- 1 fun factor

The problem I currently have with the vehicle controls isn't the difficulty in keeping them going straight, but the awkwardness of complex manoeuvring. If I push the stick to the right, it's a very fine line between going forwards and turning right and going backwards turning right - an important difference if I'm trying to turn round in a small space.

Switching acceleration (and reverse) to a separate control (such as L1/L2 as you suggest) would fix that (but I've only driven the LAV so I don't know if those buttons have other functions on HAVs).

Go play Mario Cart?

But seriously, Dust isn't an arcade FPS. It's anything but an arcade FPS. Why should vehicles break from this realism motiff?
If this were any other game I'd be inclined to maybe agree but this isn't any other game. This is Dust and CCP are going in the opposite direction to any arcade mechanics.

The majority of players are complaining. I have no problem with it, but others do. Seeing it will make some impact of player count in frustration that's my concern.

Go play Mario Cart?

But seriously, Dust isn't an arcade FPS. It's anything but an arcade FPS. Why should vehicles break from this realism motiff?
If this were any other game I'd be inclined to maybe agree but this isn't any other game. This is Dust and CCP are going in the opposite direction to any arcade mechanics.

Because everything has to be so hardcore, and nothing can just be simple. Why don't we just invert infantry movement controls? You know, so its no longer like CoD or other nooby arcade games, so that walking will take skill. Who cares about fun at all, right?

Just because you prefer something a certain way doesn't mean that is how it should be, and doesn't mean people don't have the right to ask for it to be different. I don't really see any merit to the "because its not mario cart" argument. Any simple game mechanic comparable to something from an arcade game, and be grounds for changing, no matter how ridiculous it is. Believe it or not, FUN ACTUALLY MATTERS in games.

Vehicles are expensive. Even militia vehices that can be destroyed with weapons ranging from free (militia swarm launcher) to about 4,000 ISK (standard forge gun) can cost more than 130,000 ISK. Besides the starter LAV, militia vehicles are no longer permanent (which I think is a good thing). Think about these things together, expensive + hard to use, because something is hard to use, it requires practice, but should someone have to spend hundreds of thousands of their ISK on a couple of weak piece of poop dropship sthat might get taken down in 3 minutes just to get use to the controls?

I'm fine with LAV controls (doesn't mean it shouldn't be tweaked), haven't tried the HAVs recently, bu the dropships really should be changed back.

Then you should have to use Steering wheel and pedals to drive. After all, it means more realism right?

While I agree with that direction in general, I don't think people should be forced to PAY extra. That's where I draw my red line.

I think you should push to the max with the tools at your disposal. If you need a new tool you're doing it wrong.

Dust is based on the same motiff as EVE. Sharp learning curve and ultra hardcore.
While I do realise this is just my opinion and not fact, I believe in it.

I don't see much point to people argueing for realistic hit detection, weapon range and firing cone (scatter) but on the other hand asking for simplified vehicles. A hardcore game means you specialize. Just because you're an amazing sniper and can't drive for **** doesn't mean vehicles should be simplified. It means you should find a good driver for your squad.

Dust is based on the same motiff as EVE. Sharp learning curve and ultra hardcore.
While I do realise this is just my opinion and not fact, I believe in it.

I don't see much point to people argueing for realistic hit detection, weapon range and firing cone (scatter) but on the other hand asking for simplified vehicles. A hardcore game means you specialize. Just because you're an amazing sniper and can't drive for **** doesn't mean vehicles should be simplified. It means you should find a good driver for your squad.

Go play Mario Cart?

But seriously, Dust isn't an arcade FPS. It's anything but an arcade FPS. Why should vehicles break from this realism motiff?
If this were any other game I'd be inclined to maybe agree but this isn't any other game. This is Dust and CCP are going in the opposite direction to any arcade mechanics.

Arguing realism is an argument IN FAVOUR of changing the controls. You don't get your car speeding forward faster than intended because you're turning the wheel sharply, do you?

NO.

In this, hard cornering is near-impossible without affecting movement speed as well. Movement and steering should be separate functions. The reason that works for racing sims (NOT just karting games) is because it's ... say it with me... MORE REALISTIC.

TRIGGERS (as I mentioned before, also pressure-sensitive, and therefore appropriate to allow variable acceleration) for accelerator and brake/reverse. Left stick for TURNING ONLY.

Before flaming me, please read my OP. Thank you.

I do point out that the turning mechanism is flawed ATM and have also suggested a solution.
I originally wanted to go with L1/L2 for forward/reverse but as someone pointed out, that would've broken the HAV.

