Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Edu Ashbourne
Doomheim
54
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 18:40:00 -
[31] - Quote
Onar Kion wrote:WHz DS9899 wrote:Onar Kion wrote:I have to say I don't want a personal hover bike that is armed, you'll get endless circle strafing against infantry. It would look stupid and silly. You would see majority of the time on them doing circles. Or come in at 80 mph, slide side ways shoot, then go back going straight.
Vanu in Planetside 2 has a hover tank.
If there is hover does that mean we can have a EMP explosive that shorts it out and makes it drop for a bit?
I say more team work, if the map is huge, get on a dropship, and deploy from it work together. One you deploy the dropships satellite to give you cover fire. No personal vehicles so everyone can lone wolf it.
Dust needs a APC and a Dropship. Well, I'm what's called a team lone wolf. I still help my team, but I also like to sneak around by myself. Sadly, I can't in this game because there's no well thought out stealth aspects in the game YET. WHen there is, this should be one of them. I want team work over a bunch of single players out for themselves. If you want to lone wolf but help the team ok, but you don't need a hover bike for this. Ask your dropship pilot to fly over a area you want to set your ambush at, then jump out. Then set up your position. As it is now, so many matchs I am in you see solo LAV guy driving around. But sadly I feel FPS are going to the lowest common type of player. The run and gun. I'd like a slower shooter, were tactic's when battles, not super fast meat shields that can take hundreds of rounds. And the only tactic is swarm.
Lonewolf =/= not being a team asset. Sometimes you want to go in alone to avoid attention and get something important done. Being told you're 'just out for yourself' because you're not joining the meatshields on a frontal assault is just a bit dumb.
Not to mention that forcing a single playstyle on everybody is always a terrible idea. You want teamwork, go form a squad with your corpmates. Because the lonewolf is going to wander off regardless of what restrictions you place, so you may as well let him equip himself properly.
You can't even say the hoverbikes are exclusive to soloing anyway. I think if a squad needed to get somewhere quick, they may prefer to ride together on bikes then a LAV or APC. Better mobility, harder target to hit and if a heavy got one driver, he doesn't take his squadmates with him. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 20:31:00 -
[32] - Quote
LAVs are already small enough that Heavies are looking like they want to overflow.
The "problem" is that maps are large, but you don't want to use the existing solutions (LAVs and Dropships). Custom-fitted LAVs can be fast and tough to hit, and you can choose not to pile everyone into a single vehicle if you want. Put everyone in the group into their own FREE STARTER FIT LAV, and you can travel around in a group that way.
There isn't a real need for hoverbikes. There isn't a valid balance-related argument in favour of adding a faster, smaller vehicle type. There's only the "I think hoverbikes are cool so they should gimme" argument, really.
Vehicles in DUST give you several advantages, one of which is movement speed. They also have drawbacks, one of which is high visibility. You have a tradeoff between being fast and being able to hide yourself effectively. What you want is one of the core advantages to bringing vehicles, but without any of the tradeoffs that vehicles usually require.
Sorry, but while it would be cool, and would be fun, I don't see hoverbikes being a sensible option to add to the game. |
v3k3v
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
24
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:48:00 -
[33] - Quote
Ya I suggested our backpack kinda unfolds into a hover bike so we can quickly get from A to B Its the future and totally possible ;) Kinda like Tron |
Novas Prime
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
61
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:52:00 -
[34] - Quote
Zat Earthshatter wrote:I like the concept of the hover bike, but I find issue with your "heavy" bike. If you're knowingly entering "heavy" combat in a small vehicle, it should be an LAV - I dare you to out-shoot a 360 degree turret in a bike. In my opinion, they should be a sort of "horse" for scouts that need to to fight as guerrillas, attacking and quickly disappearing in a cloud of dust. That means a fast bike without weapons, as you don't need mounted weapons if you know how to use hit-and-run tactics.
+1 The use of a fast 1 man vehicle would be perfect for snipers and scouts. As the maps open and get to there full size it's going to be hard to keep up with the movement of troops over such a large area, especially for snipers as scouts.
The ability to move location fast for 1) changing loc for snipers 2) moving to high points and fast reconnaissance for scouts and 3) setting mines and traps before main enemy forces appear, would be good tactics. |
v3k3v
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
24
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 21:59:00 -
[35] - Quote
Ya it could be a module, in the accessory slot rather then a nano hive.. a backpack hover bike... it wont happen tho.. its bound to mess up the game some how.
