicle command in our example).
So let's change the way we think of tanks. The tank owner should be the tank commander and not the driver. That makes a lot more sense to me and pretty much solves all these disputes.
What do you think?
For better or worse, every FPS I've played which has tanks has the driver controlling the main gun. Changing that notion is of course possible, but whether it's doable is questionable given the reasons I listed in a previous comment. |
Grit Breather
BetaMax.
660
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 12:59:00 -
[50] - Quote
Arramakaian Eka wrote:Grit Breather wrote:May I suggest a change of thought direction on this matter? The discussion right now is all about the driver's options in a tank he owns and how keeping him as just a driver will make the owner unhappy. But what if the owner wasn't the driver but the commander? Work with me on this...
Think of a real life situation. Say you have a really cool vehicle with a gazillion gadgets and capabilities. These all require you to not be driving as that takes too much distraction. If you'd own such a vehicle you'd get a good driver but stay with your gadgets (or large turret + vehicle command in our example).
So let's change the way we think of tanks. The tank owner should be the tank commander and not the driver. That makes a lot more sense to me and pretty much solves all these disputes.
What do you think? For better or worse, every FPS I've played which has tanks has the driver controlling the main gun. Changing that notion is of course possible, but whether it's doable is questionable given the reasons I listed in a previous comment. Dust is changing many things in the FPS world. Dust, for starters, is bringing a hell of a lot teamwork than anyone is used to. It's bringing game support for defined command structures.
So why not also change some fundementals? Tank drivers don't shoot. They drive and they're damn good at driving. |
|
Arramakaian Eka
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
363
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 13:46:00 -
[51] - Quote
Grit Breather wrote:Dust is changing many things in the FPS world. Dust, for starters, is bringing a hell of a lot teamwork than anyone is used to. It's bringing game support for defined command structures.
So why not also change some fundementals? Tank drivers don't shoot. They drive and they're damn good at driving.
Not new. MAG had a command structure, and support for true teamwork much better than DUST currently has, and communication which didn't even require a headset to be useful when playing with randoms. Even Battlefield 2 had these to a certain extent - which was dumbed down in BF3 to compete with CoD, but that's another topic - and so did Natural Selection.
I'm all for changing the genre - it surely needs it - and mixing things up, but you need to offer more than just driving to a tank driver, otherwise very few people will do it. |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 13:57:00 -
[52] - Quote
@Grit Breather, It could definitely be an idea to have the driver != owner, but I don't think introducing a commander (i.e.: not driving and not gunning) would work. You would be hard pressed to find drivers then and be completely vulnerable while you get one. Drivers would have to be non-tank owners (mostly I guess), yet drive enough to be good! Not an easy combination. Of course the owner would not need to be the commander, but the job of the driver would still need to be more fun that just driving, but could not really be because the fun operations are done by the commander.
To clarify, my proposition is to separate the driver and main gunner positions, it doesn't mean that the owner needs to be the driver (even if that is what I hinted at). The owner could decide to be the main gunner. Hopefully the owner should always have the option to decide where he wants to play in his tank, or even not play in his tank and leave the place for a better crew!
I originally was thinking of a 4 man tank to reduce the rework to be done. But if we ignore the amount of work necessary, it could remain a 3 man tank, but the small gunner would need full 360deg view then, and it would be nice if the driver had his fixed gun in the front.
Other options to compensate for the loss of main gun control by the driver: - If there is no main gunner, the driver could be firing the main gun (instead or in conjunction with his fixed gun), but the main gun would always be pointing in the front, so no aiming reticule, no left-right control and no up-down control either. Enough to be able to attack large targets at ground level, or defend himself (a bit) against another tank and not be completely helpless. - Have the low level tanks be driver-gunners, but the high level tank separate the driver and gunner. So for newbies and fresh players, they could get in tanks and have fun, but for the serious stomping power, you would need more collaboration.
Fundamentally, I think the ability of fitting a CRU in a tank points to the willingness of CCP to go in that direction. |
Arramakaian Eka
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
363
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 15:20:00 -
[53] - Quote
Sandair Mulholy wrote:- Have the low level tanks be driver-gunners, but the high level tank separate the driver and gunner. So for newbies and fresh players, they could get in tanks and have fun, but for the serious stomping power, you would need more collaboration.