It isnt a tacical simulator either.

With the total lack of UI elements the current control schemes are extremly hard to be managed.

Finally with the controls where they are they have very shallow 'ceilings' that once you can competenlty operate them thats it, there is nothing beyond that really to be honest.

Throw in the fact you have to use modules and manage tanking at the same time severly reduces focus factor requires of vehicle operators if the vehicles had absolutely no items to have to turn on this would been okay but its not, we're expected to throw up electronic warfare, tank, slam the capacitor injectors just to keep the modules going.

The controls shouldnt be so difficult that nobody wants to get in these golden coffins. They shouldnt also be something people master in one day. Finally the control schemes shouldnt and I bear repeating shouldnt be favoring the best killing machine the HAV. Doing so results 'why drive anything else?' question whcih is what lead to murader overpopularity last build and quickly leading to it this build again, since dropships are having extremly difficult time engaging a tank safely.

As the previous poster said we dont have gas and break contorll installed in the steering wheel. They're on the floor in form of foot pedals.

I'm not flaming you, I read the OP, this was my second post in the thread.

And you may not have noticed, but there are separate "wheeled vehicle" (LAV) and "tracked vehicle" (HAV) controls. HAVs, imo, handle fine (I suck with them), and LAVs aren't too bad (I'm better with them, but find the control scheme more awkward).

All I'm saying is that it would make more sense NOT to use the current control scheme for LAVs, both from the perspective of realism AND fun factor.

You mentioned in several comments that using buttons doesn't work as well for realism because you can't vary the speed as fluidly - I'm pointing out that with the triggers, you CAN.

dude said vehicle controls are fine
#imdone
this game will fail if this is the kinda delusional feedback and suggestions these fanboys giving

dude said vehicle controls are fine
#imdone
this game will fail if this is the kinda delusional feedback and suggestions these fanboys giving

I'm open to your thoughts on the matter.
You're clearly opposed to my opinion on the matter, I'd love to hear why. What makes the current controls so bad for you and what would make them better?

the ideal learning curve should be

Okay I can get in and not crash.
Okay i can move a bit and not blow up.
Okay hitting things is bad, going faster would probably blow me up next time.
Okay that swaps seats, this operates my modules, oh i can go backwards.
Okay I can easily get from point a to b reliably.

and thats where LAV and current DS controls learning curve really ends though.

There is no, so compentently be able to drive a vehicle that I can scoot into a fire fight pick up the wounded and get them out of there safely.

Because the infantry learning curve is nowhere near as steep let alone has a much much much higher ceiling than any vehicle.

I'll clarify. The controls may need tweaking (especially sharp turns with throttle) but in general the physics model of the vehicles in Dust is perfect. They behave as they should as I see it.

The holy grail for the new physics model for it is the dropship. I'm completely in awe with CCP for accomplishing this. It almost seems like they built a dynamic vehicle force engine and allowed the controls to just map to that. For a new vehicle they just define its vectors and let it loose. No special control mapping, just the dynamic engine.

L1/R1 for driving? whats wrong with you them are basic controls for aiming and firing

L2/R2 are the standard driving controls

Dropship controls are horrible, clunky, and not even remotely fun. I don't see why a Dropship should be so much harder to pilot than a tank, when you consider the impact a tank makes vs a Dropship, and also when you compare their difficulty to kill.

Dropship controls are horrible.

^ and this is why you dont impliment horrible controls its going to encourage the 'lame' and 'lazy' tactics mostly, As posted in another thread the dropship tower camping is going to be popular again for the basic grounds of 200isk into 100k sp conversions and the extrem difficulty in challenging the tower.

Players would like to take the path of least resistance, and the skill route for dropships is so adverse it is going to constantly boil down to 'why fly one?' Name one thing a dropship can do that an LAV can't in the same amount of time and you'll find yourself in a losing argument. At least a LAV can land without blowing up.

But you're not also listening about the skill caps. Infantry are nearly infinite ceiling, there is always something to aspire to in infantry peformance, better aiming, better planning, better situational digestion as infantry and appraoches. You can see other players in infantry being very good and envy them.

When I look up and see a dropship or see an LAV I can only think of one thing, pinanta. I dont evny the pilots I dont envy his skills I mutter on his poor choice of mobility. Oh you can do one barrel roll, good luck as the followup launch timed on purpose to meet you as soon as get done rolling means you either eats the first or second launch. The only good lavs Ive meet are the ones that know to stay away from the heavy looking for them, most are just solo cappers that really dont know how to operate them esepcially when one AV nade ends thier joy ride.

