Forum Opinion on Tank Bailing Poll

[Crni-Wuk]

It's necesarry in my eyes to keep a sense of verisimilitude. When your vehicle is damaged or more acurately imobilized you should get the option to leave it "alife" and walk on your own. This would be particlarly important on smaller combined arms maps.

 

[Hans Ludwig]

Even Project Reality, which has 64 players, allows you get in out of a vehicle. And that game (BF2) was made in 2005.

Why are we going backwards in game development?

 

[Dr. Pierre Chang]

I'd like to be able to bail out (or attempt to do so in vain) after the tank is damaged or on fire, even if it means certain death.

 

[SheepDip]

Even Project Reality, which has 64 players, allows you get in out of a vehicle. And that game (BF2) was made in 2005.

Why are we going backwards in game development?

Getting out of vehicles isn't new? Shut the front door.

There are obvious merits to not being able to get out, and obvious disadvantages too - most people on this forum believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks and I doubt it was a decision taken lightly by TWI.

Could we please stop *****ing and wait for the beta...this is getting almost as ridiculous as the Mkb42 thread.

 

[jalex3]

Getting out of vehicles isn't new? Shut the front door.

There are obvious merits to not being able to get out, and obvious disadvantages too - most people on this forum believe the benefits outweigh the drawbacks and I doubt it was a decision taken lightly by TWI.

Could we please stop *****ing and wait for the beta...this is getting almost as ridiculous as the Mkb42 thread.

+100. it was know before the tank video that you could not leave it and only now has everyone gone nuts. wait for beta and if you still dont like it leave the tanks for people that do.

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

For me its just another punch in the stomach much like the confirmation of a DH style suppression system was.. except this time instead of adopting elements of one of the worst mechanics to ever plague an FPS, its been decided that simply removing depth, real abilities and immersion is the best way to solve what some perceive as game-breaking actions on the part of players. Instead of working toward actual creative solutions, a gross amputation has taken hold as the only conclusion. Man, we dont like how those guys are playing the game, so we'll just remove that entire part of the game so they'll play how we want them to. Even though what they were doing was possible in reality, we'd rather choose the most uncreative, unrealistic, draconian method possible to force the gameplay we want. Lock them in their tanks, yeah, that's the ticket. No, no, it doesnt introduce a whole host of unrealistic behaviors of its own.. suiciding to 'pop' into a brand new tank sounds like the exact instant arcade action we're going for, it'll be great!

chalk up another thread victory for REZ :IS2:

 

[Snuffeldjuret]

Isn't really everyone the loser of this discussion...

The thing is that some other things have to be "defined" and agreed upon before we can even start to discuss this one. Then "we" need to find a more solid common ground than "we all want what is best for RO2".

GL HF with that...
Unless people get serious about this instead of just expressing pure whineage it will never happen.

To me it looks like those 40% are the people that need to man up and make something constructive about this discussion as those 60% doesn't have to "to get their way".

 

[dogbadger]

Even Project Reality, which has 64 players, allows you get in out of a vehicle. And that game (BF2) was made in 2005.

Why are we going backwards in game development?

i don't know if you've ever played project reality but it uses a different system where you have to request a crewman kit in the vicinity of a tank, its not a class that you spawn as.
As for BF2, any class can jump in a tank iirc.
So i'm not sure this is the best example seeing as anyone can get in (and) out of a vehicle.
Unless, of course, you are including the ability to suddenly become a trained tanker just by walking up to an AFV as part of the way forward?