Not a bad idea at all. Keep the main gun with the driver on the lighter Assault/C&C/ECM/etc tanks, but separate it for Main Battle Tanks. That way those drivers who insist on shooting (me) would still be able to melt faces, but we'd also get heavy MBT which would be a formidable weapons platform.
There would still need to be more to do for the driver than just driving, though, and that's my main concern. |
Darkz azurr
Royal Uhlans Amarr Empire
105
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 18:15:00 -
[54] - Quote
dunno how your idea would work out in highsec op with people that dont really group up, and people with no coms etc |
SILENTSAM 69
Pro Hic Immortalis RISE of LEGION
421
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 19:27:00 -
[55] - Quote
I just want to say i love that CCP made a vehicle control method that makes sense.
I always hated how in HALO each stick only used half its range of motion. Now all the same controls and range of motion is done equally well with one stick using all its range allowing you to have your other stick for controlling a gun or just the direction you are looking.
Controlling vehicles in DUST 514 is just easy and intuitive and makes sense. |
Ender Storm
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
50
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 19:28:00 -
[56] - Quote
OP, suported.
Your idea makes sense and would make vehicles more meaningful and sometghing that demands organization, and not something that everyone spams across the field. |
Ender Storm
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
50
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 19:30:00 -
[57] - Quote
Darkz azurr wrote:dunno how your idea would work out in highsec op with people that dont really group up, and people with no coms etc
Thats an incorrect assumption, high-sec have just as many organized corporations, at least in EVE side of things.
Even if not, too bad for the vehicle owner, but with little time i am sure people will form bonds with other players and at least group with 1 or 2 guys. |
Alshadow
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
71
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 22:20:00 -
[58] - Quote
i like this idea alot but i have to say this is one of the reasons that adding a grouping system needs to be the top priority thing right now because without it adding this would kinda suck |
Alshadow
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
71
|
Posted - 2012.08.08 22:25:00 -
[59] - Quote
Arramakaian Eka wrote:Sandair Mulholy wrote:- Have the low level tanks be driver-gunners, but the high level tank separate the driver and gunner. So for newbies and fresh players, they could get in tanks and have fun, but for the serious stomping power, you would need more collaboration. Not a bad idea at all. Keep the main gun with the driver on the lighter Assault/C&C/ECM/etc tanks, but separate it for Main Battle Tanks. That way those drivers who insist on shooting (me) would still be able to melt faces, but we'd also get heavy MBT which would be a formidable weapons platform. There would still need to be more to do for the driver than just driving, though, and that's my main concern.
make all the current tanks have slightly less armor and shield and alittle less pg and cpu... then interduce a whole new kind of tank that would be even beter than the ones we have now but be much more expensive and have seperate diver/gunner, make the current ones LAVs and the new ones HAVs then make the jeeps like recon vehicles or (insert clever name here) |
Arramakaian Eka
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
363
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 00:02:00 -
[60] - Quote
Alshadow wrote:Arramakaian Eka wrote:Sandair Mulholy wrote:- Have the low level tanks be driver-gunners, but the high level tank separate the driver and gunner. So for newbies and fresh players, they could get in tanks and have fun, but for the serious stomping power, you would need more collaboration. Not a bad idea at all. Keep the main gun with the driver on the lighter Assault/C&C/ECM/etc tanks, but separate it for Main Battle Tanks. That way those drivers who insist on shooting (me) would still be able to melt faces, but we'd also get heavy MBT which would be a formidable weapons platform. There would still need to be more to do for the driver than just driving, though, and that's my main concern. make all the current tanks have slightly less armor and shield and alittle less pg and cpu... then interduce a whole new kind of tank that would be even beter than the ones we have now but be much more expensive and have seperate diver/gunner, make the current ones LAVs and the new ones HAVs then make the jeeps like recon vehicles or (insert clever name here)
Just because you built it doesn't necessarily mean people will use it. My point all along has been that people play FPSs to shoot things. Making tank driver a gunless FPS player makes him... FP player. There needs to be something fun for the driver to do, and driving alone is not sufficient - and my imagination is not vivid enough to come up with ideas what that could be. I haven't seen anyone else have any ideas, either.