Technically our suit might have a low flying jet pack.. thats more expected in a fancy suit then the bike idea |
Edu Ashbourne
Doomheim
54
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 22:04:00 -
[36] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:LAVs are already small enough that Heavies are looking like they want to overflow.
The "problem" is that maps are large, but you don't want to use the existing solutions (LAVs and Dropships). Custom-fitted LAVs can be fast and tough to hit, and you can choose not to pile everyone into a single vehicle if you want. Put everyone in the group into their own FREE STARTER FIT LAV, and you can travel around in a group that way.
There isn't a real need for hoverbikes. There isn't a valid balance-related argument in favour of adding a faster, smaller vehicle type. There's only the "I think hoverbikes are cool so they should gimme" argument, really.
Vehicles in DUST give you several advantages, one of which is movement speed. They also have drawbacks, one of which is high visibility. You have a tradeoff between being fast and being able to hide yourself effectively. What you want is one of the core advantages to bringing vehicles, but without any of the tradeoffs that vehicles usually require.
Sorry, but while it would be cool, and would be fun, I don't see hoverbikes being a sensible option to add to the game.
And we come back to this problem again: "If we can already do it with this, why add that?". There was a time I was told we shouldn't have ladders on buildings, because we have dropships to lift people up there. Just because you can manage doesn't mean you can't improve.
So maybe the I and the OP are basically saying "I think hoverbikes are cool so they should gimme." so what? Bikes would have their pros and cons just like anything else and people would be free to use them if they please.
I'd imagine they'd have the tank of tinfoil, no weapons and terrible damage when hitting players but it would be better then the Great and Sacred LAV for driving through tight areas and keeping speed. There. A whole different vehicle for different purposes.
I'd much prefer adding 'unnecessary' stuff to Dust then tell the devs we want a game with the absolute minimum of content. |
Shijima Kuraimaru
WarRavens
168
|
Posted - 2012.11.07 22:15:00 -
[37] - Quote
WHz DS9899 wrote:Shijima Kuraimaru wrote:1. You can stop being a #unt just because someone disagrees with you.
2. My point still stands. It's unnecessary. I never said it wouldn't be fun. I never said it wasn't a good idea. I merely stated that CCP actually giving us hoverbikes, when we already have LAVs, is highly improbable. After all, I did say "If I thought it was something CCP might do, I'd be +1ing you and asking for the addition of a heat lance, blade vanes, and cluster caltrops." But the LAV's and hover bikes would have a different role, because of size and crew. Since their smaller and faster, they're more of a "stealth" vehicle that most other vehicles like tanks won't even bother with you. And I'm not being a "#unt". You are not reading and thinking about it, and instead wanting to argue saying that it would be usless, when in fact these could win or lose a game. Just think about it.
And you accuse me of not reading. I never said it was useless. "I merely stated that CCP actually giving us hoverbikes, when we already have LAVs, is highly improbable.". And unnecessary doesn't = useless if that's what you were going on. |
WHz DS9899
Doomheim
136
|
Posted - 2012.12.17 23:26:00 -
[38] - Quote
Shijima Kuraimaru wrote:WHz DS9899 wrote:Shijima Kuraimaru wrote:1. You can stop being a #unt just because someone disagrees with you.
2. My point still stands. It's unnecessary. I never said it wouldn't be fun. I never said it wasn't a good idea. I merely stated that CCP actually giving us hoverbikes, when we already have LAVs, is highly improbable. After all, I did say "If I thought it was something CCP might do, I'd be +1ing you and asking for the addition of a heat lance, blade vanes, and cluster caltrops." But the LAV's and hover bikes would have a different role, because of size and crew. Since their smaller and faster, they're more of a "stealth" vehicle that most other vehicles like tanks won't even bother with you. And I'm not being a "#unt". You are not reading and thinking about it, and instead wanting to argue saying that it would be usless, when in fact these could win or lose a game. Just think about it. And you accuse me of not reading. I never said it was useless. "I merely stated that CCP actually giving us hoverbikes, when we already have LAVs, is highly improbable.". And unnecessary doesn't = useless if that's what you were going on.
unnecessary goes ahnd and hand with useless, because if something isn't unnecessary, then something as well, or even better, then the new item would be useless.the Hover bikes have a different role, makeing it usefull. we ust wern't on the samepage is all |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |