DUST Search - HAV: The Gunner Dilemma

All Channels

General Discussions

HAV: The Gunner Dilemma

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Villore Isu Algintal Core Gallente Federation 115	Posted - 2012.10.28 20:53:00 - [31] - Quote Sarra Jardox wrote: Due to us moving to the main server being a huge ordeal they will have to make it coincide with a large eve patch to try to minimize downtime (doing otherwise would be bad business) so I'm pretty sure December 4th - 11th is a safe bet for us going into open beta because we will need to be on a much larger server for open beta player numbers. If not in early December then the second week of January. Ccp has held off a patch for like a month before but normally its a matter of a few days if they have to hold it back. We have ppl complaining now tht the game feels lifeless due to a lack of options, it'll be a lot worse if we go into open beta lacking planned features. So eventhough its speculation its looks like a pretty safe bet. And yet ur proposing something tht could take a month to code. Then it has to go through the whole Sony QA process. It just seems impossible in the amount of time. The game is NOT going live in December, although open beta is certainly possible. I don't know why everyone thinks that Dust has got to coincide with a named EVE expansion. In case everyone has forgotten, CCP is spreading out their releases a lot more by making the point releases much more substantial, hell there are even going to be 3 named expansions this year (Escalation, Inferno, Retribution). No, I think Dust will release spring/summer 2013 hopefully with it's own mini expansion, or if the date gets pushed far enough, the main summer expansion. And for the record, I think it is definitely worth giving the idea outlined in the OP a shot, besides it'll give tank drivers the ability to control other active mods without losing their main offensive weapon, and tanks might also get a small shield / armour buff to go with it.
Waruiko DUST G I A N T 90	Posted - 2012.10.28 22:50:00 - [32] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Waruiko DUST wrote: I've got a thread on turrets and AV and damage types and how they interact in feedback that covers my opinions nicely. Not sure how to link that thread as I get yelled at by the board every time I try to do so. Are you trying to use the hyperlink function, or just pasting it? Tried both and got error-ed at both ways. Might be a problem with the terminal I'm using.
KEQ Harbinger KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 2	Posted - 2012.10.28 22:56:00 - [33] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Look, a lot of people have been throwing out a lot of ideas for balancing the current one-man tanks against AV weapons. I've been a proponent of separate seats for driver and gunner for a while, and rather than insist on a 4-man tank, I even conceded to the idea of giving the driver the front turret. Obviously people have really strong opinion on this, and I'd just like to say that I think the separate positions should be tested. We've already had changes to game mechanics that were reverted based on negative feedback, and I'm sure this would follow the same path if it was found to be more detrimental than helpful. I'm not trying to say that our (the separation proponents) way is the best or only way. I just think we should give it a shot, see if it works or not. Can you explain yourself further? Are you asking to eliminate the gun control from the driver?
Jason Pearson Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 742	Posted - 2012.10.28 23:27:00 - [34] - Quote I actually like this. Vehicles need to be a threat, but to be a threat it should require effort and teamwork. Mavado can complain "THIS IS NOT A DROPSHIP NRGGGHHHARAGE." As much as the guy wants, but tbh I don't think I'd be nearly as effective if I didn't have separate guns (blahblah a Dropship isn't a gunship but let's face it, they pretty much are right now). As this game is a beta, we should try the following, bring in new 3 man tanks with the gunner controlling a small turret and then bring in some 4 man tanks with the Driver/Gunners being separate. A Tank Driver will still get SP from kills and doesn't always have to be moving. Can always switch from Driver to Gunner if you want to be a sitting duck, OR, get a crew together. Same with Gunships. I plan on being a Gunship Pilot and I hope I do require a gunner. Also, DUST isn't ready for release. We're in a Closed beta, next step is an Open Beta, okay lads? Release is probably sometime next year.
Victor 'LifeLine' Ramous SyNergy Gaming 242	Posted - 2012.10.28 23:45:00 - [35] - Quote Jason Pearson wrote: I actually like this. Vehicles need to be a threat, but to be a threat it should require effort and teamwork. Mavado can complain "THIS IS NOT A DROPSHIP NRGGGHHHARAGE." As much as the guy wants, but tbh I don't think I'd be nearly as effective if I didn't have separate guns (blahblah a Dropship isn't a gunship but let's face it, they pretty much are right now). As this game is a beta, we should try the following, bring in new 3 man tanks with the gunner controlling a small turret and then bring in some 4 man tanks with the Driver/Gunners being separate. A Tank Driver will still get SP from kills and doesn't always have to be moving. Can always switch from Driver to Gunner if you want to be a sitting duck, OR, get a crew together. Same with Gunships. I plan on being a Gunship Pilot and I hope I do require a gunner. Also, DUST isn't ready for release. We're in a Closed beta, next step is an Open Beta, okay lads? Release is probably sometime next year. It does require effort and teamwork to manage it... its just not broken so why fix it is what Mavado is saying (he has dealt with these threads/ideas a lot, so his patience has worn down. Its okay nums, rest your eyes a bit) If you think anyone can grab a tank and own **, you havnt used a tank. You have to be very smart about positiioning, a lot of noobs with tanks are overly aggressive and get killed easily. Keep in mind a lot of people think its broken because they are looking at it from an unorganized pub standpoint when a majority of the game will be about organized fights. Tanks are 0 problem in competitive games, no balancing issue. And even in pubs, when you get someone who knows how to use a forge problem solved. There is no need for a solution when nothing is broken. People are just either butthurt they dont have proper skills in the AV area, or are completely clueless on how helpful AV skills are** And even assuming there is a problem, why would adding someone to drive and one to shoot turret make it that much harder? Your just splitting jobs but doing no difference, communication is not going to increase. Turret guy literally just looks around and shoots things, drivers makes sure to be cautious... actually not any need to talk. No more communication then a spare gunner seat and a driver/mainturret guy would have in the current tanks. "there a guy in X location" "True" positions tank no difference. None. 0 extra communication. People have failed to see that OPs argument has an implacent fallacy, IT ASSUMES by adding an extra person and splitting functions that it will = more need for communication. That is the fallacy, its a jump in logic that has no backing and in fact when critically thinking about it, does occur to be flawed. It certainly wont help any percieved balance issues. Edit: No offense to OP, just im passionate about not splitting CCP resources, time and brainpower on changes that dont provide anything. They have a lot to chew on. I respect your idea but you also have to be able to see the criticism, and tbh criticism does drown the idea.
EnglishSnake Zumari Force Projection Caldari State 1012	Posted - 2012.10.29 13:37:00 - [36] - Quote I say go for it with a 4man tank, i wouldnt mind driving my tank and not shooting that way i can just concentrate on activating mods and GTFO when i need to, problem is the 4man tank would need alot more shield/armor because the tanks we have are paper 20k AV fit with a forge gun can take out a 700+k fit with barely any SP invested into AV tbh where as the tank driver had to at least put in 10x the SP? maybe even 20x Even a tank with all slots filled and all with mics still has to avoid forge gunners, they can hide behind a small hill and the splash damage wont even touch them and they can crouch ther and snipe from the otherside of the map in safety, even SL can damage the tank enough Sure a tank should have infantry support but when the infantry has to go before the tank then ther is something wrong, the tank is ther to smash the frontlines down **** things up for a bit then infantry come frome behind and take over while the tank can retreat and repair


Pages: 1 [2] :: 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.