Again, any tank driver actually thinks this is a good idea, or is it just those who either play grunts or pilots? |
|
wathak 514
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
106
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 00:09:00 -
[61] - Quote
K i dont know how long many of you been playing video games but my experiance with shooters goes back to socom 3 which was somewhere in the 2000 and lasted for years in there there were tanks on multiplayer maps and the driver operated both main gun and steering wheel. This also holds true for bf3 and other games between the 2.
The problem ur trying to solve by splitting the driver and main gunner to 2 diffrent spots is not in the seat layout but instead in the control layout.
Currently the right control stick controls both acceleration and turning which is very ineffecient. The fix thats needed is to remap the controls so the currently unused l2 and r2 triggers become acceleration and braking and the right control tick is soley used for steering making it more effecient and a little easyer.
Now ofcoarse if ur manning the gun u wouldnt be able to see infront of u if aiming behind u for not crashing well that be skill of the driver and his knowledge of the map but i myself am a supporter of an idea brought up for the driver to get a miniscreen that always show where hes going ofcoarse limited and may even be a module that would be attached to the tank |
Zero Harpuia
Maverick Conflict Solutions
422
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 00:33:00 -
[62] - Quote
Arramakaian Eka wrote:Alshadow wrote:Arramakaian Eka wrote:Sandair Mulholy wrote:- Have the low level tanks be driver-gunners, but the high level tank separate the driver and gunner. So for newbies and fresh players, they could get in tanks and have fun, but for the serious stomping power, you would need more collaboration. Not a bad idea at all. Keep the main gun with the driver on the lighter Assault/C&C/ECM/etc tanks, but separate it for Main Battle Tanks. That way those drivers who insist on shooting (me) would still be able to melt faces, but we'd also get heavy MBT which would be a formidable weapons platform. There would still need to be more to do for the driver than just driving, though, and that's my main concern. make all the current tanks have slightly less armor and shield and alittle less pg and cpu... then interduce a whole new kind of tank that would be even beter than the ones we have now but be much more expensive and have seperate diver/gunner, make the current ones LAVs and the new ones HAVs then make the jeeps like recon vehicles or (insert clever name here) Just because you built it doesn't necessarily mean people will use it. My point all along has been that people play FPSs to shoot things. Making tank driver a gunless FPS player makes him... FP player. There needs to be something fun for the driver to do, and driving alone is not sufficient - and my imagination is not vivid enough to come up with ideas what that could be. I haven't seen anyone else have any ideas, either. Again, any tank driver actually thinks this is a good idea, or is it just those who either play grunts or pilots?
So by that logic, Logistics, dropship pilots, LAV pilots, ad those who focus on knives don't belong/don't matter because they don't shoot? Remember that next time you get res-ed or act gunner. Also, the RE players of this build will attest that their gun just gets in the way of carrying more explosives.
And that something fun the driver is doing is dodging cannon shells and Forge Gun bolts while running all the modules. |
Arramakaian Eka
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
363
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 00:51:00 -
[63] - Quote
Zero Harpuia wrote:Arramakaian Eka wrote:Alshadow wrote:Arramakaian Eka wrote:Sandair Mulholy wrote:- Have the low level tanks be driver-gunners, but the high level tank separate the driver and gunner. So for newbies and fresh players, they could get in tanks and have fun, but for the serious stomping power, you would need more collaboration. Not a bad idea at all. Keep the main gun with the driver on the lighter Assault/C&C/ECM/etc tanks, but separate it for Main Battle Tanks. That way those drivers who insist on shooting (me) would still be able to melt faces, but we'd also get heavy MBT which would be a formidable weapons platform. There would still need to be more to do for the driver than just driving, though, and that's my main concern. make all the current tanks have slightly less armor and shield and alittle less pg and cpu... then interduce a whole new kind of tank that would be even beter than the ones we have now but be much more expensive and have seperate diver/gunner, make the current ones LAVs and the new ones HAVs then make the jeeps like recon vehicles or (insert clever name here) Just because you built it doesn't necessarily mean people will use it. My point all along has been that people play FPSs to shoot things. Making tank driver a gunless FPS player makes him... FP player. There needs to be something fun for the driver to do, and driving alone is not sufficient - and my imagination is not vivid enough to come up with ideas what that could be. I haven't seen anyone else have any ideas, either. Again, any tank driver actually thinks this is a good idea, or is it just those who either play grunts or pilots? So by that logic, Logistics, dropship pilots, LAV pilots, ad those who focus on knives don't belong/don't matter because they don't shoot? Remember that next time you get res-ed or act gunner. Also, the RE players of this build will attest that their gun just gets in the way of carrying more explosives. And that something fun the driver is doing is dodging cannon shells and Forge Gun bolts while running all the modules.