 

[cmdrsven]

For me its just another punch in the stomach much like the confirmation of a DH style suppression system was.. except this time instead of adopting elements of one of the worst mechanics to ever plague an FPS, its been decided that simply removing depth, real abilities and immersion is the best way to solve what some perceive as game-breaking actions on the part of players. Instead of working toward actual creative solutions, a gross amputation has taken hold as the only conclusion. Man, we dont like how those guys are playing the game, so we'll just remove that entire part of the game so they'll play how we want them to. Even though what they were doing was possible in reality, we'd rather choose the most uncreative, unrealistic, draconian method possible to force the gameplay we want. Lock them in their tanks, yeah, that's the ticket. No, no, it doesnt introduce a whole host of unrealistic behaviors of its own.. suiciding to 'pop' into a brand new tank sounds like the exact instant arcade action we're going for, it'll be great!

Wow, thanks for a good laugh. I always enjoy reading the completely over-the-top, sky-is-falling hyperbole type of arguments. A decision has obviously been made by the devs and I seriously doubt any argument like yours will sway them over.

What remains to be seen now is how this plays out. If there's a huge outcry over this in the testing phases and/or the devs come up with a better solution to the lameness of people leaving tanks, I doubt there would be a huge problem with implementing that in a later patch.

 

[Mormegil]

The only reason I see to let tankers get out, is for recon on foot. That should only be available to the tank commander, and they shouldn't have cap power on foot. I'd also argue, if their tank goes, so do they.

 

[Ralfst3r]

In the current game, when you bail your tank you are either dead soon, or you have to walk for miles. Quite annoying, so I don't see it as a nerf for not being able to get out of the tank. I voted no.

If you can't get out of your tank, you might play a little more careful with it anyway.:IS2:

 

[dogbadger]

i'm always open to other ppl's thinking and ideas, and don't stubornly think my opinion's always right - but i honestly don't understand how anyone who played RO didn't think the game got a bit stupid when you saw tank crewmen running around in the battle.

 

[Nicholas]

I'm just glad that the tanks are done right in the first place....

 

[10-78 BusterKing]

I can't vote right now because I don't really know how it will play if you can't exit the tank. I need to experience it first to give a fair opinion.

 

[Das Bose]

nobody forces you to play tanker, and playing GTA with tanks shouldn't be allowed in HOES

I very rarely play as a tanker but I think tankers deserve to have the option of getting out of their vehicles. As it stands, and someone has already mentioned this, the people who annoy you so much in RO tanking, will simply scuttle their tank rather than try and get in another or run back to spawn.

So instead of people getting out of their tanks with a nice animation, you will have tanks take a hit and get scuttled, with the occupants immediately teleported into a new tank in spawn which will be so much better than the occupants having the choice of fighting on or one/all disembarking with a realistically timed animation to help a cap or return to spawn

I can see why this is being done and while there are much more realistic, more immersive, more open and far less restrictive solutions. None comes close to requiring as little time to implement as locking into tanks.

What I find annoying are some of the nonsense reasons people are coming up with to justify a decision thats already been made by the Devs for a very clear reason. That reason being that Ramm ( and countless others including myself ) finds it lame that players can insta-teleport out of their tanks as in RO.

 

[Dwin]

For me its just another punch in the stomach much like the confirmation of a DH style suppression system was..

Since when was their a confirmation that HoS would use a DH style suppression system? In fact, I remember reading on the forum that the devs were adamantly against a DH style suppression system.

except this time instead of adopting elements of one of the worst mechanics to ever plague an FPS, its been decided that simply removing depth, real abilities and immersion is the best way to solve what some perceive as game-breaking actions on the part of players. Instead of working toward actual creative solutions, a gross amputation has taken hold as the only conclusion. Man, we dont like how those guys are playing the game, so we'll just remove that entire part of the game so they'll play how we want them to. Even though what they were doing was possible in reality, we'd rather choose the most uncreative, unrealistic, draconian method possible to force the gameplay we want. Lock them in their tanks, yeah, that's the ticket. No, no, it doesnt introduce a whole host of unrealistic behaviors of its own.. suiciding to 'pop' into a brand new tank sounds like the exact instant arcade action we're going for, it'll be great!

THIS.

If tankers fighting as infantry is such a problem then

A) don't give them any cap power

B) give tankers on foot the ability to respawn without penalty (with a slight delay) INSTEAD of scuttling your tank.

C) don't give SMG's to tank commanders (maybe?)

D) don't award points for kills made on foot by tankers

This way, tankers will not feel inclined to fight as infantry because their ability to fight is severely handicapped due to weapon loadout, they do not have the ability to hold objectives, and they can respawn with a new tank very quickly.

Also, the poll should really have 4 options:

Yes, and frequently/always play tanks.

Yes, and I occasionally/never play tanks

No, and I frequently/always play tanks.

No, and I occasionally/never play tanks.

It would be interesting to see what proportion of the people voting no actually play tanks on a regular basis. I suspect it's a very low percentage.

 

[hockeywarrior]

WWII Online also had it set up so that you were locked inside your tank. Worked really well too, as it was clear what your role was. Things would be pretty chaotic if people were allowed to bail.

Just offering an example of it working well.

 

[Dwin]

I'm sorry, I thought those examples were already pretty clear:

1) Tanker on foot deprives their team of a tank and the resources of said tank (happened to me playing Hedgehog yesterday)

Solution: assign tank roles on a per tank basis. Tank roles only become active when a tank is ready to be spawned, and last only for the duration of one life. If you die, you lose your tank role until a new tank is ready to be spawned. If you bail out and fight on foot and your tank is destroyed, another player from your team can take the tank role when it becomes available, and you will lose yours if all available tanks are occupied.

2) Tanker on foot looks pretty close to an enemy tanker, often leading to team kills and confusion (happened yesterday on Konigsplatz)

All the more reason why a tanker should be ENCOURAGED not to fight on foot, but not FORCED to.

3) Tanker on foot slows down getting a new tank into combat if they're huffing it back to the tank spawn (I've seen this happen)

Give tankers on foot the ability to respawn (with a slight delay, so you can't respawn just before someone shoots you) without penalty.

4) Tanker on foot leads to asynchronisity with the rest of the team when team tanking (happened to me yesterday on Konigsplatz and DerZooBunker)

What do you mean by asynchronisity?

5) Tanker on foot attacking an objective is unrealistic and gamey compared to reality (based on your example, I usually stick to my tank)

Don't give tankers capping power, and they won't feel inclined to attack objectives, only to fight for their lives (until it is safe for them to respawn themselves).

7) Tanker on foot with a pistol wouldn't really have the ability to hold an objective in real life, so shouldn't add to cap power in game

Exactly. So don't give tankers cap power instead of forcing them to stay inside tanks,.

8) Tanker on foot requires coding and animating for TWI, delaying the game

Worth the delay for TW to produce a superior product.

 

[Dwin]

WWII Online also had it set up so that you were locked inside your tank. Worked really well too, as it was clear what your role was. Things would be pretty chaotic if people were allowed to bail.

Just offering an example of it working well.

WWIIOL's gameplay generally does not necessitate the need or desire to bail out. Though it would probably be a better game if you could.

 

[Reise]

Since when was their a confirmation that HoS would use a DH style suppression system? In fact, I remember reading on the forum that the devs were adamantly against a DH style suppression system.

THIS.

If tankers fighting as infantry is such a problem then

A) don't give them any cap power

B) give tankers on foot the ability to respawn without penalty (with a slight delay) INSTEAD of scuttling your tank.

C) don't give SMG's to tank commanders (maybe?)

D) don't award points for kills made on foot by tankers

This way, tankers will not feel inclined to fight as infantry because their ability to fight is severely handicapped due to weapon loadout, they do not have the ability to hold objectives, and they can respawn with a new tank very quickly.

Do that and you would likely end up with even more complaints.

People would be upset that they might as well be dead and respawning once they bail out since they can't do jack but run around and be a target.

Also, notice how this is basically their function in the first game once they're separated from their tank. Unless they screw around and play super secret undercover satchel agent, they're pretty much SOL.