If there is such a think as a superior dropship pilot, I havent seen it yet, I havent seen on last more than 20 seconds in combat, I havent seen one I didnt make sure didnt stay in combat that long, I havent seen a dropship that didnt get shot down by a single milita reload. and BTW battlefield 3 choppers dont fly this horribly there is something deep level wrong in control responses.

. A good dropship pilot can do incredible things with the new dropship which were not remotely possible with the old one. I endorse this.

You're right.

When they nose dive into a cliff, it's freaking incredible.

Sarcasm aside, can you give some actual, specific examples of these incredible, new found maneuvers?

You're right.

When they nose dive into a cliff, it's freaking incredible.

Sarcasm aside, can you give some actual, specific examples of these incredible, new found maneuvers?

Have you even seen a helicopter doing trick flying? Our dropship can be even more agile than that, the physics model (and yes, even the controls) allow for that.

As for a more down to earth example.
Think of a trained and in-sync dropship crew spotting a target right below them. The new dropship can do a 90 degree side roll and bring one gunner immediately above the target below them for 2-3 seconds. That should be enough for a good gunner to release 1-2 missiles into the target's head.

Think of a realy acrobatic dropship dodging missiles around buildings with sharp turns.
Think of a quick pilot side rolling to avoid a tank shell headed their way.
Think of flying at almost ground level and following the land conteurs in order to avoid AV fire. Think of 3 dropships doing this in sync and dropping off 12-18 mercs on the enemy's doorstep.


The new dropship is an increadible beast. People just need to learn how to tame it.

And congradulations I've shot you down. try again.

Have you even seen a helicopter doing trick flying? Our dropship can be even more agile than that, the physics model (and yes, even the controls) allow for that.

As for a more down to earth example.
Think of a trained and in-sync dropship crew spotting a target right below them. The new dropship can do a 90 degree side roll and bring one gunner immediately above the target below them for 2-3 seconds. That should be enough for a good gunner to release 1-2 missiles into the target's head.

Think of a realy acrobatic dropship dodging missiles around buildings with sharp turns.
Think of a quick pilot side rolling to avoid a tank shell headed their way.
Think of flying at almost ground level and following the land conteurs in order to avoid AV fire. Think of 3 dropships doing this in sync and dropping off 12-18 mercs on the enemy's doorstep.


The new dropship is an increadible beast. People just need to learn how to tame it.

realistic

All I have to say to that, is that this game takes place in the EVE universe. We're talking, GIGANTIC space ships, MASSIVE weaponry, immortal soldiers, warp drives, afterburners....

You'd think in this age of hyper advanced technology, a dropship would possess on board computers to alleviate a lot of the tedious aspects of piloting, such as adjusting for wind or leveling out the ship.

Realism has always been a poor argument in sci fi games.

For me, it all comes down to fun factor. And for me, the new dropships are so far from fun, it's not even funny.

the new difficulty level is a spam filter actually.. imo

The only reason you saw so much dropship spam last build was because militia vehicles were free. Dropship use was actually at a really good place the build before last. We went from just about the right amount of DS use, to WAY too much DS use, to seeing a dropship once every 5-10 matches.

If you're in open sky with nothing to quickly duck behind as a Dropship pilot, you're doing it wrong.
If you're not, you can dodge missiles just fine if you're good with the controls.
If you're NOT good at flying yet, then you're pretty much dead before you take off.

That's not a problem, it's a learning curve.

That's not a problem, it's a learning curve.

Dropships are in the air. Everyone can see them and especially AV guys.
The new dropship isn't more vulnerable than the old one. What you're argueing is that dropships shouldn't exist at all because they can be shot down. That has nothing to do with the new one vs. the old.

ok well thanks for the insight. which is i posted correct me if i'm wrong, and which is why i dont plant to fly them on plateaus anymore..

so ducking behind a tower or something will break the missle lock? because on last build it did not the only thing that dodge the missile was out running it

ok well thanks for the insight. which is i posted correct me if i'm wrong, and which is why i dont plant to fly them on plateaus anymore..

so ducking behind a tower or something will break the missle lock? because on last build it did not the only thing that dodge the missile was out running it

Grit I think you idea to follow infantry key mapping is wrong in my opinion.

Whole R2 wheel idea is not met with positive reactions because it is not working swiftly as it should. Switch from primary to secondary should be fast and reliable e.g triangle.

L2 and R2 are perfect for every vehicle controls due to their design - long movement and feel. I am usually tank ho in every fps but driving in Dust is lacking precision.