We're talking tanks here, not applying flawed logic. To rehash my points from previous posts: I have extensive tanking experience, and #1 reason I drive tanks is to kill people. Take that away from me and I'll go to my other favorite role in FPSs: anti-tank grunt. I bet that vast majority of tank drivers wouldn't drive tanks unless they can **** **** up. Tank driver expectations are different than other vehicles: tanks are designed to destroy and kill, not to move people or do logistics. And the lack of support for this idea from tank drivers is a testament to the feasibility of the OP's idea.
It's perfectly fine to challenge and change that expectation and I would embrace it like I have said before, but something compelling and fun has to take the place of gunplay; nobody has offered enough, yet. Driving around and dodging is not enough. |
Bunsen Honey Dew
Doomheim
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 04:41:00 -
[64] - Quote
I think in general that having dedicated tank commander, driver, main gunner and hull gunner would make for some really interesting gameplay but would be more suited to a dedicated tank/armor sim however for Dust maybe it would add a level of unnecessary complexity
|
Noowb Sauce
10
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 04:52:00 -
[65] - Quote
I've seen some games where the tank driver gets the smaller forward turret and another player gets the main turret... this actually works somewhat well due to pov and really allowing for full 360 degree use of the main turret no matter where the tank is driving but the forward turret is only moved in the direction of the tank with some vertical manipulation allowed ie. Moving the gun up and down some but turning the whole tank from side to side to aim the forward turret. |
Duke Ikalla
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 05:17:00 -
[66] - Quote
I think its an okay idea, but the driver needs to receive some points per kill. And limited access to turrets would be nice as well! |
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.09 15:25:00 -
[67] - Quote
Arramakaian Eka wrote:
We're talking tanks here, not applying flawed logic. To rehash my points from previous posts: I have extensive tanking experience, and #1 reason I drive tanks is to kill people. Take that away from me and I'll go to my other favorite role in FPSs: anti-tank grunt. I bet that vast majority of tank drivers wouldn't drive tanks unless they can **** **** up. Tank driver expectations are different than other vehicles: tanks are designed to destroy and kill, not to move people or do logistics. And the lack of support for this idea from tank drivers is a testament to the feasibility of the OP's idea.
It's perfectly fine to challenge and change that expectation and I would embrace it like I have said before, but something compelling and fun has to take the place of gunplay; nobody has offered enough, yet. Driving around and dodging is not enough.
I am a tank gunner, and I drive tanks because I am good at it and it helps my team to win. I did not suggest this to make it more fun for me, I suggested it to improve the game, so I can enjoy it for a long time. It actually pains me to suggests this, but I think it is necessary so Dust will not become a tank game (nothing wrong with a tank game, but there is too much potential in Dust to be limited to tanks). I think that if this is not done, CCP will implement a maximum number of tanks per match (either active, or overall) to compensate, or worse, nerf the tanks, and that would be a shame. We pay for the tanks, so we should not be arbitrarily limited, and a tank is meant to be an awesome instrument of destruction, if not, it becomes an LAV!
Dust 514 is meant to be more involved (like Eve Online), and to attain this goal I think this change is necessary.
PS: I've been playing tanks for a long time : BattleZone
|
Sandair Mulholy
Codex Troopers
42
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:47:00 -
[68] - Quote
I had to revive this thread. This build made the tanks useless. Exactly what I was afraid of. With the terrain that offers a lot of cover to infantry, AV grenades that are OP and nanohive that regenerate grenades, tanks, and vehicle in general, are useless. Add to that the ISK rewards that are low and the price of tanks that is high and you hardly see tanks in game anymore. It might also be due to lack of cooperation and ambush maps, but nobody can argue that vehicles underused right now. |
Mack Five
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:14:00 -
[69] - Quote
Well, it seems someone else retook the idea: Tank: Separate the Driver from the main-turret. |
Alldin Kan
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
169
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:27:00 -
[70] - Quote
... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |